Industry and Technology Committee on Nov. 19th, 2025

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Your advice would be to stay the course.

[Richard Foster]

Yes, it would.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Thank you. I think I'm out of time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Thank you, Mr. Falk.

Mr. Bardeesy, the floor is yours for six minutes.

[Karim Bardeesy, Liberal, Taiaiako'n—Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Thank you.

Ms. Lambert, the budget proposes investments in research dedicated to defence and the quantum industry. In your opinion, how will these investments benefit the Canadian quantum industry, and how will they help address defence challenges? What other funding could come from those investments?

[Lisa Lambert]

We're waiting to hear some more details about specifics within the budget. It did indicate that of the roughly $334 million that was announced for quantum under the defence industrial strategy, about a third would go to industry, and two-thirds of that would go to research on that side. For comparison, right now when we're looking at the rest of the globe, that's about an order of magnitude less than a lot of our comparatives in this space. It's a good start to see, but to build something competitive and build off the base that we have right now, we will have to see some further investment coming forward on that side.

[Karim Bardeesy, Liberal, Taiaiako'n—Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Thank you.

This is a question for Mr. Langlais.

Happy anniversary. I know it's the 100th anniversary of the commissionaires. I appreciate everything the commissionaires do across Canada and in particular for the community here in Ottawa.

One of the things we know is that with lots of defence procurement and investment there's a potential of replicating patterns where the beneficiaries of that investment and a higher proportion of the people involved would be men rather than women. I wanted to ask from your perspective, especially from the workforce perspective, what are some things that this committee and the departments need to keep in mind to make sure that the investments that are being proposed have some benefit towards women?

[Michael Langlais]

The question is an excellent one.

There are imbalances between men and women, as represented in both the security and defence industries. A focus on small to medium-sized enterprises in Canada as part of the defence industrial strategy is an excellent way to be able to encourage women-owned and women-led small businesses, among which some have been represented in front of this committee in the immediate past, I believe, on behalf of businesses working towards creating drone capabilities in Canada. This focus on SMEs I think is the best way to be able to rectify at least some of that imbalance.

[Karim Bardeesy, Liberal, Taiaiako'n—Parkdale—High Park, ON]

I will have a quick follow-up on that, and then for Mr. Foster a similar question will probably be coming.

How is our current ITB framework playing out with respect to that issue, do you think?

[Michael Langlais]

I have heard directly from small to medium-sized enterprises, including those that are led by women, that have experienced frustrations with being able to access the ITB framework and have characterized it as—these are not my words—Byzantine. Simplifying that as part of a wider strategy in order to encourage Canadian small to medium-sized enterprises' talent towards addressing pressing national defence and security concerns, again, is the best way to make sure that those women who uttered those words are involved in that conversation and are able to access those benefits and those offsets directly.

[Karim Bardeesy, Liberal, Taiaiako'n—Parkdale—High Park, ON]

I have a question for Mr. Foster.

Thank you for your service and for your dedication to Canada through so many different parts of this work.

Again, this is a more open-ended question about the ITB framework and what you think needs to be addressed or improved in this defence industrial policy.

[Richard Foster]

I would say that a sovereign partnership or a strategic partnership would help in that regard. Instead of going directly to ITBs, if you look at the F-35, for example, we're already looking for cybersecurity partners. We're looking for logistic partners. We're looking for hangar developments because we see that coming. We've made a commitment to the Canadian government that it's not just about L3Harris and our having all the work; it's about looking to see who else needs to be part of this journey over the longer period.

That would also enable us to identify where research and development should be focused, whether it's in quantum companies or it's in UAV companies. If, competitively, we look at it and say this is where Canada is going to make a difference on the global export market, then we can work together and get expertise to say, that's where we should put our development.

The ITB process at the moment works the other way around. When you win a program, they say, “You won. Now you need to go and plan how you're going to spend that money and sprinkle it around.” It's very difficult for us because our company, which is very large, competes on many programs. For me to invest in a small slice in maritime or in aerospace becomes difficult. From a business perspective, I'm not going to gain much out of doing that.

[Karim Bardeesy, Liberal, Taiaiako'n—Parkdale—High Park, ON]

I want to stay on this...or come back to the workforce side. I think through your company and through the sector more generally, we've really benefited from having highly skilled aerospace mechanics, engineers and other maintenance workers.

How can we best ensure that we retain these highly skilled workers and continue to develop them, regardless of the choice that's being made in this forthcoming decision on aircraft procurement?

[Richard Foster]

I think that Canada needs to make long-term commitments to enable predictability in the workforce. I can tell you that there's some angst at L3Harris just on all the conversation that's gone on this week in terms of high-paid engineers going, “All right, maybe it's time to go somewhere else, or maybe I should be looking somewhere else,” because the predictability is not there. They want to have stable lives with their families.

The second thing I would say is that I think Canada needs to invest more heavily in its universities and STEM programs and encourage high school students to be more educated in STEM. I think Canada is falling behind compared to other nations.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Thank you, Mr. Bardeesy.

Mr. Ste‑Marie, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette—Manawan, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Greetings to the three witnesses, and thank you for being here. I also want to thank them for all the information they are providing.

Mr. Foster, my questions are related to those of my colleagues Mr. Falk and Mr. Bardeesy.

This morning, La Presse published a very disturbing article in which you were interviewed. It talked about L3Harris. The article was written by Julien Arsenault and was entitled “Un fleuron de l'aéronautique est en péril”, which in English would be “Aerospace Industry Jewel in Peril”. Can you explain what this is about?

[Richard Foster]

As I already explained, the problem is that if Canada chose two fleets of fighter jets, it is highly likely that we would have to lay off 500 employees and lose 1,100 people who work for our suppliers. I will respect the government's decision, but I'm afraid that it's too hasty.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette—Manawan, QC]

I understand that half of the highly specialized L3Harris employees in Mirabel could lose their jobs. L3Harris maintains the aging CF‑18s. The purchase of the 88 F‑35s by Canada was an opportunity for L3Harris to become a North American heavy maintenance centre. However, the fact that the government has changed its mind means that jobs and expertise are at risk. Is that correct?

[Richard Foster]

That's correct.

In order for the project to be profitable, there have to be several F‑35s at the same time in our facilities. If there were 88 Canadian F‑35 aircraft, that would mean that there would only be about five F‑35s at a time in our facilities. However, there would have to be between 17 and 22 for the project to be viable. We are therefore looking to obtain other F‑35s from the United States or from our NATO friends, to ensure that we have enough aircraft at the same time in our facilities.

I would like to say something else, as a simple businessman. When we look at the figures, we see that 3,400 F‑35 aircraft will be built around the world and that 14 NATO countries will share them. As for the Gripen aircraft, we're talking about two NATO countries, Sweden and Hungary. In terms of production, it is estimated that there may be 200 or 300 in the world in the future. As a businessman, I can say that the F‑35 is a much bigger opportunity.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette—Manawan, QC]

On that subject, La Presse pointed out that, last June, Canadian Chief of Defence Staff General Jennie Carignan said that replacing the F‑35s with a potentially mixed fleet was a questionable idea. What do you think of the idea of Canada having a mixed fleet?

[Richard Foster]

I think that it will be difficult. It would involve training two different types of pilots and two different types of technicians. I would also involve building two different types of infrastructure at the bases. It would be quite costly for Canada.

In terms of NATO operations, we either lead them or participate in them. If we have F‑35s, we'll definitely take part in operations. I experienced this a long time ago with the F‑18. If we have another type of aircraft, we'll just participate in operations behind the scenes.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette—Manawan, QC]

In your remarks, you focused on the need for predictability and stability and on the value of long‑term contracts that extend beyond political cycles. We finally had a commitment for the number of F‑35s, but the current government is now reconsidering its position. What message does this send to the industry?

[Richard Foster]

I respect the fact that the government wants to review its decision, for example. However, this raises concerns on our end. We need predictability and reliability to ensure the continuity of our operations.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette—Manawan, QC]

Noted.

Yesterday, Radio‑Canada's English channel quoted the Minister of Industry. She said that Saab would create 10,000 jobs in Canada if we were to choose the Gripen. In one minute, what do you have to say to that? Where do you think these jobs would be? You spoke earlier about direct and indirect jobs related to the F‑35. What comparison can be made?

[Richard Foster]

I know that Saab, at the time of the call for bids, spoke about creating 6,000 jobs in 2022. The current figure is 10,000 jobs. These jobs are in the support and production sectors. However, I don't know whether the goal is to create 5,000 jobs in each sector. That said, the production will last only three to five years, since the plan is to build 50 or 100 aircraft. I'm not sure anymore. The production jobs won't last long compared to the F‑35‑related jobs. A total of 1,000 of these aircraft have been built, and the plan is to build 2,000 more.