National Defence Committee on Feb. 8th, 2007

[Dan Ross]

It applies to both.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Casson]

Okay. Thank you.

Mr. Blaney, five minutes.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Good morning, gentlemen, and welcome to the Standing Committee on National Defence.

I travelled aboard a tactical airlifter, a Hercules, with my colleagues, Mr. Bachand and Mr. McGuire. At the time, we were told that the aircraft had reached the end of its useful life and that, in fact, it had run out of time and now needed to be replaced.

C-17s are strategic airlifters—in other words, transcontinental aircraft. You have demonstrated a need to procure this equipment. So, I'm always surprised to hear my colleagues opposite say they have not supported the purchase of these aircraft since 1993. Is the idea to ensure that our Canadian Forces remain on the ground? We used to have 793 aircraft but we now have no more than 290, that are between 30 and 60 per cent serviceable. That is pretty—

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Casson]

Mr. Blaney, in just a second. We have a point of order.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

That was just a comment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Casson]

Just a second. We have a point of order.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

The Standing Orders do make provision for points of order.

For the record, we've done a plan of $13 billion. We were not saying we were against buying planes, because that's been accepted.

He asked about C-17s. We're on the record; that's not the goal.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Casson]

Thank you for that intervention, but I don't believe it is a point of order.

Go ahead.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

So, that brings me to my first question. In terms of strategic airlifters, we are talking about C-17s that can take loads of 39,000 kilos and transport two light armoured vehicles. Correct?

[Dan Ross]

Yes.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

So, are they able to transport all the equipment the Canadian Forces would need in theatre?

[A voice]

No.

[Dan Ross]

I believe that some of the equipment was very large.

I think there are some engineer water purifiers that are very specific and won't go in a C-17. There are very few pieces left.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

I understand.

In this specific case, perhaps you could ship it over.

[Dan Ross]

Yes.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

I believe you have clearly explained that National Defence's role is basically to establish a performance requirement—in other words, military and operational requirements. That is essentially National Defence's role.

After that, Industry Canada and Public Works and Government Services Canada, or PWGSC, take care of the tendering process and everything else. Is that correct?

[Dan Ross]

Yes.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

I would be interested in having you comment on an observation that was made, and I quote:

The occasion arises so seldom in column-writing to say something good about a government that I should waste no time congratulating the federal government for its decision to step away from a hornet's nest of regional rivalries...

Those words were written by someone who teaches economics at McGill University. As I understand it, there have always been conflicts between military requirements and the need to let regional contracts.

I would like to hear your views on that. What is National Defence's position in that regard? Are they compatible? If so, which one takes precedence?

[Dan Ross]

We worked hard with our colleagues in Industry Canada on these programs, and I think very cooperatively. They don't interfere at all. They understand the high level of performance requirements of the Canadian Forces and are very supportive, and I work closely with my fellow ADMs; we meet every month on a Friday morning and review how we are collectively moving these programs forward.

It is an important opportunity to bring in economic industrial opportunities for Canadian firms, to transfer that technology and those skills to Canada, and to sustain jobs and economic growth for Canadians. It is not, and does not have to be, at odds with providing good effective equipment to the Canadian Forces.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

They are compatible. Fine.

You talked about uncertainty. You said that in the past, the procurement process has been costly and fraught with delays.

Can you explain the new process? How will we avoid losses of $500 million, as we were discussing earlier? That is a significant amount of money. Could you give us your take on this and explain how you believe the new process will avoid financial losses with no return on investment for taxpayers?

[Dan Ross]

Perhaps I could give an example.

The army has a requirement for certain direct-fire weapons, and there are only several of these built in the world. The intellectual property of how they're built is very closely guarded by these countries. I can't write a specification that tells this company how to build that specific weapons system.

We have run processes that have gone on for several years, trying to design and write these enormous specifications, and it cost a lot of money. It cost the several firms that bid millions of dollars. Then these firms missed the mandatories in the hundreds--not by one mandatory, but in the hundreds. That entire process--years and millions of dollars--was wasted.

I said to my staff to state what range that thing should shoot, whether it had to be transportable by two soldiers, whether it had to be on a tripod, whether it could be fired in an enclosed area--in other words, your key performance requirements. I told them to invite the two companies to bring their weapons and we would fire them and have real soldiers shoot them.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

It's a loss, not only for the government, but for those industries that waste their time preparing bids.

[Dan Ross]

Yes.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

Thank you.