National Defence Committee on April 29th, 2009

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Thank you.

I notice in your presentation, in talking about your projects in the north, you talked about the need for the expansion of the Ranger program, the Arctic offshore patrol ships, etc., and a berthing and refuelling facility, and a training centre in the Arctic. But I noticed a distinct lack of mention of any icebreaking-capable vessels in your presentation. Have you talked to the Chief of the Defence Staff about that as something you might need to carry out your function in the north?

[VAdm D. McFadden]

Sir, I suppose the difficulty of understanding the true value of the Arctic and offshore patrol ships as a capability is the intent as to when we will need to exercise presence. When the need for sovereignty, presence, will be greatest is when activity rates go up. The activity rates in the Arctic are going up because we're seeing a reduction in the size of the ice.

It doesn't mean there isn't a requirement for icebreakers, but what I'm able to talk about is what capability we can bring by the projects we have online. There is an immensely significant change in our capability to operate in the Arctic as the Canadian Forces with the coming online of that capability. It will be capable of operating in first-year ice with some multi-year ice intrusions, and that's a fundamentally significant change for us. The requirement for icebreaking—

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

What has brought that about? We've been told that 12 new ships are being built for the coast guard, and none of them are ice-reinforced. They can conduct patrols, presence, and surveillance as well as the navy. But on having a naval presence for enforcement purposes, wouldn't you require some ice capability beyond what you have now?

[VAdm D. McFadden]

We anticipate we will be conducting operations when activity is greatest with those types of assets. We put ships into those waters when we see the greatest amount of activity.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

So you're saying we don't need armed icebreaking capability.

[VAdm D. McFadden]

I'm not saying we don't need icebreakers. With the role we've given the Canadian Forces to establish a presence, and the capability coming online with the Arctic offshore patrol ship, we increase activity when the risk goes up.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

I understand that, but we're talking in circles here. We had an announcement that we were going to have armed icebreaking capability for the Canadian Forces. It doesn't seem to be part of your plans. Is it something you need and want, or is it something you can quite happily do without, and we will just wait for someone to make a decision?

[VAdm D. McFadden]

I haven't said this country doesn't need icebreaking capability, but that's not going to be resident within the Canadian Forces.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

So the decision has been made that the navy will not have ships with icebreaking capability.

[VAdm D. McFadden]

I'm not aware of any project or any discussions that we're bringing icebreakers online in the Canadian navy.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Okay. Thank you.

You mentioned a number of projects that are available dealing with surveillance. The Polar Epsilon project is under way to integrate with the RADARSAT-2, and we are increasing that capability with a phase two over the next number of years.

Are you aware of a project call Polar Breeze? Does that have anything to do with your surveillance capabilities in the north?

[VAdm D. McFadden]

I'm not aware of it, sir.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

In the media in the last couple of days there has been some suggestion that the Canadian Forces, and the government in general, have denied its existence. Then they said that while it does exist it is classified. We had an assertion here a couple of days ago that it doesn't exist, yet I have a 50-page document here that was released under freedom of information. It doesn't have much information now, mind you, because most of it is blanked out.

So you know nothing about something called Polar Breeze, or once called Polar Breeze and now under some other name, that increases the capability of our Canadian Forces to obtain information, surveillance, or intelligence in the north.

[VAdm D. McFadden]

I am not aware of any project called Polar Breeze.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

You've never heard of it.

[VAdm D. McFadden]

No, sir.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

On the technological demonstration you were talking about that's being activated right now for underwater capability, is that part of the Polar Epsilon activity or is it under Northern Watch?

[VAdm D. McFadden]

That's under Northern Watch, and I wanted to show that location on the chart I gave you.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Where is that location again?

[VAdm D. McFadden]

If you see three yellow dots in the centre of the page, it's the middle yellow dot, at Gascoyne Inlet. It's just to the east of Resolute.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Is that one of the so-called choke points we heard about earlier?

[VAdm D. McFadden]

That is a choke point, sir.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Thank you.

Mr. Kessel, we heard from Madam Lalonde a little earlier that the Northwest Passage...and I don't know if you even want to talk about that as the Northwest Passage. Perhaps it might give someone the idea we are acknowledging there may be one. Is there any evidence of any other country attempting to use the area over the so-called Northwest Passage for international flight--for overflight as a right? Has there been any attempt by anyone to do that, or any history of that?

[Alan H. Kessel]

I'm not aware of any.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

We understand, from the legality of it, that if it were an international strait there would be right of overflight.