National Defence Committee on Nov. 29th, 2012

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Thank you, Ms. Moore. Your time is up.

Mr. Strahl, you're on deck.

[Mark Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My congratulations, General, on your new role.

We've been hearing testimony throughout the last number of months about the fact that we don't have to necessarily prepare for the war we just fought, but look to new threats on the horizon. One of the things that keeps coming up is cyberspace security, cyber threats.

What are your plans to help address this? Is this a focus as you move forward? Do you agree that this is an area that we need to do more to prepare for?

[Gen Thomas Lawson]

Indeed, cyber threats have the attention of the Canadian armed forces. In the larger sense, of course, it falls under Public Safety, but we are partners in this as we address it. Much of what we call our weapons system is based on an infrastructure of information technology, and what we're finding is that if not increasingly vulnerable, it's certainly under increasing attack from external agents and parties.

It does have our attention. However, I think all of our allies are coming to a realization that we're behind the game and we need to catch up. Two years ago, the Canadian armed forces opened up a new position called the director general of cyber operations, and Brigadier-General Greg Loos is holding down that role now. He is in constant and very constructive talks with General Alexander, who leads cyber command in the States. From my experience at NORAD, it was my sense that they were probably five or six years ahead of us on this.

Everyone is trying to get a grip on just exactly what the threats are and what our laws allow us to do. You will be aware that there is a cyber policy now in place that will help guide the way ahead, not only for Public Safety and all departments, but for the Department of National Defence as well. I think we can be heartened by the fact that our most secure systems have been well protected against cyber attack.

However, no system is perfectly defended against all attacks, and those attacks can be either cyber or even the man in the loop—the person in the loop. All of that speaks to cyber security, and this is something we're becoming more and more seized of, along with our like-minded allies.

[Mark Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Thank you.

General, I'm sure you know you have big shoes to fill from General Walt Natynczyk, and I have to tell you it feels nice to say that to somebody else instead of having it said to me.

I did always appreciate General Natynczyk's personal concern for the mental health of the men and women under his command. We're currently embarking on a study for care of our ill and injured, and I wonder if you could comment on that. Going forward in your role, do you plan to continue the good work that General Natynczyk did in that area?

[Gen Thomas Lawson]

It's one of my top priorities, and one of the four that I spoke about. Mental health, in particular, is one that we've really made great strides in. Operational stress injuries and the Canadian approach have been recognized by some of our biggest allies. They're coming to us to see how we've done it.

It's not perfect, and we know that. The ombudsman and the Auditor General have provided us with input that shows we have to get better. By and large, the joint personnel support units have stood up across the nation. They provide a one-stop shop, where in the old days you would have to travel to various sites to find support for whatever ailed...or whatever you returned from theatre with in any sort of injury. Now it all comes in the form of one case manager at a joint personnel support unit. These are tremendous steps forward.

I think one of the most heartening things, and one of the things that will remain one of my top priorities, is our ability to decrease the stigma attached to mental health. When our members recognize that early treatment comes without any sort of stigma and leads to early recovery and a return to full combat-ready status, we're finding that the success rates are far greater. We're seeing the return on those investments, and those investments have been considerably more in recent years than we've had in the past.

We hadn't been used to OSIs in the numbers that we're seeing now. Even though we're out of combat now, and have been for a year, we're not finding that OSI numbers, operational stress injury numbers, are coming down yet. This is something we're coming to understand, that these things continue to manifest themselves long after our soldiers, sailors, and airmen and airwomen have returned from the places that have put this stress on them.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Thank you. The time has expired.

I just want to say that both of you gentlemen are filling those shoes quite well.

Ms. Leslie, it's your turn.

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm going to give my time to Mr. Harris.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Harris.

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

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Ms. Leslie.

General Lawson, as you said, given its importance to the next generation, I'm going to turn briefly to the F-35. You suggested that the contracts aren't wired because they're done blindly without reference to aircraft, yet our experience with the fixed-wing SAR, of course, was that only one plane met the requirements, and they appeared to have been designed to meet that plane, so we had to go back to the drawing board.

In the case of the F-35, of course, the statement of requirements wasn't written until June of 2010, after several years of discussion, mostly with Lockheed Martin, and one or two meetings with the other competitors. Of course, only one plane met the requirements. They specifically discovered that a particular helmet design that was unique to the F-35 was part of that, so a lot of people are concerned because that took place there too, and the contract was awarded six weeks later.

But if, as you say, all options are truly going to be on the table, then surely the comparisons between what we were told by other manufacturers.... Stealth is important, but it's one of many factors in what's called survivability. As a pilot, you would know that. Speed, interceptor capability, stealth, how low you can fly, manoeuvrability, etc.—for many of these aspects they claim superiority. So if the options are truly going to be on the table, isn't there really a requirement to re-evaluate what your needs are in comparison to what's available today, and also to consider whether or not there could be, for example, a two-fleet option? If they're all going to be on the table, that has to be on the table too. Is that really what's going to happen?

[Gen Thomas Lawson]

I will have to claim ignorance on exactly what the secretariat is doing with options. What you've just suggested sounds like a very reasonable way forward, but I've heard from the Minister of Public Works in open press that the statement of requirements will be set aside as the secretariat does its work.

At a point in there, of course, the Canadian armed forces will give us advice in the form of a statement of operational requirements and any advice on any options that come forward, and that will be our role.

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

Thank you. I hope you're right. We'll follow that very closely, of course.

I'll move to another area that's of great interest to me, and has been for the last number of years, and that is, as you mentioned, the Arctic. There's a recent paper on search and rescue in the Arctic, and the needs that Canada has and hasn't quite been able to fulfill and the new treaty we've signed with the Arctic Council.

One of the issues I've championed over the last number of years is the notion of response time, how quickly we can get into the air. I know your CF-18s can get into the air in five minutes on high alert. We talked before the meeting about seeing a fighter pilot running for an airplane. That's when they run for an airplane.

We have fixed-wing SAR aircraft and Cormorant helicopters that are supposed to be able to get into the air in half an hour, between 8 and 4, Monday to Friday, and up to two hours after that time. We've had debates about that in this committee.

Something I recently brought to the attention of the House is that Sweden just entered into a new contract with AgustaWestland, I think it was, the manufacturer of the Cormorants, for a different type of plane. Their country, which is one-twentieth the size of ours, with a population of about one-fifth, has five primary SAR locations. They have helicopters as well as fixed-wing aircraft. They have 15 minutes wheels-up 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. I feel we're behind the international standards.

Other countries, like the U.S. and Australia, have 30 minutes 24/7. Is that something you think needs to be evaluated, or do you think we're okay on that? I know you're an air force man, so you have some knowledge of this. We do have to get better in the Arctic. It takes four hours to get a Cormorant from Gander to Inuvik. These are long times for search and rescue missions that save lives.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Harris, your time has expired.

Again, General, I ask if you could be as concise as possible in your response.

[Gen Thomas Lawson]

I will. I do thank the member for the question.

It's a very important point, and yes, the Canadian armed forces continually takes a look at all of the problems—the weather, the equipment we have, the number of crews we have. I will say that in comparison to Sweden—I think it was Sweden you mentioned—there are two things. One is that our geographical problem stands as a completely different problem from theirs, for the very reason you talked about. Ours is 18 million square miles, and theirs is one very small fraction of that. So we head out on operations knowing that those operations could be as long as 12 or 14 hours, and we need to equip ourselves with aircraft and capabilities that will meet that requirement.

But I will also say that I was the head of delegation during the negotiations of the Arctic SAR treaty that you spoke to, and what was very interesting is that of the eight nations that signed that treaty, Canada provides a gold standard for response into the Arctic that almost no other nation there even attempts. I didn't know that until I showed up and saw it. It spoke to the desire of other nations to team with Canada for the very reason that they believe there's a higher probability that Canada will get up to save one of their members somewhere around the Arctic circle than they may be able to do themselves. It speaks to the friendship and partnership in that treaty.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Chisu, you have the floor.

[Corneliu Chisu, Conservative, Pickering—Scarborough East, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, General, for appearing in front of our committee. I congratulate you for your excellent military career and your recent appointment.

You have combined very successfully two illustrious professions—the profession of arms and the profession of engineering—in the service of the country, and I am very pleased about this situation. I am sure that as CDS you will make good use of engineering principles in your important function.

Along this line, I have the following questions. As a former commander of the RMC, what do you think is the most important factor in a military education, and what is the best way to ensure that military education translates into effective and efficient officers in the future?

[Gen Thomas Lawson]

In full disclosure, I have to say that the only true engineering I've done, even though I have an electrical engineering masters degree, is to teach it as a professor at RMC—and to finish the electric wiring in my basement, which just about outpaced my capabilities.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Gen Thomas Lawson]

I will say, on the question regarding education and the most important factor, I truly have come to believe, even as an engineer, that it's a balance. I think that's why the Royal Military College and the Collège militaire royal de Saint-Jean have been so successful in graduating leaders who then become very distinguished in their careers, because it's a very balanced education that has you thinking not only of the stiff rigours of the mathematics of engineering, but also about the more abstract thought that can lead you out of the box to solutions that might not otherwise have been evident on your calculator.

I think both of those things come together, so I would say probably it's balance.

[Corneliu Chisu, Conservative, Pickering—Scarborough East, ON]

General, as Canada has a long and varied history in terms of how we engage in global affairs, do you think there are any areas of military engagement, whether it be via peacekeeping or perhaps in concert with our allies, where the Canadian Forces might not be able to partake in the mission?

[Gen Thomas Lawson]

If I understand the question correctly, you're asking if there are certain missions that may be out there that Canada may not have readiness capabilities for.

What is really quite impressive about Canadian capabilities is that even though we have been down to numbers as low as the mid 50,000s in decades recently, we've maintained a hand in just about every capability. We were out of submarines for a while, although we have them. We were almost out of tanks, although we have them, and we were out of Chinook heavy-lift helicopters, but we're back in that as well. Arguably, in just about any capability that is honed by our like-minded allies, we have a play in that still.

What is very heartening is that even as our supply line comes down somewhat, the order to me and to the Department of National Defence is to maintain all of those capabilities, so the message here is that the government and successive governments have purchased for themselves a balanced, multi-purpose, multi-role, and a combat-ready force that could provide, especially to an alliance, a very real capability almost anywhere, in any area in which one could be required.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

You have one minute.

[Corneliu Chisu, Conservative, Pickering—Scarborough East, ON]

On the same issue, General, I'm raising this question about education. I'm going back a little bit on the education at the Royal Military College and the education of engineers. I was in an engineering unit. I have seen that we encountered difficulties in overseas operations, both in peacekeeping and in combat operations, with engineering skills, for example, construction engineering skills. As you know, the British forces are allowing engineers to have a practice of engineering before they go back on the construction engineering field.

How do you think these things can be mitigated in our forces?

[Gen Thomas Lawson]

Mr. Chisu, I know you were an engineer over in Afghanistan, and I thank you very much for your years of service, both in the forces and over there.

I think in a really strong economy, engineers are often a hot commodity, and we put quite a few through the Royal Military College of Canada, which allows us a very robust construction engineering and combat engineering capability, of which you were part. That remains sound, although it may not be the case with some of our allies and partners, and that speaks to the strength of a partnership where Canada can come in with capabilities that are well honed by our training and background and not so well honed within other forces.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Thank you.

We move to Mr. Brahmi. You have five minutes.

[Tarik Brahmi, NDP, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

General, after Mr. Chisu, I'm afraid you're going to have to spend the next five minutes talking to an electrical engineer, as well.

I want to congratulate you on your appointment, as well as your attendance at the 60th anniversary celebration of the Royal Military College in Saint-Jean, a few weeks ago.

I had the opportunity to attend the event. Whenever I talk to former or current RMC students, they always tell me that French is in a constant state of decline among the student body.

They also talk about the recruitment of French speakers. RMC Saint-Jean is having more and more trouble finding students to fill francophone spots. I don't think that is due to an unwillingness to accept francophone students, but rather a lack of them.

You were head of the Royal Military College in Kingston. Over the years, have you observed a lack of interest in a military career among francophone students? As you carry out your new duties, what efforts will you make to reverse that trend?