National Defence Committee on Nov. 29th, 2012

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Good afternoon, everyone.

We're pleased to be joined today by General Lawson, Chief of the Defence Staff, as we continue on with meeting number 59.

General Thomas Lawson graduated from the Royal Military College of Canada with an electrical engineering degree in 1979. He then completed his wings and fighter training and was posted to 421 Squadron of CFB Baden Soellingen, where he flew the CF-104 Starfighter.

In 1988 General Lawson was promoted to major and was posted to Montgomery, Alabama, to attend the United States Air Force Air Command and Staff College.

In 1996 he was posted to National Defence Headquarters as a career manager and was promoted to lieutenant-colonel.

In 1998 Thomas Lawson was appointed commanding officer of 412 Squadron, where he flew the CC-144 Challenger until 2000.

In 2003 he was promoted to colonel and held various staff positions with the air force before joining the CF transformation team in 2005, where he led the stand-up of the Strategic Joint Staff.

In 2006 General Lawson was posted to CFB Trenton and completed a year in command of that base before being promoted to brigadier-general in May 2007.

In September 2009 he was promoted to major-general and appointed assistant Chief of the Air Staff.

In July 2011 he was promoted to lieutenant-general, and on August 15 of that year he was appointed deputy commander of NORAD and posted to Colorado Springs, a place I hope we'll be travelling to soon.

On August 27, Prime Minister Harper announced the appointment of Lieutenant-General Lawson as incoming Chief of Defence Staff to replace outgoing General Walter Natynczyk.

General Lawson, welcome, and thank you for appearing. It's good to have you here. Although you have been to committee before, I understand you're going to speak for longer than our regular 10 minutes with your opening comments. We will accommodate you, and we look forward to everything you have to say.

You have the floor, sir.

[General Thomas Lawson, Chief of the Defence Staff, Department of National Defence]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Members of the committee, good afternoon. Bonjour. It really is a privilege for me to be here today as the new Chief of the Defence Staff. As I sit here, I am struck that even though we are in slightly different uniforms, we are all serving the great people of this great nation.

Before I begin, I would like to express my sincere appreciation for the important work you do, both in Parliament and specifically in this committee. Thank you for the attention and oversight you give, time and again, to pressing Canadian defence issues.

Further, having met some of you already, I understand that some of you have had distinguished service, and I know that all of you have intense interest in the Canadian armed forces. It really is an honour for me to join you here today.

I have been in the Canadian armed forces for over 35 years, and I come from a family with some military tradition. I am the son of a Second World War Spitfire and Mustang pilot and the grandson of a transplanted Scotsman who fought in the trenches in France, and I am now the father of a couple of young servicemen. My family is quite typical of the very rich history and heritage of many families in the Canadian armed forces.

Thanks in great part to my predecessors, the Canadian Armed Forces have developed a solid foundation of skill, experience and expertise that will allow us to meet whatever challenges come our way. So it is with a profound appreciation for those who have served before me, but also with an eye firmly fixed on the future, that I will serve this country as the 18th Chief of the Defence Staff.

Members of the committee, today marks the end of my first month in this term as Chief of the Defence Staff, and in the past few weeks I've gained a deeper understanding of where we are as an organization and of the challenges and opportunities before us. This afternoon, I will share with you my priorities for the Canadian armed forces going forward.

The Canadian Forces are a dynamic institution operating in a dynamic environment, and we see that all the time. Like any vibrant organization, we're constantly learning lessons and adjusting course accordingly, so I would expect my priorities to evolve as time goes on. But as a starting point, I envision four key areas of focus presented to you as a whole, and not necessarily in order of importance, this afternoon. These are: leading the profession of arms; delivering excellence in operations; caring for our people and their families; and, finally, preparing for our forces of tomorrow.

Let me begin with leading the profession of arms.

It is an honour and a privilege to wear this uniform, but it also comes with a profound responsibility. As military members, we must meet the highest standards of professionalism.

We must uphold the four core military values: duty, loyalty, integrity, courage. Ultimately we must be willing to sacrifice everything in the service of the country.

The high calibre of our men and women in uniform is widely recognized across Canada and around the world. Indeed, I believe that because of our track record of service and sacrifice we have developed a strong relationship of respect and trust with Canadians from coast to coast to northern coastline. As CDS, it's my responsibility to ensure that we continue to exercise good, sound judgment in everything we do, and that we continue to uphold the highest ethical standards to maintain the trust of Canadians. It's also my intention that our forces continue to receive the necessary education and training to ensure that this level of professionalism endures.

As you probably know, I spent some time commanding the Royal Military College in Kingston, so the importance of professional development for our officers and NCMs is firmly ingrained in me.

It's the planning, the preparation, and the integration of all skill sets, expertise, and experience across the defence team that enable operations. Quite simply, professional development and a culture of continuous learning are essential to success and operations, which brings me to the priority of delivering excellence in operations.

Members of the committee, I command the Canadian armed forces as they work to protect and serve Canadians and operations here at home, to work alongside our American counterparts in the common defence of North America, and to project Canadian leadership and contribute to international peace and security abroad in places like Afghanistan, Libya, and the Mediterranean Sea.

The last few years have been particularly busy ones for our forces. Although the pace is not as hectic as it was, there's still a lot of operational work that continues.

Today, we still have over 1,600 military personnel serving Canada around the world: in maritime security and counterterrorism operations in the Arabian Sea; in UN missions in places like Cyprus, Haiti, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and the Middle East; and of course with some 950 Canadians with the NATO training mission in Afghanistan, where Canada remains the second largest contributor to that vital mission of training and transition.

That list, of course, is not exhaustive. We have troops deployed on 15 operations around the world. In fact, I will visit some of our deployed troops next week to see first-hand the tremendous work they are doing.

We also have forces stationed from coast to coast to coast, standing ready to help Canadians in case of emergency or disaster, undertaking search and rescue missions at sea and in the air, monitoring and defending our maritime and air approaches, and contributing to Canada's sovereignty in the Arctic.

So while the current operational tempo has changed, I would not say that things are slow.

As every mission we undertake is a no-fail mission, delivering excellence in operations remains paramount on my agenda.

Carrying out our operations in a wide variety of environments and circumstances—both here in Canada and around the world—requires a concerted effort by everyone on the defence team.

I want to underline that the key to our operational success has been, and always will be, our men and women in uniform. They are the ones who deliver—on the ground, in the air, on the sea—whatever the mission. These men and women deserve the best support to position them for the excellence they unfailingly achieve.

This leads me to the next priority, caring for our people. I mean this in the broadest sense. Our military family is large and comprises not only our men and women serving in uniform and the great civilian team in the department, but also their families, our veterans, and of course our wounded warriors. We must provide the necessary care and support to our military members, regular and reserve force, throughout their service career.

We are acutely aware of the toll that military service can take on our men and women physically, mentally, and emotionally, and of course the toll it can take on their families.

Much has been done in recent years to improve the care and support available to our whole military family, like the physical and mental health services for our ill and injured personnel, the career counselling and financial support for education for those transitioning into the civilian workplace, and the compassionate services for the families of the fallen. But when you meet a soldier who is silently suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, or you try to comfort the family of those who have lost a loved one, you know that we can always do better. Indeed, as Rear-Admiral Smith explained to you just last week, continuous improvement is a key pillar of our approach to caring for our ill and injured, and I'm firmly committed to that.

l'm also studying the ombudsman's latest report on the treatment of injured reservists and would like to highlight that we are not tackling these issues in isolation.

Reservists are an integral part of our military family, and I am committed to ensuring that they are given fair and equitable treatment.

Supporting our military also means effectively preparing them for their work tomorrow. This is the final priority I'll present today. We've learned a lot in recent operations—particularly in Afghanistan—and we must use this knowledge as we plan for the future. But we must also ensure that the soldiers, sailors, airmen, and airwomen who we send into harm's way have the right tools and equipment to keep them safe.

The Canada First defence strategy has served as an excellent blueprint for the government's systematic modernization of the Canadian armed forces to ensure that we are agile and combat ready.

We've been re-equipping the army with land combat vehicles, providing the air force with new tactical and strategic airlift, and modernizing the navy's frigates, while planning for the replacement of the entire surface fleet through the national shipbuilding procurement strategy.

These equipment renewals are key to our military's readiness and, ultimately, to our operational success.

The Canada First Defence Strategy remains our framework going forward.

We will continue to deliver the commitments made in the Canada First defence strategy, even as we do our part to help government to return to a balanced budget. That is why we are increasingly thinking of how a mix of complementary systems and technologies, a sort of system of systems, could get the job done more efficiently. Acquisitions we have made through the Canada First defence strategy have enabled the success of our ready forces and will continue for the days ahead.

The creation of the Chief of the Defence Staff position almost 50 years ago was about improving coordination and establishing true unity of purpose within the Canadian armed forces, but it was also about streamlining decision-making structures to be more cost-effective. So the times we find ourselves in at present are not so unique. The Canadian armed forces are not new to the challenge of building flexible, agile, and resilient forces while adjusting to fiscal constraints. In order to deliver on the four priorities I've just spoken to you about, it's clear we must address today's budgetary challenge.

In fact, it necessitates a determined and focused effort by the defence team to ensure our resources are being put to best use.

That is why the defence department has created a defence renewal team to help us identify and eliminate ineffective practices and ensure that taxpayer dollars are being put to best use. As the Prime Minister expects of us, we are working to free up resources that can be reallocated to our front lines. As you've heard, more tooth, less tail.

Some changes have been made already through the CF transformation with the stand-up of the Canadian Joint Operations Command this fall, with a plan to reduce administrative overhead by 25% and to redirect those resources to the ready force. I will make it my priority to ensure that this critical work will move forward in the months to come.

In conclusion, members of the committee, thank you again for your ongoing interest in what we do. As you know so well, the defence team has been very busy in recent years, and you can now see that our agenda will continue to be filled, but we have a great team.

I am immensely proud to lead such a skilled and professional institution. And I know we are capable of tackling whatever challenges lay ahead.

As CDS, I look forward to working under the leadership of Minister MacKay and alongside Deputy Minister Fonberg and the civilian defence team. Together, through sound governance, the Department of National Defence and the Canadian armed forces will continue to embody the highest ideals of public service in defending the sovereignty and interests of our great nation.

Thank you. Merci beaucoup.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Thank you, General Lawson. You're well under time. Well done.

Mr. Harris, you have the first of the seven-minute rounds.

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

Thank you, Chair and General Lawson.

First, I want to thank you for joining us today. You have had a very distinguished military career as a fighter pilot, as a military academic—I guess you could call it that—and as a leader in various functions: commandant of RMC, command positions in the forces themselves, and also, of course, most recently as a co-leader of our partnership in NORAD.

Congratulations on your appointment as Chief of the Defence Staff. It's a significant position and important to our nation. So thank you for your service to the military and for taking on this challenging role.

Let me start by talking about what the Prime Minister talked about on your installation. I was among the many who were there to hear what he had to say, but he only repeated what we'd already seen in the transformation report prepared by General Andrew Leslie about a year or so before. You're no stranger to transformation issues, having participated in 2005 and 2006.

Tooth to tail is the shorthand for it, but clearly what General Leslie suggested...and I know some things have been done—the change in command structure, for example, the one that you stood up back in 2006. If I can just paraphrase what he talked about in terms of reducing significant costs, particularly at the command level, and that NDHQ had grown 46% over this decade while the so-called teeth had only grown by 10%.... He talked about reducing numbers and headquarters staff by grouping functions or eliminating certain organizations; reallocating approximately 3,500 regular force personnel; demobilizing full-time reservists back to the baseline; converting the part-time service workers in units at armouries, etc.; and—this is an important one—reducing by 30% over several years the $2.7 billion spent on contractors, consultants, and private service providers, and investing these funds in other programs, for example, in the CFDS. And that's mostly headquarters money. Then reinvesting approximately 3,500 civil servants in the higher-priority activities.

These are significant goals, probably not short term. I know some things have been started. I realize you've only been on the job for a month, although you've known about it for some time. Can you tell us your specific plans or how you envisage the Canadian Forces under your direction in terms of looking at these objectives? Is that something you see that needs to be done to be able to withstand the budgetary challenges and yet have the capable military force we need?

[Gen Thomas Lawson]

The transformation report that General Leslie produced has been an excellent blueprint in many ways for the transformative activities that have been under way over the past year and a half and that are continuing.

You've spoken already about the command structure, the regrouping of Canada Command, the Expeditionary Force Command, and Support Command under one roof, which leads to about a 25% administrative cost reduction that can be turned back into “tooth”.

You've also spoken about the process of rebalancing our reserves. It's really very heartening that as the Prime Minister and the government give me my marching orders to focus on more tooth and less tail, they also commit to my maintaining the capabilities and numbers in uniform.

In our reservists, as you mentioned, we won't see cuts. They'll maintain a balance of about 27,000. However, that balance will be much more towards part-time, so we'll go from about 11,000 class B reservists, which we really depended on during our combat time in Afghanistan, to a more traditional number of around 4,000 in full-time service, with the remainder back in part-time service.

You will have seen announcements about a decrease in the size of the public service supporting the Canadian armed forces. There will be a trimming of contracting, which we have to be very careful about. Of course, that contracting has come about over the recent 10 or 15 years, as we have transformed over the past couple of decades. Many of the capabilities that were carried out before by those in uniform but that weren't truly combat-type capabilities were handed off to contractors. So we have to be careful which of those we give away.

Quite a number of those things that were in the transformation report that you refer to have been undertaken already. Another third are under way and have been provided to the government for consideration. We will stand by for government decisions and direction on that.

For the future, for this difficult task of reforming our business process, the business of defence, to find these efficiencies is far more difficult. For that, we've stood up the defence renewal team that I spoke about. What's exciting about this is that it's a team made up of half public servants and half members of the armed forces.

Kevin Lindsey, the chief finance officer for the Department of National Defence, is the DND representative and co-leader of that. Major-General Al Howard, former assistant Chief of the Land Staff, is the military side of it. They're supported by an excellent and talented staff of military members and public servants.

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

Perhaps I could get in one more question before the first round ends. It may come back to me again. This one is more directed toward your leadership, I suppose, and a question of confidence that the Canadian public and Parliament need to have in you, and it has to do with the F-35s.

We know that one of your roles in 2010 was to promote across the country the choice of the F-35. I don't know what you recall, but you were making the rounds of the country touting the virtues of the F-35.

As you know, of course, this is now under review. We hope, certainly on this side—because as a committee, we started a study of the F-35. We heard from some of the manufacturers and we heard all the arguments. We didn't write a report.

What I want to know is this. I don't think it's going to be left up to Mr. Fonberg as deputy minister, although he's on this committee. Clearly the Canadian Forces are going to have a significant say in this. We're being told that there's going to be a review, or a so-called “options analysis”. We assume this means a re-evaluation of what the choices are in terms of aircraft or in terms of whether we should have a mixed fleet of fighters, for example, to perform our various tasks, including patrolling the longest coastline in the world, etc., and the capabilities that are required for one function over another.

Can you tell us how you can give us confidence that despite your role in the past, you will be able to participate in this in a fair and objective way so that Canadians can be convinced that this is not just a public relations exercise?

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Just before you start, General, if you can be brief in your response, I'd appreciate it—so I can be fair to all members of the committee and give them equal time, because we're well over a minute over the time

[Gen Thomas Lawson]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would confine my comments to say that I'm very pleased with the process that's now in place, in that it's a whole-of-government approach. The Canadian armed forces have one of those seven-point steps that's been outlined for the Public Works secretariat, and that is to provide advice on the options that come forward.

I think, by and large, when such a significant decision is being made regarding purchase of a fleet that will be with us for at least a generation and a half, perhaps more, all Canadians will have a chance to be comfortable that Canadian taxpayers' dollars are going to be used in the right way.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Thank you.

Mr. Alexander, it's your turn.

[Chris Alexander, Conservative, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Congratulations, General Lawson, formally on your appointment. We're all delighted to have you here today. You have the support of this committee and the Canadian Forces have the support of this committee. That is the reason we're all here.

Of course, your opening remarks are stimulating for us, but also inspiring for us in that they remind us how broad the effort now under way is to bring about the systematic modernization, the continuous improvement of which you spoke. You know from your personal history—and you mentioned ancestors and children—how important it is to put that process of adaptation and transformation at the centre of what the Canadian Forces do. That has been the key to their excellence at every stage of their history. Part of that relates to new acquisitions, and you mentioned many of them in your opening remarks. Obviously, seven new aircraft in one decade is unprecedented and complicated.

I've personally been impressed, since coming back from Afghanistan, by the effort under way to learn lessons in terms of doctrine, in terms of tactics, in terms of strategy preparation for the very different kinds of operations the Canadian Forces are asked to perform. The army has learned exhaustive lessons, and still is learning them, from Afghanistan, the navy from recent missions and training in the Indian and Pacific Oceans, and the air force, obviously, from Libya and other missions.

I'd like to ask you to tell us a bit more about the “tooth” side of the future, which we hope will continue to benefit from an effective and streamlined “tail”. Part of it is obviously in leadership. Some of it's in the net workforce of the future, on which a lot of work has been done, but some of it relates to the basics: firepower; mobility; intelligence, which is more complex than ever; and the partnerships we have, not just with a huge number of allies now, but with non-NATO countries with which we operate.

Tell us a bit about—after your first month—what that front-line capacity of an improved fighting force looks like for the Canadian Forces in the years to come.

[Gen Thomas Lawson]

Mr. Chair, it's a great observation that having been in combat, arguably for over a decade, there is now an entire generation of junior and senior officers, and young and more senior non-commissioned officers, who have learned all kinds of things that would have taken us double the time to learn in training back in Canada. What I speak about is the interoperational capability with our key allies and more. When I speak about that, I speak about not only our procedures and processes in the field, but also about equipment working together as we go on joint operations together. We've also learned how to operate jointly. The air war going on over top of the ground war in Afghanistan, the air war going on over top of the naval efforts in the Mediterranean during the Libyan conflict—all of these things provide us with an opportunity to experiment with the leading edge of the fabric that holds us together, those things that bring us together that we can then bring into our doctrine.

It's very important, as we come out of these lessons—and as we all learn at staff college, not to fight the last war—to take the lessons out of the war you've just had that can be generalized to other combat and be prepared for what you may find in the future. I think we have an opportunity now, for however long we're out of combat, to really bring back our army, navy, and air force and have joint exercises. We have a wonderful joint exercise coming up in May called JOINTEX—which I'd love to take the credit for, but it was well under way before I came in as CDS—which will bring the army, navy, and the air force together with their three major exercises and the Canadian division over top with some of this connective tissue. When I say “connective tissue”, I refer to some of the things you've spoken about: unmanned aerial vehicles, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities that we were just starting on 10 years ago and now are fundamental to our success and going ahead.

I think that really is a very heartening thing. We have this new generation who have been energized by having practised their craft under the toughest of conditions. We come back, and for a period, at least, we'll be able to really transform that into the doctrine that drives not only our three environments, but also the joint interoperational abilities of those three environments together.

[Chris Alexander, Conservative, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Thanks, General. Thank you for that insightful answer. It really digs into the fourth point you covered in your opening remarks, the preparation we need to continue with our forces for the missions of the future. Our committee will be reporting soon on the whole concept of readiness, an elusive concept but an absolutely important and fundamental one.

Tell us a bit about numbers. Our government has gone to great lengths to protect the size of our force in spite of the budgetary pressures we're under and our intention to balance the budget. Does the number of our forces reflect our needs in the current global climate? Does the breakdown of personnel in each of the elements adequately reflect the uses to which our navy, army, and air force are being put and are likely to be put?

[Gen Thomas Lawson]

Mr. Chair, in my 30-some years in uniform, I've seen the numbers as high as 80,000 people and as low as the low 50,000s. We are now at 68,000 in the regular force; 27,000 balanced across full-time and part-time reserves; and about 25,000 to 26,000 in the public service as a defence team. You're asking me, someone who's been in for 35 years and seeing what has been provided to us as core missions, this question, and I think what we have coming out of Afghanistan, coming out of Libya, is a very nice balance.

The tasking in the Canada First defence strategy is to have a balanced, multi-role, combat-ready force. With 68,000 and 27,000 in reserves, I believe we can do that. It's nicely balanced against the three forces. The army remains the largest, the air force is next, and the navy is next. There will be some balance in that, but I think largely we have not only the personnel, but the equipment for the personnel and the infrastructure for the personnel we need.

You speak to readiness. It's always a balance between those four things. Once you have the personnel, the equipment, and the infrastructure, what you do with it provides the readiness. I know the honourable members around this table have been looking at that very carefully. That's probably the most complicated of those four columns. In terms of personnel, I'm quite pleased with the numbers we're at right now.

If I could add just one little more piece to that, one of the most heartening things about being at 68,000 now.... As we came up from the mid-50,000s to 68,000, that was a tremendous bite to swallow. We were taking in upwards of 7,000 to 8,000 a year, which had our schools full and our training lists full. Now, last year, we brought in about 4,000. That's all we needed to maintain because our retention rate is so high in the Canadian armed forces. That's allowed our schools to empty out and our training lists to come down. Our trained effective strength is quite impressive.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. McKay, you have the last of the seven minutes.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, General Lawson, and may I add my congratulations to your appointment. It was a very impressive ceremony at your installation and it was a privilege to be there.

Rightly or wrongly, you're associated with the F-35 acquisition. As you can probably appreciate more than most, that's been a controversial procurement.

It appears, from what the Minister of Public Works is now saying, that all options are on the table. I'm assuming your contribution, the military's contribution, to “all options on the table” will be a restatement, if you will, of the statement of requirements.

[Gen Thomas Lawson]

The process that's under way does not require a restatement of the statement of requirements. The statement of requirements is done independently, based on a close study by the air force of future battlefields they may have to work over and the issue of sovereignty back here in Canada—defence of the continent. That's what the statement of requirements is based on.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Will the minister be working with the same statement of requirements?

[Gen Thomas Lawson]

The secretariat requires from the armed forces a clear statement of requirements and advice on any options they bring forward. That's our entire role.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Will that statement of requirements be the one that's already in existence?

[Gen Thomas Lawson]

That statement of requirements has not been asked to be reformatted.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

So there's been no change in the statement of requirements, at this stage, that you've been asked for.

[Gen Thomas Lawson]

That's right.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

If there's no change in the statement of requirements, how are all options still on the table?

[Gen Thomas Lawson]

The statement of requirements, as you know, Mr. McKay, is based on looking at the equipment we have, looking forward to how it may be used in the future, and looking at what threats that equipment will face. That statement of requirements is written in such a way that it's blind of whatever is out there, except in terms of technology that may be available.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Will stealth still be a priority in the statement of requirements?