National Defence Committee on Nov. 25th, 2014

[Robert Chisholm, NDP, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Yes, I am speaking to the point of order, Mr. Chairman. I don't accept what the member has suggested. I, as a member of this committee, frankly, felt insulted by the fact that the minister wasn't providing us with any.... This operation is a big deal. I take it very seriously. My constituents take this matter very seriously, as do people within our caucus, and we're looking for some accountability. I don't buy the fact that the department doesn't have and hasn't given the cabinet estimates, Mr. Chairman, and I am just asking really basic questions about accountability. It's part of our parliamentary process.

I felt insulted that the minister would just basically give me, my questions, and our questions, the back of his hand. I don't think it's becoming of this government.

[The Chair, Conservative, Peter Kent]

Mr. Chisholm, as I ruled during proceedings, you did use unparliamentary language. You may be frustrated, but as Mr. Bezan has pointed out, the conduct of this committee is to ask questions and to listen to answers. If you wish to proceed further with the rhetoric that is accepted in the House, then that's fine, but I think we do try to maintain a level.... Shouting at a witness is unacceptable at any committee that I chair.

Now, in the interests of time, I would hope that you would take under consideration Mr. Bezan's suggestion. An apology to the minister may be in order. I believe it is in order, even though you can respectfully disagree with the answers you have heard.

Let's get on with things now.

Mr. Bezan, you have five minutes, please.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank the witnesses, all the members from DND and the Canadian Forces, for coming in and spending time with us today. I'm really excited to see that there is $900 million-plus in the supplementary estimates (B) to help with everything from readiness to our Canada First defence strategy and overhaul of equipment.

One of the lines in here under vote 1b provides for $190 million in extra funding for “strengthening the Canadian Forces Service Income Security Insurance Plan – Long-Term Disability components”. I was wondering if you could speak to that as to why we need it and how it's going to be utilized by members of the Canadian Forces.

[Richard Fadden, Deputy Minister, Department of National Defence]

I'd be pleased to do that, Mr. Chairman.

Essentially, you'll be aware, that the CF service income security insurance plan is a group insurance plan that supports the income of Canadian Armed Forces members who are disabled or released from the military for medical reasons. There are similar plans in the RCMP and the public service. Essentially, $140 million of this amount will go toward strengthening the SISIP reserve. Like all funds of this nature, it's necessary to maintain it at a reasonable level as you go along, and of the $190 million mentioned here, $50 million will go toward the implementation of the settlement that we agreed to in the Manuge class action settlement that was ordered by the Federal Court.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake, MB]

Thank you.

Of the $652 million that's for sustainment and operational readiness, we talked about some of the overhauls and long-term investments we are making. Can you go into a little more detail, particularly on the LAV program, the upgrades we are doing there, and how that is playing out in support of our army?

[Richard Fadden]

With respect to the LAVs it's difficult to add a great deal to what the minister said. We have come to the view that the vehicles we have now can be improved by simply adding more armour and by upgrading the technology, which provides for the mobility of the system but also for its weapons system. The basic reason for doing this is to improve the capacity of those members who are operating at the function and also to protect them at the same time.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake, MB]

Thank you.

In the capital expenditures there is reduction of $6.2 million. As the minister alluded, that's because of the sale of Downsview Park and property in the Stanley Greene neighbourhood.

How is that being reinvested in the military?

[Richard Fadden]

We have a general practice, Mr. Chairman, that when we acquire funds—and if you'll forgive me for using the word “unexpected”, I don't quite mean unexpected—off the general process, it is put into a general fund that is administered centrally by the senior leadership of the forces and of the department. We will take this, along with any other funds that we acquire off-line, and over the course of the months ahead, if it is beneath a certain threshold, or if it's very important, we will ask the minister to make investments in shorter-term activities: exercises, the purchase of spare parts that might be necessary in the very short term. We put it in a pot and we try to prioritize access to that pot for those issues that are the most important for that fiscal year.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake, MB]

Thank you.

Mr. Fadden, the increase to supplementary estimates (B) brings our total proposed authority to date to almost $20 billion for the operation of the Canadian Armed Forces and National Defence. Would you be able to speak to the facts as we were hearing from Ms. Murray or Mr. Chisholm, who want to know the costs for Operation Impact, and Operation Reassurance?

Is there enough funding here to conduct our operations not only abroad but here at home?

[Richard Fadden]

I think if the chief operating officer of any institution, including I bet the chair, were given the opportunity to acquire more money, be it for travel, research. or whatever, he or she would be delighted.

Could we use more? We absolutely could, but with the adjustments that we made over the course of the last several months, several years, we have reprioritized. We stopped doing some things, and we've reallocated essential moneys to readiness, to exercises, and to operations abroad. So the short answer is yes, I think we do have enough to be able to discharge the essential responsibilities that the minister has under CFDS, but I wouldn't be the chief operating officer if I didn't say I'd certainly like a lot more. But we do have enough to discharge our central duties.

[The Chair, Conservative, Peter Kent]

Thank you, Mr. Fadden.

Mr. Bevington, please, you have five minutes.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Northwest Territories, NT]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the witnesses.

I was interested in the minister's comments about the importance of matching the resources with the job at hand for the armed forces, and I think that's obviously something that has to be taken into account. But recently we've seen reports that the resources available for the frigate fleet indicate that we're likely to have only four coming out of that. Has the plan to build these ships been changed? Can we say that we only require four now, rather than eight? Is this part of the planning, or is there really a need for eight ships for the Canadian navy?

[Richard Fadden]

Mr. Chairman, forgive me for correcting you, but I don't think you're referring to the frigates. The frigates are the modernization program. You were probably referring to the—

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Northwest Territories, NT]

Arctic patrol ships, sorry.

[Richard Fadden]

—Arctic patrol ships. When the government made the initial announcement they said they would try to obtain up to a certain amount. In order to provide for increased costs and whatnot, our current planning, in working with our industry counterparts, is to get as many of these vessels as we possibly can.

Much like the answer to my previous question, if you ask the commander of the navy if he can use an extra vessel, the answer is always, yes, but I go back to the government's initial announcement, which said we would get as many as we could for the moneys that were available.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Northwest Territories, NT]

You really don't have a particular plan that says you needed eight or six or four. No number is attached to it.

How is that part of capital planning if we don't have a raison d'être for these boats that we're putting in the water, so many on one coast, so many on the other perhaps? Some kind of plan should be attached to the capital acquisition, wouldn't you think?

[Richard Fadden]

Well, I entirely disagree with you, when you suggest there's no plan. If there's one thing the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces have, it's plans.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Northwest Territories, NT]

Okay, fine, there's a plan. I'll leave it at that. I wanted to move over to Mr. Forster for a second.

You're building a new building. It's a very expensive building. It's my understanding that you have contingents from other countries, such as the U.S., that occupy space in your existing facilities. NSA has a contingent there. I don't know if that applies to the others under the listening program. Do you lease this space to other countries within your own facilities?

[John Forster, Deputy Head and Chief, Communications Security Establishment]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The short answer is no. We do have exchanges of personnel amongst the Five Eyes nations, particularly with Australia, the U.S., and the U.K. They have some personnel who work with us as liaison officers, and so on, and vice versa. No, we don't charge each other rent.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Northwest Territories, NT]

So these people are not working on separate operations? They are working within your jurisdiction within the building?

[John Forster]

We have liaison officers assigned to each other's countries to interact and deal with our partners on operational issues, and then we have people posted there, and they have some people posted with us.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Northwest Territories, NT]

So there's a structure for this liaison that is very well laid out in terms of the information sharing that may take place?

[John Forster]

Yes. There are provisions around all that, and they're reviewed annually as well. Actually our commissioner just recently tabled a report on information sharing.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Northwest Territories, NT]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Peter Kent]

You have one minute, Mr. Bevington.