National Defence Committee on Feb. 23rd, 2015

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

In the far north, especially during joint operations naturally there are challenges. I'm interested in knowing what your energy challenges are, specifically electricity. Do you have ready access to whatever you need? If so, how is it provided?

[MGen Christopher Coates]

If I can I'll start and then I'll pass it over to General Loos as the commander on location.

If I were to summarize the challenges in the north from an operational perspective, logistics would be one of them because of the nature of the north. We treat it very much like an expeditionary operation. If my counterparts are planning for an operation in Africa or the Middle East we generally try to arrive self-sufficient, at least initially. For all of our operations up north that's the approach we apply.

If we have equipment that requires an awful lot of electricity or electrical support then we make sure we arrive with the necessary generators and the fuel, etc.

I am interested, and we are working with Defence Research and Development Canada to examine alternate sources of energy that might be applicable in the north. Some of our allies are doing that, and we're looking at that with them.

Maybe General Loos could add something.

[BGen G.D. Loos]

I can just add very quickly to that. Certainly to reinforce that point, if it's about mission continuity as it applies to electricity, we always plan on bringing it with us. There are many communities, and most are served by diesel in remote areas. Some have hydroelectricity but we always have to plan to bring it with us. We have to plan to bring our fuel along with us as well if it is something deliberately planned, or if it is in a crisis response that becomes part of our planning process for logistical resupply.

We attempt insofar as is possible not to deplete community resources. They get their annual resupply, and we don't want to use all their diesel fuel filling our planes or things like that, so we take it with us.

As far as our permanent installations go we are on provided power in Yellowknife, Whitehorse, and Iqaluit for our detachments. They all have backup power so we have our own generators should the local power go out.

[The Chair, Conservative, Peter Kent]

Thank you, General.

That's your time, Ms. Gallant.

Madame Michaud, please.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I want to start by thanking the witnesses for their presentations.

Most of my questions are for Brigadier-General Loos.

In your presentation, you said you had identified new threats due to climate change—for example, the melting Arctic ice—and the high level of human activity in the region.

Could you tell us more about these new threats you have identified and how you are preparing to address them? Are you working with Environment Canada or other similar organizations?

[BGen G.D. Loos]

Yes, but if you will allow me, I will answer in English.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

No problem.

[BGen G.D. Loos]

That way, my comments and answers will be clearer.

In terms of risks and threats, there are evolutions in the climate. That's changing a number of things. Whether you're travelling in the summer via maritime means or travelling in the winter, as the weather patterns are changing, it affects almost everything you do. In terms of the impacts on the individuals in the communities, whereas before we might have relied on community knowledge for when the ice was good and we could go out and travel on it, they don't know as well as they used to what it's going to be like. That may show up in terms of incidents, or it may show up in terms of restricting certain activities or patrols that we ordinarily would have done.

We're also seeing increased activity. I would say it's on a linear progression as opposed to geometric. We're not seeing great numbers of additional cruise ships, but there are more, and there are bigger ones coming. There is more activity, with more adventurers going up in winter and summer, which we try to keep track of through open source information just so we're aware of what's going on and how we can respond.

How do we get better at that? We try to circle those areas. We discuss them at our Arctic security working group with all of our partners to see if we're seeing the same increases in risk and if we have the same appreciation that it may be a problem for one or more departments.

Then, where and when we can, we try to introduce those ideas into our scenarios for things such as Operation Nanook. We'll go out and simulate a cruise ship grounding down the bay in Frobisher Bay, and we'll all go through our respective parts to practise how we would call in for federal help: what the steps are, what the procedures are, who would integrate into whose team, and how that would play out. It really is quite an excellent collaborative approach.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Thank you very much.

I would like you to tell us more about how you work with local communities. You touched on this. You rely on their knowledge of the climate and the land, but aside from the Rangers, how do you work with local communities in the Arctic?

[BGen G.D. Loos]

I would say it is limited. Certainly, I make it a point to visit with the mayors, the hamlet councils, and the senior administrative officers in every community when I do happen to visit if I'm there on operations, on exercises, or visiting Ranger patrols. It's an attempt to have some contact. I would say that we have more connection with those communities through Rangers and also through our partners. We work closely with the RCMP. Through those lines at least we have communications.

Beyond that, in Whitehorse, Yellowknife, and Iqaluit, I would say that there's a more robust relationship with many different organizations, because that's where a number of regional organizations are based. Obviously, most of the population in the north is concentrated in those three bigger cities.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

How much time do I have left, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Peter Kent]

You have about 60 seconds left.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

We know that there have been a number of delays in the delivery of the Arctic offshore patrol ships. We are told that Irving can supply six ships, but the Parliamentary Budget Officer says it can deliver only three or four.

Do you feel that three or four ships would be enough to conduct your operations in the north and meet our needs? Would these ships have the technical capability to meet our needs in the north?

[BGen G.D. Loos]

From my perspective, I think that in capability terms I'm looking forward to that capability when it's delivered. From where I sit, I'm not an expert in maritime operations who can tell you that I need three, four, or seven patrol ships. What I do know is that we have a certain window where you're able to ply the waters up north today. That may change in the future.

I think we're going to have an excellent capability once it's delivered, and certainly for me, it's not based on the number of ships. It's about having a capability that's available to respond to different requirements.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Peter Kent]

Mr. Chisu, please. You have five minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much, Generals, for your presentation and testimony.

General Loos, in your “Commander's Intent”, you state your commitment to strengthening the Joint Task Force North's “infrastructure and organization to better ensure its operational relevance”, especially when the north warning system is reaching the end of its operational life. In practical terms, what does this entail?

[BGen G.D. Loos]

I'll separate your question into two parts, if I may: my operational intent, and then the other part with respect to the north warning system.

The north warning system is part of NORAD's suite of equipment. I'm certainly not in a position to comment on the future evolution of its capability development, improvement, or recapitalization. Lieutenant-General Parent down in NORAD would best answer that question.

From my perspective, I take a bigger view of infrastructure. It's about the facilities I have for my units that are based in the north. It's about the infrastructure, in terms of communications, that I need to command and control, either permanent installations or forces as they are deployed out on the land. We have an emerging concept whereby we establish northern operational hubs as launching pads. We bring forces from the south strategically and move them out tactically from a number of different locations in the north.

When I say “infrastructure,” that could be a standing contract for a certain amount of support or services based on that concept. We use some of the infrastructure we have. We have contracts in place. We bring forces and ready kit from the south. By “infrastructure” I mean all of that, such that we are better positioned to launch, command, and control operations.

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

In your opinion, is there a new arms buildup under way in the Arctic, as some analysts are maintaining? If so, what does it mean for Canada and the United States? I'm just putting that in the context of reinforcing Russia's ambitions in the Arctic, starting on January 1 of this year.

[MGen Christopher Coates]

Maybe General Loos will have something to add.

From a Canadian joint operations perspective, we are monitoring all threats to North America. At this time, we do not consider that the Russian activities along their northern slope constitute a military threat that we need to address.

We are not complacent about that, nor are we naive about that. We continue to monitor this closely, but we do not consider that to date to be a military threat.

General Parent would be another good person to pose that question to, with respect to the air activity that occurs, but certainly the activity we're watching on the Arctic archipelago of Russia, which, perhaps, you're characterizing as an arms buildup, does not constitute a threat to continental defence.

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

General Beare, the former commander of the Canadian Joint Operations Command, stated in 2014 that, “under the direction of both Chiefs of Defence, Canada and the U.S. initiated a strategic review to analyze and examine the threats and ensure that NORAD remains informed, ready, and above all, capable of responding.”

Has this strategic review been completed? If so, what are the implications for your operations in the north?

[MGen Christopher Coates]

Sir, I believe the strategic review has been completed. I believe they have provided a report to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretary of Defense in the U.S., and our Chief of the Defence Staff. That hasn't made its way out as an impact yet to Joint Operations Command. I believe that Lieutenant-General Parent, as deputy commander of NORAD, would be a really good person to ask that question of, as he was central in the production of the report.

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

I was just asking you if the chain of command came down with something for you.

[MGen Christopher Coates]

Nothing has impacted us yet, although we look with anticipation at the focus on the north that we believe is in the report, and things like the north warning system and what the future of it will be. We look forward to that.

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

Thank you very much.