Evidence of meeting #21 for National Defence in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was ships.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Stephen Fuhr
Thank you.
We'll move to Mr. Fisher.
You have the floor for five minutes.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thanks, gentlemen, for this. The amount of information you have presented to us this morning is incredible.
Last week we heard from Vice-Admiral Lloyd about the Halifax class modernization and its potential, or its possible potential, after the spring of 2018 when the last frigate is delivered.
My question is in regard to possible capacity or capability and readiness to take on jobs for other countries' fleets. If we're recognized for this ability and we're set up for this, do you see this as being something as a potential, some type of bailiwick we should get involved in, servicing and modernizing other fleets?
12:25 p.m.
VAdm Drew Robertson
Could I just clarify? Do you mean things like cooperating with other fleets—
12:25 p.m.
Capt(N) Harry Harsch
Other fleets with technical—
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
The actual modernization of other fleets, like other fleets in other—
12:25 p.m.
VAdm Drew Robertson
Oh, right.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
I'd like your perspectives on this. My question is on your thoughts, and I represent Dartmouth—Cole Harbour and Shearwater and I'm right there by the dockyard, so if we have the capability, if we have the capacity—and I'm not certain that we do—is that something you three feel we should consider taking on in the future? Again, Ms. Romanado talked about personnel and you spoke about sense of purpose and sense of worth and that their service is appreciated. Is this something that we should consider, going out and making our services available to other countries and modernizing their fleets?
12:25 p.m.
VAdm Drew Robertson
When Lockheed Martin won the contract to modernize the Halifax class, they did it with a set of capabilities that they could market internationally. With intent. They did that to make sure that which was used would not be constrained by national American rules, the result of which is a very capable system, as you would have heard from Admiral Lloyd, that can be marketed and has been marketed. Two New Zealand frigates will be modernized with the same capability effectively—
12:25 p.m.
Capt(N) (Ret'd) Harry Harsch
Effectively.
12:25 p.m.
VAdm Drew Robertson
—in the hands of Seaspan on the west coast. That's a great success, and while that's not the navy's doing—that of course is civilian industry and Seaspan's doing—there's no doubt in my mind they will be marketing that capability more broadly. All navies wind up being used as showpieces for their own nation's industrial base, so other countries would want to see how effective that modernization is going to be and the New Zealand ships only have to look at the success achieved in the Halifax class.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
Back to sense of purpose, sense of worth, is there any morale issue? Is there any issue with contracting out services at the dockyard in Halifax? I asked the question last week and I got a sense that there was a bit of a best business case for everything. Is there any issue, in your mind, of contracting out services and having private industry working side-by-side with members of the navy?
12:30 p.m.
VAdm Drew Robertson
You mean working not just with members of the navy but alongside public servants who work—
12:30 p.m.
VAdm Drew Robertson
—and make our navy effective by the work they do in the dockyards.
Do you want to go ahead?
12:30 p.m.
Capt(N) Harry Harsch
Sure. That, I think, has been standard for a number of years. We have done the refits of our ships in civilian yards. Some refits have been done in-house, particularly on the west coast, but what you might be getting at is what the U.K. went through a number of years ago, where they actually privatized their dockyards. Is that—
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
We're getting some feedback from constituents who work in the dockyards and such, who are asking those questions. It seems like it's something new to us here. Perhaps it's not.
12:30 p.m.
Capt(N) Harry Harsch
The whole idea of commercial contractors being involved in maintenance of ships is absolutely nothing new. It's something that has gone on for as long as I can remember. The focus on different pieces of kit have changed, for example the Victoria class submarines. Traditionally, the old Oberons were maintained by the Halifax dockyard. Now they're maintained by Babcock in the Victoria yard, which is a significant change. But my personal opinion is it's a positive change with respect to maintaining the submarines.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
Okay. Can I ask this really quickly?
As you know, we did the aerial readiness review in June. We talked a lot about a capability gap. Would you suggest that we potentially have a capability gap in the navy?
12:30 p.m.
VAdm Drew Robertson
With respect to the aerial side or...?
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
12:30 p.m.
VAdm Drew Robertson
We have multiple capability gaps at this point. In fact, the gaps are turning into—
12:30 p.m.
Capt(N) Harry Harsch
Chasms.
12:30 p.m.
VAdm Drew Robertson
Yes, in some cases, with respect to supply ships, as just one example. The fact that we can't put a supply ship to sea to keep frigates and destroyers on station doing the work they need to do at sea is an indication. We can't even get gas.
Both the previous government and this government took steps to get us towards the point where we can have a rental—effectively, a leased ship—for six years for Canada, such that at least on one coast the skills won't perish and there will be an ability to keep ships at sea longer.
Yes, we have multiple capability gaps.