Okay.
Dr. Byers.
Evidence of meeting #36 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 need.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Professor, Department of Political Science, University of British Columbia, As an Individual
I'd just say that, if you follow my suggestion and give it to the Department of National Defence, then the people responsible for procuring the equipment are friends and colleagues of the people who will actually be using that equipment and desperately want that equipment, so you'd bring it closer to home.
You still need oversight, and especially at the stage of the definition of the statement of operational requirements, because that's where things slip up, right at the beginning, almost every single time. You can address that issue and provide oversight right at the beginning, and then let the men and women who are actually going to be using this equipment be part of the implementation process and not someone in Public Works who will never get on a ship or fly in a military aircraft.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC
Then I guess the last thing I would say is that I think you've told all of us to look carefully at the budget that's about to come out and see if the funding is there to match the commitments we've actually made.
For me, this has been a really useful session. I just want to thank all four of you for being here today. I'm sorry we didn't have a bit more time.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Stephen Fuhr
Thank you very much.
Third party expert opinion matters. Just from listening—I don't get to ask questions, unfortunately—I thought this was fantastic. Obviously, this committee's going to come out with recommendations after we get this report sorted out. We have a lot to think about.
I want to thank you very much for coming.
I'll take a motion to adjourn.
Thank you, Mr. Garrison.
This meeting is adjourned.