National Defence Committee on March 22nd, 2016

[The Chair, Liberal, Stephen Fuhr]

We have about a minute and 40 seconds left.

Anybody on the right side, you have a minute and 40 seconds to ask a quick question and get a quick response. We're going to move on to—

[Darren Fisher, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

I have a quick one.

We've talked a lot about the west and we've talked a lot about the Arctic, and I know we're really well liked in eastern Canada, but can you discuss just for a moment the protection, the ability to respond to any threats in eastern Canada—P.E.I., New Brunswick, Newfoundland?

I know we have a major base in Florida. We have Greenwood as well, in Nova Scotia. We have our planes in Cold Lake and in Quebec. Is there a quick bullet that you can throw at us on the preparation, what we do, how we would be prepared to handle a threat on the east coast of Canada?

[RAdm Scott Bishop]

We obviously have a lot of capability in eastern Canada. Right across the country, we've broken the country into essentially five regions, and in each region there is what we call a joint task force commander who works for our joint operations command. If there were any kind of incident, that commander of joint operations command could mobilize all the resources of the Canadian Forces to provide assistance, if it were required.

There is a very robust capability on the east coast. In Halifax there's joint task force Atlantic, which can pull together army, navy, air, and special forces resources to respond to any incident, and we have the same architecture on the west coast of Canada, as well.

In terms of being able to mount a response very quickly, I think it exists on both of our coasts. I have to also say that we have a very good militia service and system of reserves, a lot of whom live in these communities in western and eastern Canada, who in our previous experience have mobilized very rapidly to assist in responding to any kind of incident we have. So east coast, west coast, I think we're well positioned to be able to respond to any kind of crisis.

[The Chair, Liberal, Stephen Fuhr]

Thank you.

The last question goes to Mr. Garrison, if you have a question.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

Thanks very much, Mr. Chair.

I'm going to go back to the navy now and ask an obvious question to the rear-admiral. Without asking you to comment on what I'm going to say at the beginning as a kind of preface, we've had procurement failures over the years that have resulted in some lack of capacity at this time for the navy. In terms of a threat analysis, we have a gap now with supply ships. Some have called our navy “a territorial navy” at this point. I just want to ask what's happened in terms of the ability to respond to threats at the naval level due to the delays in the procurement process for the new ships.

[RAdm Scott Bishop]

With respect to replenishment ships, it's a key challenge for the navy. We talk about a territorial navy; it's important to understand that we have huge ocean space in our country. Even to be able to operate in our own waters, we need an expeditionary capability that includes the ability to resupply and refuel at sea, just given the vast distances in Canada.

The Canadian Armed Forces tried to introduce some mitigating measures with an interim replenishment ship. It has also enlisted the support of some of our key allies to send ships up to work with the Atlantic and the Pacific fleets. That's mostly not out of sovereignty or national operations issues, but mostly to make sure we don't lose our skills to be able to operate with a replenishment ship until we've actually built one in Canada.

We are confident that we have a very good plan to bridge the gap from the oilers that have just paid off to the replenishment ships that will be built in Vancouver. Those ships, obviously, will be a great leap forward for the Royal Canadian Navy and also for the Canadian Armed Forces, because they bring some new capabilities to the Canadian Armed Forces that we didn't have in our previous generation of replenishment ships, capabilities that will be very useful for us, like a limited lift capacity.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I don't know how much time you are giving me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Stephen Fuhr]

You had five minutes. You have two minutes left.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

By the same token, what I have heard from some people in the navy is that there's an urgency now to refit some of the frigates, given the longer time frame for replacement of the frigates. Again in terms of the threats we're meeting, what kinds of things are we going to have to do to our frigates to extend their lives?

[RAdm Scott Bishop]

Our frigates have actually just undergone a major modernization program that has significantly increased their capabilities across most areas of war-fighting and operations. From that standpoint, we're very confident, with the 12 Halifax-class frigates that have just been modernized, that we're well positioned for the next couple of decades until the Canadian surface combatant starts to enter the inventory.

We did a very good job on the modernization of those ships. I've been on board these newly modernized frigates. My only regret is that I'm past the rank to serve on them. They'd get deeply concerned if a rear-admiral showed up and said he was sailing on the ship for six months.

They're great ships and they will be the workhorses for the Canadian navy. They're already proving their worth in the operations they're doing. We have one of those frigates in Operation Reassurance right now in the Mediterranean and Aegean Seas. She attracts a lot of interest from our allies in terms of what we've done with that modernization program. In fact, New Zealand is going to refit their two frigates in a Canadian shipyard, based on how well that modernization process worked for us.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

Great. Thanks.

[The Chair, Liberal, Stephen Fuhr]

Thank you very much.

I'd like to thank Mr. Burt, Rear-Admiral Bishop, and Mr. Drake for coming today.

Thank you very much for your time.

I'd like to suspend for a couple of minutes. We'll return in three to four minutes for committee business. Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Stephen Fuhr]

Welcome back, everybody.

For committee business, I'm going to give the floor to Mr. Bezan, who is going to table a motion.

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

If time permits, we'll do both motions. If not, we'll do one motion today and one motion tomorrow.

[The Chair, Liberal, Stephen Fuhr]

Okay. Fair enough.

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

For the first motion I want to move onto the floor, a notice of motion was already handed out.

I move:

That the Committee undertake a study on the force protection measures and procedures that have been adopted by the Canadian Armed Forces since October 2014; that, in relation to the study, the Committee invite the Chief of the Defence Staff, General Jonathan Vance, and/or his representatives and any other person the Committee deems appropriate to appear as witnesses; that the Committee hold no less than two (2) meetings to conduct the study; that these meetings be held in-camera to protect the operational security of the Canadian Armed Forces; and that the Committee report its findings to the House of Commons.

Just to give you and colleagues some background on it, Mr. Chair, after the attacks in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu and here in Ottawa, which took the lives of, first, Warrant Officer Patrice Vincent, and then, Corporal Nathan Cirillo, the armed forces started to do a review of the measures that need to be taken to protect the forces here in Canada. Then, of course, with the North York terrorist attack and the wounding of a couple of our soldiers in the recruitment centre in Toronto, I think it's important that we find out as quickly as possible what the forces are doing to ensure that our brave men and women have the best possible ways of protecting themselves from these lone-wolf attacks that seem to be occurring.

Of course, there's no timeline on this, so it leaves it to the discretion of the chair in planning committee business and working with the availability of witnesses to organize and schedule these meetings.

[The Chair, Liberal, Stephen Fuhr]

The floor's open for discussion.

Mr. Rioux.

[Jean Rioux, Liberal, Saint-Jean, QC]

I am receptive to your request since I am the member for the riding of Saint-Jean.

We have an agenda that goes to the end of June. Ms. Gallant suggested that we broaden our mandate when that work has been done. Could we look at this after June, when we have completed the first part of our mandate?

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

As I said, I'm not trying to predetermine the work of the committee. I'm saying that this is something we need to undertake.

There are going to be times—the chair and I have had this discussion—that witnesses aren't going to be available for our study on North America, so possibly we could backfill to make sure we are making use of those dates with the witnesses we want to call for this study. If it doesn't take place until the fall, it doesn't take place until the fall. But it provides flexibility to the committee so that we're maximizing our time.

[Jean Rioux, Liberal, Saint-Jean, QC]

If I understand correctly, we are going to look at this in a second phase, after the month of June, as Ms. Gallant has suggested.

I agree.

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

Don't be getting confused with this. This isn't part of the North American study. This is about making sure that the proper policies are put in place to protect our forces here in Canada—on base, at recruitment centres, on parade.

[The Chair, Liberal, Stephen Fuhr]

Mrs. Romanado.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I just want to make sure of something. We don't know exactly.... I'm assuming there's going to be an investigation about what happened a few weeks back at the recruitment centre. But you're not including public places specifically. You're speaking specifically about recruitment centres, bases, and so on. Is that correct?

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

This is a study on the entire force protection measures being implemented by the Canadian Armed Forces. It's a policy that they've been working on for the last two years. It's a matter of informing us as a committee.

We'd do this in camera, so that we're not disclosing publicly the measures that the chief of the defence staff is initiating. He's alluded to this in some of the press conferences he's done on the attack that happened in Toronto. Of course, that investigation is ongoing, but we do know that individual has been charged with two counts of attempted murder. Again, the targets of this terrorist attack were unfortunately members of the Canadian Armed Forces.

It's going to take at least two meetings when we look at this. It's the overall policy, what we are doing not just at recruitment centres but what we are doing to enforce protection at bases. A lot of our army bases have no outward security measures in place at all. You can just drive into most of our army bases without going through a checkpoint, unlike at a wing. At a wing, especially in urban centres, you have to go through a commissionaire and checkpoints.

This is about how we best protect members of the Canadian Armed Forces and what measures have been taken, so that we can make recommendations to the House if we feel there are shortcomings.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

On that note, do you think that would be something that would involve the public safety minister?