Evidence of meeting #56 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 going.
A video is available from Parliament.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
General Vance, I want to talk about submarines. We gather that the defence policy says that we should keep our old submarines and invest $2.5 billion in modernizing them.
Is that correct?
5:10 p.m.
Gen Jonathan Vance
Yes.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
In this instance, what does modernize mean? I know that the Windsor has new electronic monitoring equipment. In what part of these old submarines will you invest the $2.5 billion? In mechanics?
5:15 p.m.
Gen Jonathan Vance
Okay, I think I'll let the submarine expert at the table answer that question. But suffice it to say, any modernization effort is going to be designed to ensure that the platform is able to function in a threat environment that we intend to use it in. It's going to involve all the systems of the submarines to ensure that we can defend the underwater approaches to Canada, in combination with underwater RPSs, remotely piloted systems, as well as to project offshore. I think Monsieur Finn will explain.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
The Senate Standing Committee on National Security and Defence recommended that 12 new submarines be acquired. At the Standing Committee on National Defence, we've just submitted a report. The report was tabled last week. We also recommend the purchase of new submarines.
As part of the defence policy, why did the navy decide to invest billions of dollars in old submarines that are already outdated rather than acquire new submarines?
5:15 p.m.
Gen Jonathan Vance
I think that we need to see the defence policy not as a wish list but as the equipment necessary to do the job that the Government of Canada has given us.
So we consider the four submarines, with the additional anti-submarine and water column defence mechanisms that we'll have, sufficient to do the job that the Government of Canada has asked us to do in the maritime domain.
5:15 p.m.
RAdm Patrick Finn
I want to address the comment that the submarines are outdated. In reality, they have strong capacities and they regularly demonstrate, during operations, what they can accomplish. We've had many issues with maintenance and spare parts. That's a fact. However, we're addressing the situation. Also, some aspects of modernization involve acquiring spare parts and more recent equipment that's easier to maintain. In any event, these submarines demonstrate their exceptional capacities during operations and exercises.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I'm very pleased to see the commitment to the subs, given the riding I represent. Any modernization, of course, is likely to take place there, but I also think it's an important part of Canada's ability to play a role on the world stage, and I'm also very glad to see the commitment to the shipbuilding strategy.
I have a question. It says in the shipbuilding strategy that we will get what is called a defence investment plan in 2018. Is that going to then lay out the parameters for procurement, and will that include a plan to centralize more of the procurement in DND?
5:15 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of National Defence
The plan right now will increase the delegation of authority from Public Services and Procurement to National Defence, and that will take care of about 80% of the defence procurement contracts that are $5 million or less, and we'll manage those.
That will leave Public Services with us and the industry department to manage the large, more high-risk, more challenging procurements, such as jets and ships. So they will continue to lead on the procurement of the ships, but we will be taking 80% of the contracts ourselves.
Sorry, there was another part of your question and I—
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC
Let me just go on.
Also, you talk about an increase, 1,150 defence—
5:15 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of National Defence
Oh, sorry, you asked about the investment plan.
Yes, our intent is that for the first time we will publish our investment plan. Normally, that's something we take to Treasury Board, they approve it, and—
5:15 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of National Defence
Nobody ever sees it.
So in the interests of transparency, there are two things in this policy. One, we are going to publish regular public report cards on major procurements. They will say what our intended schedule was and how we are doing against it, so you can hold all of us to account.
Two, the investment plan lays out for the next five years what it is we're planning to buy. We'll have cost ranges and timelines in there, and it's updated every three years. So we will publish the next one next year, for the first time ever.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC
I certainly do welcome those changes. I think they'll be quite important.
You talk about increasing defence civilians by 1,150, I think it is. I've heard a lot of concern about increasing privatization of maintenance functions, having those services provided by private companies rather than maintaining those skills within DND or within the Canadian Forces.
It looks good to me, to see more defence civilians. How does that relate to those privatization trends that have been taking place?
5:20 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of National Defence
The civilians we'll be hiring will be in direct support to the Canadian Armed Forces. We'll certainly be putting them into areas like intelligence, cyber, and more into procurement. We'll continue to use a mix of our own people and private industry on maintenance and support.
Pat, you might want to add to that.
5:20 p.m.
RAdm Patrick Finn
Thank you for the question.
Yes, in fact, we're very familiar with the fleet maintenance facilities and have a lot of discussions with them. What we're trying to do with the fleet maintenance facilities and other places is to make sure that they are focused on our most capable assets, meaning our submarines and frigates, and therefore, take the less complex things.... A lot of what we're doing around sustainment is bundling contracts that are going to industry. It is not any effort to reduce the number of public servants who are either army, navy, air force, special forces, or otherwise working on maintenance, but to make sure that they're focused on our most capable assets, where we really need the expertise, on those key military assets.
5:20 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of National Defence
We don't see a shrinking of the fleet maintenance facilities at all, but they will be doing the higher-value, more technologically complicated land support.
5:20 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC
I think that's good news, both for the workers but also just for the maintenance of the skills and the capability. My concern about privatization has always been that we would lose the capabilities, and then the next time it's time to bid, somebody's bidding on something else, and those skills walk away from us.
I think it's good news to hear that you're going to try to focus the fleet maintenance at the high end and keep those high-end skills. We need to keep, in particular in my case, the navy running.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Stephen Fuhr
You have about 30 seconds.
Given the time we have left and the will—I saw lots of people signalling that they wanted more time for more questions—I'm going to allow three more questions of two minutes each. So just be careful when you're asking your question that you don't burn up all the time. Again, this means that you have to wrap it up pretty quickly.
Mr. Robillard, you have the floor.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Yves Robillard Liberal Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
General Vance, I asked the Prime Minister a question on June 7, during the question period. I hope that you can elaborate on the matter today.
We know the government has announced its new defence policy. Since it's our duty to support our women and men in the Canadian Armed Forces, can you provide the details of this new defence policy, and focus specifically on the measures to support our families?
5:20 p.m.
Gen Jonathan Vance
I imagine that I have less than two minutes to respond.
5:20 p.m.
Gen Jonathan Vance
That's less than two minutes.
I think I will describe this very generally and give you some specifics. What we need to do is to make the family experience in the armed forces more consistent and even across the country. Families deal with different housing markets, different tax rates, different costs of living in different parts of the country, and so we have to look at that. We have to make certain that the family experience with education, doctors, and generally with the services to families becomes more consistent and even.
There are different ways to do that. We are going to look at all of those different ways. Some can be done by compensation. Others can be done by doing more things inside the armed forces in empowering or increasing the capacity of the MFRCs to provide more front-line services to families so that their experience is better.
We're going to invest in the MFRCs. That's directly in the policy. We're going to invest in military families in a variety of ways, not the least of which will be to reduce harm.
I believe that, overall, the career path in the armed forces will be somewhat more individualized and account for the various changes that occur in one's life over long service. I would like us to be a bit more thoughtful and humane in how we deal with people and families, and I think that will help.