National Defence Committee on May 27th, 2024

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West, ON]

Thank you.

I have just a couple of minutes left here. In talking about preparation for operational readiness, CBC actually reported that there have been changes to the training forced by budget cuts that could leave the military less ready for a fight, and all this while a mere 61% of the force is ready for operations.

I guess my question is, with budget cuts and looking at operational readiness, how do we explain...? We're sending people for training over in Latvia and a number of places. We don't have enough trainers to train people to fly here in Canada. I would love to talk about the operational preparedness that we have of troops on the ground, plus what we're dealing with back here at home in our own fighters.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

I have good news there, then, Dean, because in Latvia we're working in a coalition environment. There are 10 different countries working with Canada. Canada is leading in Latvia. There's a new training base being developed there. For our soldiers, a decision was made by the Canadian Armed Forces that the best place for them to complete their training was in that coalition environment, using the equipment and working side by side with our coalition partners there. Frankly, that was an operational decision that I agree with, because it just seems like a smart way to get the job done.

The challenge we are facing is not that we don't have great trainers or even great training capability in this country. It's our staffing problem, and that, I think, is job one. If you're suggesting that we need to do a much better job of onboarding people into the Canadian Armed Forces.... Last year, 70,000 people applied to join the Canadian Armed Forces, and just a little over 4,000 of them actually got in. That's not good enough. We have to do better, and we're going to do better.

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West, ON]

Finally, in terms of the Arctic, when do you see us having more troops ready to be there?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

The work has already begun. We're in the north already.

I've met with the ranger program, which has almost 2,600 people right across the north. They're not military, but they're really important eyes and ears, and they perform a really important function in the military. We're going to continue to support them as well.

A couple of weeks ago, we broke ground on a new facility for the JTFN in Yellowknife. We're already beginning to make those investments.

In fairness, the policy document just came out—

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

We're going to have to leave the answer there.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

The Canadian Armed Forces are clearly turning their strong attention and capabilities to making sure that we're ready in the north.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Minister, I don't know who's the worst one at this table. It's neck and neck between the whole audience.

The final questions go to Madame Lapointe for five minutes, please.

[Viviane LaPointe, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Thank you, Chair, and hello, Minister.

I note that a significant portion of the main estimates is set aside for major capital projects. That would include the Canadian multi-mission aircraft procurement project as well as the future fighter capability project.

Can you speak to this committee about the significance of these major investments? Just as importantly, how are we ensuring that we are procuring the right capabilities for our forces at the best price and value for Canadians?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Thanks very much. I'll just highlight some of the really important and challenging work that was done on the multi-mission aircraft project.

First of all, the air force clearly defined its requirements to replace the CP-140s. They have been great planes, crewed by extraordinary people, but they've been in service for a little over 40 years, and it was time to replace them. They're primarily submarine hunters.

The armed forces very clearly defined its requirements, and then our team at DND went out and looked in the marketplace to see what was available. There was only one plane that was available that could be delivered in a timely way, within the two-year frame that the air force had defined as its requirement.

We went through a process. Frankly, in an ideal situation, we would have spent a lot more time working with the Canadian aeronautical industry, in particular. In this case, time was a bit of a commodity and wasn't really available to us, so a decision was made—it was the right decision; in my opinion, it was the only decision—to acquire the Poseidon P-8 as the multi-mission aircraft for the Royal Canadian Air Force.

We have also been working with the air force to make sure that we have supply planes available so that we can fuel our aircraft on long-range missions. We're also investing in an RPA system of unmanned drones for the High Arctic as well.

First of all, what is required is not a matter of some political person going through a shopping list. It's about the Canadian Armed Forces telling us what they need. They do that in consultation with all of our allies. They look at their needs and requirements and the job they have to do, and they tell us what they need.

We have great people who go into the marketplace and work through the important procurement processes to make sure that, first of all, we get the armed forces what they need, but just as importantly, we great real value for Canadian taxpayer dollars. When you're spending other people's money, you should do it carefully. We have to be able to demonstrate to them that we have gone out and got the best deal possible and acquired the best capability for the armed forces.

That's the job. It takes time and it can be frustrating, because you also have to ramp up production, and sometimes the delivery of these things.... The announcement that we've signed a contract is important, but the delivery of these things is every bit as important. That's why there's also a huge amount of work that needs to get done in order to make sure that the delivery stays on schedule and on budget and that the armed forces get what they need.

[Viviane LaPointe, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Thank you, Minister.

Can you share with this committee the new emerging threats in the cyber domain? Are there any targeted or specific measures around cyber-threats in the main estimates to address them?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Yes, there is, actually, a pretty significant investment in the main estimates, but also in the DPU and in the Communications Security Establishment itself—and I'm joined here by the chief today, Chief Xavier.

I point out, first of all, that the threat environment is evolving and becoming far more concerning with each passing day. We see activities of certain adversaries—notably China, but also Russia and other adversaries as well—that are constantly attacking critical infrastructure in our systems. I think the CSE does a pretty remarkable job of protecting our systems, but what we've seen is those same adversaries are now targeting some of our northern regional governments, provincial and municipal governments and other forms of critical infrastructure, and so we are investing fairly significantly, through these main estimates but also in the DPU, to increase what I think is already an extraordinary capability.

I would be remiss if I didn't share with this committee that I've had a number of conversations with our allies, particularly in Five Eyes but also in NATO. Canada's cyber-capability is considered first in class right around the world. It's hard to brag about this because we don't want to scare people, but at the same time our people are doing remarkable work. Their work is valued by all of our allies. One reason we're making it even more significant is that they're demonstrating real value for every dollar we spend at CSE. We believe that spending more dollars, as is reflected in these estimates and in our new DPU, is going to produce real value for Canadians.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Ms. Lapointe.

With that, we have to bring our first hour to a close.

Thank you, Minister, for your contribution to this animated conversation. We appreciate your appearance here from time to time—some times more than other times.

With that, we will suspend, let the minister leave, and then Mr. Matthews and his team will continue on with the next hour.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

We're back.

Mr. Matthews, do you have an opening statement, and do you wish to introduce anybody who is now at your table?

[Bill Matthews, Deputy Minister, Department of National Defence]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Just very quickly, I think the minister already covered it, but we have Mr. Crosby and Ms. Crosby, respectively in charge of procurement and our chief financial officer. The vice-chief you know, and we have Madame Xavier as well as her chief financial officer, Monsieur St-Pierre.

With that, let's get on with the questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Mr. Bezan opens with a six-minute round.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First of all, I know a number of you are either retiring or moving on. I want to thank you all for your service, for your time at the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces, and for serving Canada and serving our troops—although, with so many people running away, it's starting to look like a ship might be sinking.

No? Okay. I thought maybe it was, “Man overboard.”

Anyway, I go back to the issue of readiness, which has been a story and a major concern. We are now sending our forces into Latvia without that battle group having the battalion-level training we routinely have done at Wainwright, so my concern is how this is impacting our ability. I know we're saying it's great to exercise with our allies, but I can tell you that our allies are going out there battle-ready. I question whether or not our guys and gals are in tip-top fighting condition when they don't have that time to train, which we have routinely done in the past.

[Lieutenant-General Frances J. Allen, Vice Chief of the Defence Staff, Canadian Armed Forces, Department of National Defence]

Thank you very much. I absolutely agree with you that readiness is critically important for your ability to execute on operations, and you must be ready to execute on operations. The mechanisms through which you get ready and are ready, I think, are different, depending upon the organization that you're part of, be it the air force or the army. We know the key components to readiness, which are personnel, equipment, training and the sustainment elements that you need to deliver on operations....

Certainly, we have traditionally used the series of exercises in the west as one of the training and readiness functions for the Canadian army as they were moving into their high-readiness phase going forward. The stand-up and the move of the battle group to brigade in Latvia, with the many partners we have over there, is also causing us to reassess what is the best way to do both the individual and then collective training that needs to be done to be able to operate. We heard previously that it had quite an impact on families—

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

When we talk about readiness, the forces are sitting at only 61% readiness, and the amount of equipment that we have available that is ready and able to be used is now under 60%. We're always supposed to have at least one battalion at high readiness and another battalion training up to go into high readiness as a constant circulation, just for the protection of Canada and being ready to deploy if called upon.

If we haven't trained up our current battalion and brigade group that is in Latvia, where are we sitting with the level of readiness within the forces that are sitting domestically?

[LGen Frances J. Allen]

You are correct. We have people sitting at different levels of readiness.

As you come off of high readiness and you return to a lower state of readiness, that's a bit of a reconstitution time for people to do training, for equipment to be repaired and that sort of thing. The next group are on the road to high readiness while another group are sitting at high readiness moving forward.

This type of progression towards readiness is how the army does the managed readiness program that they have. Whether—

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

When you talk about the army at high readiness, and we are definitely behind those numbers, how many fighter pilots do we have today?

[LGen Frances J. Allen]

I'm afraid I couldn't tell you exactly the number of fighter pilots we have. We certainly do not have—

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

Would you be able to get that information to the committee?

[LGen Frances J. Allen]

Absolutely.

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

Can you ballpark it?

[LGen Frances J. Allen]

I would say there are currently fewer fighter pilots available than the commander of the air force would wish to be able to do both the missions we have today and the training for the transition to the new F-35.