Evidence of meeting #119 for National Defence in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was significant.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Clerk of the Committee  Mr. Andrew Wilson
Stephen Kelsey  Vice Chief of the Defence Staff, Canadian Armed Forces, Department of National Defence
Stefanie Beck  Deputy Minister, Department of National Defence
Wendy Hadwen  Deputy Chief, Strategic Policy, Planning and Partnerships, Communications Security Establishment
Nancy Tremblay  Assistant Deputy Minister, Materiel, Department of National Defence

Bill Blair Liberal Scarborough Southwest, ON

I would also share with you that we are making concurrent, significant new investments in infrastructure, by building new airport runways and new infrastructure and acquiring hangar capabilities for the new aircraft that are being acquired.

However, as part of NORAD modernization, I think the most significant initial investments, according to the plan that has been put forward by Canada and the United States under the NORAD umbrella, are invests in over-the-horizon radar and over-the-polar radar—

8:25 a.m.

Conservative

James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB

Have you selected those sites yet where we're putting those up?

Bill Blair Liberal Scarborough Southwest, ON

If I may, we have been advised by our allies that they are working through issues with respect to that technology, which will determine where we should make the best investment in the sites for those—

The Chair Liberal John McKay

I think there should be some equivalency between answer and question. I think the minister has run past. You still have a minute, Mr. Bezan.

8:25 a.m.

Conservative

James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB

Thank you.

Just in my final minute here, Minister, yesterday you made a reference to the Geneva Convention and Israel's right to defend itself. Do you believe that Israel has a right to defend itself and retaliate against Iran for the attacks?

Bill Blair Liberal Scarborough Southwest, ON

I think Israel has a right to defend itself and diminish Iran's capacity to attack.

8:25 a.m.

Conservative

James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB

You made the comment about striking nuclear sites—and we're talking about weapons sites in Iran. You said that it's in violation of the Geneva Convention. I just want to read to you article 56, as it is in Canadian law on the Geneva Convention. It says: “Works or installations containing dangerous forces, namely dams, dykes and nuclear electrical generating stations, shall not be made the object of attack.”

I know Mr. Poilievre was not talking about electrical sites like nuclear power stations; he was talking about nuclear weapons development sites that are happening right now in Iran. Do you not agree that those sites are fair game for Israel to retaliate against the regime in Tehran, yes or no?

Bill Blair Liberal Scarborough Southwest, ON

It's not a yes-or-no answer. Canada is a signatory to the 1977 protocols for the Geneva Convention, the law of armed conflict. That law very specifically prohibits attacking nuclear facilities—

8:30 a.m.

Conservative

James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB

Nuclear electrical facilities....

Bill Blair Liberal Scarborough Southwest, ON

—because of the risk it poses to innocent civilians and to the environment. That is a convention that the world has agreed to, and 174 countries have signed on to that protocol. I think it's reckless and irresponsible to call for attacks on nuclear facilities, which are very specifically prohibited under international humanitarian law.

8:30 a.m.

Conservative

James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB

It's electrical power.

The Chair Liberal John McKay

We're going to have to leave it there.

Thank you, gentlemen.

Mr. Collins, you have six minutes.

Chad Collins Liberal Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good morning, Minister.

In his parting speech, General Eyre highlighted that our democratic institutions are constantly under attack. You talked about the evolution of the threat environment in your opening statement. We know that Russia and China are part of a global group that is spreading disinformation and attacking our democratic institutions. The DPU highlights this issue.

Can you talk about how we address those issues domestically and then internationally with our partners?

Bill Blair Liberal Scarborough Southwest, ON

It's a multi-faceted question and, I think, an important one. I referenced the changing environment in my opening remarks, and I think we've highlighted that very specifically in “Our North, Strong and Free”,our new defence policy update. The changing environment requires an evolution in Canada's approach to its national defence and national security. Those things are very much related.

What we are seeing as a result of climate change is that our continent—our Arctic—is becoming far more accessible. We're seeing, with advances in new technologies, that those technologies threaten our security, and we need to be able to respond appropriately, which is going to require significant new investments.

We also talk very extensively about the activities of our adversaries. We're seeing, for example, that China is building up the largest military capability. It's an extraordinary investment in its military capability taking place over the past several years, which threatens to change the balance of security and power in the globe. It's something that we and our allies need to respond appropriately to. We're also seeing, as a result of Russia's attack on Ukraine, that—

The Chair Liberal John McKay

Excuse me. I'm having trouble listening to this exchange. If there is another conversation to be had, I would prefer it take place somewhere else other than the table.

Please continue.

Bill Blair Liberal Scarborough Southwest, ON

I agree that we're seeing activities from Russia. One of the things we see certainly is that they're challenging us militarily. They're also challenging us significantly in the cyber environment, and I think you highlighted in your question the importance of misinformation and disinformation. They are making efforts to destabilize our society, our institutions, important institutions like our political system, by engaging in polarizing rhetoric, misinformation, fearmongering, threats and coercion against some of our citizens. All of those behaviours are a non-kinetic form of warfare. It's asymmetrical, but it's something that Canada needs to respond to because they are direct threats.

For the Canadian Armed Forces and through our people at CSE, we are very much engaged in countering those threats and making sure that the connection between national defence and national security.... I think, it's very clear, and I think we all have a responsibility. It's going to require advances in our approaches and closer work with our allies.

I would share with you as well one thing from my experience—Russia's invasion of Ukraine, as an example. I think their intention was to destabilize the western alliance and to cause rifts between us. It's had exactly the opposite effect. In my experience, all of the nations of NATO, including Canada and the United States, have become far stronger, far more united, far more resolute in our purpose of making sure that we have the capabilities to counter the threat that Russia and China represent, and others too, by the way. We are also seeing that type of hostile activity from state actors such as Iran and North Korea. There is, unfortunately, a growing list of people who are clearly demonstrating that they are willing to engage in a number of very aggressive, assertive and negative behaviours towards our society, our culture, our institutions and our country.

Chad Collins Liberal Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON

I'll follow up with another issue that's related to the changing environment, and that is related to artificial intelligence.

I've read your comments, I think, a month or two ago, in relation to our use of artificial intelligence. You highlighted the fact that we're going to use it, but it's not going to replace the work that the members of the Canadian Armed Forces do. It's going to assist them in their duties. You also talked about establishing international rules with our allies and partners. We know that with most international agreements, Russia and China are not a part of it, and they normally thumb their nose at it.

Minister, how do we deal with artificial intelligence as it relates to domestically assisting us, and then deal with those in the world who might use it for nefarious purposes?

Bill Blair Liberal Scarborough Southwest, ON

Thanks for that. It's a very important question as well. First of all, I think AI represents an extraordinary opportunity for our national defence, for our security establishment officials. By the way, there is an extraordinary level of expertise and capability in Canada. I think Canada has much to offer. Perhaps we can talk about that later on in this meeting. Canada has much to offer to our allies in those capabilities.

At the same time, we also recognize that the responsible use of AI, particularly in military applications, is something that is going to require some international consensus. However, I'm in complete agreement with you. Some of our adversaries have demonstrated that they would thumb their noses at such conventions, and will not use AI in an ethical way. We have to make sure that we have the capability....

I think it is still incumbent upon us to make sure that we use it in an appropriate and ethical way, and in order to do that, we may have to make sure that people are at the heart of the decisions that we ultimately make with respect to how we engage in military activity. At the same time, we have to have the capability of countering the negative applications that our adversaries could undertake. It is a very significant policy challenge. I know that there's been some extraordinary work that perhaps our officials could share with you, perhaps even in a more secure setting, about some of the work that's already under way.

The Chair Liberal John McKay

Thank you.

Ms. Normandin, you have the floor for six minutes.

Christine Normandin Bloc Saint-Jean, QC

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Minister, thank you for making yourself available to us today.

I'd like to come back to the letter I sent you on June 28, in which I requested an inquiry into the actions of your predecessor, Mr. Sajjan.

We know that it was said in the news that the minister had mentioned that he had not given the order to prioritize the Sikh community, but had simply passed on information to the chain of command.

In a letter dated June 28, we asked you to investigate. We received a reply to this letter from the Department of National Defence on July 23, a month later, in which we were told that our letter was being reviewed.

Has an investigation been launched on your side, or have steps been taken to shed light on the matter?

The Chair Liberal John McKay

Before you answer that question, Minister....

I'm not sure that's within the minister's mandate. We're here to examine his mandate, not a predecessor's mandate.

I would be very concerned about ruling that question out of order, but I—

8:35 a.m.

Conservative

James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB

I have a point of order.

I believe that mandate letter that the minister is working on is the mandate letter of his predecessor.

The Chair Liberal John McKay

I don't know. I think the—

Bill Blair Liberal Scarborough Southwest, ON

[Inaudible—Editor] I inherited.

The Chair Liberal John McKay

Okay, if you're comfortable with that question....

My immediate reaction is that it is out of order, but I'm content to defer.