National Defence Committee on Nov. 21st, 2024

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

That's good news.

Because of that potential mistrust of internal sources and internal legal counsel, would you consider funding lawyers who are already part of the class action suit? These are trusted lawyers and trusted legal representatives.

Is that something the department would consider? Could it provide funding for that independent legal counsel?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Again, I think that would have to be considered on a case-by-case basis, depending on the circumstances. I don't want to give a blanket answer.

Yes, I believe there may be different circumstances that would need to be considered under those circumstances. We don't necessarily fund, for example, lawsuits against the government and against the Canadian Armed Forces.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

No, these would be the lawyers who represented within the class action who then go on to help those same survivors.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

It's something I would certainly undertake to look into to see in which circumstances it might be appropriate to provide that type of support.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Okay.

When you came before the committee last month and we discussed this topic, I asked you about National Defence's obligations under that class action suit on sexual misconduct. The class action included the review of the SMSRC mandate within five years, and that review is to be conducted alongside representatives of the class action.

You told us at the time you hadn't found a court appointment to be the external review team lead, but the external monitor's report says an internal review took place last year, and a revised administrative and executive structure for SMSRC had been approved and was awaiting finalization.

Can you further explain your comments to this committee and why you said that at the time, considering the external monitor seems to believe differently?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Again, I value the input of the external monitor. I'm advised that this is very much involved in the HR department, and it's working through some of those resolutions. The external monitor's advice on this is something.... As I said, we work with her on a daily basis in order to make sure that we respond appropriately.

I share your concern, and I did when I was here with you a few weeks ago, that five years is a long time to wait for a resolution of these matters, so we are working hard to make sure that we get the job done.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Ms. Mathyssen.

Mrs. Gallant, you have five minutes.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Thank you.

Minister, amid the $2.7 billion in cuts, how are you ever going to replenish the ammo stockpile for our troops, which you depleted? What types and amounts of ammunition have been contracted for CAF use?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Thank you very much for the question. There are a number of questions.

First of all, I think your characterization of a $2.2-billion cut is inaccurate. Last year, the actual reduction was substantially less than that, and I think—

[Stefanie Beck, Deputy Minister, Department of National Defence]

It was $810 million.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

It was $810 million, but there was no reduction in munitions acquisition. As I've said, we've put money in the ONSAF, and it's $1.8 billion. We're currently in contract negotiations. Battle-decisive munitions.... I think everybody talks about the 155-millimetre munitions, but it's a broad range of munitions.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Thank you, Minister.

How do you decrease expenditures when nothing has been done in the first place? The stockpiles were depleted and not replenished. We want to see where the contracts are. The soldiers want to know that they're going to have ammunition when sent into theatre.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Yes, ma'am. As I said, right now, our budget for acquiring munitions is about $300 million per year. There was no reduction in that expenditure. In fact, it went up last year. However, we've also heard very clearly about the need to have an adequate supply of battle-decisive munitions. One of the pressures, obviously, is the supports that we've also been providing to Ukraine, but that doesn't relieve any of us of our responsibility to make sure that the CAF has what it requires, and we're investing in that.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Thank you. We don't have contracts. Okay.

Our troops in Latvia have broken-down vehicles and no mechanics. The troop carriers are just non-functioning. They not only don't have mechanics but also don't have spare parts.

Given this, how are we going to ensure in the short term, with leading that whole brigade, that we're going to get them what they need should this become a hot war?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

First of all, respectfully, you have mischaracterized the state of readiness. We've actually made some very significant investments in our deployment in Latvia, and we've just completed a major NATO training operation with our allies in Latvia. I would characterize it, as our NATO allies have done, as an overwhelming success and a demonstration of capability in that theatre.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

We're borrowing from other countries. We don't have our own for our own troops. We're relying on the mercy of others the way we relied on mercy for choppers in Afghanistan.

What impact will the $2.7 billion in cuts to the CAF have on deterring the Russians or the Chinese in the Arctic?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Respectfully, your characterization is not accurate. We are refocusing certain spending to make sure that we are spending money well on such things as hospitality, executive travel and professional services. However, we are not in any way diminishing but, in fact, are significantly increasing our investment in operational readiness. That means significant new investments in people, which are absolutely essential to the operations of the Canadian Armed Forces, and in new platforms and equipment—new ships, new planes, new vehicles. All those investments and contracts have been signed and are well in train.

Also, we're coming forward with these estimates, asking for the money that is required to maintain those fleets that you cite and that I agree need to be kept in a state of good repair.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Thank you.

Given that your government refuses to put the capabilities in place to deter foreign incursions in our Arctic by hostile nations, is the minister hoping that the U.S. will just take over that responsibility for our Arctic? We're not doing anything. In the short term....

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

In the long term as well.... Respectfully, Canada is stepping up. I invite you to go back and reread our new defence policy update, which talks about the necessary investments and about Canada taking on greater responsibility for continental and national defence. We're already investing, as I've indicated to this committee, $38.6 billion in NORAD modernization.

Canada is doing its part, and we're going to do more. We're investing in underwater surveillance. We're investing in new fighter jets. We're investing in new infrastructure.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

We can print whatever we want, but there's no execution plan. Given the cuts to the CAF, what is the year-by-year training plan for submariners to be proficient on the new submarines, given that there's probably going to be a gap in capability in submarines?

Once we've lost that capability, it's going to take a long time to get them up to snuff and capable of deploying with our new submarines. How are you going to do that?

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

That may or may not be an important question, but Mrs. Gallant has not given you any time to answer it.

We'll move on to Mr. Collins for five minutes.

[Chad Collins, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Thanks, Mr. Chairman.

Minister, good morning. I'm going to take us back to Ukraine.

You might recall this time last year, I think it was the first week of December, we had the Leader of the Opposition playing procedural games in the House of Commons. We had that 30-hour debate and voting that took place in the first week of December that essentially was holding up, similar to today, support for Ukraine. At that point in time, if you recall, Minister, he instructed his caucus members to vote against not just all of our supports for the Canadian Armed Forces but the supports that we're providing to the people in Ukraine.

Here we are again, almost the same time of year, and the Leader of the Opposition is playing procedural games, as my colleague pointed out in her questioning. It will have the same impact and effect. It will hold up the necessary resources for people in Ukraine. I know that when I met with Ukrainian Canadians in my community recently to mark the 1,000-day point in the illegal conflict, they shared their concerns in terms of what's happening in the U.S. and what might come as it relates to the support the U.S. has traditionally provided through the conflict. They also pointed to what's happening here in Canada and the need to provide more resources.

You highlighted in your opening the resources that are included in the estimates for Ukraine. I'm wondering if you can make any sense in terms of why the Leader of the Opposition would take the position he has. Why is it important for us to continue our support for Ukraine?

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

I have a point of order.

Instead of sitting here and attacking other parliamentarians, I would just say that Conservatives support Ukraine, full stop. We don't support this government. These are two different questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

That's a debate, not a point of order.

[Chad Collins, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

My next question will be on misinformation. I will get to that next.