National Defence Committee on Nov. 24th, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Unfortunately, he's going to have to work that answer in somewhere else.

[An hon. member]

What happened to your generosity?

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

It dribbled out as we went down the table.

Mrs. Gallant, you have five minute, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Recently it's come to light that the Nanisivik deep port is not going to be available 11 months of the year. It was revealed that they decided not to go forward with the heating elements for the storage units. Therefore, we have four weeks out of the year.

How have our NATO allies in the Arctic responded to this announcement?

[VAdm J.R. Auchterlonie]

I'm not sure there is a NATO response to the question. I've not heard from any of our colleagues or international allies regarding this.

The fact is, Nanisivik's being brought to capability to ensure we can fuel not only the military resources in the north, but also our Coast Guard assets in the north.

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

Our NATO allies have not been notified.

Why was the decision taken to only have it available four weeks of the year?

[VAdm J.R. Auchterlonie]

Again, I'm the commander of operations. This question is probably more pertinent for our assistant deputy minister of infrastructure and environment or the commander of the Navy, both of whom I believe have already testified and discussed Nanisivik.

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

When we talked to them, we didn't know that it was only going to be available for four weeks of the year. It was supposed to be a full naval base, and now it's just going to be a refuelling station. How was that decision arrived at?

[VAdm J.R. Auchterlonie]

I think everyone on this panel is probably not in a position to answer that question. I'm not sure of...the nature of the question.

That being said, I think what you've seen in the north, to be clear, in terms of distances, is that fuel is essential for operations in the north. You're absolutely correct. Just in terms of some quick distances we know, we rely upon having that fuelling facility in the north so we can conduct operations, because the distance to travel from Victoria to our fuelling station in the north is greater than it is to travel from Victoria to Japan.

The same is true for travelling from Halifax to our fuelling facility in Nanisivik. It's quicker to travel to France.

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

With respect to our allies being notified, I'd like the responses to those questions in writing at some point in time.

Earlier, Mr. Kelly mentioned that CCP officials were in Inuvik to look at our infrastructure. They were with the RCMP. The RCMP were observing.

Was DND or CAF notified about the CCP kicking tires in our Arctic near our refuelling station in Inuvik?

[VAdm J.R. Auchterlonie]

I'm going to pass this to Jonathan Quinn, on policy. However, it is a forward operating location for NORAD, so it's more than just a fuelling station.

[Jonathan Quinn]

Thank you, sir, and thanks, Mr. Chair, for the question.

All I'll say on this one is that we're monitoring the facility carefully. There are instruments in place to make sure that—

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

This is the same response you gave before.

Earlier this week, Lieutenant General Alain Pelletier, deputy commander of NORAD, said that Russia is seeking to demonstrate its ability to strike Canada and the United States, and it comes after Russia resumed sending long-range bombers back over the Arctic towards North American airspace.

How are DND and CAF responding to these developments from Moscow?

[VAdm J.R. Auchterlonie]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

It's obviously a very pertinent question, given what's happening currently with our partners in Ukraine.

The reality is that competition and conflict characterize the interaction between ourselves in the west and our Russian—I would say, at this point—adversaries. We are in that competition and that conflict above and below the threshold right now with Russia. That's going to continue as we move forward.

In the Arctic, for example, Russia remains a key competitor. They've declared it to be of significant importance to their security and economic interest. They've also increased their military presence, which I believe the committee is tracking.

They have certainly displayed a willingness to operate outside of internationally accepted norms. This is obviously of concern to us and to our allies. With Russia's blatant disregard for international boundaries in Ukraine, we're obviously concerned that the same thing could happen in the north.

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

Is the fuelling station in Inuvik for sale to either the Americans or...? Are there ongoing negotiation with the Americans or the CCP?

[VAdm J.R. Auchterlonie]

In terms of that I will let General Huddleston....

For clarity, we have a number of forward operating locations for NORAD. One is in Yellowknife, which is an FOL, a forward operating location. We have one in Inuvik and we have one in Iqaluit. They are forward operating locations for NORAD that have NORAD infrastructure to support operations of fighters. They have sufficient runway space and infrastructure to support those fighters. They are not for sale.

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

When we look at the—

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Mrs. Gallant, your five minutes are up.

She had a question about whether NATO partners have been notified. If you could take that under advisement and advise the committee, that would be helpful.

Mr. Fisher, you have five minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, gentlemen, for being here. It has been said that this has been a long study, and you've been with us several times. Thank you very much, not only for your service to our country but also for your service to this committee.

One of the questions that has been asked a few times is about the growing possibility of increased navigation through the Northwest Passage in the coming years because of climate change and melting ice. We heard the other day that this brings with it a high level of risk, rather than making things easier, which one would maybe assume.

What are the top security concerns associated with an increase in shipping? Maybe you can touch on the future cruise ships wanting to go through the passage as well.

[VAdm J.R. Auchterlonie]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

The good news is that given the colour of uniform I'm wearing and having sailed up there, I'm probably the right person to answer. Thanks very much for the question.

I think perspective, again, is really key. When we talk about the Arctic in terms of the waterways opening up, there is a significant difference between the Russian northern sea route in the Canadian Arctic and what we assume is the Northwest Passage, obviously given the rotation of the earth and how the ice packs in.

You're absolutely right: Navigation in the Arctic is exceptionally dangerous. It is not through the routes you would think it would be, going across 75 north. It's actually going to go down through the islands on the north slope of Canada, so it's shallow waters and rocky and with sandbars. Navigation is constrained.

For the committee to understand, we have good domain awareness in the north. We know all the ships passing through. At this time, in terms of numbers—so folks have an expectation—there are only about 150 transits in the north a year. We are aware of all those vessels going through. A lot of it has to do with internal resupply. Many of our communities are resupplied internally from vessels. In terms of that domain awareness, we're quite comfortable.

With that said, as you articulated, as we are seeing the climate change, it's opening up slightly earlier. Depending upon the ice year, there may be more or fewer vessels going through. This is a challenge not only, I would say, from a search and rescue perspective but also a perspective of enforcement of environmental regulations and fisheries regulations and the things that we hold dear in Canada.

Your question is bang on. There are lots of challenges associated with this, and I'm happy to follow up if you have a further question.

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

Thank you for that.

What do we need, or do we have what we need for specific capabilities to address those concerns as a country?

[VAdm J.R. Auchterlonie]

We've been operating in the north for generations, back to the Terror and the Erebus. They have given us that.... We found wreckage from the 1800s. We've continued that exploration and have worked in the north for generations.

In terms of capabilities, heavy icebreakers are key. I think you've seen an investment in the Coast Guard. At the same time, you've seen a significant investment in the Royal Canadian Navy. We've now brought online three Arctic and offshore patrol ships that work in the north. In terms of that capability, the Coast Guard is recapitalizing itself, and these vessels do not operate in isolation. If you visit an Arctic and offshore patrol ship, you'll see that the vessel is designed to operate in the north in first-year ice.

At the same time, it's also designed to have our government partners on board. We have research and development on board. We can carry Transport Canada folks and folks from border services, as well as from Immigration and from Environment. Those are whole-of-government platforms to enforce the sovereignty of Canada in the north, and they are perfect platforms for that piece. They can operate throughout a larger percentage of the ice year than most ships.

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

You mentioned the Coast Guard. We had the Coast Guard here this week and we asked this question, but I'm going to ask you.

What level of co-operation exists between Coast Guard and our navy? Do we need to enhance that level of co-operation, in your opinion?

[VAdm J.R. Auchterlonie]

I think it's pretty seamless right now. We work hand in hand with our Coast Guard partners, as well as our Transport partners and our partners from Environment.

That Coast Guard and navy interaction in the north is pretty much seamless. We share resources to ensure that the vessels have fuel. As we talked about earlier, fuel's a key component of operations in the north, so Nanisivik will be supporting both us and the Coast Guard as we move forward.

That coordination of activities, which I'll keep at an unclassified level, is actually very seamless, and it works well with our assistant commissioner of the Coast Guard in the north and my maritime component commander in Halifax. That integration is pretty much seamless.

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

Do I have any time, Mr. Chair?