National Defence Committee on Nov. 29th, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Ms. O'Connell, unfortunately, we're going to have to leave it at that.

I should apologize in advance, and over and over again. We're running a clock here, and I have to stay as close as I can to the clock.

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

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I thank both witnesses for their opening remarks.

I'd like to start with Ms. Redfern. Then I will come back to Ms. Shadian.

Ms. Redfern, my question is about the sensors that are found on the fiber optic cables from which immense amounts of data can be obtained, which need to be analyzed by artificial intelligence.

Are we sufficiently prepared to process this information? Who would be responsible for processing it?

Could this be of interest to different departments? Are the departments aware of the gold mine this represents?

I would like to hear more about this from you.

[Madeleine Redfern]

We have actually done a SMART cable feasibility study. Jim McFarlane, Jr., son of the famous James McFarlane, Sr., who created International Submarine Engineering Ltd., has been engaging on my behalf with the defence sector, environmental groups and the industry to basically better understand the state of the marine sector but also how to manage that data. We know that there are already some cables, usually older cables, that are collecting data.

On the west coast, with the University of Victoria, we know that Ocean Networks Canada has a project up in Cambridge Bay. We know that there is work being done on the east coast as well. The SMART cable that is combining the telecommunications cable and the sensor cable is actually something that the Portuguese are working on. It's probably the most advanced. There's one more company, called PolArctic, that's based in Alaska. It's run by an indigenous woman who is a former air force member.

We definitely want to figure out for Canada how we can collect this data in a way that is useful for many different users while also recognizing that there are already protocols that the defence sector must be involved in with regard to being able to get the data that meets their national security requirements. They take priority when and if there is a need to respond to a foreign incursion in our region.

So it's relatively new. We also know that quantum computing is absolutely necessary to help process the sheer volume of data through this modern artificial intelligence software program that is being worked on, primarily in the western countries. Those are the ones we're most interested in. We don't want, of course, Chinese or foreign entities working on software that could harvest it for non-ally purposes.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

That just happens to be the next question I was going to ask you.

To what extent is there a risk of this data being collected by foreign entities? Are there sufficient protections?

Would a better partnership with the Department of National Defence ensure that there are safeguards in place to prevent cyber attacks on sensors, for example?

[Madeleine Redfern]

Exactly. That's why it is really important that the defence sectors and the Canadian security agencies be consulted. Cybersecurity risks are always an issue, whether it's with satellite or fibre; however, fibre is generally understood to be significantly more secure. That's why we're having these conversations early on to inform the military and the defence sectors that SMART cables are definitely a solution, but we also need to understand the vulnerabilities. We need to figure out how to ensure that not only the infrastructure but also the harvested data are secured.

Right now the goal is always to recognize that you need to have continuous development of a software that deals with those cyber-risks. You will never get a perfect solution. There will always be an ongoing development to protect that data.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Shadian, you mentioned critical minerals. We know that the United States has its eye on mines in the north.

In your opinion, is Canada doing enough to protect this resource or are we kind of letting it go to other interests, which are not as bad as Chinese interests, but are still foreign interests?

[Dr. Jessica M. Shadian]

Exactly. I didn't have time to continue on with my discussion about critical minerals.

There are several things. On the one hand, critical minerals are really Canada's space to shine, especially in the Arctic and in the North American Arctic. We have what the world wants. That is something where we have a lot of leverage in terms of the United States.

Personally, I was a bit shocked that there doesn't seem to be a lot of backlash that the Pentagon right now is very interested in helping invest in Canada's critical minerals. As you say, supply chains won't be going to Beijing, maybe Detroit, but shouldn't Canada have the opportunity and the ability to decide where its supply chains will be built and where they go?

The United States is a very strong partner and is going to be a very strong partner in this space; however, I think that Canada needs to make sure that it's doing everything to protect its national interests in this area to make sure that it's giving itself the ability to decide for itself the direction and the future of its critical minerals economy.

This is absolutely about national security. There's a whole linkage with infrastructure and everything else. If you look at the critical mineral strategy, a big piece of this is that we need to build infrastructure around it. This is where the north becomes a real potential security risk if we don't get it right and we don't take it seriously. Others will come in, and they will fill the gap if we're not ahead of the game.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Ms. Normandin.

Ms. Mathyssen, you have six minutes, please.

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

Thank you so much.

Again, I always seem to be continuing on the conversations from my colleagues, so I appreciate that.

Ms. Shadian, in terms of critical minerals, we're not prepared in terms of how Canada can best take advantage of them. Would the government need to make significant investments whenever we see the taking of those natural resources? Of course, the people within that area are impacted, and I think, obviously, in terms of first peoples, indigenous people, and how they're often not considered in that process. Could you talk about that and where the government needs to go with that?

[Dr. Jessica M. Shadian]

I think that's where Canada has a very good story to tell, because our first critical minerals mine in operation is on Dene land in the Northwest Territories. It's operated by Det’on Cho corporation, in partnership with Cheetah Resources.

We have a model for the world about how to do indigenous reconciliation and create really strong equity partnerships with indigenous communities. This goes for the north and south of Canada as well.

In that frame of mind, we have something going on the right path. I also think the critical minerals strategy, in its current iteration that I've seen, is a bold statement to the world about Canada and where we want to go.

What I didn't have a chance to say is that last year, at our annual conference, we created the first-of-its-kind session that brought the Arctic trade councillors to Canada together to talk about regional co-operation in building trade and supply chains north of 60 and to one another with the Nordic and North American Arctic.

I think where our deficits lie is in our ability to stand our ground and do what we need to do. We have the ability to lead in this space. We just need to make sure that we keep it and that we go forward robustly and very proactively. I think that is a great way to say it.

Of course, yes, we need to invest in the infrastructure. These are going to be public-private partnerships, so we need to be able to control the kind of investment and attract the kind of investment that we want. That goes back to a lot of the work that Madeleine and I have been trying to do.

There was an earlier discussion about Inuit businesses being involved in everything. One of the activities that we have persistently been carrying out is trying to bring together Bay Street with northern indigenous development corporations and northern governments to share with one another so northerners can educate Bay Street about projects and project potential in the north, and for northerners to have a conversation that would help them pull those business cases together and make sure that the business case is something that resonates with what Bay Street wants.

A lot of those kinds of efforts try to bring the two together so we can have financial institutions from Canada and the U.S. investing in our infrastructure. Of course, this goes back to needing a bigger plan, a long-term strategy. They need something that can show pipeline of projects and bundling of projects. This is what we're missing.

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

Ms. Redfern, I saw you nodding a lot. Perhaps you also could contribute to that very fulsome answer, which was awesome.

In addition, I am always concerned, because governments often talk about the need for consultation but maybe less about the more fulsome free, prior and informed consent. Maybe you could talk about that on the ground as well.

[Madeleine Redfern]

First of all, I want to speak to the fact that a lot of the infrastructure does need to be integrated. In order to be able to build out telecommunications, you need energy. In order to have energy, you need transportation. Often the communities, the mines and the defence sector are all wanting the same thing.

With respect to your question, indigenous communities more and more want more than consultation. They are now looking at wanting to have equity ownership in these major projects so that we benefit beyond just training or jobs. Take the fibre optic project. SednaLink is Inuit-owned and Inuit-led, and has the backing of Inuit organizations and development corporations. No other company or entity can really achieve that.

Nasittuq is that NORAD modernization vehicle that can help in directing where these investments need to go, but it needs to be more than defence. It needs, as Jessica said, a really fulsome infrastructure investment strategy that pulls in the private sector, from the mines to the investors, the northern and federal governments, and of course our indigenous communities and peoples, who want to be part of that.

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

Mr. Chair, I'm not sure how much time I have left.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

You have 15 seconds.

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

All right. I will cede that.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you for not trying to stretch your 15 seconds.

Mrs. Kramp-Neuman, you have five minutes, please.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Ms. Shadian, I would like to direct my initial questions to you. Your time was cut short earlier, and I'd like to give you a little bit more time to elaborate on the map of our assets.

You mentioned that we don't currently have a single comprehensive map of the assets in the Arctic. Considering that we're about to embark on a historic modernization of NORAD, with tens of billions of dollars poured into Arctic infrastructure, how, in your opinion, can that oversight be defended? After your report was published, did anyone from the government reach out to you to offer to work with you and your partners to undertake any particular type of survey?

[Dr. Jessica M. Shadian]

No. I testified at the House of Commons for their first Arctic report, and I submitted a discussion about why we need to create an infrastructure investment strategy. I also then testified at the Senate for the previous report, and I testified earlier and spoke again.

So no, I would say they have not reached out, but we have been relentless in reaching out to Canada. We spent a lot of time putting the CIB application together. Also, coming out of COVID, and Minister McKenna talking about the need to have these kinds of legacy projects for infrastructure to pull us out of COVID, we had several meetings. It was like a football. We got put around to different places, and everyone said, “Yes, yes, thank you”, so I don't know—

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

I guess that would be a natural segue for me to direct the next question to you, Ms. Redfern, with regard to how the pandemic has greatly exacerbated the digital divide in Canada's north. Could you possibly expand on the statement you made ?

[Madeleine Redfern]

It's important to understand that we're seeing worldwide, including in southern Canada, telecommunications advancing in leaps and bounds, while in the north we're back to the highest level of speeds pre-Starlink, which is now starting to come in. Through our major ISP, it is 15 megabits per second, versus the previous five for speed.

Even with the almost $50-million investment that the Government of Canada made to upgrade our telecommunications, it's very vulnerable to weather, so any time there's a blizzard, rain or clouds, it can go down to literally zero. It hampers our ability to participate in online learning for children who were trying to connect to their kindergarten to grade 12. It hampers the ability of our post-secondary students to attend. It hampers our ability to do e-health and e-commerce.

There are times when you can be at the grocery store and the Internet goes down, and you can't pay for your groceries or you can't pay for your gasoline. Of course, you can't go to the bank and the ATM to get cash. It's so consistently unpredictable. When the Rogers network went down this past summer in Canada, that is our reality several times a week. You literally cannot do anything with respect to communications. We're so dependent on telecommunications for governance and providing information to our residents. The community access program was shut down at the library, so residents who have no computer or connectivity at home couldn't get information on the pandemic.

It really is critical infrastructure, and it is now recognized by several countries around the world as a human right.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

With all the critical infrastructure that is clearly needed, and to complement everything that you've already suggested with reference to the NORAD modernization, it seems to me as though we're behind the eight ball.

How far are we behind the eight ball with regard to basic infrastructure and, more importantly, the human capital that is needed? Can we expect private industry to do most of this on their own, or do you reckon that the government needs to start some kind of initiative?

[Madeleine Redfern]

We desperately need to have proper infrastructure investment strategies. There is a telecommunications strategy that Canada produced, but I've learned the distinction between what is a political strategy versus what we in the business sector recognize as a business strategy.

A business strategy tells you what you're going to build, the routing, how much it's going to cost, who's going to do it and what level of potential government investment—let's say federal, provincial, territorial or municipal—might be in it, and we don't have that. What we have is a $2-billion universal broadband fund, which everyone has to compete for. There will be one winner, and everyone else will be losers.

It undermines competition. It undermines ensuring that our customers have options. We know that competition improves service and improves cost.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

We're going to, unfortunately—

[Madeleine Redfern]

We're really behind the eight ball on that.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Unfortunately, we're going to have to leave the answer there. I apologize again.

We'll go to Mr. May for five minutes.