National Defence Committee on Dec. 8th, 2022

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

I understand you, but in my opinion, that's not a good enough reason to explain why we're in this situation today.

Are there any countries that have best practices in this area that we can rely on? Earlier, we were talking about Russia. You can think what you want about Russia, but the fact remains that it is increasing its budgets and its presence in the Arctic.

Are there any examples of countries we could learn from?

[Karen Hogan]

We didn't look at whether there are examples to follow elsewhere, but I'm sure that discussions with other countries could be another useful source of information to improve our ability to manage contracts and purchase equipment for the Arctic.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

I have one last question—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

I'm sorry.

We'll go on for two and a half minutes with Ms. Mathyssen.

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

In terms of, again, that expansion, that extension of the lifetime of the equipment that we're talking about, the ships—I mean, it's overall in terms of all military equipment—there are a lot of questions in terms of how long we can actually make things last in order to cover that gap that you've laid out here. Were there any conversations about the concern the government needs to have about ensuring the safety of our troops, the servicemen and servicewomen who have to actually work on that equipment?

I think about the Cormorants. I think about our subs. I know that you didn't do the study specifically in terms of that, but could you give a comment in the time that I have?

[Nicholas Swales]

The comment I would offer is that life extensions don't always extend life as much as is hoped for. That's one of the concerns we have when we see counting on life extension as the means by which you cover gaps. There have been a couple of recent examples of Coast Guard ships that were life-extended and then pulled out of service much more quickly. I don't think that's a commentary on the safety of those ships. I would expect that decisions were made at the right time, but it does show that life extension is not the silver bullet here.

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

Ultimately, the Government of Canada is the employer. It has a responsibility to ensure the health and safety of its workers and the safety of the equipment it provides.

In terms of that conversation, was that ever explored? Is that something you would be looking at in the future, specifically about the extension of the equipment that you looked at and that lifetime?

[Karen Hogan]

We really didn't focus on the ship, on the safety and security of individuals on a ship or in a vessel. We really focused on the global picture of maritime domain awareness that was needed and the gaps that are created by the equipment needed to support it reaching the end of its useful life.

It's a question that I think you should ask National Defence and the Coast Guard.

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

Is that something your office would run in terms of an audit in the future?

[Karen Hogan]

I guess it's always something that we could include in the scope. We have a lot of work planned, obviously, in National Defence.

I thank you for the suggestion. Nick is hearing it, so we'll see what we can do in future audits.

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

There's no doubt that you're kept fairly busy.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Thank you.

We'll move on to our last two five-minute questions.

Go ahead, Ms. Gallant.

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

Auditor General, you outlined a 2020 case of a vessel that sailed into Canadian Arctic waters without approval. Was the intent of that vessel to make landfall in Canada's Arctic without permission? Also, where did it come from?

[Karen Hogan]

For the specifics of that, I'm going to see if Nick has any and if we can share them.

[Nicholas Swales]

I'm actually going to turn it to Chantal to speak to that specific case.

[Chantal Thibaudeau, Director, Office of the Auditor General]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

May I ask you to repeat which case you were referring to?

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

It's the 2020 case of a vessel that sailed into Canadian Arctic waters without approval. Was its intent to make landfall without permission? Where did it come from?

[Chantal Thibaudeau]

That's right.

This example makes reference to a ship that was registered from New Zealand: the Kiwi Roa. We don't have any details as such as to what was—

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

Thank you, Ms. Thibaudeau. You've answered my question with telling me where it's from.

If the the Russians have a submarine in our Arctic waters right now, can we immediately identify that threat, yes or no?

[Karen Hogan]

Unfortunately, our audit didn't look at subsurface or air. We really looked at ship traffic on the water. Again, you'd have to ask National Defence and the Coast Guard that question.

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

The sensors under water were not part of your audit.

[Karen Hogan]

That's correct. We did not look at subsurface.

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

Okay.

Do our Inuit monitors and rangers have access to drones to help them do surveillance in our Arctic?

[Karen Hogan]

I believe we had a similar question earlier on. We answered that we know that drones are in the plans, but we do not know who will actually be using those.

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

Okay.

There was a $15-billion black hole in the defence budget. In your audit, did you find any evidence that some of the money we could not find listed in the budget but was allocated is somehow going to the Arctic?