National Defence Committee on Sept. 19th, 2023

[MGen Paul Prévost]

It's a great question. It's a two-part question.

Did the first mobilization work? We don't think it did. We don't have the final numbers of how many.... There will be a lot of propaganda out there on what Russia would have us believe they were successful with. One thing is certain: Ukraine was able to hold back. As you mentioned, the resolve and the resilience in Ukraine are incredible.

At the time of the first blow, initially, we thought Russia may have had a chance. Ukraine has been really good at holding the initial offensive and also at holding ground through that mobilization. Russia was not able to do much more. The Russians have been able to hold that line, but they have not been able to take critical ground. You will have seen how long they've been around Bakhmut with not much gain there. That's to the first part of your question, about the initial mobilization.

On this remobilization, we don't have any numbers. I don't think Russia will publish any numbers, because their first mobilization didn't work very well. We don't have specific numbers. We can dig into that, but I don't think we have any. What we believe, though, is that it's going to be more of the same, with ill-equipped, poorly trained and demoralized troops, and probably not effective.

I think our role as the west is to make sure we continue to provide Ukraine with what they need to continue to hold off Russia as long as possible.

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

The enthusiasm on Canada's part has been unwavering. We heard some things. We heard six, eight, 10 months ago that there might be a bit less enthusiasm from the United States on one side of the political spectrum, but it seems that Biden is holding strong on that.

What is the general enthusiasm from our allies for supporting Ukraine?

[MGen Paul Prévost]

I can start with the first part of the question. My colleague Ty mentioned today that the UDCG is happening in Ramstein, where all the ministers of defence from the coalition are gathered to discuss that issue. The support is still there. We and the U.S. continue to look at what we can send. In that space, among the allies we've all looked into what was already ready in the inventory. We have to find a balance between this particular situation, what we can provide to Ukraine and what we have to keep as a coalition for ourselves, so it's a tough space.

The industry has answers to this. How do we work with industry to mobilize in order to continue to feed over the long run, to make sure that Ukraine sustains at least holding ground but at some point also continues to break through and regain some of that territory?

Ty or Alison, do you want to add something?

[Alison Grant, Director General, International Security Policy Bureau, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development]

I'm Alison Grant, director general for international security at Global Affairs Canada. I would love to pitch in on that question, because it's my team at Global Affairs that organized for the NATO summit in Vilnius that just took place in July.

There was very widespread and strong support to ensure that parts of the communiqué were strong on Ukraine. Also, we approved several different types of support for Ukraine at the summit: institutional support; practical support in terms of launching a new comprehensive assistance program for Ukraine, focusing on non-lethal assistance from all allies that will be pooled and will go to Ukraine; and political support with the establishment of a new NATO-Ukraine council. That all happened about a month and a half ago. It was a strong show of support for Ukraine, rallying around on good language on membership too.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Ms. Normandin, you have six minutes.

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

Thank you very much.

It's always a pleasure to have you good people here. Thank you for making yourselves available. We really appreciate it.

I have some more questions about what we can provide to Ukraine. Obviously, we have to keep certain things here because we have obligations, but we also have to produce materiel to send to Ukraine. One thing that comes to mind is ammunition, which is a problem.

Recently, there was a newspaper article about problems with the ammunition supply. It clearly tried to place the blame on the industry. However, a number of people have noted the fact that Canada hasn't given the industry firm contracts to ensure production. Among others, Christyn Cianfarani, whom we have already heard from here, said that you could not take a press release or a tweet to the bank and get funding. We need long-term contracts and guarantees for the industry so that it can invest in producing equipment. At this point, we don't have that. That's our understanding. The war has been going on for a year and a half, and no contract has been signed with the industry. Contracts would also make things better for the communities in which these industries are located. I know some of those communities are in Quebec.

I would like to know whether the absence of a firm, long-term contract between the government and industry to provide Ukraine with military equipment, including ammunition, is a problem.

[Ty Curran]

The reality is that a lot of munitions and equipment have gone out the door to Ukraine, and they need to be both replaced and provided for. There is a requirement for industry to scale up to meet that demand. Similarly, we're seeing shortages internationally on shells and equipment, as you mentioned.

It's a fair point that industry is looking for that long-term signal about what is required. Part of the challenge we've had over the last year is responding rapidly to Ukraine's needs, trying to find whatever was on the shelf in order to meet their demands and do that in as short a timeline as possible.

As the conflict continues to drag on, we need to get ourselves on a footing so as to respond to that in the long term. We all hope the conflict ends soon, but in thinking not just about the continuation of the conflict but also about how we restock our own inventory afterwards, I think industry has a significant role to play in that. It's something we're going to need to look at improving over the coming time.

[MGen Paul Prévost]

I would like to add a few points.

This is an ongoing discussion. There have been a lot of discussions between the Department of National Defence and the industry, including, for one, Quebec's ammunition industry, which you mentioned. A lot of discussions are happening. All the NATO countries involved in the conflict are having those same discussions with their industries. It's a challenge. Our materiel ADM participated in a NATO discussion in recent weeks to try to find solutions.

There certainly is a market. The U.S. sent over one million 155 mm rounds for the M777 howitzers. That market exists. The industry may be looking for guarantees, but it should see that a market exists. Canadian demand is not going to change how this industry needs to be transformed for the future. We're discussing it, but it's a huge problem for all the allies. I don't want to criticize, but there is a market right now. War is not a market we want to promote, but I think both sides have to take some risks.

Thank you.

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

Thank you.

I have a question about that too.

The former minister of National Defence, who is now President of the Treasury Board, told us to expect $15 billion in budget cuts across several departments.

Are these looming budget cuts a problem for defence, specifically providing support to Ukraine? What are your thoughts on that?

[Ty Curran]

Defence is a significant portion of the federal budget. It has a role to play in any attempt to reallocate the budget. There's a certain responsibility that defence is going to have in that space, but I don't think that diminishes the priority we're putting on Ukraine and the need to ensure we're meeting the demands it has.

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

My next question has more to do with Global Affairs Canada. We know that a number of countries have embargoed Ukraine's agricultural products, and it looks like Ukraine may want to take Poland and other countries, which I won't name because I wouldn't want to get it wrong, to the World Trade Organization.

In your opinion, does this make it look like the allies' unity is weakening?

[Kati Csaba, Executive Director, Ukraine Bureau, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development]

Mr. Chair, to respond on that point, I'll say that it has been somewhat surprising to see that several EU member states have chosen to put this embargo on Ukrainian grain. This is a trade issue between those individual states and Ukraine. We are aware that the European Union was making best efforts to be able to negotiate around this particular challenge, but we are also aware, at the same time, that those very same states are very supportive of Ukraine in many other ways and will continue to provide other types of support. We see this as a very straightforward trade-related issue.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Ms. Normandin.

Ms. Mathyssen, you have six minutes.

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

Thank you very much for appearing before us today in person. It's great.

General Prévost, you discussed the focus for Ukraine on air defence and that partnership. One of the key commitments that we made was in terms of training and dollars. Of course, we don't have the F-16s. That's what they're looking for. However, we do have a number of international schools. There is one that is really incredible and that wants to help and participate in the training of Ukrainian potential pilots on that F-16 platform.

Can you talk about that and how we're moving forward in terms of the allocation of those training dollars—specifically how it relates to air defence training?

[MGen Paul Prévost]

Although I wear the blue uniform, Ty is actually the expert on that piece.

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

Fair enough.

[Ty Curran]

F-16s have been a high priority for the Government of Ukraine. We were very excited that we were able to join the international coalition. We've been working very closely with the Dutch and the Danes, who are leading this initiative, trying to figure out how we can support the various phases that are out there for training. That includes things like language training so that the Ukrainian pilots can be up to speed on the machines. That includes things like learning how to fly fighter jets in general, as well as training that's specific to the F-16s. From a DND and CAF point of view, as you mentioned, we don't have F-16s, but there are areas where we can contribute as part of that.

It's been a challenging file from the point of view that F-16s are very complicated pieces of equipment. We're working closely with international partners to see how we can fit in. That's one of the areas that we've allocated funding to support.

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

So those potential funds for that training, for a school like the one that exists in my riding, could still be open. Is there still a possibility for that help to Ukraine as part of the commitment that the government made?

[Ty Curran]

Yes. Part of it depends on.... As I said, we're working with international partners in this space. We're trying to find a place where we can bring unique Canadian capabilities to meet the Ukrainian demands. In that case, we're trying to look at spaces or areas where perhaps allies haven't already put forward a donation or an offer to the Ukrainians.

We are certainly still looking at all the options.

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

Okay.

Obviously, 59 million dollars' worth of weapons was announced by the Prime Minister, which would be ammunition that would be sourced from Canadian companies to donate to Ukraine. Can you confirm whether the production of the equipment occurred within Canada? The sourcing of that ammunition was questioned in a news story previously, where it was coming from.

[Ty Curran]

With regard to the $59 million, would you be referring to the Colt Canada contract?

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

Yes.

[Ty Curran]

We've purchased a number of weapons, small arms and ammo, from Colt Canada, as well as, I believe, Prairie Gun Works. In the case of Prairie Gun Works, I know that the equipment was produced in Canada, or I'm pretty sure, but I don't know the answer off the top of my head for Colt Canada. I can certainly get back to you on that.

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

That would be great, because it was also hinted that ultimately the defence department wanted to actually not make that information public. Making that information public would be really helpful, considering that a lot of our industry partners, as Madame Normandin has stated, are looking to ensure that they can solidify those contracts.

In terms of your general, overall knowledge here at this table, can you assure us right now that all that information will be kept public and there won't be certain things held back in terms of non-disclosure statements?

[Ty Curran]

Let me start by saying that if there is a contractual agreement that we've signed in that space, we would obviously have to respect that, but from my point of view, I'm happy to get back to you with the answer to that question. We have a very strong relationship with Colt Canada. I just don't happen to know where all of their production is done. I wouldn't want to give you the wrong answer right now on that front.