Evidence of meeting #72 for National Defence in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was industry.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Mike Mueller  President and Chief Executive Officer, Aerospace Industries Association of Canada
Christyn Cianfarani  President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John McKay

Colleagues, let's get started. We're ready to go. We have the room until six o'clock. You'll notice that the second panel has been cancelled. We'll have to reschedule it.

I'll urge colleagues to take note that a lot of people are watching this study, because it is an incredibly important study and the current situation with procurement can't continue. I think there's unanimous agreement on that.

With that, let's get ourselves started. This time we'll still go very quickly, but I'll try to run it right until six o'clock. We should be able to get in two full rounds and maybe a bit more.

I want to call on Mr. Mueller and Ms. Cianfarani. Mr. Mueller is president and CEO of the Aerospace Industries Association. Ms. Cianfarani is president and CEO of the Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries.

You each have five minutes.

Mr. Mueller, you are listed as first on the order paper, so we'll hear from you first. You have five minutes, please.

4:40 p.m.

Mike Mueller President and Chief Executive Officer, Aerospace Industries Association of Canada

Thank you, Mr. Chair and committee members. Thank you for the opportunity to be here.

The Aerospace Industries Association of Canada represents more than 90% of the Canadian aerospace industry, including the defence sector. I want to thank the committee for this study, as it is of critical importance to our nation's defence and innovation potential and is truly a non-partisan issue. As you know, Canada's aerospace industry is a key contributor to our national and local economies from coast to coast. Our call for an industrial strategy and a greater investment in the industry will create the kind of business environment in this country that encourages investment, which creates high-value jobs. We also feel that an industrial strategy will help fix the current export permit system, which is a significant frustration for many of our members.

Procurement should be about better collaboration between government and industry. It should be about positioning Canada and our industry for the work, innovation and defence requirements of the future. It needs to be about creating more opportunities and it needs to be about better planning. It is our hope that your work in this committee will result in this government, or future governments, creating a framework that commits to the establishment of an industrial strategy. Internationally, we are seeing our friends and competitors have different relationships between industry and government. We require the same forethought here.

Members of the committee, in the past, decision-makers like you made aerospace and defence a priority. We need that same leadership and vision today. In fact, the NATO Secretary General put it very clearly last week, that “there is no defence without industry”.

This is not a partisan issue. Rather, the threats to continental and world security are more complex and multi-faceted than they have ever been. The strategic environment requires a comprehensive approach. This is why industry is eagerly awaiting the promised defence policy update. We are also looking for a clear commitment through the defence policy update on how the government will be achieving our commitments to multinational organizations like NATO.

We do believe that there needs to be more investment to both provide the necessary equipment and speed up procurement. Today's procurement system is burdensome, complex and lengthy. It must be transformed into one that is efficient and strategic. In order to succeed and to ensure that we have domestic capability and capacity, we need a procurement system that operates effectively and efficiently and is capable of responding to rapidly evolving international security threats and emerging capability requirements.

This moment presents a unique opportunity for intensified collaboration between the government and industry to refine our procurement approaches and processes. If we fail to engage in early collaboration, Canada risks missing out on opportunities to leverage our innovation and industrial strengths to meet our growing defence and security needs.

To address these challenges and seize the opportunities, I want to give some ideas that the government should be considering.

First, we need to build stronger strategic relationships with industry through ongoing and sustained engagement. The federal government and industry should collaboratively develop a strategic relationship through more meaningful and sustained engagement practices.

Second, we need to better align requirements with needs. We need to work together to develop requirements to ensure capability relevance for current and future needs.

Third, we need to tailor procurement approaches to the nature of the acquisition. Match the approach with the nature of the acquisition, adapting when necessary to ensure an appropriate fit. The determination of this will require a strategy and advanced discussions so that there's clarity and transparency.

Fourth, we should consider adopting a risk-based procurement approach. Work should be done to increase the use of risk-based contract approvals to streamline defence procurement and reduce unnecessary process requirements.

Fifth, we need to work together to enhance government procurement capacity through collaborative training and skills development. We need a new relationship between the federal government and industry to enhance procurement capacity. We need to develop mechanisms for sharing skills, talent and risk management approaches. This goes to some of the required cultural changes that you've been hearing about.

In conclusion, many of these recommendations would be addressed through a comprehensive aerospace industrial strategy that would provide certainty, transparency and the identification of key industrial capabilities and capacities that we need here in Canada. Getting this right and optimizing defence procurement are essential for our nation's security and innovation potential. Together, we can harness innovation, maintain control over our defence capabilities and ensure that Canada in fact remains strong, secure and engaged.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John McKay

Thank you, Mr. Mueller.

Ms. Cianfarani, the floor is yours.

4:45 p.m.

Christyn Cianfarani President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries

Thank you for inviting me to speak to you today about procurement and the Canadian Armed Forces.

Russia's invasion of Ukraine has upset the long-standing security balance and architecture that Canada has invested in and that serves as a cornerstone of our national security. No NATO government, military or defence company was prepared for the event or the grinding conventional ground war that has followed. NATO states, including Canada, will need to supply munitions and defence technologies quickly, likely for years, in quantities not foreseen or planned for since World War II.

At Vilnius, NATO leaders reaffirmed a three-pronged defence investment pledge. It's called the “three Cs”. The famous—or infamous—2% of GDP floor is one. To spend 20% on capital equipment and R and D is another. Canada has failed to meet both targets since their launch in 2014, and has never set out a plan to meet them. NATO also wants and needs its member states and their defence industries to be part of the effort to arm Ukraine and replenish their own stockpiles. A new defence production action plan has been put in place for that purpose.

For the last 18 months, the global demand for defence industrial production has increased significantly. The commitments that I have just mentioned will amplify what we're seeing. The global defence industry will be shaped for years to come. This is a moment, one we have not seen in decades, for Canada to step forward and make generational investments in its own capabilities to share in the collective burden. It's time to step up or step aside.

Failure doesn't look like getting kicked out of NATO or the G7. Failure looks like AUKUS—being ghosted by our closest allies. It looks like not expanding our munitions production capacity in time to help Ukraine. It looks like holding on to old kit instead of donating it, because it takes us too long to replace it.

That brings me to the subject at hand—namely, Canadian defence procurement and how to reform the system. I have appeared in front of parliamentary committees before. I have said that there are no silver bullets. I do not believe that seemingly simple, elegant proposals will reform one of the most difficult and complex functions of public administration. I have said that a single agency is no panacea.

Meaningful reform will require laborious, painstaking, incremental and co-operative work by the departments involved. Canadian industry needs a seat at that table. The work begins with mapping the acquisition process and eliminating bottlenecks. Currently, there is little to no objective process performance data, or at least not in the public domain.

We've consulted and urged officials to move away from a one-size-fits-all model, especially for rapid technology adoption and services. If it's Canadian and a key industrial capability, or a KIC, use a national security exception. I have participated in reforms to identify KICs that were meant to favour and expedite acquisition in these areas.

The hard truth is that our defence procurement produces the outcomes our country wants, not the ones we pretend to collectively want. The rigid, risk-averse gyrations we see are reflections of a lack of priority at the national level. The current approach also undermines the capabilities, effectiveness and readiness of the CAF. Morale and the public image of the forces suffer, affecting recruitment and retention, which is arguably the biggest issue facing the Canadian Armed Forces today.

Defence procurement is an instrument of foreign policy, industrial policy and national security. If we were clear on what we wanted, we would drive the outcomes accordingly. The Prime Minister needs to identify defence procurement reform as a priority and then hold ministers accountable for improvements.

Lastly, we need to start thinking about our defence industry like our allies do—namely, as a fundamental component of national security and a collective tool of deterrence. To this end, procurement system outcomes need to develop and sustain a healthy Canadian industrial base. The neglect faced by the domestic industry must be replaced by a new approach and commitment to industry if we're going to be a meaningful contributor to Ukraine, NATO and our allies, and to ensure that we have a stake in the economic opportunities that present themselves. This was our main point in our submission to the defence policy update.

We've known for decades that Canadian defence procurement is slow. So what has changed? The world has changed. The status quo is now a real risk to Canada's national security and to that of our NATO allies.

Thank you.

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John McKay

Thank you.

Mr. Kelly, you have six minutes, please.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB

Thank you.

Over the last couple of meetings, I've asked a number of questions about the production of 155-millimetre shells.

Ms. Cianfarani, I don't know if you've heard the testimony that came up here, but we had a suggestion made at this table that it's industry that is not ramping up or investing in production and that there aren't long-term contracts available. That's despite 155-millimetre shells being in demand not just to replenish our own supplies and not just to supply Ukraine, but by all other allied militaries. What can industry do to get shell production increased in Canada?

4:50 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries

Christyn Cianfarani

Industry is expecting to see demand signals that are firm, binding, signed contracts. These investments in production lines to ramp up will take capital investments that repay themselves in the order of 15 to 20 years. This means that they need to be backstopped by a procurement size that is large enough to, effectively, run the line for that long a period of time in order for them to recuperate their investment.

That's first and foremost: signed, legally binding contracts.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB

It's a year and a half into the conflict in Ukraine, and shell production has not gone up at all in Canada. We're the same as we were before. General Eyre was very concerned about this and sounded the alarm.

Why can't this happen? Is it a matter of the government making this a priority and putting the contracts out? What will it take?

4:50 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries

Christyn Cianfarani

As I understand it, proposals have been put to the Government of Canada. I have not seen these proposals, but I understand from companies that proposals have been put in to the Government of Canada to increase shell production and modify the lines, particularly for 155s. You'd have to ask the company to confirm this, but to my knowledge, there have been no legally signed contracts to increase production so that we can deliver to Ukraine.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB

Industry is waiting for the government.

4:50 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries

Christyn Cianfarani

Of course it is.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB

Okay. Thank you.

You said that the exclusion of Canada from AUKUS is a symptom of the failure of Canada to take its national defence and its procurement seriously. Can you elaborate on that?

4:50 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries

Christyn Cianfarani

I think it's an example of how Canada doesn't seem to be reading the tea leaves correctly. We went into AUKUS expecting, as I understand it, in the words of the Prime Minister, that this is a “submarine deal”, and not understanding that allies speak through defence co-operation agreements, so this is more than just a purchase of submarines. There is a whole technology stream going on behind this whereby the three nations—Australia, the U.K. and the U.S.—will collaborate to produce emerging technologies far beyond a submarine deal.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB

And they will share intelligence amongst themselves without Canada being a part of it.

4:50 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries

Christyn Cianfarani

We're not at the table.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB

That's right.

You said that eliminating bottlenecks is part of the key to fixing procurement. Can you identify some of those bottlenecks?

4:50 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries

Christyn Cianfarani

First and foremost, before I go into hypothetical bottlenecks, we would need to map the system. Right now, there exists no mapping of the procurement system, in the public domain anyway, which means we cannot identify where there are bottlenecks, misalignments, or perhaps duplications to make determinations on how we would change that process.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB

Industry doesn't know how best to go about putting together a bid or a proposal, because they don't even understand—

4:55 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries

Christyn Cianfarani

No, we understand in general how the system works, but if you actually want to do the hard work of eliminating steps that make this overall process highly complicated, you would have to be able to have exposure to the 250-some steps the Department of National Defence goes through to get a project from project conception to requirements analysis, options analysis and then through to actual procurement.

We have no visibility into those things, so we can't conjecture as to how the system might be repaired.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB

Only when the Prime Minister makes this a priority will it happen. You talk about the importance of the Prime Minister. Is it the weight of the Prime Minister's Office that's just not behind reforming procurement?

4:55 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries

Christyn Cianfarani

We would expect to see something like this in mandate letters, and we would expect it to be very directive to the ministers in charge. There are effectively three ministers, but there are a few more who play within defence procurement and export, if you will.

We would expect to see it in all of the three ministers' mandate letters to take action to have procurement reform. Maybe they need to go a bit further to say “meaningful procurement reform that reduces the number of steps and the time that it takes from conception to acquisition”.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB

The goal of reducing time is not stated as a priority of the government.

October 3rd, 2023 / 4:55 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries

Christyn Cianfarani

It is not, as far as I know.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB

Okay.

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John McKay

Thank you, Mr. Kelly.

Madame Lambropoulos, you have six minutes, please.