National Defence Committee on Nov. 9th, 2023

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Buchmüller, I'd like to apologize once more.

My first question is about the ongoing training given to your employees and volunteers. How many hours does the training take? I'd just like to have an idea of how many hours it takes to train the people who are responding.

[Klaus Buchmüller]

There's basic training, which is mandatory for every THW member. It's 120 hours of theory and practical training. Once they fulfill this training with an examination, they can go into one of the units. It depends on the unit whether it's bridge building, water purification, infrastructure or whatever. It depends, also, on how many hours of training they can do, but they have permanent training in the local sections.

They train in first aid, security in the field, how to behave on a disaster site, how to co-operate and how to use the radios. This is ongoing training they have about every month on a weekend, starting Friday evening and ending Saturday evening.

They have special training where they can use one of our three training centres, but they are called to these training centres depending on their role and the function of the unit where they are based.

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

I'd like you to tell us about how the training is funded. If I understand correctly, there's a kind of continuum in terms of training civilians who become volunteers. Part of the training is done at the school. In your opening remarks, you talked about something similar to the Scouting movement.

Do people give the training entirely on a volunteer basis? If not, where does the funding come from to pay these people?

[Klaus Buchmüller]

There are two different things. In the training centres, there are trainers, paid staff from the federal budget, and there are members of THW. They are supported by volunteers, as well. If we do training, for example, for bridge building, there's an instructor, maybe two engineers and maybe about five to 10 volunteers supporting the training.

We do international training for UNHCR, the World Food Programme and others in our training centres. It's conducted by about 85% volunteers and about 15% permanent paid staff.

The ongoing training and the normal basic training in the local sections is 100% done by volunteers, who, of course, are trained to be trainers. They have trained in trainer courses before. They follow the curriculum that is made at headquarters, which is the same curriculum from north to south and from west to east. They get the curriculum, the paperwork, the PowerPoint and whatever they need. All this is funded through our normal budget from the federal government.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Ms. Normandin.

Next, we have Ms. Mathyssen, for six minutes.

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

Thank you so much for your late-night attendance. We appreciate that greatly.

You spoke a bit about jurisdiction, where the local government—versus the federal government, in your instance—makes the THW work so well. We face that a bit in Canada, in that there have been conversations here about the creation of a national agency to fight disasters. Under the Constitution, of course, those responsibilities fall under the provincial governments.

Can you provide further insights into how Germany navigates those different levels of government, in order to ensure the THW fits the emergency preparedness for each level, as well?

[Klaus Buchmüller]

It's more or less the same as in Canada.

The responsibility for civil protection—like the fire brigade and paramedics—falls under the German Länder, such as Bavaria, North Rhine-Westphalia, Rhineland-Palatinate and so on. There are 16 Länder. The federal government is responsible for civil defence, which means in war time.

The THW law mentions that we support the regional Länder on request. If they need something, they can ask us for it. We're going to support them. The responsibility for a big fire in Munich is the responsibility of Bavaria. If they need support from the federal government and the THW, they can call on us. This is all regulated in the THW law.

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

Are you finding that those regional groups, like Bavaria, are not fulfilling their requirements and are turning more often to the federal government for that support?

[Klaus Buchmüller]

No, they fulfill the requirements.

Since this is a long-standing process, it's quite clear that the THW has, for example, the bigger and heavier machines, and the long-lasting equipment. We can do longer missions. If the fire brigade has a special problem or technical issue.... This happens every day. The Länder in our country call on us about 30 to 50 times a day for any support—small, medium or bigger supports.

They fulfill their jobs, but it's quite clear that it's shared. We do some things. We have heavier equipment, let's say, than the fire brigade.

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

The Canadian Armed Forces is dealing with a recruitment and retention crisis. We don't have the personnel required, sometimes, to do what is required of us. There have been a lot of discussions around the role of our military and changing that relationship.

In terms of the impact the THW has had culturally, can you comment on the conversation? What does it mean for that cultural context and sense of duty to the national perspective, within Germany?

[Klaus Buchmüller]

I don't know whether I get the question. Can you please try to specify it?

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

Sometimes our military is called “the service”. It is service. It's a national duty. There's a sense of honour. We're facing a recruitment and retention crisis here in Canada, and we aren't able to fulfill that. Yet, servicemen and servicewomen still want to fulfill that role and have that sense of duty and honour in service to their country.

I was wondering whether you could comment on how the THW has fulfilled or increased—in your opinion—that sense of duty to the nation.

[Klaus Buchmüller]

If I have it right, the THW has increased the level of service.

If you join the THW, you are a part of the federal government, and society recognizes you as part of the government. I don't mean as a member of Parliament or whatever, but you have a special status for the government. This shows others that the only chance to manage these disasters and support people in need is when the government—either the local or federal government—and citizens work together.

This is the big difference with a lot of other countries. Our civil defence system and protection system are volunteer-based systems. It means the government works together with the citizens. The citizens aren't blaming the government if something goes wrong, because it's an “all-burden” problem. We work together on disasters. This increases resilience for the country.

I hope I got it right, but I'm not sure.

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

That's perfect.

Thank you, sir.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Just before I suspend so that we can go on to the motion that is on the table, I want to follow up on Ms. Mathyssen's question.

We do have a recruitment problem here for our military. Does the THW feed military recruitment in any way, shape or form? In other words, when they volunteer for your organization, does that sometimes lead to people who want to volunteer for the military?

[Klaus Buchmüller]

We do have some volunteers who are working permanently as paid staff for the military. There are maybe about a thousand of them.

The volunteers from our side are supporting the military. We do jobs that the military has to do in other countries. We free up space for the military to fulfill their original tasks. We keep them more or less free from supporting disasters within Germany, aside from very big disasters. Then they come with some units.

I think the co-existence of the THW and the German military makes it that the German military can fulfill their tasks.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you for that, sir. I thank you for your willingness to make yourself available at what is your very late hour. You are free to leave. Your thoughtful evidence will be duly incorporated into our evidence and reflections.

We're back to Ms. Normandin on debate.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Actually, my intention is certainly not to draw out debate. I think the motion that was put forward is explicit enough without my having to add any explanation. So I submit it for debate.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Ms. Mathyssen.

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

I support this motion. I think it is an important motion to put forward. I am concerned however, that during Veterans' Week, leading up to Remembrance Day, we have a veteran who is waiting to speak in the second hour on this study.

I want to honour that.

In fact, he will be the only member who had served directly on a domestic deployment to speak on this study. I want to be able to get to that very quickly. If we can call the vote now, then we'll be done with it.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Mr. Bezan.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to move the following amendment to the motion.

In English where it says, “concerning the public procurement of the CP-140 Aurora replacement”, that needs to be clearer.

Where it goes into the formal call for tenders, I believe there's a mistranslation. Following a conversation with Christine, I believe it should read, “requests for proposals” rather than “call for tenders”.

Then after “contract” delete “to this effect” and add “and that the competition be done on an accelerated timeline for competition and delivery of the new Canadian Multi-Mission Aircraft”.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Is there any debate on the amendment?

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

I'll speak to the amendment.

At Tuesday's meeting, we heard from the government, and then we heard from Mr. Martel with Bombardier, who at one point even said that the government lied and that there was definitely a breach of the timeline and the request for information, and there wasn't communication back to industry.

We're concerned from our side that, one, the government has not been transparent on this; two, the government hasn't talked to all potential bidders for this potential contract; and three, and the reason I am bringing forward this amendment, there is a need to replace the Auroras more quickly, based upon the needs of the Royal Canadian Air Force, and for that reason there is a call for an accelerated timeline.

In my questions to Mr. Martel on Tuesday, I asked about the current expedited timeline to replace the Auroras, and he replied, “Actually, there's plenty of time in front of us. We're in 2023. There's apparently a process that could take place with a selection in 2027. Hopefully, we can expedite that and do even better.” I don't see this as an impediment to Bombardier putting together a bid if a proper RFP is issued. I don't believe that undermines Boeing, which already, as we know, has contracts in place with Germany and other nations to continue to build the P-8 until Canada makes a selection. I don't think we're sliding that timeline at all to the left for them.

Ultimately, we want to get to a proper competition, to follow the rules the government has in place and to ensure that we get the right plane selected for our Canadian Armed Forces.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Mr. Fisher.