National Defence Committee on May 6th, 2026

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

I think I've done one better. I spent an hour and a half face to face with your premier. We reviewed the presence of the Canadian Armed Forces and DND in Newfoundland and Labrador. It turns out that we're the third-largest employer in Newfoundland and Labrador.

As an aside, as an example, we employ 50,000 people in Ontario. We employ more people in British Columbia than Lululemon does.

We are very engaged right now in working with the premier and assessing our needs in Newfoundland and Labrador very systematically. Any good advice you can give us in terms of helping to feed information into this analysis would be very appreciated.

[Jonathan Rowe, Conservative, Terra Nova—The Peninsulas, NL]

We have some of the highest unemployment rates in the country, especially among tradespeople. We have huge opportunities there to go and get that construction.

I'm also wondering about Atlantic Canada and Nova Scotia. We've seen a launch pad being used there—for skyrocketing costs, if you ask me. I have a launch pad in my riding as well, in St. Lawrence. I'm curious as to why the Department of National Defence didn't use that launch pad, especially considering that it put $8.3 million of government funding into the one in my riding.

Why didn't we use that launch pad for free rather than spending over $200 million for a spaceport in Nova Scotia?

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

A hard decision was made, through analysis and through advice coming from our officials. Now we've made a conscious decision. As one of our major sovereign capability priorities under the DIS, we've decided to go further into the space business and the space-launch capacity.

We did it partly because we have a tremendous Canadian tradition in space. We also did it because there's only one launch pad in all of Europe. Many European Union countries have approached Canada to say that if we do build this, they will come. They're shipping from SpaceX now in the United States, and they'd like to diversify.

[Jonathan Rowe, Conservative, Terra Nova—The Peninsulas, NL]

I just can't understand—perhaps you can help me understand—why it is that we're reinventing the wheel by building two spaceports in Atlantic Canada, just across the pond, rather than doubling down on the one already built in my riding of Newfoundland and Labrador.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Our agreement with Maritime Launch, the company involved, will see a dedicated Government of Canada launch pad built in a geographically strategic location near Canso, Nova Scotia. What we're really saying is that we're getting into this field, we're going to make the proper investments and we're going to participate in what is a massive global opportunity. We intend not only to do that but also to achieve our own satellite sovereignty.

[Jonathan Rowe, Conservative, Terra Nova—The Peninsulas, NL]

We're not just going to do it good. We're going to do it twice as good by building two spaceports.

On another note, you mentioned drones today. I think that's going to be the future of warfare, unfortunately, with the development of AI and everything. We're seeing this in the Strait of Hormuz and other parts of the world. We're seeing drone technology advancing not just in the air. It's also about marine drones.

I was very surprised by your saying that the hub of the think tank is going to be here in Ottawa rather than in, perhaps, B.C., Atlantic Canada or Newfoundland and Labrador, where we could test these drones in the water, with ice conditions, sea mammals and ocean currents.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Just so you know, there's a small piece here, but it's primarily at Mirabel. There is a cluster, as you know, of capacity in that area.

This raises the question of the $30-million investment we made in Halifax through the COVE centre to stand up a specialized maritime location for a defence innovation secure hub. It's precisely to look at these kinds of autonomous underwater systems, working with Kraken and other companies. We made that decision. We made that investment.

You're right. The whole question of autonomous weapons speaks to our AI strategy, which we've put in place. We're looking at that. We're looking at what's going on not only below water but also on land and in the air. It's about all autonomous systems.

[Jonathan Rowe, Conservative, Terra Nova—The Peninsulas, NL]

Are we able to produce sea drones?

[The Chair, Liberal, Charles Sousa]

Thank you, Mr. Rowe, for your questions. They were very good questions, and I appreciate it, but we are running out of time.

Ms. Lapointe, it's over to you. I'll have to cut you off, probably, but go ahead.

[Viviane LaPointe, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Minister, I'm always pleased when you come to committee because I get to talk about critical minerals—something very important to Sudbury and me.

This committee undertook a study on the nexus between critical minerals and defence. Witness after witness told us that without critical minerals, we don't have security and we don't have defence. The defence industrial strategy certainly identifies that.

Can you tell us how critical minerals are being factored into defence planning, particularly as they apply to supply risks and long-term needs?

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

The really good news for Canadians to know is that Canada has the potential to produce all 12 NATO-identified defence-critical minerals. That's a great luxury. We're very blessed with this kind of resource. It will be very important for us. We can become positioned as a trusted supplier because we have the potential to produce all 12. That's number one.

We're also working, now, to see how we can strengthen the full value chain—process these minerals and refine them so they can be usable inputs. That's why, in budget 2025, we included $443 million over five years to—precisely, Ms. Lapointe—advance critical minerals processing technologies, support joint investments with our allies and develop a stockpiling mechanism not just for ourselves but also under the rubric of our NATO obligations. As a NATO partner, we are also pursuing stockpiling.

This is something that is an asset, or will turn out to be. It will become an even more important asset over time. It's a national and economic security priority.

[The Chair, Liberal, Charles Sousa]

Thank you, Minister and Ms. Lapointe.

Sir, your time is up. You've done your hour.

I'm going to have to suspend for a moment to allow the minister and others to regroup.

Again, Minister, thank you for taking the time to be before this committee, as you always do.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair and all members. I appreciate it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Charles Sousa]

I'll suspend the meeting.

[The Chair, Liberal, Charles Sousa]

The meeting has resumed.

We're going to go to our officials, but before we proceed, given our time and the fact that we were delayed, we're going to end this at 6:45. Is that okay with everybody? Very good.

We're going to proceed to our first round of questions.

We'll go over to you, Mr. Bezan.

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

Thank you.

Again, thanks for joining us and being here, Deputy Minister Fox. I want to get into some of the questions that are out there on some of the orders that are outstanding.

There is a memo floating around about the regular-sized tactical vests. In the conversations I've had with some of our troops, especially women, there is a shortage of vests. I understand, based upon a memo that I saw, that it won't be rectified until 2029, and more people have to try to fit into regular vests, even if they're small.

Doesn't that represent some safety concerns?

[Stephen Kelsey]

Absolutely. The anthropomorphic work has been done. We have the money, but we haven't been able to get industry to respond. They're doing everything they can, but it's absolutely true and unacceptable that we have folks of different sizes who are having to use equipment that's not as advantageous as it needs to be.

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

Why is it going to take three years to go out there and buy body armour and vests for our troops?

[Stephen Kelsey]

It will be three years for the entire force, but not necessarily for the folks who are in Latvia, if that was the question.

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

If something bigger happens, we're not going to have the safety equipment there. We need to be making sure that people are wearing the proper body armour, that they're going to be comfortable and that they're able to march.

[Stephen Kelsey]

I agree.

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

What about body armour that's contoured to the bodies of women? When are we expected to start receiving those?

[Stephen Kelsey]

We will have to get you the answer.

[Heather Sheehy]

I don't have the dates on all elements. I recall that we have already put in place some new base layers, and they are being delivered, as I recollect. They are specifically designed for different genders, so we are advancing the program and that is the first that I recall in terms of the deliverables. I think those are being delivered now.

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

In 2022, the U.S. announced that they were increasing the production of 155-millimetre shells in Canada using both General Dynamics OTS, as well as the.... What's the name of the other company that does the shell casings? It's IMT.

They announced theirs in 2022 and, of course, they ramped up production to help Ukraine and to build up U.S. stocks. They're Canadian-based companies. We just announced in 2026 we would ramp up our own. How soon will it be that we see that production increase and we're able to have those shells delivered to Canada?