Evidence of meeting #6 for National Defence in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was systems.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Chief Operating Officer, CanArctic Inuit Networks Inc.
I would say yes, plus unmanned vehicles.
Conservative
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
That's fine, I appreciate that honesty because, with NORAD—that's our study—is there mode interoperability with the Americans? As said, it's in America's best interest that Canada take care of our own territory, which includes the Arctic and the entire country on all three coasts.
In the discussions around nuclear reactors, because I think this is something that is going to be key when we have our polar over-the-horizon radar system, where should that be located? It's going to take a pile of energy. It's going to be an SMR if it's up in the high Arctic. Ultimately, where else should we be having more of a permanent presence in the Arctic?
I'll start with you, Madam Redfern.
Chief Operating Officer, CanArctic Inuit Networks Inc.
It's already been identified where some of the strategic locations can and should be. We have Happy Valley-Goose Bay. Iqaluit would probably be another one. Churchill has been identified as strategic, as has Yellowknife and Inuvik. Alert of course comes to mind. Nanisivik is seen as probably not the most strategic choice, but we need another one. Whether or not it ends up being in a place like Pond Inlet or Resolute has yet to be determined, but I think it speaks to the project that Arctic 360 has been pushing, which is that we need to map it all out not only for security but for investments for the regions in the north. It just hasn't been done to the extent that it could and should.
My concern is that by just doing it for one purpose in isolation of all the other actors, we may be missing critical locations for those investments where they meet the security needs of the community and national security.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
Ms. Shadian, you talked about the relationship with Greenland. How does that, in your mind, fit in? Should they also be included as part of NORAD in continental security? Americans already have a base up at Thule. Should Canada have more of a presence there in co-operation with the Danes?
President and Chief Executive Officer, Arctic 360, As an Individual
Generally speaking, we should definitely have more co-operation with Greenland and Denmark combined. As I was mentioning, just in terms of maritime space itself, we know that Greenland is very eager to have strength and co-operation with Canada. There are going to be representations from both coming online.
Whether or not it becomes part of NORAD, though, I keep thinking about it in my mind, and I'm not sure I have the answer to that. I think it's very specific. It's something that would have to be sat down and discussed with Greenland. Does it make things more subject to some of the discussions coming out of the United States? Is it in a more precarious position, or does it strengthen their own defence? That's something I don't have....
Regardless, we should be strengthening our bilateral relationship with Greenland and Denmark in the defence space and thinking in terms of dual assets and critical infrastructure, because we should be looking out of both sides, our left eye and our right eye, on the way that supply chains, shipping and these kinds of things—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Charles Sousa
Ms. Shadian, thank you.
We're almost done, and I want to get everybody in.
Mr. Malette, you have four minutes.
Liberal
Chris Malette Liberal Bay of Quinte, ON
Thank you.
I guess I'm batting cleanup.
Mr. Hickey, what role is DND playing in research and development, if any, of artificial intelligence, quantum computing, machine learning, cyber-defence capabilities, advanced robotics and other emerging defence technologies? You outlined some of what you saw as some of our deficiencies in those areas, or at least where we're lagging. Are there any areas in any of those where we are progressing at pace?
Associate Professor, As an Individual
What we have currently are ideas programs. DND is pushing a lot of that, and it's very productive.
In those areas where we are very strong—I'm thinking quantum, AI, machine learning, advanced manufacturing, advanced materials—we have an ecosystem in Canada: We have researchers and that ability to build. I think that in those specific areas, we have a lot of opportunity to be world leaders.
It is in the areas that are not our central focus or historical strengths where we lack some abilities. That's where, potentially, these ideas programs that are well thought out may not be as effective for programs, for example, hypersonics, where we need infrastructure, developments and an industrial base to build on.
Professor, Centre for Military Security and Strategic Studies, University of Calgary, As an Individual
That's such a difficult one in terms of trying to think of how we get ahead of the curve. It gets back to the fact that we're not observing the reasons that people are trying to get these different technologies. I mean, to think back to World War II when everybody was saying, “Okay, we have to get on top of radar,” it's that individualistic thinking that is the problem.
Part of the reason the Brits won the Battle of Britain is that they thought in systems contexts. It's not just about getting a good Spitfire, which was the tooth of everything; it was also getting the radar. In fact, we can think of gender or the fact that you don't really care whether women are operating and serving as the receivers. It's an overall picture.
We think of AI, quantum and all of this, but, ultimately, what we're saying is this: How are our enemies using this to kill us? How, then, do we detect it? How do we get into the mindset to have technology so that we are able to stop being killed? It probably means, as part of that, how do we kill our enemies? It's a very un-Canadian way of thinking.
Again, going back to World War II, remember, we were leading on certain technologies at a point, but we did not think strategically, and that cost us. I mean, we had good radar development, but the Brits never really shared the huff-duff, which are underwater listening devices, because we didn't have the ability to really handle those at that point. That's the point: You have to think about how we get ready to stop someone who's trying to kill us and take all of this technology.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Charles Sousa
Mr. Malette, do you mind sharing one minute with Monsieur Savard-Tremblay?
Do you want to ask the last question? Then I have some more things to discuss with the committee.
Bloc
Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC
Mr. Chair, you said that I have about a minute to ask another question. Is that right?
Bloc
Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC
Ms. Shadian, you answered yes to the question about the F‑35, provided that we don't become totally dependent.
Do you think that it makes sense to bring the source code back anyway?
President and Chief Executive Officer, Arctic 360, As an Individual
What was that about the source code?
Bloc
Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC
The source code has been reclaimed.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Arctic 360, As an Individual
You're getting above my technical grade.
My only point is that we have to be able to figure out, if we need to do something, that we don't have to rely on someone else to help us defend ourselves. Co-operation is good—
Bloc
President and Chief Executive Officer, Arctic 360, As an Individual
—but it has to be—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Charles Sousa
Thank you.
Thank you to the witnesses for attending and for participating.
I have one last item to discuss. We have our next meeting on Thursday. We have the witnesses. You'll be receiving a notice. I think we have already shared it.
The Minister of Defence has confirmed his availability as well. He'll appear on Tuesday, October 21, from 3:30 to 4:30, and then the officials from DND will remain to answer questions during the second hour of that meeting.
Ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much.
The meeting is adjourned.