National Defence Committee on Oct. 23rd, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Charles Sousa]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number nine of the House of Commons Standing Committee on National Defence. Pursuant to the motion adopted on September 23, the committee is meeting to proceed with a briefing by the Secretary of State for Defence Procurement on his mandate and NATO defence spending.

I welcome the Honourable Stephen Fuhr, Secretary of State for Defence Procurement, to a committee that he's very familiar with, having once chaired it himself.

Joining the secretary of state are Arianne Reza, deputy minister of Public Works and Government Services, and Paula Folkes, associate assistant deputy minister of Public Services and Procurement Canada.

I will now invite the secretary of state to make his opening statement. You have up to five minutes.

[Stephen Fuhr, Liberal, Secretary of State (Defence Procurement)]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to extend my greetings to everyone and thank the committee for inviting me.

I'll begin by acknowledging our presence today on the traditional and unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people.

I'm pleased to participate in today's discussion of the priorities associated with my role as secretary of state responsible for defence procurement. My mandate is to deliver the capability to the Canadian Armed Forces at the speed of relevance while stimulating Canada's economy. Our government is equipping our soldiers, sailors and aviators with the tools they need while investing in the growth of a strong defence industrial base.

Canada's new government has committed to our NATO partners that we will increase defence spending by 2% GDP by the end of the fiscal year and 5% within the next decade. To make that happen, the government is changing its approach to defence spending and procurement. We all know that procurement has been too slow, overly complicated and fragmented across departments.

These are not new issues. In fact, this committee examined them in a 2024 report called “A Time For Change: Reforming Defence Procurement in Canada”, and we have incorporated many of its recommendations in the creation of this new agency. Building on that foundation, the Defence Investment Agency represents a new era in how Canada delivers critical capabilities to our armed forces. Many of its core features reflect the committee's guidance, including streamlining the end-to-end processes, simplifying approvals, tailoring oversight to project complexity and embedding a stronger sense of urgency and prioritization in how we deliver capability. We also drew from the recommendations from all parties, which called for a single point of accountability to replace the diffuse responsibility that had long hampered results. The Defence Investment Agency, established as a special operating agency within Public Services and Procurement Canada, now provides that clear accountability.

It consolidates multiple procurement functions under one roof while maintaining transparency and ministerial oversight. Our goal is simple: to make procurement faster, clearer and more responsive. The agency focuses on consolidating processes, reducing red tape and accelerating defence acquisitions while ensuring that industry has greater clarity and predictability. At the same time, the agency's work will closely align with the forthcoming defence industrial strategy, which will serve as a road map for advancing Canada's defence industrial objectives and supporting homegrown innovation in aerospace, shipbuilding and advanced manufacturing, while helping Canadian firms scale up and compete globally.

This is a significant transformation of defence procurement, and it required major shifts in how we do the work. That's why, leading up to its launch, we consulted broadly with industry partners, small and medium-sized enterprises, indigenous suppliers and allied frameworks to ensure we have this right.

To manage day-to-day operations, the government has appointed Doug Guzman as CEO of the new agency. Mr. Guzman brings a wealth of experience to the job and extensive expertise in capital allocation, project execution and managing large fiscal projects.

In the Second World War, the government of the day acted decisively to reform procurement, delivering the planes, ships, gear and ammunition the military needed at the speed that met the moment. Today, amid shifting geopolitical landscapes and growing global threats, Canada must once again rise to the occasion. The creation of the Defence Investment Agency marks a decisive step forward. It is one that will strengthen our sovereignty, support Canadian industry and ensure that our military remains ready and relevant now and into the future.

I'm happy to be here and answer your questions.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Charles Sousa]

Thank you very much for your opening statement.

I'm going to pass it over first to Mr. Bezan, Monsieur Malette and then Monsieur Savard-Tremblay.

It's over to you, James. You have six minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Secretary, welcome back to committee. It's good to see you.

In September, Vice-Admiral Topshee suggested that we should be looking at buying a mixed fleet of submarines, and then Prime Minister Carney said there's no scale of economy if we have a mixed fleet. Do you agree with the Prime Minister's comments?

[Stephen Fuhr, Liberal, Kelowna, BC]

I think in fact it's relevant to the specific weapons system you're talking about and the number of things you get. Obviously, with the smaller number of things you get—in this case, up to 12 submarines—cutting it in half makes little sense. If you're buying a large number of things, dozens and dozens of things, then it may or may not make sense, depending on what you want the thing to do and the threat. There are a whole bunch of other considerations.

It may or may not make sense. I tend to agree with the Prime Minister on those points.

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

You agree with the Prime Minister on that. Does that carry over to the F-35 review? The Minister of Defence, Mr. McGuinty, said it would be done by the end of summer, and it's still not done. You mentioned “speed of relevance”. It sounds like more red tape, more bureaucracy and just slowing the process down.

[Stephen Fuhr, Liberal, Kelowna, BC]

Well, we set this agency up almost verbatim the way this committee recommended this agency be stood up. Many governments over a number of years, including the previous Harper government, tried to set up an agency like this. It didn't get done. We tried different things—

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

[Technical difficulty—Editor] setting up an agency. We actually set up a cabinet secretariat that sped things up, and were able to—

[Stephen Fuhr, Liberal, Kelowna, BC]

Yes, sure—

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

—add that political leadership to ensure it. All you're doing is adding more bureaucracy.

[Stephen Fuhr, Liberal, Kelowna, BC]

Absolutely not. We're putting things into the centre. The Conservatives actually added more bureaucracy. We are taking resources from existing departments and bringing them together under one roof to focus on—

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

I have a point of order.

Mr. Chair, for the sake of translation, I would like it if we didn't have the witness and Mr. Bezan speaking at the same time.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Charles Sousa]

Speak through the chair, please. Let's be cordial.

Thank you.

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

I'll go back to the F-35s. You're actually considering, then, to go to a mixed fleet even though it requires two sets of hangars, different pilots and different mechanics. Is that what you're considering? A mixed fleet is okay for fighter jets but not good for your submarines.

[Stephen Fuhr, Liberal, Kelowna, BC]

To be clear, Mr. Chair, the program is under review. There are many outcomes. Nothing's been decided. I think the minister and the chief of defence were very clear that nothing's being held up. The program is under review and that's it. No outcome and no decision has been made.

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

Comments were made at committees last week. We had the commander of the Royal Canadian Air Force, the chief of the defence staff in the past, and the deputy minister of defence who have all said that the F-35 is the plane we need. We need to have our pilots in stealth. The threat is from stealth aircraft. Why would we consider anything else?

[Stephen Fuhr, Liberal, Kelowna, BC]

As I said, the program is under review. Nothing has been stopped. If you follow that logic, we are still getting the aircraft. It's in production. We're building the—

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

It's just 16 aircraft though.

[Stephen Fuhr, Liberal, Kelowna, BC]

The program is under review. The outcome hasn't been determined. It's a very important decision, and we'll take the time we need to get the decision right.

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

Secretary, you guys are talking about a defence industrial strategy, and we're looking forward to seeing that. As you know, when we look at the defence industry, for the last decade Canada's been part of the F-35 program. There are jobs tied to the F-35 right across this country in places like Richmond, Winnipeg and Montreal in the production phase. Over 1,000 aircraft have been built. Canada's been part of that, and we're only now building the very first Canadian F-35s.

Are you prepared to jeopardize this or have you been talking to the joint project office to ensure that we don't lose those jobs in Canada if we change course?

[Stephen Fuhr, Liberal, Kelowna, BC]

Again, the program is under review and no decision has been made.

James, just broadly, I understand this quite well. All options come with jobs. It's called ITBVP. We get jobs when we buy things. That's the way we work. Lockheed Martin said on TV just the other day that Canada will continue to compete for jobs at the best value. We've paid for that right for years. That will continue regardless of what we do. Lockheed Martin said that on TV just the other day.

Are these jobs important? Yes, they're important. Do we want to preserve those jobs? We 100% do. Do we want to maximize jobs under any circumstance moving forward? Of course we do. That's why we're here.

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

Secretary, as we know, first of all, the F-35 won in a fair competition run by your government. We already have a competition won, so the review is redundant.

Second, we know that it's on the sustainment side where there are lots of opportunities for more jobs and more benefits back to Canada. L3Harris in Montreal has a contract now to have a depot for airframe maintenance and overhaul, not just for the Canadian F-35s but for the entire fleet. That's from a regional standpoint. There's also the potential for the F-35A engines for maintenance and overhaul here in Canada as well. That's not just for our fleet but for the entire fleet.

Do you think JPO in the United States and the other coalition partners are saying, yes, it's okay to have those in Canada when they're only going to buy 16 F-35s?

[Stephen Fuhr, Liberal, Kelowna, BC]

I think that I'll take Lockheed Martin at its word, which is that Canada competes for best value. We have some of the best aerospace companies on the planet. It's in their best interests to allow our companies to compete.

I will say one thing, just to make sure we get our terms straight. The F-35 was chosen in a competition, but we had two compliant aircraft. The F-35 was chosen. Let's just be super clear about that. It was chosen, but it wasn't the only compliant bidder.

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

Yes. It won the competition. I think that's fair.

[Stephen Fuhr, Liberal, Kelowna, BC]

It was chosen.