Thank you. Good morning, Chair and members of the committee. Thank you for inviting me to contribute to Canada's dual-use and defence research needs.
Before I begin, I'd like to set the stage with a quick exercise. Take a look at what you're wearing today and ask yourself, how much of it was made in Canada? My bet is this: Almost none. However, if you ask a room full of American soldiers, the answer would be nearly 100%. Why? It's because our allies have invested in the research, the innovation and the industrial base behind their soldiers' equipment. We have not. As a result, our Canadian Armed Forces are underequipped to do their job.
The data tells the same story. An independent survey of 500 CAF members found that 84% of their kit only sometimes or never fits properly, 82% buy their own kit out of pocket and 100% of the women surveyed reported fit issues. On top of this, our soldiers are paying for their own gear for protection—gear their country should be providing. At a time when we're trying to recruit and retain more soldiers, that's not good enough and it's not a good look. Every month we see new examples of this in the news.
I'm before you today to show you that there's a problem we can fix, and that everything we need already exists right here in Canada. In fact, I spent the last decade building proof of it.
My name is James Yurichuk. I'm founder and CEO of Wuxly. Wuxly is a Canadian-owned and operated manufacturer of advanced textiles, serving both civilian and defence markets, from Arctic outerwear to combat uniforms, made in Canada from head to toe. We are dual-use by design since 2015, and 99% of what we make has been made here in Canada. We employ more than 50 people in Mississauga, and we indirectly employ 300 more through our supply chain of over 100 Canadian suppliers. We have been Canadian when no one was looking.
There were three times that commitment has been put to the test. The first was during COVID, when the world was cut off from the PPE supply overnight. Wuxly mobilized and pivoted, and within weeks we started producing isolation gowns. Over the two-year period of COVID, we made 10 million isolation gowns here in Canada for nurses, doctors and our front lines. We could do that for one reason: We owned the IP and the supply chain.
The second came when Russia invaded Ukraine. We put up our hand again, delivering over a quarter million military soft goods to Europe. Included in that is 40,000 female-specific combat uniforms built around the realities of women in active combat.
The third test is in front of us right now: our own Arctic. Working directly with the Canadian Rangers, we have developed a complete cold weather system, head to toe, designed and made in Canada for the harshest conditions on earth, and we had it displayed at CANSEC. It is ready to go today.
Winter planning must start now. To me, that is what sovereignty means. It's not only fighter jets and shipyards but the ability to protect people wearing the uniform with equipment we control end to end. When taxpayers fund research here but the ownership and the manufacturing sit offshore, we end up paying to depend on someone else.
Now, remember what you're wearing. Canada imports nearly 95% of our clothing. That's $17 billion that's imported every year, and that money doesn't come back. We're hollowing out the supply chain.
It does not have to be that way. We're Canadians. We know the cold. Nobody does it like us. Nobody knows the Arctic like we do. This should be ours to lead in the high north and across NATO.
I offer the committee three priorities. First, define the “Canadian value” proposition. Canadian value means Canadian ownership, IP, manufacturing and suppliers. All four must be Canadian. Second, build clear pathways among universities, the NRC and Canadian SMEs. When academia and industry connect, dual-use research becomes equipment. The most agile innovation happens in smaller companies. Third, value total security, not lowest profit up front. A Canadian-made system buys you supply chain security, speed in a crisis, quality control and retained know-how.
Chair, before Wuxly, I spent eight years playing as a CFL football player. In that job, your equipment is not an accessory. No coach would ever send a player onto the field with the wrong pads, and we should never send a soldier into the Arctic or into combat in gear that doesn't fit, when the stakes are even higher. Gear is protection. It keeps people safe.
Our army commander, Lieutenant-General Wright, said it best: “the army we have today is not the army we need”. That includes the clothing and equipment our soldiers wear every day.
The question for this committee is whether we choose to build the army we need here at home or let someone else do it.
Thank you.
