Debates of May 9th, 2012

National Defence--Main Estimates, 2012-13

[Julian Fantino, Conservative, Vaughan, ON]

Mr. Chair, I feel a sense of duty to acknowledge the service to Canada or Canadian armed forces by the hon. member. I want to thank him for his dedication to duty, having served honourably as he has for many years.

The light armoured vehicle is the Canadian army's primary fighting vehicle. It is used for quickly and safely moving infantry on the battlefield, combining defensive protection and firepower necessary to protect against such threats as mines and improvised explosive devices.

Major upgrades to the light armoured vehicles will dramatically improve the safety of our soldiers. As operating environments and future threats evolve, the Canadian Forces must be prepared to counter threats through the improvements in our vehicles and equipment. We are doing that on an ongoing basis. These improvements have been influenced by lessons learned during recent operations in Afghanistan as well as technological advancements. The light armoured vehicle upgrades will provide our troops with improved protection, mobility, firepower and surveillance in order to safely and effectively carry out their missions.

The vehicles receive a completely new lower hull, including engine, transmission, wheels, suspension and mine-resistant protection. In addition, the turret will receive a major redesign, and new fire control systems for the gunner and commander. These upgrades ensure that the light armoured vehicle remains a truly state-of-the-art combat vehicle.

The first vehicles will be delivered to the army within a year. I am proud to say that hundreds of hard-working, skilled Canadians are making these improvements in factories in London, Edmonton and across Canada. I had the great honour and privilege of being among them as we unveiled this new program, dedicated to making our men and women in uniform safer as they engage in very difficult and dangerous circumstances.

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, the Conservative government is often criticized by the NDP for working with our allies on programs like the joint strike fighter. By working with our allies we can save money, share technical expertise, mutually benefit from shared knowledge and undertake projects that would have been cost-prohibitive for us to do alone.

The Mercury Global project is another international project that the associate minister has been involved with. This project is critical to ensuring that our military members can communicate effectively to do their job and to complete their mission successfully. Could the associate minister please tell us about this project, who is involved and was it delivered on time and on budget?

[Julian Fantino, Conservative, Vaughan, ON]

Mr. Chair, Canadian Forces missions in Afghanistan and Libya highlight the secure exchange of information between headquarters. Formation of units is a critical part of the success of modern military operations. The Government of Canada is participating with its military allies in the Wideband Global Satcom system, also known as Mercury Global. This partnership provides Canada with access to satellite systems, further strengthening secure communications during our missions and cooperation with our closest military friends and allies around the world.

It enables Canada to be a part of a global satellite system of additional bandwidth and communications capabilities, intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance and combat support information necessary for missions today. This agreement will not only support Canadian Forces' requirements for strategic satellite communications for the next two decades, it will also be at a lower cost than the Canadian Forces would pay to maintain the status quo.

This is yet another example of our government's leadership. It demonstrates how we continue to provide value to taxpayers. At a cost of $337.3 million over the 20-year timeframe, Mercury Global represents a significant cost saving over planned expenditures on short-term lease of satellite communications capabilities.

Finally, this forward-thinking, decades-long approach is indicative of the careful consideration that National Defence and the Canadian Forces take when dealing with taxpayer dollars.

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, I have a question for the Minister of National Defence.

The issue of infrastructure has been discussed earlier in these proceedings, but I would be remiss not to add the western perspective to this discussion. In March of this year the minister announced a new $54 million building will accommodate the Land Force Western Area Headquarters, Joint Task Force West Headquarters and 1 Area Support Group Headquarters. This is in addition to the announcement of $3.6 million for 4 Wing in Cold Lake, Alberta in September, 2010 to modernize key infrastructure at the base.

Sir, how will this new building and infrastructure programs like these achieve the government's overall objective of ensuring the efficient and effective use of Canadian taxpayer dollars?

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Chair, I rise on a point of order. I know you have diligently, throughout the evening, been reminding members that they should address questions to the Chair, but this member insists on calling him sir, asking him questions and speaking to him directly, instead of directing questions to the Chair.

I wonder if he could be reminded of his obligation?

[The Deputy Chair, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

The hon. member is correct that all comments ought to be directed to the Chair.

The hon. Minister of National Defence.

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Central Nova, NS]

Mr. Chair, with respect to aging infrastructure, we have a number of bases and infrastructure projects ongoing across the country. In fact, in the last six years or more we have invested roughly $3 billion in addressing some of these infrastructure needs.

In response to the question, with respect to the new accommodations at Canadian Forces Edmonton, it is no different than some of the other investments that we have made. This is for Land Force Western Area Headquarters. The result will be a more integrated, better coordinated command team that can coordinate and lead domestic operations in Western Canada. They can track Canadian Forces operations and personnel around the world. Our largest base at CFB Edmonton has contributed mightily with respect to the Afghanistan mission and other deployments. Also, this new infrastructure will provide timely and seamless information in support of senior military and government decision makers, as well as communicate those decisions effectively.

All of these efforts are about improving this base. The construction of this new facility in Edmonton, by Pentagon Structures, will be providing 161 local jobs. This is true of all of these infrastructure investments. They have a tremendous impact on the local economies, and these investments are felt at a time like this.

[The Deputy Chair, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

This completes the time for the hon. member for Etobicoke Centre.

The hon. member for Saint John's East.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Chair, I am pleased to have another opportunity to ask some questions of the ministers and officials opposite.

I know that the members opposite are fond of referring to the Liberal era, previous to them as the “decade of darkness” when it comes to military equipment and equipping the Canadian Forces. Would the minister not agree that we are now, and have been, in what I would call “an interval of incompetence” when it comes to acquiring equipment for our Canadian Forces?

I will start with a few examples, such as the cancellation of the joint support ship program in August 2008 at the 11th hour and 59th minute of awarding a contract. We now are not going to have the first ship of the joint supply program until 2018, a 10-year delay. There is a six-year delay in the acquisition of the Chinook helicopter program, with the failure to comply with its own tendering, according to the Auditor General.

There was the failure to put forth a fixed wing SAR procurement program that actually followed its own rule to the point that that was also shut down, with yet another delay for the acquisition of fixed wing, which is desperately needed because of our 50 year-old Buffalos, which are supposedly ending their lifespan in 2015. We will not have any replacements there until the earliest projected date of 2017. We have a total reset on the closed combat vehicle procurement, just announced the other day. Again, this is because the government failed to follow a proper procurement procedure. Of course, we have the debacle of the F-35s, which we are discussing in great detail tonight and the Auditor General has commented so roundly on.

Would either minister, or both ministers, agree that we have a serious problem in the Department of National Defence with respect to acquisition programs? They cannot seem to get it right. They do not seem to be able to follow the rules. We have a serious problem. Would he not agree with that, and will he do something to fix it? Is he going to tell us what his government and his department is going to do to fix this problem so they can get it right and do what they say they want to do, which is to make sure we have the right equipment for our forces?

[Julian Fantino, Conservative, Vaughan, ON]

Mr. Chair, the premise that the hon. member put forward is absolutely fraught with misinformation, miscommunication and misunderstandings. I give him charity for that.

However, let me inform the hon. member opposite of facts. The Globemaster project, delivered; the C-130J Hercules project, delivered; lightweight towed Howitzers, delivered; medium to heavy lift helicopters implementation, in progress; fixed wing search and rescue, in definition phase; Arctic offshore patrol ships, in definition phase; joint support ships, in definition phase; Canadian surface combatants, in definition phase; force mobility enhancement, in implementation; light armoured vehicle LAV III upgrades, in implementation; tactical armoured patrol vehicle, definition; medium support vehicle, definition; tank replacement project, implementation; military personnel management capability transformation, definition.

Mr. Chair, I am proud of the work that we are doing to support our men and women in uniform. With the NDP, none of this would happen. It is totally and absolutely non-supportive of any assets for our military.

[The Deputy Chair, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

Before I go back to the member for St. John's East, I would like to remind all hon. members that the answer to questions put ought to be of similar duration to the question. My colleague, the chair of committee of the whole, made that point in advance, but I would like to remind all hon. members.

The hon. member for St. John's East.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Chair, I am not surprised that the member mentioned the acquisitions of the Globemaster and the Hercules. It is not that hard to buy things that are already built and in production. They can be bought off the shelf. In the case of the Globemaster, it was an advanced contract award. They were bought six months after the decision was made to buy them. Buying things off the shelf is easy, but doing the things that the government cannot do and that it has messed up is hard. That is why everything else is in progress.

Let me mention an acquisition that I am particularly interested in seeing done properly. It is based on a letter to the Minister of National Defence on October 2009 and signed by General Natynczyk, who is here with us today, regarding the rotary search and rescue aircraft.

We acquired 15 Cormorants in 2004. They were deployed around the country, including to Trenton Air Force Base. In 2005 it was decided that they would be replaced, on the condition that it was temporary, by CH-146 Griffons, which are less adequate than the Cormorant for the search and rescue role. This was due to the unavailability of the Cormorant fleet that had been promised by the manufacturer.

Could the minister tell us the percentage of availability of a Cormorant aircraft as we speak today? What percentage of a time is a Cormorant helicopter available to task for search and rescue?

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Central Nova, NS]

Mr. Chair, what I can tell my hon. friend is that we have increased dramatically the serviceability of that aircraft, in part because we bought spares; that is, we bought aircraft that were used and available for the presidential fleet in the United States. By virtue of that purchase we now have parts to upgrade the current fleet of Cormorant aircraft.

The member will know this particular procurement has a bit of a long and, I dare say, tortured past. As a result of the cancellation of the Sea King replacement, there was a split in the maritime helicopter program and the search and rescue helicopter program. That was something we inherited. We continue to deal with this issue with respect to the replacement of the Sea King.

The CH-148 Cyclone helicopter replacement is also an ongoing procurement. We hope to take delivery of an aircraft as soon as this summer. This will be the first in a number of aircraft that are going to eventually replace the entire fleet of Sea Kings, which will be in their 50th year.

There is an example of a procurement that went particularly bad during the decade of darkness that the member spoke of earlier in his remarks.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Chair, I am asking specifically about the Cormorants and their availability. I have heard availability figures in the range of under 50%, perhaps in the range of 40%. Would the minister confirm that number as of now, as we speak today? What is the availability of the Cormorant aircraft?

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Central Nova, NS]

Mr. Chair, I do not have the specific availability. It has improved as a result of those parts acquisitions and as a result of the incredible work done by maintenance crews on both Cormorants and Sea Kings, and we continue to see improvements in the use and availability of the Cormorant.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Chair, I am sure someone here tonight, whether here in front of us or behind the curtain, knows the answer to that question. I wonder if the minister would undertake to make that available to the committee tonight.

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Central Nova, NS]

Yes, of course, Mr. Chair.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Chair, I raise this report because General Natynczyk says in this letter that this is the result of a study done and presented to the minister himself in 2009. The study indicates that it would be possible to return and sustain four CH-149 main operating bases after two to three years. In other words, Cormorants would be back at Trenton for proper service by means of a variety of initiatives, each of which would supply some relief.

In this report there are 14 recommendations to reach that goal in two to three years. Here we are three years later, and there are still no Cormorants at Trenton. The Cormorant is a faster aircraft, with a greater range. It is a more capable aircraft, particularly for at-sea rescues in the north and on the Great Lakes.

Were those 14 recommendations followed? Why are Cormorants not operating at Trenton today?

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Central Nova, NS]

Mr. Chair, I can tell the hon. member that we have an array of military assets that are used throughout the country in the central region. At that particular base, the combination of Griffon helicopters and CC-130 Hercules aircraft fits the bill for our requirement. All Canadian Forces assets, particularly air assets, can be assigned for search and rescue purposes at various times, given the need, and in response to certain incidents.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Chair, it is all very well to say we have a variety of aircraft.

This report talks about the concern, expressed by General Natynczyk, that the Cormorants have been taken away and need to be put back. They are the helicopter of choice. There needs to be a program to do that.

There was talk about acquiring new ones. We know the government has since then bought nine complete helicopters from the U.S. government in the last year for $125 million, which is a bargain basement price after the U.S. government spent $3 billion on the program. Why is the government not seeking to use those or to convert them into search and rescue helicopters?

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Central Nova, NS]

Mr. Chair, the hon. member will know that we lost one Cormorant helicopter to a crash on the east coast. This was part of the impetus and motivation to go out and get those parts.

If the hon. member is suggesting that we should build functioning helicopters with these parts, that is simply not possible. We purchased them specifically to improve the serviceability of the existing fleet.

As I mentioned earlier, we have a number of Canadian Forces air assets that are used on occasion for search and rescue. We have the Cyclone helicopters that are going to be coming into use in the near future. We have other assets, such as Twin Otters that are stationed in Yellowknife.

The Canadian north is a tremendous area of search and rescue responsibility. We are improving our assets as well as our capabilities there, and we will continue to make those investments.

Of course, as the hon. member also mentioned earlier this evening, we have an procurement outstanding with respect to fixed-wing search and rescue. We are pursuing that necessary capability as well.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Chair, could the minister give me a yes or no answer on this, please? I think he suggested that some of the Cyclones will be configured for search and rescue and used as part of the search and rescue fleet. Is that what the minister was implying?

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Central Nova, NS]

Mr. Chair, I in no way, shape or form made that indication.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Chair, I thought the minister was trying to get us to believe that without actually saying it, so I am glad he clarified it.

Why did the government not consider this? We know it acquired, for $125 million, nine aircraft. They are called VH-71 Kestrels. I understand some or all of them are being cannibalized for parts. The department made no attempt to study the cost of converting or reconfiguring some of them to search and rescue capabilities. They are the exact same size, have the exact same load weight and have engines very similar to those in the Cormorants. Why was no study undertaken to make them into search and rescue aircraft to replace the ones in Trenton and the one that was lost, sadly, with the loss of three lives. It was a very sad occurrence. I think three of the gentlemen were from Newfoundland and Labrador.

There was and still is an opportunity to invest in a program to replace those search and rescue helicopters in Trenton, to make some more available to increase our capability in the north with proper search and rescue helicopters.

Why is the government not doing that? It is not even investigating the costs of doing that.

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Central Nova, NS]

Mr. Chair, as I indicated a number of times now, this capability was to improve the spares and the serviceability of the existing fleet. While they may have the same airframe and some—some—of the same capabilities, such as a hoist, this is not the purpose for which these particular helicopters were designed. In fact, they are spares. They are boxes of parts, essentially, and certainly not assembled for the purposes of search and rescue.

I come back to the issue of Cyclones, though. All Canadian Forces air assets can be used—commandeered, if you will—on occasion, if necessary, for the purposes of search and rescue. That is a commonly known fact within the Canadian Forces.

Most importantly, though, let us spend some time talking about the SAR techs themselves and what they are able to do. These individuals give so freely of themselves and are so prepared to go above and beyond. They are fearless to a fault. They exhibit daily courage. The training regimen is akin to what Olympic athletes do, and it allows them to perform these feats of courage and heroics in terrible conditions in response to search and rescue incidents that occur with frequency across the country. They often put themselves at great risk in response to those calls.

I want to report to the hon. member, in response to an earlier question, the serviceability is approximately 60%, meaning that eight of the 14 Canadian Forces CH-149s are available on any given day.