House of Commons Hansard #151 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was procurement.
This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.
Criminal Code First reading of Bill C-293. The bill creates a stand-alone offence for violent home invasions, with a maximum life sentence, a five-year mandatory minimum, reverse onus for bail, and DNA orders upon conviction. 200 words.
Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities Members debate a committee report on youth employment, citing rising unemployment and barriers to first jobs, training, housing, and seasonal work. Conservatives call for lower taxes and red tape, labour-market-aligned immigration and training, workforce housing, and EI reform; Liberals highlight job growth and Red Seal training, while the Bloc emphasizes gaps in EI coverage. 5200 words, 40 minutes.
Strengthening Canada's Defence Sector Act Second reading of Bill C-40. The bill would establish the Defence Investment Agency as a Crown corporation with expanded authority to coordinate defence procurement, production and investment, aiming to deliver military capabilities faster and strengthen Canadian industry. It would also broaden the Defence Production Act to cover national security. Supporters say the corporation retains ministerial and parliamentary oversight; critics warn its powers could weaken transparency, competition and accountability. 39000 words, 5 hours in 2 segments: 1 2.
Alleged Premature Disclosure of Bill C-40 Kevin Lamoureux argues that an investigation found no evidence Bill C-40 was disclosed before its introduction. He says public discussion of making the Defence Investment Agency a Crown corporation and appointing a procurement minister made the proposal foreseeable, and asks the Speaker to reject the opposition’s privilege complaint. 2600 words.
Freedom of Speech in Members' Parliamentary Work Members hear a Conservative question of privilege arguing that an Ontario medical regulator’s investigation of a Liberal MP over a supplementary opinion in a parliamentary committee report may infringe parliamentary freedom of speech. The member asks the Speaker to find a prima facie breach and refer the matter to committee for study. The Liberal parliamentary secretary reserves a response. 2600 words, 15 minutes.
Canada Revenue Agency Act Second reading of Bill S-217. The bill requires the Canada Revenue Agency to report tax-evasion convictions and publish regular tax-gap statistics, while sharing data with the Parliamentary Budget Officer. Supporters across opposition parties say the measures would strengthen transparency and parliamentary oversight; Liberal concerns focus on existing reporting and protecting confidential tax information. The House passes the bill at second reading and refers it to the Standing Committee on Finance. 5700 words, 40 minutes.
Canadian Fuel Affordability Act Report stage of Bill C-38. The bill extends the suspension of federal fuel excise taxes on gasoline and diesel through January 31, 2027, then restores half the tax in February and March before reinstating it fully on April 1. Liberals describe the temporary relief as support for affordability amid global fuel-price pressures. Conservatives support the extension but call for broader, longer-lasting tax cuts, while the Bloc questions whether the savings reach consumers and whether the measure is well-targeted. The bill passes. 48300 words, 6 hours.
Freedom of Speech in Members' Parliamentary WorkPrivilegeGovernment Orders
The Speaker Francis Scarpaleggia
It is noted.
I wish to inform the House that because of the deferred recorded division, the time provided for Government Orders will be extended by 12 minutes.
The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-40, An Act respecting production, procurement and investment in relation to national defence and national security, be read the second time and referred to a committee.
Bill C-40 Strengthening Canada's Defence Sector ActGovernment Orders
Winnipeg North Manitoba
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed that the Conservatives do not recognize that a Crown corporation is the best direction to go in when it comes to military procurement. This is for many different reasons. Suffice it to say that one of those reasons was part of the last election platform. We had indicated that it would be independent in nature. We want to be able to speed up the process to better serve our Canadian military and build a stronger, healthier economy through supporting our military industrial communities throughout the country.
Why does the Conservative Party not support something that has been well established in many other areas in terms of accountability, transparency and so much more?
Scott Anderson Conservative Vernon—Lake Country—Monashee, BC
Mr. Speaker, this is a bit ridiculous. The parliamentary secretary stood up for a good 10 minutes and told us all about how this was really the plan from the very beginning. He referenced that Mr. Guzman stood in committee and said that maybe it would be that. Mr. Guzman was completely confused as to what the direction of the DIA was at the time and said that he did not know and that maybe it would be that.
I would like to discuss the PBO appearing before us recently, who was similarly confused as to the direction of the DIA. They have no clue. This is an experiment that is rolling out, with big announcements and changes of plans. The PBO does not even have a handle on what we are doing. I have no idea.
Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC
Mr. Speaker, as I understand it, there seems to be some confusion about what the procurement system should look like, because we have two bills before the House right now. First there is Bill C‑31, which will create a Crown corporation, and then there is Bill C‑40, which proposes a completely different process.
From what I understand, once Bill C‑31 is passed, much of what we are debating today will simply go out the window. Today, in committee, the secretary of state told us that the plan was always to have a temporary structure before setting up a permanent one later.
I wonder if my colleague knows why the government, in this case, is presenting us with the structure that was meant to be temporary, Bill C‑40, and the structure that is meant to be permanent, Bill C‑31, and why we are debating them at the same time in the House.
What is the logic behind that?
Scott Anderson Conservative Vernon—Lake Country—Monashee, BC
Mr. Speaker, the logic escapes me entirely. Most governments will make a plan and then follow the plan. The Liberal government has no plan, but it spends lots of money and makes lots of announcements, and then changes the plan that it said it had in the first place. Then it changes it again and says that it meant to change it all along. Even the PBO is confused as to what direction we are going in. I think the government is similarly confused.
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Vernon—Lake Country—Monashee for his service as a veteran.
It is quite laughable listening to the parliamentary secretary, the member for Winnipeg North. Five months ago, when we were talking about the second iteration or version of the Defence Investment Agency in Bill C-31, he was saying that it was the greatest idea since sliced bread. Now he is up here saying that this new Crown corporation being created for the Defence Investment Agency is the best thing we have created since sliced bread.
The Liberals can get up here and make all these claims, but at the end of the day, is this the type of thing we need, or is it just something that gives unfettered power to one minister and access to $1 billion under the general revenue fund? Does it provide opportunities for political interference and corruption and to get away from accountability and transparency?
Scott Anderson Conservative Vernon—Lake Country—Monashee, BC
Mr. Speaker, as I said before, we are moving at speeds not seen since the last ice age. These are not generationally quick speeds. These are speeds that have no direction whatsoever. The Liberals are simply meandering along and changing plans. My good colleague across the aisle is here to tell us all that this was the big plan in the first place, but there is no direction whatsoever.
David McGuinty LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, because this is the first time I have had an opportunity to address the House with respect to the incidents that occurred this past weekend, I want to say a few things about the tragedy that occurred in Wainwright.
On Saturday afternoon, at CFB Wainwright, a violent, fast-moving fire broke out while soldiers were training on the range. Thirty-nine members of the Canadian Armed Forces were injured, including 19 critically, and four lost their lives: Private Aidan Goulding of the 3rd Battalion, Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry, from North Vancouver, British Columbia; Private Shaun Farrell of the 3rd Battalion, Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry, from Prince Albert, Saskatchewan; Private Hayden Lykkemark of the 3rd Battalion, Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry, from Langley, British Columbia; and Sergeant Morgan Wong of the Loyal Edmonton Regiment, from Edmonton, Alberta. Canada will remember them. This is one of the most difficult moments the Canadian Armed Forces has faced at home in peacetime.
Yesterday, I met with Canadian Armed Forces members and first responders and received an update from CAF leadership on the ongoing response. Our priority remains the well-being of the families of the fallen and those who remain hospitalized. As of this moment, 27 members of the Canadian Armed Forces are still in hospital receiving treatment. I want to take a moment to thank all of the health care workers in our hospitals, our surgeons, our nurses and our critical care experts for the support they are providing to these incredibly brave members of the Canadian Armed Forces. In particular, I would like to single out those whom I met yesterday at the hospital in Wainwright, the men and the women who performed heroically throughout the crisis. It was indeed a crisis. In the face of profound loss, they have shown extraordinary strength, compassion and care for one another. We will continue to stand with them and their families and ensure that they have the support they need.
Let me now turn to the legislation before us and explain why our government is taking action to strengthen Canada's defence sector. I do rise today in support of Bill C-40, the strengthening Canada's defence sector act.
This is a defining moment for Canada's security and sovereignty. Threats are evolving rapidly. Technology is changing the nature of conflict, so we and our allies must adapt to a new reality. Canada must be ready. We need to strengthen our military capabilities, modernize our institutions and ensure that our investments produce concrete results.
That is exactly what the bill seeks to do.
At the heart of every decision we make in national defence are the women and men who serve the country. I have had the privilege of meeting them on bases and wings across Canada, aboard our ships and alongside our allies overseas. Wherever I go, I am reminded of the extraordinary professionalism, determination and sense of duty that define our Canadian Armed Forces. We ask a great deal of these Canadians, as we have all been witness to this past weekend. We ask them to defend our sovereignty in the Arctic, to stand alongside our NATO allies in Europe, to respond when Canadians face wildfires, floods and natural disasters, and when necessary, to put themselves in harm's way. They answer that call without hesitation.
Behind every member in uniform is a family that serves alongside them, families that endure long separations, repeated moves and sacrifices of their own. When we ask that much of our people, we have a responsibility to give them the tools they need to succeed, because readiness is not an abstract concept; it is whether a sailor can depend on the ship beneath their feet, whether an aviator has the capabilities needed to complete the mission, whether a soldier has the equipment and protection necessary to return home safely. We owe these Canadians more than our gratitude. We owe them those results, and delivering those results begins with ensuring that our defence procurement system works for the people who actually depend on it.
Canada is making generational investments in national defence. This is irrefutable. We reached NATO's 2% defence spending target in fiscal year 2025-26, five years ahead of our previous scheduled commitment.
Budget 2025 committed approximately $81.8 billion in additional defence funding over five years. We are rebuilding, rearming and reinvesting in our national defence. As I have said before and will repeat again here, investing more is only part of the job. We must also change how we deliver, because money committed is not capability delivered. A contract signed does not put equipment in the hands of a service member. An announcement cannot defend our airspace, patrol our oceans or protect our sovereignty. Only real military capability can do that.
For too long, Canada's defence procurement system has been too fragmented, too complex and too slow, with too many steps, too many hand-offs and too much time between identifying what our armed forces need and getting that capability into their hands. That is not a reflection of the talented military personnel, public servants and procurement professionals who work within the system, but a reflection of a system that must simply evolve. The world is not going to wait for us to do just that, pursue that evolution.
That brings us to the legislation before the House. The Defence Investment Agency was established in October 2025 to transform how Canada acquires and delivers defence capabilities. Bill C-40 would take that transformation even further. It would establish the agency as a Crown corporation within the national defence portfolio, giving it a permanent structure, greater commercial flexibility and the specialized expertise needed to manage complex defence investments. This is not simply about creating another institution, as some would have us believe, but about fundamentally improving how we deliver for our armed forces, bringing procurement, production and investment together, connecting military requirements with the industrial capacity needed to meet them and ensuring that decisions can be made with the speed and discipline that national security demands.
Acquiring equipment is only one part of the challenge. We must also be able to maintain it, repair it, replenish it and sustain it throughout its operational life. Bill C-40 would provide broader procurement and investment tools, including mechanisms to help strengthen production capacity in strategically important areas. It would also amend the Defence Production Act to better reflect Canada's evolving national security requirements, including economic security. It would support a more coordinated approach to major defence acquisitions. The Canadian Armed Forces, National Defence and the Canadian Coast Guard would continue to determine what capabilities they need. The Defence Investment Agency would focus on getting those capabilities delivered. The proposed agency would remain subject to appropriate government and parliamentary oversight, with clear governance and accountability arrangements.
Canadians expect their government to move with urgency. They also expect responsible spending and value for money. We can do both, we must do both, and in Bill C-40 we will do both.
Canada has never been a country that turned away from difficult challenges. Generations of Canadians have stepped forward to build, serve and defend this country. They built the institutions that protect us. They served in conflicts far from home. They understood that sovereignty, security and freedom could never be taken for granted. Today, that responsibility belongs to us. We have inherited it. As a result, we are making the investments. We are strengthening our armed forces. We are rebuilding our defence industrial capacity. We launched Canada's first ever defence industrial strategy a short 10 months ago. Now we must ensure that our institutions can deliver at the pace this moment demands because it is accelerating. The measure of our commitment to national defence is not simply what we promise, but what we build, deliver and sustain, and whether the women and men who serve Canada can count on us when it matters most.
They are ready to serve. We must be ready to deliver. Bill C-40 takes the process of procurement to its next logical step, building on our experience to be able to provide the equipment, the materiel that is required by the women and men on the front lines of the Canadian Armed Forces, because ultimately we are here for them as they acquit themselves courageously of their responsibilities as members of the Canadian Armed Forces.
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the minister for the hard work he did this weekend being out there at CFB Wainwright, being there to support the families. I appreciate that he was there to be with the troops and that he kept the Canadian public informed. I cannot express that enough. I share his sympathy and condolences to the families, and want to give our thanks and gratitude to all the first responders. There was incredible work done in fighting the fire, rescuing those who were injured and providing medical care and attention. We are, as Canadians, all grateful for the minister's commitment to our troops.
However, I have to say that on Bill C-40 we are seeing a third iteration of the Defence Investment Agency and we are still not seeing any real true procurement happening on the scale that we want. We have seen a lot of announcements. We have seen reannouncements. We have seen intentions to deal with preferred suppliers. However, they talk about building at speeds that we have not seen yet, and all we are getting is bureaucracy. What started off as the defence investment agency under PSPC then became the Defence Investment Agency as a stand-alone entity in Bill C-31, and now, in Bill C-40, the Liberals are turning it into a Crown corporation.
I just want to ask the minister this: One of the concerns we have as Conservatives is around the accountability and transparency within this system. How are we going to ensure that we exercise our fiduciary responsibilities and still support the troops at the same time?
Bill C-40 Strengthening Canada's Defence Sector ActGovernment Orders
October 20th, 2026 / 4:20 p.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Mr. Speaker, my colleague and I are in complete agreement with respect to the troops and our combined support and, I think, Parliament's support for the folks who are battling right now in our health care system and struggling for health. We wish them, of course, speedy recoveries.
I want to begin perhaps by just going back to the first part of his question, which was about the distinction between the Crown corporation and the special operating agency. One of the things that happened when we actually began the reform of a procurement regime in defence, for the first time in decades in this country, is that there were lessons to learn. We have learned from experience. We have learned in terms of the sophistication of the commercial marketplace. We have learned how to deal more overtly with the suppliers of goods and services.
That is why we believe the Crown corporation will have greater flexibility to draw on commercial expertise, execute innovative investment tools and streamline decision-making processes. For example, it will allow, in this case with the Crown, the opportunity for the Crown to invest by buying equity or even providing loans. That is something that the agency previously could not provide. We think this is a step forward.
Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois joins our colleague in expressing our heartfelt sympathy and condolences to the people affected by the tragedy in Wainwright. Our thoughts are with them.
Making the Defence Investment Agency a Crown corporation will enable the government to practise selective accountability. On the one hand, with Bill C‑40, the government is removing oversight mechanisms for its most costly expenditures. On the other hand, by creating an independent Crown corporation, the government will take credit for successes when doing so suits its purposes and deny responsibility when sensitive or controversial matters arise on the grounds that the corporation operates independently. Why has this government been working to reduce accountability ever since it came to power?
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, I would say to my colleague that the proposed Crown corporation will be accountable to Parliament through a new associate minister of national defence for procurement. This is exactly the case in several other allied countries in Europe, for example, in Great Britain.
The government will establish a board of directors to oversee the agency's day-to-day management and supervision. In addition, the Crown corporation will be subject to ministerial requirements regarding reporting to Parliament and financial controls, as well as audits and reviews by the Office of the Auditor General of Canada.
We have established a model, or an architecture, that will streamline procurement. At the same time, we are ensuring that there is the kind of accountability to which the member is referring.
Bill C-40 Strengthening Canada's Defence Sector ActGovernment Orders
Winnipeg North Manitoba
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate many of the words, especially the tributes by our members making reference to the disaster that took place in Wainwright.
I wonder if the minister can just provide his thoughts. From the last federal election, with our new Prime Minister and 70-plus new members of Parliament, one of the highest priorities was to deal with the Canadian Forces. It is one of the reasons we saw the substantial increase, meeting the 2% GDP. It is one of the reasons we saw raises going to our military personnel and so many investments. This piece of legislation is just a continuation of commitments to our Canadian Forces and the Canadian economy as a whole, that military industrial component in Canada that provides thousands of jobs.
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Mr. Speaker, my colleague is a former serving member of the forces, and I thank him very much for his service.
What the member is really indicating is that we made a decision some 14 months ago to transform the Canadian Armed Forces in terms of investments, recruitment, retention and pay packages. Overall, as I mentioned, we made a 2% commitment to spending, $81 billion-plus over the next five years, and we have seen results. We have seen, for example, a 61% increase in completed applications to join the Canadian Armed Forces this year as compared with last year. We have seen recruitment numbers continue at other levels. We have seen retention also continue to augment and ameliorate. What we are really doing here is making the requisite investments to recruit, retain, arm and rebuild, and this is exactly what the Canadian Armed Forces have been waiting for, for some time.
Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC
Mr. Speaker, first, I want to extend our gratitude to the minister for his efforts yesterday, representing all of Parliament in Wainwright and supporting the Canadian Armed Forces and the families who have been impacted.
I know the minister is sincere and wants to get military equipment to our military faster so they have the right equipment. However, there are serious concerns about parliamentary oversight of a Crown corporation. We just heard, right now, that the government gave a contract to a subsidiary of a U.S. company, its Canadian supplier, that is delivering services to ICE on behalf of the Trump regime, and that is unacceptable. No one here, across the country, believes it is acceptable that a foreign company is taking contracts like this.
Does the minister agree that this is outlandish and unacceptable? What is he going to do to ensure that this would not happen with what they are proposing here today?
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Mr. Speaker, what the member is referring to is overall accountability and, for that matter, also compellability. The CEO of this Crown corporation could be brought before committee at any time. The board could be convened at any time. There would be opportunities to put tough, difficult and probative questions to them. There is no off-ramp with respect to the creation of the Crown in terms of accountability to Parliament.
On the contrary, what it would do is make this body more fleet-footed, more focused, more commercial and more able to negotiate better deals more quickly. We have seen that most recently with the example of the forthcoming acquisition of the fleet of new submarines. A process that normally would have taken five years was in fact, hopefully with a completed contract soon to come, completed within 20 months.
Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
Mr. Speaker, I count the hon. Minister of Defence as a dear friend.
I want to very quickly put this forward, and I am sorry if it sounds hypercritical. We transferred the Coast Guard into the defence budget to reach the 5% target, and I am hearing from Coast Guard folks in my riding. They used to be able to do the work to remove derelict vessels that were hazards to navigation by picking up the phone and calling someone they knew was competent, like a local contractor, to say, “Come and get this vessel out of our waters.” They are now forced through the defence contract and procurement process, which slows them down tremendously. I think every time we change regimes and the way the bureaucracies work, whether in civil society or in the military, we slow things down.
Is the minister aware of this problem within the Coast Guard, and what can be done to ensure they can move quickly?
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Mr. Speaker, I am aware of the continuing responsibilities the Coast Guard has in this regard.
I would like to set the record straight, though. The Coast Guard was not transferred into the DND family as a result of our trying to hit a target. It was transferred into the DND family in order to provide security and intelligence functions in a more complete defence posture for the country.
Jenna Sudds LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Government Transformation
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time today with the member for Tobique—Mactaquac.
I rise today to speak in support of Bill C-40, the strengthening Canada's defence sector act. This legislation represents an important step in modernizing Canada's defence procurement system, strengthening our domestic defence industry and ensuring that the investments we make in our national security deliver meaningful results for Canadians.
At its core, the bill is about three things: equipping the Canadian Armed Forces with the capabilities they need, building a stronger and more resilient Canadian defence industrial base and ensuring that Canada is positioned to meet the security challenges of an increasingly uncertain world. These three objectives are deeply connected. We cannot have a strong national defence without the industrial capacity to support it. We cannot build that capacity without giving Canadian businesses the opportunity to innovate, compete and grow. We cannot achieve either objective if our procurement system is unable to move at the speed our national security demands. That is why Bill C-40 matters.
As parliamentary secretary and the member of Parliament representing the communities of Kanata, Carp, Bells Corners and Stittsville, I see this legislation through two important lenses: our responsibility to defend Canadians, and our opportunity to build on the extraordinary talent, innovation and entrepreneurial spirit that exist within communities across the country.
My community of Kanata is home to a remarkable technology ecosystem. Our businesses work at the forefront of advanced software, cybersecurity, communications, aerospace and other technologies that are increasingly essential to modern defence. These companies understand innovation. They understand the importance of investing in research and development. They understand that in a rapidly changing technological environment, the ability to move quickly can make the difference between leading and falling behind. We need a defence procurement system that understands that reality as well.
I would like to address three key areas: how this bill supports the objectives of Canada's defence industrial strategy, how we can create greater opportunities for Canadian small and medium-sized businesses, and how this legislation helps modernize the way Canada acquires the capabilities necessary to defend our sovereignty.
On the first, supporting the objectives of Canada's defence industrial strategy, our government recognizes that defence procurement must serve a purpose beyond merely the acquisition of equipment. Of course, our Canadian Armed Forces must have the equipment, technology and infrastructure they need to carry out their work. That is our first responsibility. However, the way we make those investments also matters. Defence spending represents an opportunity to strengthen Canadian industrial capacity, support highly skilled workers, encourage innovation and develop the sovereign capabilities we need to protect our country over the long term.
Canada's defence industrial strategy provides a framework to achieve these objectives. It recognizes that our national security and our economic prosperity are closely linked. This bill supports this ambition by proposing to establish the Defence Investment Agency as a Crown corporation, with a clear mandate, dedicated leadership and greater operational and commercial flexibility. This is a meaningful change.
By bringing key defence procurement, production and investment activities together within a dedicated organization, the agency will be better positioned to reduce unnecessary hand-offs, make decisions more efficiently and provide greater predictability to Canadian industry. The proposed model also maintains government oversight and preserves the responsibility of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces to establish their operational requirements.
We are working to improve how decisions are delivered, without losing sight of who those decisions are meant to serve.
Our defence industrial strategy recognizes that Canada must be deliberate about what we build domestically, where we partner with trusted allies, and when we purchase capabilities from international suppliers. This approach allows us to strengthen Canadian expertise where it is strategically important, while recognizing that collaboration with our allies remains essential to our collective security.
Our geography, our Arctic responsibilities, and our commitments to NATO and other international partners require strong domestic capabilities combined with reliable international partnerships. The Defence Investment Agency can help connect those priorities. It can help ensure that major defence investments are considered not only in terms of what we need to acquire today, but also in terms of the industrial capacity, supply chains and technical expertise that we will need tomorrow. That is how defence procurement becomes a longer-term investment in Canada's security and sovereignty.
Secondly, we must ensure that Canadian small and medium-sized enterprises have a meaningful place in this strategy. When we talk about Canada's defence industry, it is natural to think about major shipbuilding projects, large equipment manufacturers and significant military platforms. Those are important, but a strong defence industrial base also depends on the smaller businesses developing specialized technologies, designing advanced components, building secure software and solving complex engineering problems. Those companies are often responsible for the innovations that give our defence capabilities a competitive advantage.
There are also important employers in communities all across our country. In my riding of Kanata, we have a strong and growing defence innovation ecosystem. The Ottawa area has built an international reputation for technology and innovation. We have companies with deep expertise in software, secure communications, cybersecurity, sensors and advanced digital systems. I look to the work of Kanata-based company Adaptive Marine Solutions, which is designing and engineering the next generation of vessels for the Canadian Coast Guard. These vessels will give the Canadian Coast Guard the tools it needs to conduct marine research, mapping, search and rescue, and maritime security and enforcement operations. I also look to Kongsberg Geospatial. Its real-time geospatial software supports applications such as situational awareness and unmanned systems.
These examples demonstrate the kind of specialized Canadian expertise that can contribute to modern defence capabilities, but they also demonstrate why it is so important that our procurement system be accessible to innovative Canadian businesses. A smaller business or smaller company may have a promising technology that may address a genuine operational need. It may have talented engineers, a strong research team and a solution that could benefit the Canadian Armed Forces, but developing a technology and operationalizing it are two very different challenges.
We must make sure as we move forward that our procurement system does not unintentionally prevent Canadian innovation from reaching the people who need it. Bill C-40 would create an opportunity to improve the relationship between government and industry. With greater commercial flexibility, the Defence Investment Agency would be better positioned to engage with suppliers, assess potential solutions and move from validated requirements to procurement decisions more efficiently.
I am honoured to have the opportunity to speak to this bill today, and I look forward to the questions that will come.
Arnold Viersen Conservative Peace River—Westlock, AB
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals have been talking about reform to the acquisition method in Canada. I am wondering if the member could give us a history of the acquisition of the F-35s and whether she thinks the Liberals have done a good job of that or not.
Jenna Sudds Liberal Kanata, ON
Mr. Speaker, we know that procurement is ongoing, and I will not speak to the status of that in this moment, but I will point to some recent successes. We are negotiating for up to 12 submarines currently, which would potentially be supporting up to 100,000 Canadian jobs. We have a strategic partner with General Dynamics that is supporting thousands of jobs in London and across the country. We have seen an $11-billion investment in the Davie icebreaker, which is involving more than 1,500 Canadian suppliers. This is evidence of the progress that we are making as we move forward.
Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC
Mr. Speaker, today we are discussing Bill C‑40, a procurement process that will be demolished by Bill C‑31, which will be passed because it is a budget bill, a confidence vote.
Earlier today, the Standing Committee on Finance heard from the Secretary of State for Defence Procurement. I asked him why a new Crown corporation was needed for procurement, which runs counter to Bill C‑40. He replied that our companies do not want government contracts, but rather commercial ones. However, none of the Five Eyes countries or any other NATO member has a Crown corporation, or a state-owned enterprise, that handles procurement. That is evident from the fact that politicians will continue to control the procurement process.
I would like my colleague to tell me why she is selling us this bill that Canadian businesses want nothing to do with. That is what the secretary of state said this morning.
Jenna Sudds Liberal Kanata, ON
Mr. Speaker, I think the questions are as follows: Why create a Crown corporation? Why was the decision made to do that now?
The answer is that the goal is actually the opposite. I think the agency would have greater flexibility to negotiate and manage contracts using business practices better suited to the industry. It will also bring procurement and strategic investments under a single mandate.
Bill C-40 Strengthening Canada's Defence Sector ActGovernment Orders
Winnipeg North Manitoba
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I am a little confused about the motivation of the Conservative Party, along with the Bloc, and why they would oppose corporations. In fact, Crown corporations have a huge history of success, whether it is municipal, provincial or federal. It is a way to ensure more transparency and more accountability, and to have something be at arm's length of government. These are all positive things we have witnessed for generations, at both the provincial and the national level, yet we have the Conservatives and the Bloc now saying that they do not support it.
I am wondering if my colleague could provide her thoughts not only on how it would make it more efficient, but on the fact that there is a high level of accountability and transparency with Crown corporations.