National Defence committee  Through you, Mr. Chairman, that was one of our cautionary notes, only because we don't know the figure. Because of commercial confidentiality reasons, it's difficult to understand where work is already being won. Clearly, on a $380-plus billion program, given the current metrics, there are clear opportunities for Canadian industry.

National Defence committee  I am aware of that, yes.

National Defence committee  We understand that Industry Canada has established a sustainment working group and that a number of companies have been invited to participate in it. We're equally conscious that the Department of National Defence is working up its numbers and its plan. Our access to that data is, obviously, and for legitimate reasons, restricted.

National Defence committee  Our understanding is that this is a competitive process. Our encouragement of the Canadian government is that it works effectively and aggressively with Canadian industry to optimize the opportunities that are available. We are working, sir, in a market that is less defined by free trade and more defined by managed trade.

National Defence committee  Sir, if I've understood your question correctly, I answered it in my introductory remarks, in which I said that the model we see the F-35 following is akin to a defence industrial strategy because it contains a number of characteristics that we would naturally believe to be in an industrial strategy, starting with there being, from the earliest possible stages of a procurement process, engagement between industry and government; second, the opportunity for Canadian industry along with the Government of Canada to participate through R and D collaborative efforts, in order to build domestic capability and capacity to support future requirements; the inclusion of articulating individual capabilities that the Canadian economy can then effectively compete for, when an early stage project goes into production; and the inclusion of Canadian companies in the supply chain of a major global OEM.

National Defence committee  Thank you. First, I would, with respect, suggest that there is more than one motivation behind the government's interest in a next-generation fighter. Industrial opportunities would be one, and I'm confident that operational military requirements would clearly be another one, and probably more important, as it well should be.

National Defence committee  Oh, I think very much those elements that I've articulated—I did so intentionally—as they relate—

National Defence committee  Thank you for your question. Where I come from there are very few real guarantees in life. What we've been trying to suggest to you, sir.... First, if I may respond to your first comment, CADSI has not taken a position on the F-35 because it is a specific program, and we as an organization don't take a position on specific programs, in part because we have 860 members, and to side with one platform relative to another would obviously put us in a tight spot with our membership.

National Defence committee  I guess I don't have very many points of reference for you, sir, other than to suggest that our understanding from government data issued to date is that on an investment of about $168 million, Canadian industry has been able to earn about $350 million in contract value, and we are seen with some envy amongst partner countries for having done as well as we have to date on the program.

National Defence committee  I'm interested in understanding, through the government, where and when Canadian companies have been able to earn business from the F-35 program. I think there's a good story to be told there, and we need to get that data so that Canadians and organizations like ours can properly judge, in the fullness of time, just how well Canadian industry has been able to do on this program.

National Defence committee  We are convinced that with the government's commitment to spend $240 billion through the Canada First defence strategy over the next 20 years, the best way to plan for and measure an economic return on that investment is through the creation of a defence industrial strategy. I thank you for your commitment to such a strategy, and I would be happy to work with you and other members of this committee to see how we might be able to raise the awareness and support of the government for this idea.

National Defence committee  Sir, with respect, I hear that as a political question. My job here today is to try to convince you and your colleagues of the value of a defence industrial strategy in the context of defence procurement, outline that we believe the F-35 program includes characteristics that are akin to such a strategy, and encourage you as a committee to measure the success of this model in terms of wealth creation and jobs created in this country.

National Defence committee  I'm not in a position to comment on hypothetical questions, sir. I can say that we have great confidence in the ability of Canadian industry to compete successfully for business, both at the production and at the sustainment phase. I would add, if I may, that there is still work to be done in defining the industrial plan around sustainment.

National Defence committee  Thank you for the questions. Through you, Mr. Chairman, I outlined in our introductory remarks the characteristics that we deem in this model to be applicable to a defence industrial strategy. Those included early engagement between industry and government, and it would appear that that commitment and that undertaking have been met on F-35.

National Defence committee  To the best of our knowledge, the organization that is responsible for the industrial and regional benefits program, namely Industry Canada--I remind you that F-35 is not an IRB program--would be the place that one would logically look to track the return on investment, if you like.