National Defence committee  I would add, if I might, that it's an expensive undertaking to respond to a request for proposal. Spending millions of dollars, months of time, depending on the program, and then to run a false competition is not appropriate. It costs both government and industry time and money that could be better spent elsewhere.

National Defence committee  We didn't look at that. What we did look at, however--

National Defence committee  You read it well. What we did see is that Canada traditionally flies, drives, and sails its military equipment longer and harder than almost anybody else. That's why, in our report, we emphasize the importance of a viable in-service support capability in this country. Over time, industry has become the true steward of military equipment, long after the DND or Public Works official has defined the requirement, engaged in the competitive process, and signed a contract.

National Defence committee  Thank you for the question. We obviously had our boots filled with answers to the question you have just put to us during the consultation, and we recognize that Canada is a relatively small market. Therefore, Canadian industry can't be all things to all people across the military requirement--whether it be soldier system, aerospace, land, or naval systems.

National Defence committee  This is speculation on my part. I'm sure my colleagues will have specific examples. In an era when competition at all costs seems to be the mantra, you lose sight of how you got to the point where you've identified a requirement, and sometimes that's through a co-development that DRDC and S&TR; and DND may have developed with industry.

National Defence committee  The key for us was that there be a whole-of-government approach to the consideration of defence procurement such that all of the different points of light that are resident within the government--whether it be from an R and D perspective or whether it be from an export support perspective, or whether it be from Advantage Canada, or from S and T strategies within DND or within Industry Canada--that are out there have some connectivity, they're aligned to something, and that there be an accountability for how those are working effectively.

National Defence committee  We were conscious during the consultation of a few things. First, there was the number of times that industry remarked on how inconsistent the procurement process was. On one program they could be operating by set of rules A, and on a separate procurement of a similar nature they'd be operating on a set of processes B, and with different people with different levels of understanding and different levels of experience.

National Defence committee  We haven't yet seen the government commit at cabinet level to new naval ship production. We're hoping, when they do, that they will have considered not just the shipyard end of the business but also the electronics and the communication and the weapons systems and the real value added that goes into a military vessel as well as the in-service support, because we believe that sourcing parts from onshore domestic suppliers will facilitate your long-term in-service support relationships, reduce costs, and increase predictability.

National Defence committee  Thank you for the question. Canada's idea for a capability centre is called ACCORD, which is a pre-competitive environment through which they are trying to assess among government, military, and industry where capability exists and where capability will be required in a 10-year to 15-year timeframe.

National Defence committee  We wrote a report last year on the marine industrial sector, and in that report we expressed our support for an allocated long-term production schedule to rebuild Canada's naval fleet and coast guard fleet. We did so out of recognition that we have a national shipbuilding policy.

National Defence committee  Quickly, sir, to your question as it relates to machinery of government, we didn't deem it within our purview to predict how the government might respond to that recommendation. Clearly, questions around machinery are the prerogative of the Prime Minister. The recommendation comes out, I think, from a general frustration within industry related to accountability and related to understanding what industrial objectives are being identified per defence program.

National Defence committee  I will ask my colleague Janet to answer your first two questions. I will deal with the third.

National Defence committee  If I could add to your question, the Canada First defence strategy has identified a long-term spending plan to rebuild the military. As far as CADSI is concerned and our members are concerned, that is a clear demonstration of leadership from this government to achieve an objective that it has identified, and a gap in our current capability.

National Defence committee  If I may, the creation of a defence industrial strategy would enable industry to make investments in production upgrades, in technology improvements, in human resource skills development, such that when programs come to market, Canadian industry will be well positioned to compete successfully for those programs.

National Defence committee  Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for inviting us to appear before the committee. I am pleased to have this opportunity to introduce our association and my colleagues to the members. I appear before you with David Stapley, the newly elected Chairman of our Board of Directors, and Janet Thorsteinson, our venerable Vice President for Government Relations.