National Defence committee  I think you heard this morning that the military systems are likely protected against an EMP attack. Given a choice between an EMP attack and its consequences for civilian functionality, I'd still take it over a hydrogen bomb on a major city. It's one of a range of slight risks t

National Defence committee  I'm shaking my head because the European-based system is fundamentally different from the North American one. It's an Aegis class system with Standard Missile-3s. The United States purposely changed to that system because Russia had regarded the idea of larger interceptors as thr

National Defence committee  I'll just say a couple of things. First of all, Ms. Gallant, you were very right to point out the marine-borne threat of weapons of mass destruction. Thank you for that. This is something we need to step up, in terms of protection. We do a lot of work with the United States t

National Defence committee  The power of disparity between the United States and North Korea at the present moment is overwhelming. This is a tyrannosaurus rex versus a very loud and angry mouse. The thing we need to remember is that if it chose to, the United States could crush North Korea using convention

National Defence committee  We have theoretically been exposed to the North Korean nuclear threat for over a decade now, because you can put a warhead onto a freighter or a private yacht and sail it into Vancouver harbour. We do radioactive screening for containers after they make it onshore but not for the

National Defence committee  Where do you want to spend your money? The United States has its weapons system. It's working on its system and is spending roughly $10 billion a year. Do you want to sign on to that, or do you want to add capacity with Canadian systems? For instance, we have to—

National Defence committee  Our northern warning system needs to be completely renewed. That's a big expenditure. Canada should take the lead. That's directed against air-breathing threats, including cruise missiles from really dangerous countries like Russia. Rob Huebert very correctly mentioned the Cana

National Defence committee  You're right. And we haven't been asked formally to join, and we don't know what the entry price would be if we were allowed in. Is the United States going to open up NORTHCOM and let Canada in, and how much would they charge? Until you know the answer to those questions, you ca

National Defence committee  Thank you. I'll jump right into it. You heard this morning that North Korea does not consider Canada a threat. I don't find that surprising. Canada does not have nuclear weapons; we do not have ICBMs; we do not have bombers, and we do not have aircraft carriers, so, no, we are n

National Defence committee  And stay tightly focused. Resist the temptation to politicize and to turn this into a large-scale industrial boondoggle.

National Defence committee  I'd just say that, if you follow my suggestion and give it to the Department of National Defence, then the people responsible for procuring the equipment are friends and colleagues of the people who will actually be using that equipment and desperately want that equipment, so you

National Defence committee  I would agree that there's more uncertainty in international relations today than there was just a few years ago. Just look at what's happened in the United States in the last two and a half weeks. I think it is important that the current naval procurements be expedited as much a

National Defence committee  I would get Public Works out of defence procurement, put all the responsibility on the defence minister, perhaps have a subcommittee of this committee to specialize on oversight of defence procurement, and then insist that the minister is responsible for questioning every single

National Defence committee  There is some room for Canadian industrial involvement, absolutely, but sometimes we make it too complicated. The clearest example I can give you is the maritime helicopter procurement. For some reason, the Sikorsky Seahawk was deemed to be too small for Canada's purposes, even t

National Defence committee  The point of the Canadian surface combatant is to have a single hull design for all of our large combat vessels. Within that single hull design, you can put different capabilities. The area air defence capability enables us to operate without allies providing that capability for