National Defence committee  What I'm suggesting is that we need systems that can look further north. Whether this is going to materialize in the form of radar sites further north or other technology, I am not sure.

National Defence committee  It's all based on the 2025 date, or thereabouts, I have to say, because it's never clear. Again, it's not a cliff; it's a graceful degradation. It could be an option where we'll be looking at extending the radar if there's not a solution that's apparent immediately. Those are alw

National Defence committee  That's a two-part question, Madam, if I understand correctly. The first one is about interoperability and the use of our current infrastructure. Perhaps the best indication that our current infrastructure might not be a good base of reference is to look at the structure. For exa

National Defence committee  I could describe NORAD's evolution in four ages. The first age was Soviet long-range aviation with gravity bombs, in such a way at that time in the late fifties that the air battle was going to take place just north of our border. That's how the air defence system was designed.

National Defence committee  It is a difficult question to answer because.... NORAD is a force employer. We benefit from forces that are presented to us from both the United States and Canada. Other than for specific pieces of equipment, such as north warning system radar, something that is really specific t

National Defence committee  Yes, sir.

National Defence committee  As per the agreement, the commander of NORAD is responsible for delivering or executing his mission. Once in a while—actually, on a monthly basis—we get readiness reports, where regions and units, and whatever agency is responsible, or stakeholders in the NORAD mission, will stat

National Defence committee  This is another reason why we have to ask ourselves the same question. In rationalizing the command and control we have organized, are we as efficient as we could be with the common purpose of defending North America? This is one of the very critical factors that would be a part

National Defence committee  That's a difficult policy question. NORAD is only in aerospace. From a maritime warning point of view, where we might see something wherever, if it is in the maritime domain, we have a mission to report to both national chains of command. So it would not apply. It would not stop

National Defence committee  Yes, that would be my experience.

National Defence committee  I would say yes, sir.

National Defence committee  We have left the cyber-domain now, and we're now talking about the warning system.

National Defence committee  I mentioned that system was put in place as a result of a threat as perceived in the late 1970s. There are some capability challenges out there we can mitigate operationally, but from a capability point of view, we have to look at something else. With respect to sustainability of

National Defence committee  So your question is whether it would more valuable to have somebody physically present as opposed to relying on a communications network, I think yes, but I'm not sure we would be prepared to entertain some type of solution like this, because there are some barriers that exist in

National Defence committee  Yes, ma'am. The general military requirements usually will address this issue, and our systems will be as protected as can be.