National Defence Committee on June 17th, 2024

[Dr. James Boutilier]

Yes. I can hear you now.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

That's wonderful.

My questions are mainly for you, Mr. Boutilier.

In the first part of the meeting, we were told that we can expect a decrease in military spending starting in 2029, as well as a decrease in the percentage of gross domestic product spent on national defence. This decrease would stem from the expiration of commitments made under the defence policy, “Strong, Secure, Engaged”.

Do you agree with that analysis?

What message does the fact that we will not be able to achieve, in the long term, the objectives we had committed to with our NATO partners send?

[Dr. James Boutilier]

Thank you very much for that question.

I apologize for not replying to you

in French.

To begin with, we have a lamentable inclination to freeload on our structural or institutional arrangements, particularly with the United States, and that, I would suggest, is a strategy that is rapidly becoming endangered. Americans have significant challenges of their own in order to meet the defence demands of a global power.

Second, I would suggest that all the evidence suggests that what we're looking at is a declining level of vitality in the Canadian economy.

Third, at the very moment that we might begin to turn the corner—and there are some who would suggest that the decline in armed forces is so profound that it is incapable of being reversed—there are some who would suggest that at the very moment we begin to make real inroads in the deficits that successive governments have left us, we will in fact find ourselves without sufficient revenue to continue in the way that we were before. If you look, for example, at standards of living, we've fallen from fifth to 33rd globally. This is all a warning sign of our lack of competitiveness moving forward.

National defence is in real trouble, but it will be in even greater trouble if we don't move with enormous rapidity and urgency now.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

You have only about 15 seconds left.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

I will be brief, Mr. Chair.

The operating and maintenance budget has been cut by $1 billion.

Could we afford to make those cuts? Can we still afford them?

[Dr. James Boutilier]

No, we cannot maintain these. We're in a state of complete delusion and self-congratulation about our performance.

At the onset of the conflict in Ukraine, we had more than 80 tanks, but as a point of fact, probably fewer than 20 of them were actually available for service. The same is true across a whole array of equipment in the Canadian Forces. There's a lack of spares, a lack of personnel, a lack of—

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Unfortunately, Dr. Boutilier, we're going to have to leave Madame Normandin's questions there.

Ms. Mathyssen, you have three minutes.

[Dr. James Boutilier]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Professor Charron, when you appeared for our Arctic security study, we spoke about the balance of confronting hostile states and yet still maintaining diplomatic international agreements and relations. We spoke about calling out Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine and sanctioning them, and then holding them within institutions like the Arctic Council. We talked about that collaboration and those challenges.

Last week Minister Joly spoke about our approach to the Arctic. She spoke about the challenges of how those hostilities are making a change.

Could you speak to how that's changed since we heard from you on that study, and how those changes have impacted things like the Arctic Council and our ability to continue in the international space and security space?

[Prof. Andrea Charron]

In the case of the Arctic Council, the working groups have decided that they will proceed, but it will be online.

One of the major concerns, of course, is that Russia has the largest Arctic territory. We're seriously concerned that we do not have access to their data that speaks to how much methane is being released from permafrost that is melting, which is going to change the world's weather and climate change values. It's essential that we still work with scientists and work through diplomatic channels to make sure that we get that information.

This does not excuse their atrocious behaviour, but we don't want to cut off our nose to spite our face. There are areas in which we absolutely must work with Russia. Again, that is not to say that we accept their egregious behaviour, but at some point, we are going to have to find a way to get these sorts of information, because doing otherwise is going to damage us.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Okay.

We're also in the middle of a study on space defence. Similar to the Arctic, we're seeing commercialization in space. I have concerns about that, given the observations on the necessity of diplomatic operations and the fact that we are potentially cutting our nose off to spite our face.

What do you suggest for the spaces we talk about—Russia, China and Iran—and those really complicated situations?

[Prof. Andrea Charron]

You know, it is, and this is why having global affairs is—

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

I'm sorry, Dr. Charron. Unfortunately, you've been left 13 seconds to respond to that complicated situation.

I'm going to be a little arbitrary here. We have to rise at 12:50. My thought is having a one-minute round for each party and then calling it a day. Is that acceptable or otherwise?

Mr. Allison, you have one minute.

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West, ON]

All right. Thank you, I think, Mr. Chair. I'm not sure.

Dr. Boutilier, you talked about it being a bit of a fantasy that we could ever hit some of these targets. When it comes to the defence of our Arctic, just very quickly, in the 45 seconds you have, what should we be prioritizing right now? Give us two or three things to start to do this rebuild.

[Dr. James Boutilier]

Personnel and equipment are the two things you have to move forward with, and with lightning speed. We are 10 years behind the curve because of a dithering delay, and this is what we have to do. Only with those can we even begin to contemplate having a real presence in the Arctic.

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West, ON]

Okay.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Allison.

Ms. Lambropoulos, you have one minute.

[Emmanuella Lambropoulos, Liberal, Saint-Laurent, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank our witnesses.

Ms. Charron, this question is for you. You spoke about the Rangers and the need to invest more in administrative personnel in order to help them increase their capacity and capabilities. I'm wondering if you could speak a bit more about the importance of that. It's not the first time we've heard that in this committee.

[Prof. Andrea Charron]

They are the eyes and ears in the Arctic. I'll note that with any incursion that has happened in the Arctic, including submarines, it's been the locals who have noted it and brought it to the attention of the Government of Canada.

We want them to be out on the land, being those eyes and ears, not trying to struggle with PDF versions, wonky Internet, filling out complicated forms again and again and again, and then waiting for months for reimbursement. In most cases, they use their own equipment. You can imagine that if a snowmobile, for example, is damaged, that doesn't mean that it's only the Rangers who can't use it: It also means their family can't use it and the community can't use it.

We really need to have northern-appropriate responses to dealing with these administrative burdens.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Ms. Lambropoulos.

You have one minute, Madame Normandin.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Boutilier, it took two years for Canada to come up with a new defence policy. According to that policy, Canada is going to explore the possibility of buying major equipment, such as submarines.

Would it have been better to say nothing, rather than to appear not credible as to our intentions?

[Dr. James Boutilier]

I'm terribly sorry. Your translation didn't come through at all. I apologize.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Are you still on the English translation, Dr. Boutilier?

[Dr. James Boutilier]

I am indeed.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Let's go at that again.