Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 17 of 17
View Jean-François Larose Profile
FD (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Regarding our current fleet, we can say that
about half are dry-docked right now. Is that correct?
What would be a typical scenario? Would it be about 5 dry docks for 30 vessels?
Could you please give a quick answer?
View Jean-François Larose Profile
FD (QC)
So it is about 5 out of 30, or a little more.
View Jean-François Larose Profile
FD (QC)
Thank you.
So we cannot currently say that our fleet is operational, even if you compensate in terms of training. The Arctic is currently melting. We know that maritime space is expanding and, as you yourself said, the current scenario is based on the situation from 50 years ago.
I am having trouble understanding, even if we take new technologies into account. How can you say that we are currently ready, even with the new technologies?
Perhaps you could help me understand something. If we need new vessels with new technologies, it is because a need currently exists. How can we compensate now, given that the maritime space is much larger than it was 50 years ago and that it will certainly grow even larger 50 years from now? We all know that the Arctic continues to melt. What can be done to compensate? Should subcontractors be used? Should we work with the Americans?
You talked a lot about training. Beyond that, what are you doing to be ready in terms of your naval capabilities? What are you doing to compensate in that area? You currently do not have a full fleet; you have only half a fleet.
View Jean-François Larose Profile
FD (QC)
Before you explain that, I would like to share my concern about the water extent and our presence, as we have no aircraft and have very few vessels. I understand the issue of technological competence, but we are replacing our fleet because its technology has not been updated.
View Jean-François Larose Profile
FD (QC)
Of course, given the limited number of vessels we have, their use
is somewhat overextended.
So that affects those vessels' wear and tear.
I am asking you again what we can do to compensate for that. The few vessels we have are currently overused. They are also already old. You are overusing them because there aren't enough vessels. So we end up with foreign ships that ensure support, like the American vessels, but at what cost?
The other issue is that cuts have been made in your department. There is no allowance for new vessels. Cuts have also been made to civilian positions providing logistical support. So I am having some trouble seeing anything positive in this situation.
View Jean-François Larose Profile
FD (QC)
I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.
I would like to know whether I will have an opportunity to question the witnesses today and at all the meetings I will be participating in. I wanted to raise a quick point of order, so that my rights and privileges as a member of this committee, pursuant to Standing Order 104, will be recognized.
I want to remind you that the motion adopted by the committee on November 5, 2013, states the following with regards to the second round of questioning: “[...] based on the principle that each committee member should have a full opportunity to question the witness(es).”
So I would like to repeat my question, Mr. Chair. Will I have the right to question the witnesses today and at subsequent committee meetings?
Thank you.
View Jean-François Larose Profile
FD (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
A lot is being said about conventional targets, but I would rather talk about unconventional targets. I think our fellow Canadians are concerned about the fact that they are now affected in their homes, through the Internet. In committee, we have often discussed establishing something of an army that would be tasked specifically with handling Internet issues.
What are currently our capacities in that area?
Earlier, you talked about collaboration with the Department of Public Safety, but the situation may be a bit more advanced. The map presents a very conventional situation, but we are facing unconventional enemies. They can reach our children directly at home and create local cells.
Does your strategic planning involve specific targets related to the Internet? Is anything being done to limit the access those enemies have to the Internet? Is any kind of equipment targeted? What concrete measures are you taking in this respect?
View Jean-François Larose Profile
FD (QC)
Absolutely, but you are directly involved at the source. You are in contact with those individuals, whether you like it or not, given all the complexity of the situation.
Do the Americans and the coalition have a capacity? Is some sort of collaboration established in that area?
View Jean-François Larose Profile
FD (QC)
In any conflict, enemy's logistics are definitely a target. The Internet provides the enemy with candidates, support or media coverage. I think this should be a priority and not a possibility. Canada wants to maintain a defensive approach, and I understand that. However, now that we have unfortunately become a target—in other words, we have failed in other areas—this should be a priority target.
View Jean-François Larose Profile
FD (QC)
Okay.
I feel reassured, but I think that everyone would like more reassurance. Seeing the big picture is nice, but the priority also consists in seeing what concrete actions are being taken.
View Jean-François Larose Profile
FD (QC)
Mr. Chair, I would like to make it clear that the situation was actually created by the official opposition. I maintain that I am a permanent member and I do not find it at all usual to be ignored. I did not ask to find myself in this situation.
All members of Parliament have a right to do their jobs. Once again, I find myself out in the cold, cast aside. I appreciate the chair’s indulgence, but I do not at all appreciate the position of the party opposite. I have a right to speak and a right to vote. I should not be ignored.
Thank you.
View Jean-François Larose Profile
FD (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My thanks to the witnesses for their patience.
In terms of the shipyards, Mr. Norlock mentioned—and I agree with him—that we have to maintain our knowledge and our expertise for the future. When we bring shipbuilding projects down to simple job creation, we lose out. We have ships that are extremely out of date.
Currently in Canada, two shipyards are working and one of them is in Quebec City. Logically, should we not be activating them all so that we can maintain the expertise, accelerate the process and expand our shipbuilding capacities in Canada?
View Jean-François Larose Profile
FD (QC)
Thank you very much for that answer.
Earlier, you mentioned Lockheed-Martin aircraft. I agree that they are excellent aircraft, but we have other options available.
Would it not be preferable to establish a balance by using several technologies, drones, for example? Could that not be an worthwhile approach: to obtain more drones and use jets in support?
I am not sure if you fully understand my question.
View Jean-François Larose Profile
FD (QC)
In that case, the balance is definitely better.
View Jean-François Larose Profile
FD (QC)
I have a concern about ballistic missiles. My concern is that the effectiveness of what exists now has not really been fully proven.
It's an uncertainty about the effectiveness of the countermeasures that also exist, or that are seen as perhaps even being developed.
Let us talk about the dynamics of that.
If Canada provides money to support development by the Americans, what is our guarantee in that relationship? Going by the number of reports we receive, it is not enough, given the number of missiles that could be directed at the United States. So, by investing billions of dollars, we end up with a few more, or we improve the technology. How can we be sure that the Americans are also going to use them in order to defend Canada too?
In the case of Europe, we understand that, because of the distance, their only possible choice is to use them to defend themselves.
Given the strategic priority based on the adversary’s targets, what guarantees do we have that the missiles we deploy will also be used to defend what I consider important targets in Canada?
Results: 1 - 17 of 17

Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data