NDVA Committee Meeting

37th PARLIAMENT, 3rd SESSION

Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Thursday, April 22, 2004

¹

1535

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric (Cambridge, Lib.))

Major-General Edward Fitch (Project Manager, Land Force Reserve Restructuring, Department of National Defence)

¹

1540

¹

1545

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric)

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant (Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, CPC)

MGen Edward Fitch

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant

MGen Edward Fitch

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant

MGen Edward Fitch

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant

¹

1550

MGen Edward Fitch

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant

MGen Edward Fitch

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant

MGen Edward Fitch

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant

MGen Edward Fitch

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant

MGen Edward Fitch

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant

MGen Edward Fitch

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant

MGen Edward Fitch

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant

MGen Edward Fitch

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant

¹

1555

MGen Edward Fitch

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric)

Mr. Claude Bachand (Saint-Jean, BQ)

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

º

1600

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric)

Mr. John O'Reilly (Haliburton—Victoria—Brock, Lib.)

º

1605

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. John O'Reilly

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. John O'Reilly

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. John O'Reilly

MGen Edward Fitch

º

1610

Mr. John O'Reilly

MGen Edward Fitch

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric)

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant

MGen Edward Fitch

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant

MGen Edward Fitch

º

1615

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant

MGen Edward Fitch

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric)

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

º

1620

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric)

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric)

Mr. Murray Calder (Dufferin—Peel—Wellington—Grey, Lib.)

º

1625

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Murray Calder

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Murray Calder

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Murray Calder

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Murray Calder

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric)

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant

º

1630

MGen Edward Fitch

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric)

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric)

Mr. John O'Reilly

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. John O'Reilly

MGen Edward Fitch

º

1635

Mr. John O'Reilly

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. John O'Reilly

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. John O'Reilly

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. John O'Reilly

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. John O'Reilly

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric)

Mrs. Cheryl Gallant

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric)

MGen Edward Fitch

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric)

MGen Edward Fitch

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric)

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

M. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

Mr. Claude Bachand

MGen Edward Fitch

º

1640

Mr. Claude Bachand

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric)

---

CANADA

Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs

---

NUMBER 009

l

3rd SESSION

l

37th PARLIAMENT

---

EVIDENCE

Thursday, April 22, 2004

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

¹  (1535)  

[English]

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric (Cambridge, Lib.)): Good afternoon, colleagues.

    This is meeting number 9. It's Thursday, April 22.

    Our order of the day, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), is a briefing session on land forces reserve restructuring,

    Today we have two witnesses from the Department of National Defence: Major-General Edward Fitch, project manager, land forces reserve restructuring, and Colonel Eric Meisner, acting project director, land forces reserve restructuring.

    After your presentation we'll go to seven minutes for an opposition party, seven minutes for the Liberals, and then to a round of five minutes back and forth.

    Gentlemen, the floor is yours.

    Major-General Edward Fitch (Project Manager, Land Force Reserve Restructuring, Department of National Defence): Merci, Monsieur le président.

    In my introductory remarks I'll offer a brief history and perspective of Canada's army reserve; a refresher on the mission and the scope for the land force reserve restructure project; a view of some of the exciting initiatives we've undertaken to transform the army reserve, in concert with the rest of the army; where my mandate fits into the overall army transformation; some of the funding and risk management challenges; and an exciting concept derived from our recent conference on reserves in homeland defence, homeland security that was sponsored by the centre for military and strategic studies at the University of Calgary. Needless to say, I'm prepared to go into much more detail in any part of the project you would like.

    On the history of the army reserve or the militia in Canada, we count the start of militia history at 1673, during the French regime. For the next 300 years Canada's militia served this country in peace and in war. A characteristic that was a constant over that 300-year period was frequent if irregular change. All that ceased in 1964.

    In 1964 we had the Suttie commission. Commissioner Suttie, the historians tell us, was really looking back, not forward. He was cleaning up business after World War II. The militia was reduced by 22,000 positions. In the context of the Cold War, when the world was contemplating a war in Europe of a 30-day duration, with a nuclear holocaust, the concept of reserves that might take 30 days just to get mobilized faded into the background. We then entered a period of some 30 years that could be described within the militia as stagnation.

    Following that, in 1994 and 1995 we had two more commissions, the Gollner commission and the Dickson commission. I consider it to this day to be a bit of a miracle how this moribund, neglected, stagnated element of the Canadian Forces suddenly came back on the political agenda. We have plenty of evidence that it happened, but I'm still struggling to understand why it happened. In any case, it became clear to the army, to the Canadian Forces, that the militia needed to be revitalized. From 1995 to 1999 there were two attempts to do this. Neither was successful. However, we learned important lessons from each one.

    One lesson was that change will not occur without broad consultation among serving reservists--retired, and indeed any of the 30 million stakeholders out there in Canada's reserve. The other lesson we learned was that we must build consensus for change, that the militia will not easily react to a simple fiat from the government or from national defence headquarters.

    We're now living the third attempt at LFRR, as led by Lieutenant General Mike Jeffery, who at that time was about to become the army commander, and working very closely with the Honourable John Fraser, who I'm sure is known to the people in this room. They were able to achieve sufficient consensus that on October 6, 2000, the land force reserve restructure plan was made public. It was accompanied by a government policy statement--I'll refresh you on that shortly--and we have been living out the implementation of that strategic plan ever since. Phase one of this two-phase plan was completed at the end of March 2000, and we're now doing phase two.

    It was with General Jeffery that I appeared before this committee previously. Some of the issues we talked about then are still very much extant: the high operational tempo that the army is living through--the army is very much in demand; and the insufficient resources the army has for its perceived tasks. General Jeffery said at that time, “We are living beyond our means”.

¹  (1540)  

    Funding for LFRR phase two was very much in question at that time, and it was just about a year later, on April 2, 2003, that funding for part of phase two was announced.

    Even at that last time we were together, there was considerable interest in chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear response in homeland defence, which is not exclusively a reserve issue, but reserves have a special role to play. There was also mention of training the reserves more like the regular forces.

[Translation]

    Mr. Bachand, this is one of the points you raised, and I will delve into it in a moment.

[English]

    When I talk about the army reserve, here's a view of the lower part of Canada where most of the army is situated. You can see the population centres and the five locations where the full-time or regular force part of the army lives. When we add the red dots, that's the 130 units of the army reserve that live in 110 communities across Canada.

    I'll let you refresh on this; this is an extract from the policy statement of 2000. Ça va?

    Going on to the next slide, this is the mission statement out of the strategic plan. It has been given to me as my personal mission in life. The highlight at the end of the sentence is a reminder to me that we can come up with the most glorious plans in the world, but in the end, if they aren't relevant to the needs of the nation--and in that we must include economy--then we've wasted our time. So that's a touchstone we go back to frequently.

    Phase one of the project was to stabilize the reserve. It was in manning free-fall at the time, which was the term that was used. We brought the strength from a nominal 14,000 up to 15,500. The key point here is that had to be done from within DND resources. There was no new money to do phase one.

    On April 3, 2003, the minister rose in the House and congratulated the army on completing phase one of the project and granted further growth, as you see there--750 new positions in each of the last and current fiscal years--and sent us new money to do that. The overall goal remains the same--18,500, as mentioned in the strategic plan.

    In phase two, these are some of the changes. Some are increases in capacity, but there are many transformational and innovative things in here. I won't go through them in detail, but I welcome your questions and I'm quite happy to come back to any of them after.

    We will go ahead to the next slide. Just to situate myself here, my responsibility is the design of the army reserve in the army of tomorrow and the army of the future. The issues of today are handled by another officer, Brigadier-General Dennis Tabbernor, who is the director general of land reserves.

    This slide tries to demonstrate how we build consensus. There are many acronyms on here. It just wasn't possible to put them all in full, as it would have filled the page. Don't bother with the actual terms, but let me indicate that feeding those routes and building the tree and making it stronger are the many different agencies, internal and external to the department, that feed the chain of command. The chain of command, of course, makes the decisions. It holds the responsibilities.

    The next slide shows how we've used the growth. Again, don't bother with the detail. This is just to show you--and I'm happy to take questions on it--how we've used the 750 positions in these two fiscal years and some of the plans that we have for the future.

¹  (1545)  

[Translation]

    Mr. Chairman, my ten minutes are up. I will now take your questions.

[English]

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric): Thank you, Major-General.

    Now we'll go to questions.

    Madam Gallant, you have eight minutes.

    Mrs. Cheryl Gallant (Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, CPC): Thank you very much.

    Through you, Mr. Chairman, to the witness, to what extent do we have our full-time armed forces personnel retiring when their contracts are up and then re-entering the military field through the reserves? Do we have a good influx from the regular forces?

    MGen Edward Fitch: I don't have data on that. It's one of those army-of-today issues. We can take note of the question, if you wish, and follow up on it. I'll send a reply to the committee through General Tabbernor.

    But indeed, I am personally an example. On May 3, in ten days' time or so, I will retire from the regular force, and I have been asked to come back as a reservist and continue for two years to bring this project to its logical conclusion.

    Mrs. Cheryl Gallant: Are all retiring regular forces personnel asked to be on standby in some reserve capacity if they leave the forces on good terms?

    MGen Edward Fitch: Thank you for that last phrase. Under that condition, they are all offered the opportunity to add their names to a list called the supplementary ready reserve. On the SRR, they don't receive any pay or any further training, but they can be contacted if we need someone with that particular skill set.

    Mrs. Cheryl Gallant: And within the current reserves, would you be able to give us an idea of the proportion that have been regular forces at some time in the past?

    MGen Edward Fitch: Again, that's a data question. I'll have to go back and get an answer, and we'll provide it to you as soon as possible.

    Mrs. Cheryl Gallant: From your experience so far in the reserves, what seems to you to be the greatest challenge or impediment to increasing the numbers in the reserves?

¹  (1550)  

    MGen Edward Fitch: In a word, money. There is no shortage of young people in Canada who want to serve their nation, particularly in a part-time capacity. The issue around further increases would simply be resources.

    Mrs. Cheryl Gallant: So you do have the people lining up, it's just that there is not the money to train and pay the people.

    MGen Edward Fitch: That's correct.

    Mrs. Cheryl Gallant: What potential concerns or threats would there be to the security of Canada, given the current strength of the armed forces, were one of the scenarios to come about that you as a regular force person do exercises on? Are we prepared, as a nation, for a catastrophe or a potential terrorist attack of large proportions?

    MGen Edward Fitch: It's a very important question, but it's a difficult question. I don't wish to be in any way trite, but tell me what the catastrophe is, and I'll tell you if we can handle it or not. There are descriptions and there are briefings available on the risks against our security, our safety. These things are difficult to measure, to quantify.

    The work I'm doing is based on defence policy, so we have studied defence policy. Out of that we have analyzed how many reservists you need with the regular force to accomplish defence policy. That's a capability-based approach, as opposed to a threat-based approach.

    Mrs. Cheryl Gallant: I believe either last spring or the spring before there was a joint exercise between the United States and Canada. I believe it had to do with a dirty bomb in one of the northwestern U.S. states. Were the Canadian reserves involved in that exercise?

    MGen Edward Fitch: If I'm correct, that was TOPOFF 3.

    Mrs. Cheryl Gallant: Correct.

    MGen Edward Fitch: That was short for “top officials”. Very few, if any, troops were involved. That was a simulation done to engage political leaders and decision-makers. I don't have a lot more detail on that. It's outside my area of work.

    Mrs. Cheryl Gallant: I was going to use that as an example of the type of catastrophe we might face, and if you had been a part of that exercise I was going to ask if there were enough in terms of numbers.

    MGen Edward Fitch: I understand what you would like to know better, so perhaps we should look at some actual disasters: the Winnipeg flood, the Saguenay River flood, the ice storm, or as recently as this past year, the forest fires in the Kelowna area and the cleanup after Hurricane Juan in the Halifax area. Reservists presented themselves in considerable numbers. They were very willing and want to be involved, and they made vital contributions.

    On those examples, de facto, we had enough.

    Mrs. Cheryl Gallant: Do the reserves have the opportunity to exercise jointly with American reservists?

    MGen Edward Fitch: Quite frequently, usually at small levels. But I'm part of a committee of general officers, leaders of reserves from both Canada and the U.S., who have been meeting for a number of years now promoting that particular activity. Many reserve units have partnerships with American counterparts and they train back and forth across the border fairly frequently.

    Again, if you wish more detail on that, we can pull up the numbers of units, when, and so on.

    Mrs. Cheryl Gallant: In terms of helping out with training the army in Afghanistan, would our reservists have a role to play in that?

    MGen Edward Fitch: Absolutely. As part of the Canadian contingent in Afghanistan right now, there are a number of reservists, in the order, I think, of 70 or 80. Again, if you want the precise number, I can get it.

    Essentially, in anything the army does there's a place for reservists, and they contribute in many important ways.

    Mrs. Cheryl Gallant: Are there roles that could be filled by our reservists, but for one reason or another we're just not capitalizing on their abilities?

¹  (1555)  

    MGen Edward Fitch: There's huge potential in the reserve that we don't even know very well. We're looking at trying to determine the most economical or most painless way of cataloguing the knowledge and skill sets that our reservists have.

    Our regular soldiers, the full-timers, the ones who have been with us since they were quite young, we know quite well what their skill sets and knowledge bases are--they're well documented. But the reservist comes to us part-time, and we have not been asking them specifically what they do in civilian life, what their education has been, what their experience has been. We know anecdotally that there are tremendous skills among these individuals, and we're looking for ways to catalogue those and be able to draw on them in a time of need.

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric): Thank you.

    Monsieur Bachand.

[Translation]

    Mr. Claude Bachand (Saint-Jean, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Thank you for your presentation, General.

    I would like to get back to some elements you raised earlier, because I would like to see how phase 2 will unfold. I think the objective, at the end of the second phase, is to have 18,500 reservists.

    In April 2003, I believe it was announced that the first stage had been completed and that we then had 15,500 reservists. Is that correct?

    MGen Edward Fitch: We had reached the objective of 15,500, as required for the first phase. We reached that objective in the month of September 2002. By the month of April, our numbers had already dropped because no announcements had been made regarding resources. That forced us to reduce their equipment, their training, etc.

    So, with the announcement in the month of April, we started up again and we've been actively recruiting since the month of September. We've noted that the increase is not as rapid as we would have hoped. However, we believe that after the first three years of the second phase, we will once again have reached our objective.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: Of 15,500?

    MGen Edward Fitch: Of 17,000, sir.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: All right. But you just said that you had 15,500 by the month of September 2002.

    MGen Edward Fitch: That's correct.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: In April 2003, did you still have 15,500 reservists, or less than that?

    MGen Edward Fitch: Less, we had lost some.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: How many were there?

    MGen Edward Fitch: If I recall, between 14,500 and 15,000.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: Between 14,500 and 15,000. And now, under phase 2, if I'm not mistaken, you'd like to recruit 750 people in 2003-2004 and another 750 people in 2004-2005.

    MGen Edward Fitch: Yes, sir.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: According to my figures, you will then have 17,000.

    MGen Edward Fitch: Precisely.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: So, you would go from 14,500 to 17,000 over the next two years. Is that it?

    MGen Edward Fitch: No, over the current fiscal year.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: Over the current fiscal year.

    MGen Edward Fitch: In fact we had six months of last year, that is the time it took to implement the announcement made by the minister in the month of April. Over those six months last year we weren't able to add the 750 we would have liked to have added, but now we have a full year to recruit the 750 for the second year, as well as those we were unable to recruit for the first year of phase 2.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: All right. If I add all of that up for the years 2003-2004 and 2004-2005, I get 17,000, but you want 18,500 reservists. You're still missing 1,500.

    Over subsequent years are you planning to increase the number by 750 at a time, until you reach the objective?

    MGen Edward Fitch: By the month of March 2005 we should reach the objective of 17,000, as you see here. So in March 2003 we started with 15,500 reservists, more or less. The first part of the green line shows you the expected increase until March 2005.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: Okay, I understand.

    MGen Edward Fitch: We don't have any news as to what will happen after March 2005. The objective remains : 18,500 people by March 2006. That objective will be difficult to reach.

    You see option A. Under this option we would double the rate of increase that we would have had over these two years. You'd have to increase the rate to 1500 over a year. That's a lot of work.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: Is that in keeping with your budget?

    MGen Edward Fitch: Pardon me?

    Mr. Claude Bachand: Does that match the budget you're going to receive?

    MGen Edward Fitch: The budget?

    Mr. Claude Bachand: The bigger the budget, the faster you will reach your objective.

    MGen Edward Fitch: The speed is partly related to the budget.

º  (1600)  

    Mr. Claude Bachand: Yes.

    MGen Edward Fitch: But there are also limits to the machine we have today. Can we get it to work twice as fast as it currently does?

    Mr. Claude Bachand: I see.

    MGen Edward Fitch: I wonder if it's truly effective.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: Yes, but is that what led John Fraser, in March 2004, to say that you were overestimating... I don't know if you were there in March 2004?

    Did you feel offended when Mr. Fraser said that you overestimated the size of the reserve? He was harder than that on you : he said that headquarters wasn't doing everything in its power to get there quickly.

    MGen Edward Fitch: I work closely with Mr. Fraser. I know his opinions very well. I respect them as well. A policy announcement is one thing; it's another matter altogether to provide the resources or set priorities in order for policies to be implemented.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: You're not saying much. Weren't you a bit upset that Mr. Fraser would say such a thing?

    MGen Edward Fitch: Whether it upsets me or not, the important thing is to reach our goal. I can assure you that the military is doing everything it possibly can with the resources it has. But for the time being, resource announcements bring us up to March 2005. After that, we don't know.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: Okay. But now you want to reach these objectives in a context where the job descriptions for the reserve have been updated, i.e. they are now supposed to support the regular army, etc.

    You've introduced a new notion which seems interesting to me, and I'd like us to discuss it in more detail. It has to do with a group that can respond in the case of a biological, chemical or nuclear attack.

    But if we add these tasks to the reserve, aren't we overburdening it a bit more? Are you aiming to have more than 18,500 people, if we add these tasks? They're interesting, I think, and they're worth studying in more detail. But if you're having a difficult time reaching your goal given the current job description for the reserve, which is limited, and if you add a whole new set of tasks, you're going to have an even more difficult time getting there. I do agree with you however that these duties are important.

    MGen Edward Fitch: Unless you change the priorities for the reserve. We have certain resources. We can't do everything with them, obviously : you either do this, or you do that. It is a decision that is as political as it is military.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: And you, you had the idea that--

[English]

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric): Excuse me, but your time has run out. We'll go to Mr. O'Reilly for seven minutes.

    Mr. John O'Reilly (Haliburton—Victoria—Brock, Lib.): Thank you very much for attending. This isn't the first time we've met, or talked about reserves.

    I guess it was easier to recruit when the cadet program was in the high schools. People came out of the high school cadet programs looking for something else to do, and would perhaps consider the reserves. That's how I went into the reserves—out of the cadet program. I ended up on a gun crew, and then they cancelled the gun crew and gave us two-way radios to play with, and I left. Then the armouries closed, and if you wanted to stay in the reserves you had to go fifty miles down the road, which isn't that attractive.

    I know that you have those problems in recruiting in some areas, such as I'm from, because the nearest armouries would be Oshawa or Peterborough, maybe, which are a long way from any area young people would want to travel to, or in fact be able to travel to, in joining the reserves. A lot of the reserve opportunities aren't there for all of the population, but are only there if you happen to be close to an armoury. So those logistics or rules are one of the impediments that I find to the reserves.

    Now, where you are rebuilding and restructuring and redoing armouries, such as the opening of the new Simcoe armouries in Ontario, and the rejuvenation of the Oshawa armouries, with their gun ranges and the electronic equipment, there are a lot of people who are very, very happy to be in the reserves, and there is a waiting list. But there's a vast number of people in the outlying areas who the reserves are not available to, but who would make good reservists.

    I'm not asking you to solve that, because I don't think you can, obviously, but I think it would be very easy to reach your targets if there were a way of availing people in other areas to consider the reserves. You can't come to an area 50 to 60 miles away from an armoury to recruit, and have a lot of luck holding those people if they do show up.

    Is that a good statement or a bad statement?

º  (1605)  

    MGen Edward Fitch: I'm not sure that there was a question there, sir.

    Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

    Mr. John O'Reilly: Well, the question was more of an observation—

    MGen Edward Fitch: I don't agree with the statement. We could discuss it.

    Mr. John O'Reilly: Would it be easier if you perhaps were able to pay mileage to people to come to an armoury? If you had a budget to pay mileage for five or six people from 50 to 60 miles away to car pool, or something, would you be able to get people more interested in the reserves?

    MGen Edward Fitch: How far a young Canadian is willing to travel for an evening's part-time work is an interesting subject. It varies greatly across the country. In a big city, 20 or 30 minutes by bus is the limit. They won't go any farther. A farmer's kid in Saskatchewan will easily travel for two hours to see a movie. To get to the armouries in the Lakehead and Kenora, it's remarkable how far people will travel. So that's a variable we're sensitive to.

    It may be useful to understand how we decided and sought the approval of the minister on where the growth should be. We did it against the three-part role of the army reserve: to provide structure for mobilization, to maintain the army's connection with Canadians, and to provide augmentation to the Canadian Forces. That led us to extending our presence into the high-density areas of the country, not into the low-density ones. We can recruit in the low-density areas, but it's going to cost us more because there are fewer opportunities to find young people and get them to us.

    So we are creating a presence--I won't say by building armouries, because the lovely stone castles are a thing of the past. We're not building that kind of thing any more. We're moving units into high-density areas, particularly suburbs. But fifty years ago, the last time we moved units around, there weren't very many people. Now there are huge numbers. There are examples in Ottawa--Kanata, Orléans; Toronto--Mississauga, Scarborough; Montreal--moving a unit down to the south shore; and Quebec City--moving into the suburbs to the west of the city. We have about 130 units. We think that's enough structure. We really don't want to create any more structure. We're going into the areas with the highest concentration. It's true that some young Canadians will find it much more difficult to get to a reserve unit than will others.

    Mr. John O'Reilly: The other thing I want to ask your opinion on is the outsourcing of food, maintenance, carpentry, and laundry to the various companies that are not military. The theory is to keep the pointed end of the sword in the military and have someone else do the other work. Wouldn't people who want to become a cook or a carpenter or to do maintenance work be more interested in joining the reserves if those jobs were available and not outsourced?

    MGen Edward Fitch: It's remarkable to me that you can see a big historical circle coming around again. When the British army arrived in Canada in 1759, its logistics were almost exclusively provided by civilians. We've gone through various periods to the point where almost 100% of our logistics were provided by the uniformed military. Now, where it is sensible and economically advantageous, certain logistics are being outsourced, and with considerable success. We're certainly not alone in this. All our major allies are doing the same thing. We retain a core of logistics people in the army to do those jobs that you cannot contract out. That may be a matter of time, place, or function. I think we're moving toward a much better balance between them. So it's nothing to be afraid of. I think it's a good thing.

º  (1610)  

    Mr. John O'Reilly: In your recruiting, do you talk about discipline, respect, and the benefits of military service?

    I know it didn't work for me, Cheryl, but it does for some.

    Great discipline and respect are taught outside of the normal role of young people today, and that would be an attraction.

    MGen Edward Fitch: We want to make sure that they get that message very early on. In fact, I'll go one step further. A broad range of people--they may not be all that young--join the army reserves for many different reasons, but the desire to serve their country is a strong one, and that it's a good part-time job is another one. Fair enough. But we want to evolve the culture so that any young Canadian coming to join the reserves is joining it with the intention to deploy. When we tell somebody that it's time or in an emergency tell them that it's their turn, we don't want to hear, as we've heard anecdotally from across the border in some news reports, “Iraq--I didn't join for this.” So we want to make sure that those purposes, the discipline and the opportunity to serve your country, are very much up front.

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric): Thank you.

    Now we go to the five-minute round. Madame Gallant, Monsieur Bachand, and Mr. Calder, five minutes each.

    Mrs. Cheryl Gallant: With regard to your lack of resources, we know that there are people lined up. If we look at other sectors of society, the private sector, they require people to be trained as well. They as well cannot afford, for example, if it's a small business, to put an employee in an apprenticeship program.

    Now, over in HRDC there's a huge surplus sitting there. Has there been any genuine effort put forth to take the needs of the private sector as well as the reserves, utilize this money and somehow satisfy each other's requirements in terms of resources?

    MGen Edward Fitch: The investment you make in your reserve provides you many things. Some of those are spending on youth; spending on creating very high-quality part-time employment; money invested in nation-building. It promotes diverse communities to take part in mainstream Canada.

    It contributes to the defence of the nation, of course--that's the primary product--and it has the benefit of being non-partisan, in that reserves are in virtually every riding in the country. We don't direct it that way, the way you suggested, so much. We know that there are incidental benefits to Canadian society of these investments in the reserves, but we're building for the army's requirement.

    There are some programs that may yet be promising, but we have to focus on what we need to produce, our primary product. We don't have the resources to add the extras. Nevertheless, even with what we're doing, there is an incidental consequent benefit to the whole nation.

    Mrs. Cheryl Gallant: So there are no other departments that have the resources that you can work with symbiotically.

    MGen Edward Fitch: If you know any departments that would like to give money to the army reserve, I'll go phone them tomorrow.

º  (1615)  

    Mrs. Cheryl Gallant: In terms of HRDC, they are looking for jobs for people. You have people lining up for jobs.

    MGen Edward Fitch: We have good jobs. I'll get in touch with them. Anybody in particular?

    Mrs. Cheryl Gallant: Who is it now? We may have to wait till after the election to find that out. What about physicians, doctors? Do we at present have professionals, medical professionals for example, who are still interested in being a part of the reserves?

    MGen Edward Fitch: Yes, we do. The medical reserve is just in excess of about 1,000 now. Again, it's going outside my domain. The medical reserve has been separated from the army reserve. There are many professionals in there. I've met a number of them myself.

    Again, they're busy people with very full lives, often high-wage-earners. In their civilian life they're earning much more than we can pay them, but they want to serve their country. They will make the time.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: Adventure.

    MGen Edward Fitch: The sense of adventure, vous l'avez expérimenté vous-même, monsieur. That's for sure. That's a great attractant.

    Mrs. Cheryl Gallant: Thank you.

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric): Mr. Bachand.

[Translation]

    Mr. Claude Bachand: I'd like to get back to the supplementary tasks you referred to. Would it be a separate corps, specialized in nuclear, biological and chemical defence, within the reserve? Or would you want to train all reservists, create a new job description and add to their current duties?

    MGen Edward Fitch: That's a very good example, perhaps the best, of a capacity which could serve two purposes. We're considering the creation of a group of nuclear, biological and chemical defence specialists within the reserve, or NBCD. The equivalent expression, for civilians, is rather chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear, but regardless, you're dealing with more or less the same capabilities. We need them within the military, for expeditionary operations, to protect our troops overseas. The same capabilities, within the country, are available for homeland operations. They could support first responders, municipally, within militia units that they would be working with. These people train for expeditionary operations, but they can also train with municipal resources and support them in emergencies.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: So it's a specialized corps, and not new training for all reservists.

    MGen Edward Fitch: We want a specialized corps, indeed.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: Now, I heard that the central sector and Quebec sector were drawing up plans to prepare for that type of an attack.

    Are you aware of plans underway?

    MGen Edward Fitch: It's a test to prove our concept. The question remains: can a reservist, a part-time soldier, acquire and maintain the necessary capabilities? So, we're setting up a demonstration. We hope to do it here, in the Ottawa region, in the fall. There are about 30 individuals from the Quebec sector, including some from the Hull Regiment, about 30 from the central sector, including some Governor General's Foot Guards, that we want trained and equipped to demonstrate their ability to learn and maintain, as I've said, certain capabilities.

    If this test is successful, perhaps someone will say that it's a good thing, that there should be more and that money should be spent to create 20 or 30 teams, instead of just one, for instance.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: I would appreciate your inviting the national defence committee to the demonstration. I think it's the kind of thing that is easy to organize, especially if it's in Ottawa. As far as I'm concerned, I would be interested in seeing that demonstration.

    MGen Edward Fitch: I've written that down, sir. I'd be delighted.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: Very well.

    As you said, I got to experience my own adventure with the Royal 22nd Regiment during my training and deployment in Bosnia. However, I noticed one thing. Reservists were deployed with members of the regular army, who are called the regulars, and these regulars always had a bit of an attitude towards reservists: they consider them second-class.

    Are there any plans underway to ensure that there's a genuine esprit de corps in operational theatres, so that there's no difference between a reservist and a regular army member? I didn't go to many training camps, etc., but for the short time I was there, I noticed they considered that the reservists weren't as good as they were.

    MGen Edward Fitch: I can't tell you that the attitude you describe no longer exists among any members of the regular forces, but things have improved a great deal in the past 10 years. What has happened in the past 10 years is that the Canadian Forces have been involved in many more operations than ever before, since the Korean war. And in those 10 years of operations in Croatia, Bosnia, Somalia and other places, we have used thousands of reservists and tens of thousands of members of the regular forces. They have served together in all those places, and in any case as soon as they wear a helmet and body armour it's very difficult to distinguish among reservists and regular forces. This has been noted by commanders of units that included reservists and regular forces during operations. They are very satisfied with the reservists, and more and more of our regular forces have seen for themselves that reservists, once their training for the mission is completed, are just as capable as their colleagues from the regular forces. The result has been that some attitudes, like the attitude of considering reservists as second-class military personnel, are disappearing.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: Do I have more time?

º  (1620)  

[English]

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric): Yes, go ahead.

[Translation]

    Mr. Claude Bachand: I remember that there are battalions, sections and something else as well, but I forget the term. Can you help me here? There are...

    MGen Edward Fitch: There are companies, sections, platoons, and battalions.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: Are there three sections in a platoon?

    MGen Edward Fitch: In English, yes.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: I see.

    MGen Edward Fitch: This is where the confusion stems from : in France's land army, what we call a platoon—a group of 30 to 34 people—they call a section.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: I see.

    MGen Edward Fitch: It's bound to confuse people.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: But here in Canada, a platoon is a group of 30, and a section is a group of 10.

    MGen Edward Fitch: That is correct.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: Did I see sections of reservists doing training exercises with the regular forces, or am I wrong?

    MGen Edward Fitch: That is quite possible.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: That might be where we should change things. Perhaps we should include reservists in every section, rather than keeping them in separate sections.

    I don't want to say anything against them or yourself, but I've seen the difference between regular forces and reservists in target shooting during exercises. The people from the regular forces appear to shoot much better than reservists. I don't want to blame reservists. They probably do a lot less shooting than regular forces personnel.

    But when we have that kind of discrimination, and when we send two sections out to the range—frequently, dignitaries like us are there to watch—and we see the reserve section take a turn, we see the difference.

    Could these groups not be integrated, in an attempt to create the kind of esprit de corps that we need?

    MGen Edward Fitch: You saw what you saw, and I cannot deny it happened. However, I have seen the opposite as well.

    What you suggest is how we used to do things. We would take reservists individually and include them in platoons of the regular forces. What happened then is that reservists became the second-class soldiers. They never acquired the experience within a section or platoon to learn command.

    What we have done recently is included complete sections, then platoons, then companies. Three or four times now, we have sent out companies made up entirely of reservists. The reservists come back and are extremely proud, because they are part of their own subunit, with their own reserve officers in command. This gives them enormous confidence.

[English]

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric): Mr. Calder.

    Mr. Murray Calder (Dufferin—Peel—Wellington—Grey, Lib.): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

    Actually, Mr. Bachand has delved into some of the things I wanted to talk about, so I'm going to switch gears here and go another way.

    For the last two years I've been involved with making employers more informed on what the reserves are all about. When reservists come and ask for time off work for training, in fact they have a working knowledge of what they're asking for. They're not going out and partying someplace.

    Could you give us an update on how the program is working? Could you give any suggestions to this committee on how we could improve the program?

º  (1625)  

    MGen Edward Fitch: I would mention for the committee that you're referring to the work of the Canadian Forces Liaison Council, led by Mr. Eaton.

    Mr. Murray Calder: That's right.

    MGen Edward Fitch: We're very blessed. They're a wonderful group of very influential employers, who come together and pass on the word, exactly as you said, and persuade companies to support reservists within their organizations. It's a way for a company to contribute to the defence of the nation, but they also get people who are more mature, better organized, and more self-disciplined. There are many benefits that come back to the organization. The CFLC carries on, and they're doing wonderful work.

    I find it exciting that we're now in the process of extending it not only to employers, but to post-secondary education institutions, colleges, and universities that clearly are highly concentrated pools of very high-quality potential recruits. The same kinds of benefits come to them. Universities don't pay their students, but think of the employer as someone who occupies their daytime hours, and we want them on evenings and weekends.

    We've now signed a partnership between the Atlantic area and Mount Allison University in Sackville, New Brunswick, particularly with the 8th Canadian Hussars and 1st Battalion, Nova Scotia Highlanders.

    That's the model. We want to replicate it across the country. In fact, the birth of that idea is very much the thinking of our former defence minister, John McCallum. It looks very promising indeed for the same CFLC approach to now be extended more broadly across the country.

    Mr. Murray Calder: It sounds great, because I am also a product of the cadet program back in the 1960s.

    Have you considered bringing in, for instance, the chamber of commerce and incorporating them in this? Within my own riding, I have two chambers. We've done a stint up at Base Borden to let them see the policing aspect of it. When we had one of the frigates down in Toronto, we took them out on it and that kind of thing.

    MGen Edward Fitch: We do. I've participated. I've been to speak to the chamber of commerce in Toronto—I think it's called the board of trade—and a couple of others. It escapes me for the moment. It's part of our outreach and it's part of our approach for a wider connection with Canadians.

    Yes, I see your point. There's a group of employers. To get a whole group, rather than going to them individually, I'll transmit that to CFLC.

    Mr. Murray Calder: What I find--and I think this would be something the regular forces could be involved in too--is there is a perception within the country that the Canadian military is on its last legs, which, as far as I'm concerned, is not an accurate perception. Since I've started embarking on this, in the different businesses that I've taken and shown the type and class of equipment that we do have within the forces, they're saying “Wait a minute here. This is not what I thought I was going to see. This is state-of-the art equipment.”

    Can you think of a way this committee could help to increase that interaction--that you have a closer contact with the military and you have a better working knowledge of the military?

    MGen Edward Fitch: Personally, I think just the fact that this committee sits and takes such an interest in the military is a form of leadership that's very important to us. But you all come from ridings where you influence many hundreds of thousands of Canadians, and we'd be grateful for your support.

    Mr. Murray Calder: Okay.

    Thanks, Mr. Chair.

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric): We'll go back to five minutes.

    Ms. Gallant.

    Mrs. Cheryl Gallant: Mr. Chairman, to the witness, are you aware of any benefit that American companies receive from their government as a result of having in their employ military personnel? For example, when they're called to duty all of a sudden, if it's a large company they can be faced with many spaces that have to be filled. Is there any type of compensation, be it tax consideration, pay to hire somebody else that they receive that we do not?

º  (1630)  

    MGen Edward Fitch: I'm sorry, I'm not an expert in American legislation. They have legislation dealing with reservists and employers, but whether the employer gets a compensation, I don't know. There is analogous legislation in the United Kingdom, and in some cases companies can get compensation, but they're compelling reservists to serve, both in the U.K. and in the U.S. Canada does not do that. In fact, we've only done it twice in our history. I suppose in the early years, when the bell rang you grabbed your rifle and you came, and I guess you felt you were compelled.

    I'm sorry, I don't have good knowledge of that legislation.

    Mrs. Cheryl Gallant: Thank you.

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric): Mr. Bachand.

[Translation]

    Mr. Claude Bachand: In the same vein, what if I told you that the government was preparing to enact legislation that would require employers to release members of the reserves?

    Do you think such legislation would be useful?

    MGen Edward Fitch: In peace time, I would say no, because measures like persuasion yield a sufficient number of reservists. Perhaps someone would like to do a stint outside the country, as you did in Bosnia, but cannot because of his or her job. However, we don't need to seek out these people because we have enough others who volunteer.

    But in a crisis situation, if we needed more reserves than the volunteers we had, then we might have to institute some compensation measures to require them to serve. We are beginning to look into this.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: So you believe that this is less important in peacetime. If a world war broke out, or there was a major event, employers would no doubt be required to release the reserves. But there is another problem; sometimes, they refuse to rehire them when they come back.

    That is why I have always believed that Parliament should enact legislation requiring an employer to release a member of the reserve forces who is called up for deployment, then to rehire him when he comes back with no loss of seniority.

    I understand that this does represent some cost to companies. It is more difficult.

    MGen Edward Fitch: We might extrapolate from a real case I have come across. When there was flooding around Winnipeg, large numbers of reservists showed up—they had neither been called nor required to report for duty. But can you see even one employer refusing to allow an employee in the reserves to go fill sand bags to stop the water! I don't think any employer would have refused. And any employer who would have refused to rehire the reservists on their return—the reservists who contributed to saving the city—would not have done much business after that.

    Internally, this is rarely a problem.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman.

[English]

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric): Thank you.

    Mr. O'Reilly.

    Mr. John O'Reilly: I wasn't sure, but if a reservist is called up in Canada, does the job protection that was offered under Bill C-7—now Bill C-17—not apply in Canada? It only applies on a....

    MGen Edward Fitch: We've had a close look at Bill C-17, and the wording is very clear. Allow me to use a colloquial term, but it would apply in an armed emergency, but if it is a natural disaster, Bill C-17 does not address job protection for reservists. The last time I heard, the bill was still in the Senate and not yet enacted. We'd sure love to see that definition of emergency expanded.

    Mr. John O'Reilly: I was co-chair of that bill when it was going through the House. It wasn't a regular committee of the House of Commons, but a legislative committee. I thought that it did include a radioactive, chemical, and biological call-up in Canada. I'll look at it and see....

    MGen Edward Fitch: For instance, if the disaster were a chemical spill.... I'm quite sure that it would require troops in an armed mode to qualify, because it talks about “insurrection” and rebellion, and those kinds of words.

    It does not apply, as far as we could tell, to naturally occurring events.

º  (1635)  

    Mr. John O'Reilly: That's not the information I had, but I'll check into it.

    MGen Edward Fitch: Sir, if you could fix that, we'd be delighted.

    Mr. John O'Reilly: I won't fix it, but I'll find out, because I was sure that it was told to us in the hearings, that if in fact there were a chemical or biological attack, or an attack on an institution in Canada, and there were a call-up—

    MGen Edward Fitch: If there's an attack—

    Mr. John O'Reilly: But an attack could be a chemical attack or a biological attack. An attack, as you and I think about it, may have changed.

    MGen Edward Fitch: We'd have to sit down with a couple of lawyers, I think, to sort that out.

    Mr. John O'Reilly: That would be dangerous.

    The other thing is the bonus system, which Madam Gallant brought up. There is a bonus system in the United States, but it varies from company to company. I think it's a good thing and a bad thing, because you have to be called up to get the bonus. When you're called up, you're usually sent away, but some companies do offer bonuses to people who are in the national guard or the home guard.

    MGen Edward Fitch: So it's initiated by the company itself?

    Mr. John O'Reilly: Yes.

    I have experience with that. I was employed in California at one time, until I found out that I was eligible for Vietnam. The good thing was that you got a bonus for going; the bad thing was that you might end up in Vietnam, so I didn't go. So there is that type of thing going on.

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric): Thank you.

    Are there any further questions?

    Mrs. Cheryl Gallant: I found it interesting that my Bloc colleague was inferring that perhaps conscription for our reserves in a time of need might be in order.

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric): Let's not get into that.

    I just have a brief question, Major-General. You mentioned in your opening remarks that you would need more money. Could you be a little bit more--

    MGen Edward Fitch: I'm sorry, what was that about money, sir?

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric): You said that you would need more money. Could you be a little bit more specific? Would the money be for equipment or training?

    MGen Edward Fitch: Actually both.

    You know, in this world, you get what you pay for. If Canada wants a larger army reserve—and that's the question—you can't knit it out of thin air. I didn't bring this data with me, but we can tell you how much soldiers get paid, what their equipment costs, how much it is to put fuel in the trucks. These are real costs.

    So we're happy to do your bidding. If you want more, by all means--we know how to grow them. But somebody has to pay the bills.

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric): Usually it's the taxpayers.

    MGen Edward Fitch: Absolutely, and I'm one as well, sir.

[Translation]

    Mr. Claude Bachand: There's someone called Drapeau, everyone knows him, and I'm sure you know him as well.

    MGen Edward Fitch: Jean Drapeau, the former mayor...?

    M. Claude Bachand: No, not the mayor.

    MGen Edward Fitch: I don't know any other Drapeau.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: I'm talking about Mr. Drapeau, the retired colonel who claims that, out of the 60,000 current members of the Canadian Forces, only 7,000 are actually ready enough to perform in the theatre of operations. The rest of the army he considers to be a very, very cumbersome bureaucracy.

    In your view, among the people who are not deployed to theatres of operation, could some be recycled so that greater numbers could be assigned to theatres?

    MGen Edward Fitch: Cutting off one's head to make one's arms stronger is not a useful act. The head still has to function.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: Yes, but let's say that the head may be a bit swollen. The U.S. army has one general for every 8,000 soldiers. We have one general for every 800.

    Could we not perhaps...? I don't want to take your stripes away, but the statistics are what they are.

    MGen Edward Fitch: The statistics are highly debatable, especially if they are provided by the Mr. Drapeau that I know. He chooses his statistics very selectively. He was unhappy when he left, but that is not my problem.

    Can we find other means of being more efficient? Perhaps we can. We seek to do so all the time. But the burden of administration is a heavy one, and it is a burden laid on our shoulders by the government and the Treasury Board. We carry it as best as we can, but it does take resources.

º  (1640)  

    Mr. Claude Bachand: Thank you.

[English]

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Janko Peric): Thank you.

    If there are no further questions, Colonel Meisner and Major-General, puno hvala--thank you very much.

    The meeting is adjourned.