Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Fisheries and Oceans
Issue No. 4 - Evidence - May 17, 2016
OTTAWA, Tuesday, May 17, 2016
The Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans met this day at 5:05 p.m. to study Maritime Search and Rescue activities, including current challenges and opportunities.
Senator Fabian Manning (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: My name is Fabian Manning, a senator from Newfoundland and Labrador. I am pleased to chair the meeting this evening.
Before I give the floor to our witnesses, I would invite the members of the committee to introduce themselves.
Senator Eaton: Senator Nicky Eaton from Toronto.
Senator Sinclair: I am Senator Murray Sinclair. I am not a member of the committee, just a visiting senator.
Senator Hubley: Senator Elizabeth Hubley, P.E.I.
Senator Raine: Senator Nancy Greene Raine from British Columbia.
Senator Enverga: Senator Enverga from Ontario.
Senator Stewart Olsen: Senator Stewart Olsen from New Brunswick.
Senator Munson: Senator Munson from Ontario.
The Chair: A special welcome to our new senator. This is the first opportunity for you to join our committee meeting. Maybe we will have a new member on the Fisheries Committee before it is all over.
I would like to ask our witnesses to introduce themselves and the offices they hold.
Jody Thomas, Commissioner, Canadian Coast Guard: Jody Thomas, Commissioner, Canadian Coast Guard.
Jeffery Hutchinson, Deputy Commissioner, Strategy and Shipbuilding, Canadian Coast Guard: Jeffery Hutchinson, Deputy Commissioner, Strategy and Shipbuilding, Canadian Coast Guard.
Mario Pelletier, Deputy Commissioner, Operations, Canadian Coast Guard: Mario Pelletier, Deputy Commissioner, Operations, Canadian Coast Guard.
The Chair: Thank you, witnesses. On behalf of the committee, I thank you for taking the time to join us here.
Ms. Thomas: Good afternoon, senators, and thank you for your time today. Following the remarks I will make today, we will be pleased to take your questions.
Last week you heard from senior Coast Guard officials about the current maritime search and rescue environment, about the distinct difference between ground search and rescue and maritime search and rescue, and about the strategic allocation of our resources and how we carry out search and rescue missions with our partners. I will review a few of these elements in my remarks today and elaborate on the Coast Guard's existing and emerging search and rescue partnerships and some of the important work we are undertaking in the North and across the country. I will close with examples of the good work that the men and women of the Canadian Coast Guard do each day. I am extremely proud of these professionals, and I want to thank our search and rescue specialists, and all members of the Coast Guard, for their dedication and professionalism in saving lives.
It has been nearly 18 months since I became the Commissioner of the Coast Guard. It has been an exciting and challenging time. Changing landscape has resulted in an evolving mandate for the Coast Guard.
We are replacing and updating equipment that is no longer up to the demands we place on it. The frozen North has seen traffic volumes we could not have imagined a decade ago. We are facing challenges with our icebreaking fleet. Several of our vessels are nearing the end of their operational lives, and that has a direct impact on the delivery of services.
It's not only icebreaking that causes challenges in a country surrounded on three sides by oceans. We are an organization with aging infrastructure, but with funding under review we are optimistic. Budget 2016 commitments are helping us achieve the stability we need and ensuring that the Coast Guard delivers what Canadians expect from us.
The budget, for example, commits $45.9 million to improve the dependability and efficiency of our aids to navigation and communications towers. Improvements will replace older diesel generators with clean technologies at sites across the country. This is the first major investment of new money in shore-based infrastructure in many years. This will not only improve the reliability of assets, but will bring us closer to becoming a cleaner and greener Coast Guard.
Last December, Minister Tootoo announced an important investment off Canada's West Coast with the reopening of the Kitsilano Coast Guard base. Budget 2016 brought an investment of $23.6 million, and on May 1 the base became operational. Crews have been busy responding to calls in these first few weeks, keeping Vancouver area waters safe 24-7.
The enhanced base at Kitsilano is the first of its kind, a consolidated site for search and rescue, environmental response services, emergency response training and an incident command post.
As you are also aware, the Minister of Transport tabled the Canada Transportation Act review report in Parliament in February. The report is the result of a review that concluded in December 2015. It examined Canada's transportation system and more specifically how it can continue to support competitiveness, trade and prosperity.
The review called for a strengthened and more vibrant Coast Guard with a rejuvenated fleet. I welcome all recommendations that would ensure the Coast Guard is better positioned to meet the ever-growing demands from our clients. Transport Canada is holding stakeholder consultations on the recommendations at this time.
The Coast Guard is out there 24 hours a day, seven days a week for mariners in Canadian waters. Each year, the Canadian Coast Guard search and rescue program assists more than 19,000 people in 6,000 marine search and rescue incidents. A typical day involves assisting an average of 52 people and saving 15 lives. When vessels large and small are trying to weather a storm at sea, it's the Coast Guard that is sailing into harm's way to help those in danger.
We do not perform this important work in isolation. The search and rescue system is a shared responsibility led by the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces, and it includes a myriad of partners.
The Coast Guard leads the on-water component of the SAR system. We jointly operate the three Joint Rescue Coordination Centres in Canada, which are located in Halifax, Trenton and Victoria. Halifax covers an area of some 4.7 million square kilometres that comprises of all four Atlantic provinces, the eastern half of the province of Quebec, the southern half of Baffin Island and Nunavut and the northwestern quadrant of the Atlantic Ocean.
Trenton covers more than 10 million square kilometres, the bulk of Canada's land mass, plus Hudson Bay, James Bay and the Canadian portions of the Great Lakes and the Arctic Ocean.
Finally, there is Victoria, which covers some 687,000 square kilometres off the Pacific Ocean, extending to about 600 nautical miles off Canada's west coast. This region includes the Yukon Territory.
Furthermore, we work with our Canadian Coast Guard Auxiliary, or CCGA, a Canada-wide network of 4,000-plus volunteers who reside in coastal communities and contribute vital resources to Canada's rescue efforts. These volunteers are critical in Arctic regions where local crews are highly experienced and able to respond where resources are few and far between. We have recently increased funding to the Canadian Coast Guard Auxiliary to support their immediate expansion in the Arctic. The auxiliary is now receiving an additional $500,000 annually to support their membership growth and training efforts in the North.
As a result, we're seeing real opportunities for Arctic communities and the Coast Guard for our auxiliary units. The more we explore and build these relationships, the more we recognize the great potential that exists in the Arctic areas for skilled, capable volunteers.
The Coast Guard is supporting the auxiliary in rolling out a train-the-trainer program in the North that allows flexible training options for SAR volunteers. This includes a strong mentorship element that allows trained, experienced volunteers to travel to smaller, remote communities and share their experiences in Inuktituk, working in an auxiliary SAR unit. On the West Coast, we have conducted various community-based search and rescue workshops and exercises with indigenous communities, and more are planned for the coming year.
The relationship between local indigenous communities and the Coast Guard has always been respectful and positive. We recognize these communities as true partners and we will expand these opportunities going forward.
Warming temperatures are having an impact on traffic patterns in the Arctic. It's not quite the Trans-Canada up there yet, but I can tell you that ship traffic in the Canadian Arctic is increasing as these waterways are perceived to be more accessible.
I use the word "perceived'' very deliberately. For example, the Crystal Cruises line announced its intention to sail the Crystal Serenity cruise ship through the Northwest Passage in August. The ship will sail for 32 days and will have approximately 1,000 passengers and 600 crew on board. This is not the first cruise ship to transit the Arctic, but it is certainly the largest.
We have worked with Transport Canada and the U.S. Coast Guard to plan and conduct exercises to be ready for any emergency. We know that these types of voyages have the potential to become more commonplace, and we are adapting to be as prepared as possible. While we have confidence in this ship's voyage, we are concerned about those that will follow. Not all companies and not all vessel owners will come with same level of preparedness.
On an ongoing basis the Canadian Coast Guard works with the coast guards of the six other Arctic states, in addition to the U.S., by sharing expertise and collaborating with the goal of achieving safer Arctic conditions for all those who depend on our northern marine waterways.
Another element of the changing search and rescue landscape is technology and how it's helping prevent incidents from occurring in the first place. With the national Safe Boating Awareness Week around the corner, from May 21 to 27, prevention is a timely topic and one I am personally committed to promoting as much as possible.
There are many new tools available to pleasure boaters as well as commercial ships today, from digital navigational tools to smartphone applications. Canadians have access to information they need to better plan their voyage and, ultimately, for faster and better communication between first responders and those in distress.
The CCGA's Marine Communications and Traffic Services have also been modernized across the country, providing us with cutting-edge tools. We have systems that are not only more reliable but also more flexible and adaptable. The systems, as well as the $45.9 million investment in shore-based infrastructure I mentioned earlier, allow us to continuously modernize in the years ahead, providing Canadians with a better and more reliable service.
Recently I attended an event hosted by the Navy League of Canada, an organization we are proud to work with, as we support maritime affairs and the Sea Cadets programs.
At this event, I accepted the J.J. Kinley Award on behalf of the crew of the CCGS Des Groseilliers. They were honoured for their efforts in a much-publicized SAR of two hunters that occurred in the Arctic last September. This is one recent example of the recognition our crews receive, whether it's the Kinley Award, the Governor General's Cross of Valour or a community reception in Pangnirtung to simply say thank you. Coast Guard employees are recognized for saving lives and making a difference in communities, day in and day out.
To quote the commanding officer of the Canadian Coast Guard Ship Pierre Radisson, Captain Stéphane Julien, whose crew saved a Russian helicopter pilot who went missing in the Arctic last year:
. . . we went to bed that night feeling a powerful sense of accomplishment and pride. Because, in our line of work, nothing beats saving a life. That is the ultimate reward.
To conclude, we work in a SAR system that functions due to the thousands of passionate people who go out on the water or in the air when everyone else is trying to get back in. Our country is vast, with the world's longest coastline and the greatest concentration of freshwater lakes.
The Coast Guard works seamlessly with our partners to cover 18 million square kilometres and respond to more than 6,000 search and rescue incidents per year. This requires us to strategically position our assets to ensure we go above and beyond to help Canadians in distress. I'm proud to say we achieve that each and every day.
With that, we are pleased to take your questions.
The Chair: Thank you, commissioner. I know it has been 18 months, but once again, congratulations on assuming the position of Commissioner of the Canadian Coast Guard.
I would like to add my welcome to Senator Martin from British Columbia who has decided to join us this evening, and Senator McInnis from Nova Scotia, who has also joined us.
My understanding is that Mr. Hutchinson has to leave in about 20 minutes, so if there are any questions specifically for Mr. Hutchinson, please let us know right now.
Senator Eaton: Is the Canadian Coast Guard part of the National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy?
Mr. Hutchinson: Yes.
Senator Eaton: Are there delays? Have you had to reprofile money? And do you have enough money to replace what needs replacing?
Mr. Hutchinson: Perhaps I can start with the third question first: No, we don't have enough money to replace what needs replacing. We currently have approval of just north of $7 billion, which would replace about a third of our assets.
Over time, and through our fleet renewal planning process, we will be going back to cabinet to seek more money to further fund fleet replacement.
Senator Eaton: Do you have any money reprofiled from previous years where the delay has built up?
Mr. Hutchinson: With our capital budget, we are able to carry forward 20 per cent from one year to the next. We have carried forward money using that provision. We haven't reprofiled any money in the last couple of years, since budgets and the numbers that you would be familiar with have been reset.
Senator Eaton: Have you lost money from what was originally in the National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy?
Mr. Hutchinson: No, we have not.
Senator Eaton: You were going to talk about the delay.
Mr. Hutchinson: That is actually a broad question. We do monitor projects at the specific ship level, like the fisheries science vessel, for example.
The first ship that's being built there is it not exactly on schedule, but the program of three ships is still on schedule. We do have delays within a build.
For the Coast Guard, I would say that when we talk about delay, what we are really talking about is a reordering in the build schedule that happened almost two years ago, where our polar icebreaker, for example, was put behind the joint supply ship for the navy. You could look at that as a delay in the build schedule, but in terms of the projects themselves, from the time of a construction project until now, they're generally moving as they should.
Senator Eaton: You are talking about the polar icebreaker. Is it back on a schedule, after being put behind, you can now anticipate?
Mr. Hutchinson: Generally speaking that is true. Of course, the delivery of that ship will depend on the delivery of all the ships that come before it.
The Chair: The clerk advices me that I was referring to Mr. Hutchinson as Senator Hutchinson. I am sorry about that, but there is still hope. There are openings in the Senate, just to let you know.
Mr. Hutchinson: Am I sitting in the wrong place?
Senator Raine: Deputy Commissioner Hutchinson, thank you for being here today. I am curious about the shipbuilding strategy as well. I know that there are other coast guards around the world that instead of entering into a purchase-to-own arrangement for ships are entering into long-term leases. Would that be a potential strategy for Canada to adopt in order to increase the size of our fleet with less capital-intensive operations? Is this being considered? Has it been analyzed?
Mr. Hutchinson: The strategy we have in place builds on Canada's shipbuilding strategy that has been in place for many decades and says that the government fleet will be built in Canada. That holds true for our new builds.
As we look forward, though, and as we look to our fleet requirements, say, not just in the immediate future but over the medium to longer term, we can certainly see the potential of having years where we would need interim capacity. The National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy permits for the leasing of vessels when it's done transparently and competitively. Should we develop the need for internal capacity, we would look at that as a tool, but we're not looking at long-term leasing as a means of replacing ships that we would otherwise replace through a build program.
Senator Raine: Is that because you want to design the ships specifically for Canadian use and our climate, or is there another reason you wouldn't consider leasing rather than building?
Mr. Hutchinson: When we talk about the long-term replacement of our assets, we go right back to the Canadian shipbuilding strategy which is premised partially on a strategic capacity in Canada to build ships. Certainly as you referenced, senator, there is the desire to design the ships we need, although I would note that that ability can be accomplished through a term lease arrangement or other means of acquiring ships.
Fundamentally, one of the core pillars of the National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy and the preceding strategy is that when we build ships in Canada, the economic benefits from those ships accrue to Canadians. When we talk about the ships being built in Vancouver shipyards right now, not tens of millions but hundreds of millions of dollars in contracts will be let within Canada. Under the provisions put in place by our partners at Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, previously called Industry Canada, the value of that contract will be reinvested by the shipyard in Canada.
My understanding is that the largest consideration in the range of considerations I just referred to is the economic benefit that accrues to the Canadian economy.
Ms. Thomas: Also critical in the strategy is to acknowledge the importance of vibrant shipyards to Canada. We have 117 vessels, 116 ranging from 47-foot lifeboats to the Louis S. St-Laurent, our largest icebreaker. We need to be able to repair those in Canada. We need to have shipbuilding, ship repair industry in Canada to be able to do that. Otherwise, those ships have to leave the country for refit. When you have to keep a vessel like the Louis S. St-Laurent for 50 years, it goes into refit fairly often to ensure that it can serve.
If we did not have a build-in-Canada policy where it was worth the investment for the yards to keep up their equipment and invest in new technology, it would become problematic for us to maintain the fleet. It's an additional requirement for us to have those yards and their capacity.
Senator Raine: I agree that we need shipyards in Canada and that we can build ships; but perhaps we could finance them differently so that we as investors wanting to have something in our pension fund could invest in the construction of a ship that would have a 50-year contract with the Coast Guard, thus giving us more money than we can get at the bank, which is pretty much nothing these days.
I am wondering if there have been alternate options in terms of financing these ships, even if it was stipulated that they had to be built in Canada?
Mr. Hutchinson: As I referred to earlier, we have been looking at lease options and alternate finance options for the interim capacity but not specifically for the long term replacement capacity.
I realize, senator, that you added at the end that leasing as a financing vehicle could pertain to ships built in Canada. Going back to the previous scenario, we were talking about ships built overseas. One of the challenges we run into is that ships built offshore are built in yards that are used to building to different requirements. For example, our power requirements in North America are different from the power requirements in Europe. Converting things like that can raise issues. Perhaps more importantly, when ships are built offshore, getting the parts and in-service support that we need through the life of the ship over 30 or 40 years can also be a challenge.
I take your point, though, that leasing might be a vehicle that would be available within Canada. It's not the premise of the shipbuilding strategy that we adhere to.
Senator McInnis: I apologize for being a bit tardy and not hearing their presentations and their description as to what they are responsible for. I have a question for Mr. Hutchinson.
Procurement takes a long time. You probably have DND, and Public Works and Government Services Canada, and so on. You have a renewal strategy in place, apparently. However, this process is long.
If it were Christmas and you had a wish, what would it be? What are your needs? Are you able to meet your commitments with respect to search and rescue, for example? I read some place that many of your vessels are old and that they would require layup for maintenance and so on; and there is nothing to replace them. Is that all true? If it is, how long would it take to put you on a solid footing with respect to search and rescue, for example?
Mr. Hutchinson: I'm sure my colleagues will want to participate in this answer as well.
Our view isn't that we need to wait for Christmas, with all due respect. We're preparing a fleet renewal plan that we will put in front of the government I would think before next Christmas, given our current development and analysis. If I could be granted one wish, as you have suggested, senator, it would be simply that we map out a longer-term strategy to have our fleet renewed.
It is suggested in the media from time to time that that hasn't been done. We are simply in the process of doing it. When we look forward to replacing the next classes of vessels, we're looking around the world to the best build practices available right now. We are looking to the best innovation in ship design that we can put our lands on; and we're looking to build classes of vessels that are more capable than what we currently have simply because they will be more modern and they'll have taken advantage of all the innovation in the industry that's happened in recent years. Our plan for shipbuilding in the Coast Guard is simply to make sure that we put forward ideas to the government for the most innovative vessels that we can, and when we do that, we are confident that we will be building the capacity we need for icebreaking, search and rescue, environmental response, and offshore response to vessels that get into difficulty on either search and rescue or environment. We have a plan to move that forward, and that's how we'll do it.
Senator McInnis: You should be a senator; you haven't answered part of my question. Forgive me. It has been a long day. What I'm trying to get at here is this: Are you meeting your responsibilities, and are you satisfied with the state of the vessels that you now have?
Mr. Hutchinson: We are meeting our responsibilities. We have levels of service in search and rescue. We have levels of service in icebreaking. We have levels of service in environmental response. Deputy Commissioner Pelletier can speak more specifically to those levels of service. I think we see that we will need to renew our icebreaking fleet in particular. As you've noted, our ships are getting older. We are moving forward with a plan to do that.
The Chair: Deputy Commissioner Pelletier, you wanted to respond?
Mr. Pelletier: Sure. If we put it in context, the commissioner mentioned that we have a fleet of 116 ships. Out of these 116 ships, plus or minus 40 are large ships, which are mainly covered under the National Shipbuilding Strategy.
If we look specifically at search and rescue, we operate 40 search and rescue stations, lifeboat stations, and we have a fleet of 47 vessels that move around those stations in order to deliver the service. Those vessels are fairly recent. We're building a class of 10 right now to replace some of the older ones as well. When it comes to search and rescue, we do have a fairly recent fleet. Any Coast Guard ships can respond to search and rescue, even large icebreakers. These are the ones that are referred to as older. They are more stretched, and they require more maintenance, more refit time and so on. They are the next class of ships that we want to replace as well first. As far as level of search and rescue, wherever we need to have a search and rescue vessel, we have it there. The vessels respond within 30 minutes of a SAR, and we deliver that service consistently.
When it comes to other programs, like icebreaking, if we have winters not like last winter but like the two previous winters, which were way above normal, it was a stretch to meet the level of service sometimes in those winters, but, again, then the question becomes, do we want to have a Coast Guard fleet that can respond to the extreme situation or the average situation? That's a discussion that we can have.
Senator McInnis: Anything I have ever heard over the years has been nothing but positive with respect to the Canadian Coast Guard and some of the things that you do, but the challenge of our committee is to uncover or determine any difficulties or challenges you may have. That's the reasoning for the questioning. I'm taking it that there are some challenges; everything is not all rosy. Obviously, you need renewal and replacement of vessels and so on. That's the purpose.
Ms. Thomas: If I could add, there are challenges. We are a massive nation. You all know that, and it's a massive coastline. As traffic patterns change, we have search and rescue stations established in certain locations. Moving those to adjusting, changing patterns is enormously difficult. Nobody wants to lose a search and rescue station. So it means added stations, and that costs money and requires investment. We are always looking at ways that we can use the resources we have more effectively but also looking to the future to see what's going to be needed. We use a risk model to determine where we need to add to search and rescue capacity, and that model is going to be operating through the summer. We'll have some idea of where we have increased search and rescue risk because of changing traffic patterns. The Arctic is an obvious example. On the west coast of northern British Columbia, we have had some incidents off of Haida Gwaii in the last year and a half that are starting to make us wonder what we need to have for capacity in northern B.C. The other thing that is becoming apparent is that, yes, we are very good at determining what our level of service can be. We know the state of our vessels. We know the shape they are in. We know the number of ship days we can deliver every year. We are meeting our levels of service, but what is happening, especially with the large vessels, icebreaking in particular, is that client demand is outstripping what we can provide. So there is the desire to have vessels moving in and out of Canadian waters year-round, to have ferries moving year-round. Ferries that used to be seasonal are now year-round, but the Coast Guard fleet has stayed the same or decreased, over the last few years, because of downtime of vessels, aging infrastructure, refit, vessel life extensions, all money that has been very much appreciated for us to be able to extend the life of these vessels but has meant that we have lost about the equivalent of five ship years of time.
We are meeting our level of service. Are we meeting demand? That's a slightly different question because demand is increasing. Vessels are in the Arctic longer. We are in the Arctic the same amount of time we were. So they are waiting for us at the ice edge when we get up there in the spring, and we are shooing them out of the Arctic in the winter because they want to be up there longer and longer. Vessels want to move through the St. Lawrence and keep the seaway open longer every year. That is where the critical nature is in terms of number of vessels we have.
Senator McInnis: I was just going to comment that I was amazed at the number of bases and stations that you have. I have a list of them here. It is staggering. I don't know how you keep control really.
Ms. Thomas: The stations are primarily small lifeboat stations. So we try to position them so that we can provide the greatest and broadest SAR coverage with Coast Guard assets. Then, of course, we rely on the auxiliary. It is a vast coastline.
Mr. Hutchinson: If I might add one thought to what the commissioner has just shared, it might be worth noting that, as to those lifeboat stations, which are, as you've noted, senator, extensive throughout the country, the average life of those vessels is much lower than what we talk about when we talk about our 43 large vessels, and we are replacing a good number of those vessels over the next few years. For example, by 2022, we will have replaced 12 more of those vessels. I just wanted to clarify that, when we are talking about search and rescue specifically, the average age of those inshore lifeboats is much lower than our large vessel fleet.
The Chair: Senator Sinclair, is your question for the deputy commissioner?
Senator Sinclair: Yes.
The Chair: Because he only has a few more moments left.
Senator Sinclair: I want to begin by thanking you, commissioner, for your presentation and also to just mention in passing that one year, a few years ago, two of the people you saved were good friends of mine. So I thank you for that.
To pick up on a question that was asked earlier — and maybe you have answered it — are you able to say whether any search and rescue operation has ever been compromised because of fleet inadequacy or ship inadequacy?
Mr. Pelletier: I don't recall any incidents where we had a vessel that broke down during a search and rescue operation. We might have had some mishaps where a toeing line could have gotten caught in the propeller. These are things that will happen during operation. I cannot recall any incidents where we could not go out as a result of a breakdown.
Senator Sinclair: I had a question about other technologies for search and rescue. I assume that wouldn't be for the commissioner.
Ms. Thomas: Any of us.
Senator Sinclair: Then I will ask it later.
The Chair: Thank you very much. Deputy commissioner, you are free to go whenever you wish. Thank you for being on a bit of a hot spot there for a few moments.
Ms. Thomas: He'll try to get back.
The Chair: Yes, thank you very much. We will go to our deputy chair now, Senator Hubley. Thank you for your cooperation, senator, in accommodating the deputy commissioner.
Senator Hubley: Thank you very much, and thank you for being here. As you know, an ongoing concern for the Canadian Coast Guard has been a shortage of human resources. This committee recommended, in reports from 2008 and 2009, that the Coast Guard develop a long-term human resource strategy. The Auditor General's report in the spring of 2013 on the federal search and rescue activities also pointed to the availability of trained personnel.
You have certainly informed us on the demand, that the demand is increasing and that you are increasing your support to the auxiliary volunteers. But how has the Coast Guard been responding to the shortage of human resources, and have you undertaken any specific recruiting initiatives?
Ms. Thomas: I'll start, and I'm sure Mr. Pelletier will want to weigh in.
We are competing with private industry, the navy and the offshore for the same group of people who are interested in this kind of life. There is an educational requirement, a professional certification requirement, and then there is a desire to go to sea. So we are not recruiting from the general population; it is a very specific group of people who are interested in working in an environment like the Coast Guard.
We are first responders. We ask a lot of our people, so we do have to have specific recruitment strategies.
They all begin the Canadian Coast Guard College. It's a jewel of an institution in Cape Breton, in North Sydney. Five years ago, we invested a lot of money in a recruitment program to try to increase interest in the college. We haven't been as aggressive as we would have liked, but we are revitalizing that effort in order to attract high school students and other people who have an interest in joining the Coast Guard and beginning their career with us and continuing their career through the Coast Guard.
We also recruit from private maritime institutions, and we are finding that as other industries are experiencing a bit of a downturn, people are now interested in the Coast Guard, because they have the technical skills that we use.
It is a constant effort, and our strategic HR plan is not developed to the point where I would like it to be. A focus for this fiscal year is to have that five-year look at what we need, who is leading the Coast Guard and where we will have to backfill and start to develop capacity.
Most specifically, as Deputy Commissioner Pelletier and I discuss constantly, is the issue of our large-vessel commanding officers. We have a certain generation that is now, within the next five years, going to turn over almost completely. How do we ensure that we have that cadre of people who are trained, developed, certified and who have the experience to take those very large ships to sea in the Arctic? When you are talking about a commanding officer who has to take the Louis S. St-Laurent to the North Pole, potentially, on their own, you have to ensure you have a well-trained individual in command of that vessel.
Furthermore, we have challenges getting those very qualified people, once we get them trained and at sea, coming ashore and adding their experience to our shore-based management. So we're working with commanding officers and our assistant commissioners in the regions, as well as our bargaining agents, on how we are going to do just that and have a rotation of people so that we're constantly renewing our leadership cadre.
Senator Hubley: Is there a competitive pay issue here? When you are hiring, do they fall into different categories with different pay specified for each of those — I guess different jobs that they would be doing?
Ms. Thomas: Absolutely. The Coast Guard is not just one entity. There is a myriad of jobs, classifications and bargaining agents. Our officers are paid, to start, at the same level, and then they're paid advances depending on seniority and the certifications they have. The same is true in other classifications and job groups within the Coast Guard.
We do have a competitive problem if you look at straight hourly wages, but if you look at total compensation, including pension, Coast Guard does better on the whole in terms of job stability and long-term benefits. That's not always appealing to the 25-year-old, who thinks that the $100 an hour looks better than the $50 an hour in the immediate. But in terms of career total compensation, the Coast Guard is competitive.
Senator Martin: I am just coming in today on this study, so forgive me if I'm a little off-topic, but building on what Senator Hubley was asking, the cadets program really seems to be a good starting ground for those who would be interested in furthering military training, college, et cetera. Do you have any links with them in terms of recruitment?
Ms. Thomas: I'll get Mr. Pelletier to also expand upon this. We have links with cadet corps in the Navy League across the country, and we offer ride-along programs to come and see experiences for sea cadets and Navy League cadets to experience the Coast Guard. We just finished one over the March break on the West Coast that was highly successful.
When we see that someone has been a sea cadet and are applying to go to the Coast Guard College or come into the Coast Guard, it is certainly a résumé we pay more attention to. You have an individual who wants to be at sea, has a love of the marine life and has some experience. So they are coming in with a different idea and a different level of training than the average high school student. That is not to say that we don't want to see the average high school student as well, but our relationship with the Navy League and sea cadets is a robust one.
Senator Martin: Knowing it is competitive to find the right or attract the right people, do you have incentives that are comparable? What would attract a young person to go into the Canadian Coast Guard versus the navy?
Ms. Thomas: The young people we attract generally don't want to be in armed conflict. They want a different type of service. They want to be involved in environmental response, search and rescue, and they want to go to the Arctic and serve on icebreakers.
We have a lot of reservists who are in the Coast Guard, and we have links between the Armed Forces and ourselves. It tends to be personal preference about the type of service you want to give to the country as opposed to different individuals.
Senator Martin: Lastly, I think that's a really important point, but in terms of your work with the schools — because I'm a former educator, and I have to admit that I hear a lot of students talking about wanting to go into the navy or the Canadian military, but I can't recall a student talking about pursuing a career in the Coast Guard. So I'm wondering about your presentation in the curriculum or in the schools.
Ms. Thomas: We don't have the presence we would like in high schools, and we certainly don't have the recruiting machine that the Canadian Armed Forces has, because the CAF is all three branches, not just the navy. They are a massive machine, and we are a small institution.
A lot of the interest in the Coast Guard College has been word of mouth and in some local schools where previous students have had success. We are using aggressive Twitter and social media campaigns to interest young people in our college.
It's a four-year education. It is a guaranteed job at the end. You end up with a university degree from the University of Cape Breton, a diploma from the Coast Guard College as well as your Transport Canada certifications. Therefore, you can walk into a career.
We don't have the machine to recruit that DND does, but we are finding that there is growing interest in the Coast Guard College, and we are using social media more and more to be able to attract people.
Senator Martin: Even in today's session, I have learned a lot about what you offer. I think continuing to do that will help in the human resources issue.
Ms. Thomas: It will. Deputy Commissioner Pelletier went to the Coast Guard College, and he's always happy to speak about what a valuable experience that was.
Senator Martin: And I'm sure the study will help, as well.
Senator Eaton: Commissioner, there are three Joint Rescue Coordination Centres in Canada: Halifax, Trenton and Victoria. Would you like to have a fourth and a fifth? Would you prefer to have one in Churchill, perhaps, or in the North somewhere like northern Labrador?
Would that make the operations easier? Do you look to that in the future?
Ms. Thomas: There are three Joint Rescue Coordination Centres, and there is a small marine subcentre in Quebec City that manages a portion of the seaway where a majority of the vessels go through. Our pilots all speak French, where the majority of the people who need to speak to a rescue centre need to be served in both languages.
We find that the system with the three rescue centres is very effective. The Canadian rescue system with the three joint rescue centres is a world model because we have the marine coordinators and the air coordinators in the same centre. They coordinate searches in vast areas of the country, but they know the areas, local stations and the assets very well; so they know the MCTS people, who often will do the communication about a search and rescue with us.
It functions really well, having air and marine side by side, because the country is so large that you're not going to deploy an asset into Hudson Bay or the North Atlantic without aerial top cover looking for whatever is there.
Senator Eaton: Obviously, if you are in Trenton and you have to do a search and rescue at the top of Churchill, you have assets there.
Ms. Thomas: We have auxiliary assets and vessels of opportunity. We may have a Coast Guard asset, and certainly the air force has assets. Deputy Commissioner Pelletier, when he was the Assistant Commissioner for Central and Arctic Region, was responsible for that specific area and can talk to you about how well that functions.
Mr. Pelletier: It's very important you mentioned the joint aspect, the air and marine coordinators and sitting down together and supporting each other, as mentioned is a model that is recognized worldwide. It is very efficient.
At the end of the day, at the JRCC, they are coordinating the effort. The on-water or air response is done through a number of assets that are spread out across the country. Where they are coordinated from becomes —
Senator Eaton: Moot. It's not important.
Mr. Pelletier: Exactly. The technology is there. They have eyes and can see and hear what is happening. It is on- water and in-air assets that matter.
Senator Eaton: Thank you. That explains it very well.
When we talk about the Arctic, it is still such a romantic concept for all of us. It is so pristine and beautiful. When you talk about the Crystal Cruises line going through with 1,000 people and 600 crew, all I can think about is the garbage and the environmental impact. If we get more and more cruise lines going through there, what do we do to prevent environmental damage to the still-pristine area?
Ms. Thomas: It is absolutely true that the Arctic is pristine, and it has a very sensitive and fragile ecosystem, quite different from anywhere else in the country.
Senator Eaton: In the world.
Ms. Thomas: Absolutely. The expectations of vessels transiting the Arctic, and the demands put on them by Transport Canada in terms of the regulatory standards they need to meet, are very high. Garbage, grey water, black water, all of those things are self-contained within the vessel. They need to be. That is not as big a concern as a potential accident.
In the case of the Crystal Serenity, they are being escorted by an icebreaker in order to ensure they don't get into difficulty. Their track has been preapproved, so we know where they are going and that it is a safe track for them. Every aspect of this voyage will be monitored closely.
The polluter-pay system or polluter responsibility system that environmental response operates under in Canada means they have to be able to respond should they have an environmental accident. Coast Guard would go monitor and respond if we need to, but that vessel has to be able to manage its own pollution should there be an incident.
The majority of our effort is on ensuring that there is not an incident that would require an environmental response, but they are equipped to manage any pollution they could cause.
Senator Eaton: Any ship that follows will have the same regulations?
Ms. Thomas: They will have the same regulations, but whether they put the same care into their planning, we can't say. This company has been planning this cruise for many years, working with the U.S. Coast Guard, us and Transport Canada. We would hope that the same care and attention would be given by other companies should they choose to transit. We can't say they have to have their own icebreaker escort, as an example.
Senator Eaton: So nobody controls the waters up there?
Ms. Thomas: Well, it depends on how you use the world "control.'' We manage where people go and give them ice routes they have to follow. We tell them when they can enter and not enter, and we tell them if they can't go any further. One of the conditions of the Crystal Serenity cruise is that if we determine the ice is too heavy and it is not safe to proceed, they would not proceed through a certain area. They would have to wait or potentially turn around.
The Chair: Is that their own icebreaker?
Ms. Thomas: Yes. They have contracted an icebreaker.
Mr. Pelletier: That ship acts as a shepherd ship. All emergency equipment is on board, too, so if they have a failure or a problem then they have helicopter capacity and emergency equipment on that ship as well. At the end of the day, if they require an escort, obviously it will be there. But depending on the ice regime up North, and depending on the ice condition, that may require a Coast Guard escort, or it might just require denial to entry into certain zones in the Arctic.
Senator Stewart Olsen: You mention environmental response. Is that a new service that you are being asked to do, or where did that come from?
Ms. Thomas: We've always had an environmental response program. I would say that the demands on it are increasing, and it is because of the regime that exists in Canada that the polluter is responsible to pay. It is a program that is under strain financially. It is not funded to respond.
If we respond to a vessel and the owner is unable to pay, we have to go to something called the Ship-source Oil Pollution Fund to recoup our costs. We rarely recoup 100 per cent. We do it because it is what we do; it is our mandate. But in every response there is a large probability we won't recover the full cost of cleaning up after a vessel.
Derelict vessels are a big issue in this country. Owners are either unknown or just refuse to pay because it is very easy to walk away from a vessel, unfortunately. In those cases, it becomes difficult for us to recoup our costs because the Ship-source Oil Pollution Fund will pay us to clean a vessel of hydrocarbons, but there are many other pollutants that need to be removed. When we are there, we try to clean it up completely. It becomes a money-losing proposition for us to do the right thing.
Senator Stewart Olsen: I see that you are spread across many different areas, and I worry about that.
You have what looks like a lot of money, $45.9 million and then another $23 million. I wonder about the clean technology and the greener Coast Guard. Now, did you get the extra funds because you will promise to be a lot greener? What I'm worried about is this: Are you trying to manage refitting and redoing your vessels and having to use unproven technology or greener than everyone else? Are you playing with words in order to keep your complement up to snuff?
Ms. Thomas: The money we received in Budget 2016, the $45.5 million specifically for infrastructure funding, isn't going to vessels; it's going to our shore-based infrastructure — so towers that host receivers and transmitters for the communications infrastructure, light stations, aids to navigation — and what we're trying to do is replace old, inefficient polluting diesel generators with newer, better technology, and in some places green technology using solar technology to power those aids to navigation. It is cost-effective.
Senator Stewart Olsen: It's cost-effective technology, but is it proven?
Ms. Thomas: It is proven technology. We have used it in locations already, and this is just a continuation of the program.
Senator Stewart Olsen: But that amount of money for your shore installations doesn't impact on your shipbuilding and refurbishing?
Ms. Thomas: Right.
Senator McInnis: One of your mandates is to ensure Canada's sovereignty and security by establishing a strong federal presence in our waters.
I am wondering about the North. How do you establish a strong presence up there? Do you put buoys out? A scientific exploration, I suppose, and mapping? Is that the type of thing that you do in terms of showing our presence?
Do we actually know — I presume we do — where the boundaries are? Because there's another small country called Russia that thinks that they have some property up there.
Could you explain that to us?
Ms. Thomas: Some of those questions would be better answered by Global Affairs Canada and the people who are doing the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea submission on behalf of Canada, in terms of the mapping of the Arctic.
How do we show sovereignty and how do we define it? Through a number of programs: First, we have six ice breakers in the Arctic every summer showing presence. Red and white is seen and is known. We add to sovereignty and security by resupply. We ensure food security and the resupply of communities by private sector companies, but we break the ice to make sure they can get in. As our own minister says, when an icebreaker slows up in Iqaluit, it's summer because it means new supplies are coming in and the building and construction season can start.
We have been to the North Pole the last two summers as part of the mapping exercise. The Canadian Coast Guard ships Louis S. St-Laurent and Terry Fox have been to the Arctic and the North Pole. That is quite an extraordinary feat. It says that we are an Arctic nation and have the capacity to be in all areas of the Canadian Arctic. We are mapping constantly. Wherever our vessels go they have single-beam scanners, and some have multi-beam scanners, so we are constantly taking tracks of the ocean bottom as well as doing specific hydrographic surveys.
The finding of the Erebus, which was found by the Sir Wilfrid Laurier, a Canadian Coast Guard ship with a Canadian hydrographic survey launch, is further evidence of our role in defining Canadian sovereignty.
Senator McInnis: On an entirely different point, if I may, as you probably are aware, Atlantic Canada has 40,000 kilometres of coastline.
I counted 46 search and rescue vessels in the list there, of which 12 were in Atlantic Canada. Am I accurate, and is that sufficient?
Mr. Pelletier: In Atlantic Canada, there are 47 search and rescue vessels, but 40 lifeboat stations. There are 12 in Atlantic Canada, some in the Gulf and some in the lower north shore.
We established those lifeboat stations based on a risk assessment. They looked at the traffic patterns, the level of historical data on accidents, and so on, and that's how locations were chosen. Each lifeboat has a certain range, and there is a bit of overlap all over the Nova Scotia coast, the Bay of Fundy and the Gulf. Those lifeboats are located in places to make sure we have overlap coverage.
Senator McInnis: So, we are good in Atlantic Canada?
Mr. Pelletier: Yes.
Ms. Thomas: We think we have good coverage for near-shore, 50 kilometres out, and our other vessels are, of course, further offshore for incidents that occur further out. There can be always be more, but we think we have mitigated risk with where we have located our stations at this current time.
Senator Enverga: Thank you for your presentation.
We were in Igloolik and people there and in Iqaluit were excited to see the Coast Guard coming. We were talking earlier about recruitment. If there is anyone I can think of that would be best suited for the climate in the Arctic, it would be the Inuit. Have you had any success in recruiting them?
Ms. Thomas: We are very pleased that we just this year started a partnership with the college in Iqaluit to help us recruit students from their training program into the Coast Guard, and to partner with them to help develop their nautical marine training program. Through an exchange of instructors and students, they can come down and use our simulators and work with our instructors, and we can go up and work with them.
The goal of our Marine Communications Traffic and Services Centre is to recruit locally, as that becomes a year- round station. Previously it has run for six months of the year; southerners would go up, staff the station and then leave. There will be a time — I'm not predicting when — over the next 5 to 10 years when that will be open year-round and we will want to ensure we have hired people locally to work in that station.
Senator Enverga: That's great. You have a large area of sea to cover. You said that the ships and hardware are adequate for your use at this time. However, I have been reading that three years ago the Auditor General noted that the information management system for search and rescue cases does not adequately support the operational requirements. Has this been rectified? Is this part of the $45.9 million that you have received?
Ms. Thomas: It's not part of the money we received. That system is maintained by the Department of National Defence. We co-manage a SAR operational governance committee with DND: Deputy Commissioner Pelletier, with a rear admiral from the navy who works at Joint Operations Command, co-chair a committee that looks at all the requirements for search and rescue and how we, DND and the Canadian Forces work together in SAR. Looking at that system is on the to-do list.
Mr. Pelletier: It is being updated as we speak. I don't think it has been deployed.
Ms. Thomas: It has not been deployed yet, but through this joint operations committee we are able to check off the list of things that need to be done for the two organizations — the Coast Guard and the Armed Forces — to work more effectively in search-and-rescue.
Senator Enverga: The report states that it is near the breaking point, so I'm glad that someone is working on it as we speak. Is that what you are saying?
Mr. Pelletier: Yes. That committee allows us to focus on it and set priorities. This is one system that has been used. We have other systems that do drift patterns when we receive a report, and it takes into consideration the environmental conditions, the current and everything else. We can estimate the drift and go directly to the location, as opposed to starting from scratch.
There are a number of systems like this that we use. We prioritize the upgrade of those systems.
Senator Enverga: My major concern is, of course, the safety of the people who are doing the rescuing and the ones who are being rescued.
Mr. Pelletier: We talked briefly about Marine Communications and Traffic Services. They are the ears on the water, so they are the ones who quite often will get the first call when there is an incident, and they will take the information and pass it on to the Joint Rescue Coordination Centre. We did invest a lot of money on those Marine Communications and Traffic Services Centres in the last number of years.
Senator Enverga: I know you have stations all over the place. I know the range is about 50 kilometres. Let's say a call comes in from 50 kilometres away. How quickly can you get there?
Mr. Pelletier: The typical lifeboat we have at those stations is a 47-footer, and it goes 26 knots. Most of the search and rescue cases happen within 25 miles of shore, so they get there within an hour, no problem.
Senator Enverga: Within an hour?
Mr. Pelletier: Yes. By the time we receive a call, the crew has a 30-minute reaction time in which to pack up their gear and get under way. That is our level of service. Where it is and the weather condition will influence the time it takes to get to the location. They get on their way within half an hour and go as fast as they can to respond.
Senator Enverga: That is really impressive. Do you also use helicopters or just boats for you guys?
Mr. Pelletier: For us, it is boats. The aeronautical support is provided by DND. When a call comes in to the Marine Communications and Traffic Services at the Joint Rescue Coordination Centre, the air and marine coordinators get together and deploy the most efficient asset that they have available. Initially, they deploy more than enough. As they get more information, they refine the asset. Typically when a call comes in, they look at what's available — a helicopter, a SAR lifeboat and auxiliary. They deploy everything, and as more information comes in, they fine-tune the search.
Senator Enverga: I know that being processed will take only a few minutes or drowning will be faster, especially in the cold weather. If there is a wish list that you want to make it a lot faster than 45 minutes, would you like to make a request like that? Could you tell me what it would be that you would need so that the response time will be faster than what we have now?
Mr. Pelletier: We can't ask Mother Nature to change her temper.
We have the means — and, again, we talked about vessel of opportunity as well. The coordination centres have tools to know exactly what assets are out there. Quite often the closest asset to provide support could be another fishing vessel or a commercial vessel going by as well. All those assets will be diverted to the location. We could always use more Coast Guard assets on the water. Is it the right balance? Looking at the level of risk, we have achieved a pretty good, efficient system.
The Chair: Being from Newfoundland and Labrador, I wouldn't want to be aboard and do 26 knots an hour on some of the water that I see coming in off the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador sometimes, especially with the wind.
Senator Raine: I want to ask a follow-up question to the questions of Senator Eaton earlier regarding the location of the three Joint Rescue Coordination Centres and how they have divided up the country.
We were recently in Nunavik. I noticed that the Territory of Nunavik, which is in Northern Quebec, is divided with half of it under the Joint Rescue Coordination Centre in Halifax and half under Trenton. Are there any jurisdictional issues in responding through the Nunavik local governance to search and rescue when it's divided in two like that?
I looked at the map we were shown. It didn't make any sense why it didn't have the East Coast of Hudson Bay and James Bay together. I was curious as to why it's divided up that way.
Ms. Thomas: It's as simple as the country is divided into thirds with DND and the three SAR commanders — where they can deploy assets from and the range of those assets, specifically, the air assets.
I will say — and this happens most between Trenton and Halifax and less between the centre in Esquimalt and Trenton — when we look at where there's an incident, the SAR commanders and operators share assets and look at who can respond most quickly. While your response might be coordinated, for example, out of Trenton, it doesn't mean assets out of Halifax won't be requested and deployed. It's the same with our assets. When our assets are in the Arctic, it doesn't matter if they've come from Quebec City or St. John's or Halifax; they are all under the control of the Assistant Commissioner of Canadian Coast Guard Central and Arctic Region. They are deployed where they are sent. Whether it is the SAR commander from Halifax or the SAR commander from Trenton who sends them, they go. It's a very seamless operation. The line is administrative rather than operational.
Senator Raine: When I looked at the map, it was the only place that wasn't following a provincial boundary. That is why my curiosity was tweaked.
Mr. Pelletier: JRCC can task any resource on the water, whether it is a Coast Guard or a commercial vessel. They have the big picture and will task whatever needs to go. They will not bother with whether it comes from another jurisdiction. Everyone has the responsibility to respond.
Senator Raine: The land portion of search and rescue is a provincial jurisdiction. That is where the overlap between a land search and a water search could become a bit more complicated.
Ms. Thomas: They do become more complicated. The National Search and Rescue Secretariat, which has recently moved to the Department of Public Safety, is looking at all of those complexities. They would be the right people to talk about the integration of ground SAR with air and maritime SAR.
Senator Raine: Great.
Senator Sinclair: My question is about two different aspects of technology, so maybe I will put it into one and you can respond to each if you don't mind. It seems to relate to operations. It has to do with your strategy with regard to the use of or the expansion of the use of drone technology and satellite technology as part of your search and rescue operations. Could you describe that to us?
Ms. Thomas: Happily. We have just done some tests with drones. We did a test off Prescott and one off St. John's from one of our vessels this winter to look at exactly how we could use drones. It is an interesting question for us. Whatever drone technology we purchase, we would use it to help reduce the search in search and rescue so that we're only doing rescue. They can move more quickly than a helicopter with less risk to individuals in bad weather, in particular; and search and rescue rarely occurs in good weather. It expands our reach into the Arctic enormously for a multitude of functions: ice surveillance, tracks, environmental response, as well as search and rescue.
We are actively pursuing drone technology. The drone we looked at was a very expensive one. We need to do a cost- benefit analysis to determine whether we want a $3 million drone. How do we use it vis-à-vis the helicopter? Can we use smaller drones that are a little less robust but not as painful if one is lost? That work is ongoing with Transport Canada, with whom we're partnered. DND has participated in our tests, too. It is an active file.
With satellite technology, we have Satellite AIS, which is a system we use to help us to identify vessels. It's not as robust as we would like it to be at this time. There has been a problem with the contract, so we are looking at whether we renew it because it's not giving us exactly what we need right now.
The Chair: With regard to JRCC Halifax, there are some discussions ongoing in relation to the reopening of the centre in St. John's, Newfoundland. Could you enlighten us as to where that stands at the present? The question many are asking is, does reopening entail the same level of service, activity and personnel as prior to this closure?
Ms. Thomas: I will start and then ask the deputy commissioner to weigh in as he is leading the work on reopening Maritime Rescue Sub-Centre St. John's.
It was closed, and we reintegrated that function into the Joint Rescue Coordination Centre in Halifax, which works enormously efficiently. We are pursuing options with the MRSC that are a little creative and out-of-the-box to ensure that we provide the best use of money possible. We are just discussing those with Minister Tootoo now. I certainly don't want to scoop Minister Tootoo.
We have to acknowledge that time has moved on. The JRCC Halifax is working effectively; so how do we use the MRSC and other functions that we need to invest in and develop, such as environmental response, instant command and ice operations, to ensure that we have the most robust suite of services for 24-7 support in the waters around Newfoundland?
So we are looking at a number of options to ensure that we meet the commitment of Minister Tootoo's mandate letter, but also that we don't change the effectiveness of the search and rescue system that is working right now. I think we have a good plan moving forward.
Mr. Pelletier: The bottom line is that we want to improve marine safety and do so with an efficient investment. Again, we are covering all angles and getting ready to brief Minister Tootoo.
The Chair: On the Kitsilano reopening, compared to what was there prior to the closure to now, could you elaborate on that for us and compare apples to apples?
Ms. Thomas: Apples to apples, we have opened a better and bigger station. We have the same number of crew, providing the same level of service that was there previously, but we have added specifically trained specialists in environmental response, a capacity to manage large incidents out of that station, and a capacity is being developed to do training in environmental response and emergency management for our partners in the Greater Vancouver Area and also all of B.C.
We have taken what was there and made it better in response to what we see as the changing environment.
There has been a lot of press about the vessels that are there. We have an environmental response vessel, which is a pollution-response vessel, a PRV. We also have an interim vessel, which goes about 26 knots. It is a small vessel, covered for inclement weather. We are putting a temporary steel hull on the vessel. That is undergoing refit right now. I think Director General Lick mentioned that when he was here last week.
We are procuring a specialty vessel to go into that station. It won't be as big as the ones the deputy commissioner has referred to — that 47-foot. That's too big for that station, but we're looking at models around the world for what is good for an urban environment. We also have the "workhorse'' of search and rescue around the world, the rigid-hull inflatable boat — Zodiacs, they are often known as. Those have a huge capacity for speed and quick rescue. We have it, as well, in Vancouver. It was there previously, as well.
The Chair: Would the model being used in Kitsilano be something that you will look for for the St. John's rescue service centres — aspects of it?
Ms. Thomas: Aspects of it — the instant-command aspect, certainly. But the marine rescue centre in St. John's was a coordination function as opposed to an on-water response function.
The Chair: So the coordination function is now at the JRCC in Halifax?
Ms. Thomas: Yes.
Senator Enverga: Senator McInnis mentioned Russia. I heard about the Arctic Coast Guard Forum. When you look at other countries in the Arctic, do they have any tools that we don't have? Are we better off than anyone else? Are we the best in the world as far as the Coast Guard?
Ms. Thomas: We like to think we are a very good Coast Guard.
The Russian capacity in the Arctic is greater than ours. They have a huge fleet of icebreakers, including nuclear- powered icebreakers. I don't see that as being an option in Canada; it's not the way we operate.
In terms of the other countries, we have more icebreakers operating in the Arctic than the United States. We operate closely with the United States; we will be doing a joint mission with the U.S. Coast Guard icebreaker Healy in August of this year.
The other countries are smaller, with different kinds of fleets than we have, but we work interoperably with them. All eight Arctic-nation coast guards are dedicated to working together for search and rescue, environmental response and marine coordination in the Arctic.
Navies tend to be the same: You have frigates, destroyers, battleships and aircraft carriers, depending on the size of your navy. Coast guards are as different as every coast guard. There is no one model. Every single coast guard in the eight that are involved in the Arctic Coast Guard Forum is very different. Some are extensions of the armed forces; some are extensions of their border services agencies. We are part of Fisheries and Oceans.
Everyone is slightly different, but we all have overlapping mandates.
Senator Enverga: Was there any time when we would need Russia, for example, because they have a better fleet, as you stated? Was there any time that we called them and said, "Hey, comrade, come over here. We need your help.'' Was there anything like that?
Ms. Thomas: We haven't had an incident where we have needed to call them, no. However, we do have a signed search and rescue agreement with the Arctic Council countries, and we do have an environmental response agreement where we would be able to call on each other in order to respond to an emergency of any nature. We also exercise with these countries to ensure that we can respond.
The Arctic Coast Guard Forum is just getting off the ground. Mario was in Boston to sign the agreement last year. He will be going back to the Arctic Coast Guard Forum this year, and we will start to develop that exercise and joint operations agenda so that we do work with each other so that, if an incident arises, we can respond.
Senator Enverga: I am happy to know that it looks like our Coast Guard has almost everything. There is no need for any particular piece of hardware or software. Thank you for that.
The Chair: I would like to thank our witnesses this evening. It has been an interesting conversation. I think I speak for all our committee when say thank you for the service you provide to keep Canadians safe from coast to coast to coast. Coming from Newfoundland and Labrador, I understand the challenges that you face. You are never called out when Mother Nature is in a good mood; it is usually when she is on the other side of things. It's a great service.
We as a committee hope to enhance and offer recommendations to improve that service in the long term for the benefit of all Canadians. We look forward to working with you on that in the future.
Before we go, it is moved by Senator Martin that the committee move in camera, pursuant to rule 12-6, for consideration of a draft report.
Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
(The committee continued in camera.)
——————
(The committee resumed in public.)
The Chair: Is it agreed that the chair seek an order of reference that the Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans be authorized to examine and report on the regulation of aquaculture, current challenges and future prospects for the industry in Canada, that the papers and evidence received and taken and work accomplished by the committee on this subject during the first session of the Forty-first Parliament be referred to the committee, and that the committee report from time to time to the Senate and no later than June 30, 2016, and that the committee retain all powers necessary to publicize its findings for 180 days after the tabling of the final report?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you, senators. Further to the discussion of travel plans in the context of the maritime SAR study, a draft budget for a total of $260,245 has been prepared to request funds to conduct the following activities during fiscal 2016-17: fact-finding visits in Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island; Saint John, New Brunswick; Halifax, Nova Scotia; and public hearings in Halifax; and fact-finding visits in Goose Bay, Labrador; Gander and St. John's, Newfoundland; and public hearings in St. John's.
Is it agreed that the budget proposed amounting to $260,245 for the special study on maritime search and rescue for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2017, be approved for submission to the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Any questions? Thank you.
With that, I would like to adjourn the meeting.
(The committee adjourned.)