Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Fisheries and Oceans
Issue No. 6 - Evidence - September 27, 2016
OTTAWA, Tuesday, September 27, 2016
The Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans met this day at 5:10 p.m. to study Maritime Search and Rescue activities, including current challenges and opportunities.
Senator Elizabeth Hubley (Deputy Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Deputy Chair: Good evening. My name is Elizabeth Hubley, a senator from Prince Edward Island, and I am pleased to chair this evening's meeting. Before I give the floor to the witnesses, I would like to invite the members of the committee to introduce themselves, starting on my right.
Senator McInnis: Senator Thomas McInnis from Nova Scotia.
Senator Raine: Senator Nancy Greene Raine from B.C.
Senator Eaton: Nicky Eaton from Ontario.
Senator Poirier: Rose-May Poirier from New Brunswick.
Senator Enverga: Senator Tobias Enverga from Ontario.
Senator Munson: Jim Munson, Ontario.
Senator Wallace: John Wallace, New Brunswick.
Senator Sinclair: Murray Sinclair, Manitoba.
The Deputy Chair: Thank you very much. The committee is continuing its study on maritime search and rescue activities, including current challenges and opportunities. This evening we will be learning about the Canadian Coast Guard's international obligations and relations with respect to maritime SAR.
We are pleased to welcome, from the Canadian Coast Guard Mario Pelletier, Deputy Commissioner, Operations; and Gregory Lick, Director General, Operations.
On behalf of the members of the committee, I thank you for being with us today. I understand you have some opening remarks; therefore, in the interest of allowing us as much discussion as possible in the time available to us, you are requested to please limit your opening statements to no more than 10 minutes.
Mario Pelletier, Deputy Commissioner, Operations, Canadian Coast Guard: Thank you very much, Madam Chair and senators. Yes, we will keep the opening remarks very brief.
I am honoured to appear here before this committee this evening to brief you on the Canadian Coast Guard's maritime search and rescue program. Today I will speak to our role and responsibilities as they relate to international conventions and treaties and our collaboration with other countries. Following my remarks, we would be happy to answer any questions you may have.
[Translation]
In the spring, Gregory Lick, Director General of Operations, provided this committee with an overview of the Canadian Coast Guard's role in preparing for, coordinating and responding to search and rescue incidents. This included an overview of the maritime search and rescue program environment, and some of the challenges and opportunities that exist in Canada.
Canada is party to a number of international conventions and treaties that relate to maritime search and rescue. International conventions and treaties require that signatories establish appropriate search and rescue services to ensure that assistance is provided to any person in distress at sea. They form the basis for international cooperation in maritime search and rescue, standards for operating procedures and protocols, information sharing, and communications systems to ensure a robust international search and rescue system.
[English]
To provide you with a few examples, Canada is a member state of the International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue; the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, otherwise known as UNCLOS; and the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, SOLAS. These international conventions and treaties are updated and strengthened over time as a result of technological changes and lessons learned from major maritime search and rescue incidents, such as the Titanic.
We also have bilateral agreements and arrangements with a number of countries. An example of this would be with Saint-Pierre and Miquelon, an island off the southwestern coast of Newfoundland that is governed by the French. This is a unique case given the proximity of the French soil to Canada.
The Arctic is a large, remote region, and all countries must rely on mutual assistance to ensure an effective and efficient response in the North. In 2011 the Coast Guard was involved in establishing the multinational Arctic Search and Rescue Agreement signed by Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden and the United States. This treaty is the first binding agreement to be negotiated under the Arctic Council and presents an opportunity to leverage partnerships with other Arctic nations, share experience, lessons learned, and conduct initiatives — SAR exercises — with the ultimate goal of recognizing a safer Arctic condition for members of the communities who operate or rely upon the marine waterways.
An example of the growing need for international cooperation as the North becomes more accessible is the recent voyage of the Crystal Serenity through the Northwest Passage. In preparation for the voyage, the Coast Guard participated in training and exercises with our colleagues from the United States to plan for a variety of scenarios. From a search and rescue perspective, the passage was uneventful, which is what we always want, with good weather and favourable ice conditions contributing to the success of the voyage.
[Translation]
Training and exercising are critical components of successful collaboration between Canada and other countries. Last week, in St. Andrews, New Brunswick, the Canadian and American Coast Guards, along with their auxiliaries, took part in a two-day joint search and rescue exercise. This type of cooperation, at an operational level, ensures that Canada continues in its leadership role for maritime search and rescue.
[English]
To conclude, Canada is signatory to a number of international conventions and agreements, but I am most confident and proud to state that not only are we participants in these conventions but we are highly regarded as a leader in the international search and rescue community due to our commitment, leadership and expertise.
We would now be happy to take any questions.
The Deputy Chair: Thank you very much for your presentation.
We will go now to questioning, and Senator McInnis, the third member of our steering committee, will start the questioning.
Senator McInnis: Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to the witnesses for coming this evening. Speaking for myself, this is a new adventure in trying to understand how search and rescue works. We all are very thankful that it's there, but we on the committee are looking for any challenges that you may have or difficulties that may exist.
Who audits or oversees the various signatories to the international conventions to ensure that standards are being met? I take it there are certain standards out there that have to be met by the signatories. Who does this, and what are the repercussions if nation states do not comply? Is there some sort of policing that exists there?
Mr. Pelletier: Yes. There's actually an audit function performed by the International Maritime Organization, the IMO. I'm not sure of the frequency, but I remember a few years ago they came over and audited both the Coast Guard and Transport Canada for the standard for certification in training and watch-keeping certification for seagoing personnel. So on a regular basis, they will do sample audits in signatory countries.
Gregory Lick, Director General, Operations, Canadian Coast Guard: As a prelude to that, when we sign on to a convention in that case, you sign on and you have a certain length of time, depending on the convention, to enable you to introduce certain regulations, legislation in your particular country to enable you to adhere to that particular convention. Every country has a different process for doing that. Canada enables regulations, enables policies, whatever is necessary to allow us to adhere to the particular convention.
Generally it is left up to each particular country to determine how it will meet that particular convention. We talked last time about the way that Canada has search and rescue lifeboats around the country, has an auxiliary and a number of partners and how we do coordination. Every country may do it a little bit differently. They all still adhere to that particular convention.
Each country, then, including Canada, also audits itself. So we have means of gaining information, statistics and data on how we are doing against our own standards. So we will publish those in public accounts or in our DPR or even on our website as well and how we're doing against our particular standards.
Senator McInnis: Cruise ships are a constant now in the waters, out on the ocean. How do you train in the eventuality that we have a cruise ship 200 or 300 miles out in the ocean in distress? How would you cope with that? Are you prepared to cope with it?
Mr. Pelletier: Search and rescue is a multi-phase approach. The standards require us to maintain a listening watch through our Marine Communication and Traffic Services centres. So that's how we would become aware that there's actual distress. They monitor the area. So once it is determined there needs to be a search and rescue, they turn it over to the joint rescue coordination centre. These are, again, highly trained people that are training and coordinating search and rescue response. They look at the number of assets around them. They look at the capacity of the ship as well. They have all that information at their fingertips. They will decide which resources are best suited to be dispatched to support the search and rescue effort.
Then we have our ships, as well, or the Coast Guard auxiliary that can be dispatched and deployed there. Maybe you want to talk more about the training our crew has.
Mr. Lick: I think in terms of that type of particular disaster, which it could be, we have learned from particular incidents like Ocean Ranger and the Herald of Free Enterprise in Britain. A number incidents have informed us and educated us about how we need to train our own people for those particular types of major marine incidents and how our vessels need to be equipped to respond to those types of incidents.
You can have as much equipment and training as you need, but ultimately you have to exercise that, because these types of disasters, very luckily, are very rare. So in order for us to maintain a certain amount of readiness to respond, all the elements of the search and rescue system from our federal assets, in this case, Coast Guard vessels, naval vessels, the crews that actually crew them with their training in search and rescue recovery and the actual search patterns that they have to go through are all part of our training regimen that a number of the crew on board, and in fact every one of our vessels, goes through.
Ultimately, we have to exercise that. We brought along a number of examples of recent and past exercises that go from everything from a very small exercise, sometimes a tabletop exercise, so that we look at how all the parts of the system work together right up to a real time and large exercise. In fact, with the example of Crystal Serenity, because of the public reaction to it, the size of the vessel and the first of its kind going through the Arctic, we had a number of tabletop exercises that we planned with the particular company and all the SAR partners, including the U.S. Coast Guard and ourselves. That exercising helped make it a very safe passage through the Northwest Passage.
Ultimately, exercising, equipment and planning all go into preparing for those types of tragic incidents.
Senator Fabian Manning (Chair) in the chair.
The Chair: Welcome. Excuse my tardiness. I had a group visiting from Newfoundland and Labrador, and we love to talk, so I was delayed somewhat. Thank you, Senator Hubley, for filling in.
Senator Hubley: Just to follow up on Senator McInnis' question, if I could, just today there are three cruise ships in the Charlottetown harbour, and that is now, I think, just one of four days that will happen. Other days there are not so many.
We've heard in our previous hearings about a shortage of human resources within the Coast Guard. I wonder if you might comment on that. How does that shortage also affect your ability to respond to a mass rescue operation, and do you have the resources available to mount an effective response?
Mr. Lick: I think last time we talked about some of the challenges, and I think I even mentioned the human resource challenge is one that not only we as a federal national institution are experiencing in terms of crewing 115 vessels that we operate at this point in time. That human resource challenge is across the industry and across the world as well.
However, that being said, we maintain — certainly for our emergency response, that is our largest priority within the Coast Guard — that readiness to able to respond from every search and rescue lifeboat station across the country to our major assets which cover the larger offshore zones. While we are challenged in gaining experienced crews, that's a challenge everybody is facing.
Right now we have recruited more people into the Coast Guard College, and we are planning every year to recruit people into the Coast Guard College to maintain that level of experienced officers that we require. But, ultimately, we are confident that we are ready to respond to any particular search and rescue incident across the country, including in the offshore area as well. I think while we experience a particular crewing challenge, we're meeting that challenge fairly well. We don't know where the future may take us, but we're planning to meet that challenge head on.
At the same time, as Mr. Pelletier said, the SAR system is layered, and we depend on those layers to make the SAR system successful, and it is successful. We depend on our vessels of opportunity that are sailing out there, and many times, particularly in the offshore areas, they are the first vessels to respond because they're already out there. They may be with the fishing fleets that are already out there, so they're able to respond quite quickly.
We are out there particularly with our SAR lifeboats in the near-shore zones, able to respond to particular areas of risk across the country quickly, well within our 30-minute reaction time. But ultimately we feel and we're very confident that we're ready to respond.
Senator Munson: I'm just reading this report that you're aware of that was on the CBC just three weeks ago, and it was an exclusive report to the CBC saying that the Coast Guard fleet deteriorated under the Tories and Liberals. It goes, as I'm sure you've read it and understand it, into extensive detail. I don't think we've had an opportunity to ask anyone officially about that report, which talks about the deterioration of the equipment, the ships themselves that are 34 years old and "a significant amount of the fleet is fully depreciated.''
It sounds like a fairly dire situation. It also says some of the blame for the sorry state of the agency can be heaped on the Coast Guard itself. The report suggests it has not been aggressive enough in making its case for better funding and has held on to inefficient programming influenced by socio-economic pressure.
I'd like you to respond to that because this is a report that is heavily censored. It doesn't go into detail of what you need and how you go about it, but are you really able to do the job based on what we've seen in this report that the CBC put out?
Mr. Pelletier: Maybe I can start with this one. Yes, it's true that our ships are getting older, as we are all, and we need a bit more maintenance, but we have very stringent maintenance practices and we meet all the regulatory requirements.
A ship that is 40 years old will require a bit more maintenance and money, but at the end of the day, when it's ready, it's available, reliable and ready to deliver the program. So I can assure you that our ships, although old, are meeting all regulatory requirements and are available when we need them.
Mr. Lick: The statistic that our ships are 35 to 40 years or older doesn't quite give the entire picture.
Talking about search and rescue at this point in time, our search and rescue lifeboats across the country are one of our mainstays of the search and rescue system, particularly for near-coastal inshore incidents, which are the majority of our problems in terms of incidents across the country. Those particular vessels are much younger. Those have been replaced in the 1990s.
We have a program as part of our fleet renewal plan right now to replace upward of 15 with modern, newer designs that we've taken from the Royal National Lifeboat Institution in England. We've taken their design and brought it up to Canadian standards with an aluminum hull instead of a fiberglass hull that England uses. Those vessels will be replacing our higher endurance type of search and rescue lifeboats.
So it doesn't quite tell the whole story there, particularly as it relates to the search and rescue system.
Senator Munson: I don't think you've answered the question, though. Have you not been aggressive enough in seeking more funding for your helicopters, ships and assets? We haven't heard much about budgets from both governments in the last 20 years. Are they really putting money behind it and creating a proper budget? It seems from this report that you don't have enough to do your job adequately.
Mr. Pelletier: When it comes to ships, we did have a fleet renewal plan approved. We have a number of ships under construction. We have close to $7 billion in the books to renew ships. Part of that is the smaller search and rescue vessels and part of it is the larger vessels referred to in that report that are getting old.
Part of that money, as well, is to conduct vessel life extension. Even if we have money to build a new ship tomorrow, the shipyard requires time to acquire all the necessary items and so on. We secured some money to do vessel life extension on some of our ships to bring them to the date where replacements will be available.
Senator Munson: Do you need a new icebreaker?
Mr. Pelletier: We have icebreakers in the plan to be built, and we have money to refurbish the new icebreakers we have. If you ask me about more Coast Guard, more Coast Guard is always good.
Senator Munson: Do you need a new icebreaker now?
Mr. Pelletier: Right now, we have —
Senator Munson: Because there have been reports dealing with the lack of your ice-breaking capability, which is extremely important if you're going to have all these ships being, as you say, maintained or given a longer length of life.
Mr. Pelletier: Right now, because of the vessel life extension program, we have some ships out of service. We have a ship waiting for repairs that are going to take a bit longer. So right now we're a bit tight if we're talking about ice- breaking capacity.
But as Mr. Lick said about search and rescue, the number of search and rescue units that we have is sufficient to deliver the programs we're expected to.
Senator Eaton: Speaking about our international commitment, Mr. Pelletier, I think you talked about Canada being highly regarded because of our expertise. With our lack of equipment, money or needs, why are we highly regarded? What is it that we have that other countries don't?
Mr. Pelletier: When the International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue came to light, Canada played a good leadership role in pushing the agenda forward and making that happen.
Another thing we've done in Canada was the Joint Rescue Co-ordination Centre. It is basically the first time you have marine and air in the same space. It's very efficient. If you have a marine incident, then air can support the marine incident and vice versa.
In that manner, the way we set up our program is highly regarded and is taken as an example by other countries. Do you want to add to that?
Mr. Lick: In the past, we've also played a role particularly with our Canadian Coast Guard College, which provides search and rescue training. That particular college that Mr. Pelletier and I both went to when we were much younger is world-recognized in the SAR world, as well as in a number of other areas of marine training.
Senator Eaton: Do you have international students who come and take your course?
Mr. Lick: Yes. We may or may not have some today, but we have had some in the past. Also, countries are pursuing us for that type of training.
Senator Eaton: What are some of the other signatories to the convention? The U.S., obviously. What other ones?
Mr. Lick: There are a number of conventions we're talking about, but in many of those conventions, there are upwards of 150 countries across the world that have signed many of them. The search and rescue system works so well because all of these countries have signed on. They adhere, in their own manner, within their own particular country, with —
Senator Eaton: Certain standards?
Mr. Lick: — certain standards, yes, and particularly certain ways of communicating between countries and establishing how different country, particularly countries that are contiguous to each other, support each other, particularly in contiguous waters. All of that is generally laid out in those conventions.
It talks about radio frequencies and which ones are the safety radio frequencies. All of those elements are laid out, and each country works together to respond to incidents under those standards.
Senator Eaton: This will be my last remark. I guess the interesting time will come with all those countries that have signed on to the Arctic convention. That's when you'll see how well you all work together.
Mr. Pelletier: Actually, we had an event in February. A Canadian fishing vessel Saputi, I think, that ran into some ice in Davis Strait in February and had a water ingress. They reported that to JRCC Halifax, but they had the situation under control at that time. With time, the ingress of water got worse and they couldn't handle it with their own pump, so we contacted Greenland. There's a base in Nuuk in Greenland. Our closest ship was two and a half hours away; their ship was only 100 nautical miles, so they were able to support us. This is the kind of mutual support we get among the countries, so it is working very well.
Senator Poirier: My question is around the agreement that was signed in 2011 and came into force a couple years later. The agreement I'm talking about is the Agreement on Cooperation on Aeronautical and Maritime Search and Rescue in the Arctic. Article 8 establishes the process for a request to enter a territory for a party for the purpose of a search and rescue operation. In practical terms, how has it translated? Are there any significant delays that could be harmful to the operation, or has there been any resistance by any parties to the agreement?
Mr. Pelletier: Absolutely no resistance. There have been no delays. If I can refer to the SAR case I just talked about, it worked smoothly.
In the Arctic Coast Guard Forum, we are operationalizing that agreement. There's a commitment from all those countries to run a tabletop exercise this fall, in November, and we're going to run a live exercise next year as well.
We're going to operationalize this agreement to make sure that if there are any bugs, we can iron them out. So far around the table at many meetings, everyone is more than willing to collaborate.
Senator Poirier: So you don't anticipate or don't feel you will face any challenges in implementing the agreement? Do you see any possible challenges?
Mr. Pelletier: Right now, the exercise will tell us if there are any challenges, but so far it has been collaboration among the countries. The willingness to move forward and conduct those exercises has been great.
Senator Poirier: Regarding Canada's part to this agreement, what would be the benefit to us?
Mr. Pelletier: Again, the Arctic is huge; it's vast, the Canadian Arctic especially. Any support we can get from other countries is always appreciated. It's not only in case of search and rescue; it's also to learn about best practices. We learn how they handle different situations as well. That conversation is very constructive.
Senator Poirier: What is your evaluation of this agreement or the implementation of the operation of this agreement so far? How has it been?
Mr. Pelletier: Again, so far we are in the very early stages, but it is very positive.
Senator Poirier: And with all the other countries it's going well?
Mr. Pelletier: Yes.
Senator Enverga: Thank you for your presentations. With all these international conventions, what role does a private company or private individual have? Are they part of the convention or are they a separate group?
Mr. Pelletier: As Mr. Lick said, the convention gets built into our own regulations and other countries' regulations as well. Private companies operate under those regulations and therefore those conventions. The role they have is to meet the regulations, but it's more the responsibility they have when it comes to search and rescue.
When it comes to search and rescue anywhere around the world, if you know somebody is in distress or in need of help, you have to assist. You have to report it. If the person is unable to report it, you have to report it on their behalf and you have to provide support. Anybody can be tasked from the Joint Rescue Coordination Centre to assist somebody who is in trouble. It's more around responsibility than obligations.
Senator Enverga: With these private companies, how critical are they to the needs? Don't you have sufficient governmental agencies, the Coast Guard is sufficient enough to help, or are they still very critical to the needs of search and rescue?
Mr. Pelletier: They are. Anybody is very critical to the operation if there's a SAR case. Again, everyone is blessed when it's not happening to you, so you want to go and help. That's natural. That's in our behaviour.
Senator Enverga: There was a private company here months ago, and they mentioned that they want government help so they can have more equipment or can provide more personnel to be able to support this SAR. How important is that to you? Would you suggest that we have that kind of help going to those private companies?
Mr. Pelletier: I assume you're talking about the Coast Guard Auxiliary who came as a witness here?
Senator Enverga: I would say so, yes.
Mr. Pelletier: The Coast Guard Auxiliary is set up as companies for a non-profit organization. We have a grant and contribution program where we help them raise funds to deliver services and support us. Across Canada there are about 4,000 Coast Guard Auxiliary members. There are about 11,000 units, vessels, to support us. We use them in about 25 per cent of the search and rescue cases we have. So they are a great partner and we use them a lot.
We do train with them as well. We're training internally and with other countries; but as I mentioned, last week in St. Andrews, New Brunswick, both the Canadian and U.S. Coast Guard trained and conducted an exercise that also involved the Coast Guard Auxiliary. Any opportunity we have to train with them or to exercise, we take it.
Senator Raine: This has been a very interesting study for us. I'm from the West Coast, of course, and there's a big difference. We're a long way from the Atlantic to the Pacific.
Are the operational procedures the same on both coasts? I know it might be a little bit different in the North because of the extreme remoteness and that, but basically the coasts that are populated, are they more or less the same procedures? Is everything similar?
Mr. Pelletier: Yes. Again, it flows from conventions, regulations, standards and procedures. The equipment you're using might be a bit different, but the procedure to respond will be exactly the same. By "different,'' I mean if you're in a cold water environment, you will have more equipment for hypothermia and dealing with ice; but the standard, the training, it's all the same.
We have what we call the rigid hull inflatable operator training. That was developed as a result of an accident that happened, and after an assessment we decided we needed more rigorous training on extreme weather conditions to operate our small craft. So we built that training, and it's actually training that other countries come to Canada to take as well. So, yes, we have some rigid standards for training and operating.
Senator Raine: Okay. Where is the Coast Guard College located?
Mr. Pelletier: That is in Sydney, Nova Scotia.
Senator Raine: Is there one on the West Coast as well?
Mr. Pelletier: No, negative. There's only one Coast Guard College. It provides the curriculum for our training. On the West Coast, we have what we call the RIOT school, the Rigid Inflatable Operator Training, out of Bamfield, but we do have the same thing on the East Coast as well. It's just for convenience; it's easier to get to on each coast. The standard they are using to train on each coast is exactly the same.
Senator Raine: When the Coast Guard recruits, are they recruiting on the West Coast as well, West Coast mariners, West Coast families who have grown up around the water? They would be recruited and then have to go to Nova Scotia for their training?
Mr. Pelletier: The Coast Guard College offers a wide range of training. The main focus of the Coast Guard College when it was created in 1965 is the officer cadet training program. This is where your train your navigation officers and your marine engineers. The college has since evolved and offers other training, such as search and rescue and environmental response training, marine communication traffic services training, et cetera.
But the recruitment for the fleet for the officers, there would be a national recruitment campaign every winter, and the applicants would have to go and spend four years at the college, yes.
For our crew members, that is different. They apply at the local office, and because they don't require the same level of training, then we can hire them and train them on the ship.
Senator Raine: What percentage of officers who have graduated over the last, say, 20 years have come from the Pacific coast?
Mr. Pelletier: I don't have that statistic.
Mr. Lick: I think that's something we would come back to you with. Certainly I wouldn't know the statistic off the top of my head. Mr. Pelletier and I in our own class in 1989 when we graduated had a number of officer cadet colleagues who were from the West Coast. I'm trying to remember how many we had at that point. It's a bit far back in our memory. I might have said maybe 10, 15 or 20 per cent came from the West Coast at that time.
Senator Raine: Are you getting recruits also from ex-navy people?
Mr. Lick: There are a number of avenues to enter the Coast Guard fleet as a crew member or officer. Most of the officers do come from training at the Canadian Coast Guard College. That's where most of the officers come from. Some officers do come from private industry, from commercial industry. We still get some members with proper certification so they can join the Canadian Coast Guard fleet. We do get ship's crew members who gain their tickets. We provide some training and opportunities for them to gain their tickets on their own. They may come from the ship's crew ranks into the officer corps.
But ultimately the training in Sydney is mainly provided for officers. There are other courses that may be provided more remotely, even for the officers. Essentially, it comes from a variety of different sources, I would say.
Senator Raine: When I think of search and rescue, I think of people just sitting there waiting for an accident so they can go and rescue them, but of course that's not how it works. I know from looking at fire departments and all kinds of other people involved in search and rescue, they spend a lot of their time maintaining their equipment and vessels. Are there special courses given for those kinds of jobs at the Canadian Coast Guard College, or is that something they learn on the job?
Mr. Lick: Maybe I can give an example both Mario and I have experienced when working on search and rescue lifeboats. A search and rescue lifeboat is crewed by four members: a commanding officer, an engineer and two crew members. That is the crew right now for a search and rescue lifeboat.
Senator Eaton: How big is the boat?
Mr. Lick: We have a number of different types. Essentially we have two types at this point, as well as a new type being built. The smaller version of it is 47 foot long. The next size up is 52 foot long. The size after that is close to 19 metres, which I have to make the conversion in my head and that wouldn't be a good thing, but it is 19 metres long.
With those particular vessels, it would all be essentially the same number of crew. During their time, when they're waiting for a SAR call — this goes back to our readiness — what are they doing? They're maintaining the vessel but maintaining the vessel such that it can still leave within its 30 minutes. They're not doing major overhauls of engines or anything like that.
More importantly, they're doing training. That could be training on their own to maintain their level of knowledge either as a rescue specialist, such as first aid training or rescue training. That could be at the station itself; it could be online at a computer. It could be a particular course put on at the station itself to update or refresh first aid.
The other part of it is the exercises where they will go out to sea. They will do exercises in recovery of people. They will do exercises in terms of how they search a particular area, what we call search patterns. They will do night exercises as well as daytime exercises. That's all to maintain the level of readiness to respond. Like a fireman, without that type of training or exercising, your skills go stale, and that's what we do not want to happen.
Senator Poirier: Following that line of questioning, you talked about a 30-minute window to respond. In most of the area, whether it is on the West Coast, the North, the East Coast, are your response times pretty well equal or are some places more of a challenge?
Mr. Lick: When we talk about our "response time,'' our standard is a reaction time. So as soon as we get the call at the station, the reaction time is that ship vessel, small craft, whatever it is, has to be ready and away from the wharf within 30 minutes. That's the standard of our reaction time and we're well within that 99.9 per cent of the time. That standard is the same across the country for all the vessels that are primary search and rescue or dedicated to search and rescue.
All of our other vessels, including the suite of search and rescue lifeboats across the country, other vessels that are tasked to be dedicated SAR vessels at a particular point in time, and that could be the larger vessels, will fulfill the offshore role at certain points in time to cover certain areas considered higher risk.
Ultimately, all of our other 115 vessels not dedicated to SAR have to be ready to go, assuming they're operational and not in a maintenance period, within one hour. That's our standard we maintain between primary SAR vessels and what we would term secondary SAR vessels, which is every other vessel within the Coast Guard fleet that's operational.
Senator Poirier: When you do your recruitment to have more people trained to be a Coast Guard, do you participate by going, like they do every year, into local high schools and stuff like that to create interest in our next generation population?
Mr. Lick: Absolutely. Given that we have such a large country and a relatively small Coast Guard, we're obviously not hitting every particular high school in the country. We tend to target ones where maybe we have had a number of successful candidates from in the past. They've shown a lot of interest. They've invite us in as well.
Probably our biggest recruiting challenge is getting to all the places that we want to recruit from. That's probably our biggest challenge. We would like to be face to face, and we try to do that as much as possible. In a lot of cases, particularly when starting the interview process with different candidates, we're doing it by video conference, in some cases maybe by teleconference depending on the communications set up. Ultimately we would like to be in every high school.
In fact, I had the opportunity a number of weeks ago to be the reviewing officer at HMCS Quadra up near Comox, and that's actually where we need to start, with the navy league, with the sea cadet corps, the people, the children, the parents in some cases who have already shown interest in the marine world. It is a startup organization of the navy, but the statement I left them with was, in many cases it doesn't really matter what organization you join. Join the marine world, though. It's a very exciting world.
So if we can get children that young interested in the marine world, we would have a much bigger pool to pull from for the Coast Guard. That's where we need to start.
Senator Wallace: Gentlemen, I have a question about the SAR arrangements that we have, and I guess Canada has SAR arrangements with a number of countries in order to satisfy our international convention obligations.
When we are a party to one of those arrangements, does that give us the right to demand or require resources of whoever we have that arrangement with, to provide them to us, provide them to Coast Guard if required? I'm just thinking in terms of the resource capability. There may be certain equipment or personnel requirements that perhaps you wish we had more of in Canada. Could we look to those international partners and look to their resources as being available to us when and if we require them?
Mr. Pelletier: Those agreements allow us to entertain good partnership and communication with them. For example, Greg mentioned the new search and rescue vessel we're building. We borrowed the design from the U.K. and brought it over, and that's because of the good relationship we've built over the years. The 47-footer we use, that was a design done by the Americans that we used to develop our ship.
To get equipment, per se, to ask for support for an ongoing search and rescue, that happens all the time in contiguous waters. Thinking about the Malaysia Airlines flight that disappeared, and many countries were involved in that search. Depending on the waters, where you are, yes, you ask for support. As far as equipment and expertise, that's through various forums that we meet with partners and share the expertise and equipment and new ideas that we can then use.
Senator Wallace: So there's cooperation among the countries we have agreements or arrangements with, but beyond cooperation, what I'm wondering is, when we sign a SAR arrangement with another country, are we making a commitment? For example, the United States, there may be an incident close to U.S. waters and they want Canada to provide, you, the Canadian Coast Guard, to provide our resources. Under those arrangements, are we required to provide them? Can they demand they be provided, or is it still our choice to provide them or not, and of course the flip side of that. I'm just trying to get a sense of does that give us an opportunity to have the resource capability in Canada.
Mr. Pelletier: That happens all the time on the lakes. That would be a good example to use, where you have the Canadian and the U.S. Coast Guard.
As I mentioned, a rescue coordinator can task any assets in the area. It doesn't matter which flag they're flying. If it's close enough and they feel it will contribute to the success of the SAR mission, the coordinator can task them.
Senator Wallace: Right. One other question, if I could. The Hamburg Convention speaks of rescuing people in distress from the sea. If a vessel's crew has been removed and it's simply the vessel in distress, is there any requirement? Does the Coast Guard have a responsibility to respond to that vessel? I won't use the word "salvage.'' That's another issue, I know.
Mr. Pelletier: That's a special term.
Senator Wallace: Yes, exactly. However, do your obligations as Coast Guard extend only to people or do they also apply to vessels? I realize people are on vessels. They're one and the same.
Mr. Pelletier: I'd rather talk about priority. Our priority is to save lives, so that's the first thing we go after.
If a vessel is in distress and everybody has evacuated the vessel, we can save the vessel. The vessel becomes a threat of pollution. It's an environmental response, so that's another Coast Guard program to make sure we mitigate any risk of pollution, so we will jump in at that point.
Depending on the size of the vessel, those vessels have an obligation to have an agreement with a response organization, if we can call it that. We expect the response organization to step in. If they don't, we have special authority under the Canada Shipping Act to direct an operator to take certain steps. If it's still not to our satisfaction, then we can step in.
Senator Wallace: Responding in terms of environmental response capability, it was my understanding that the Coast Guard has the environmental response capability and responsibility in the Canadian Arctic, but an environmental spill in any other Canadian waters is not a Coast Guard direct responsibility. Is that right?
Mr. Pelletier: We're still responsible for ensuring that the response to the pollution is appropriate. If we're not happy with the level of the response, then we can direct the operator or the response organization to take specific steps. We can go into a lot of details. If they're still not responding properly, this is where we step in.
Senator Wallace: That's a little outside of search and rescue.
Mr. Pelletier: That is correct.
Mr. Lick: I will add one thing. During a search and rescue incident, it's typical to get a question around towing. During a search and rescue incident, the on-scene commander in many cases will be a Coast Guard commanding officer on board one of our vessels. They have to make a call based on their expertise and experience about whether it's safer to take the people off the vessel, particularly because normally search and rescue doesn't occur during calm waters, so if you're taking the persons in distress off the vessel, that may be a more dangerous operation than leaving them on the vessel, making sure that they're safe, making sure that they have life-jackets, PFDs and everything like that and assisting them through a tow to get them to a safe environment where we can make sure they're all safe.
As Mr. Pelletier said, our primary concern is the people themselves, not the vessel. But it may be in certain circumstances that it makes sense to actually save both immediately because it's safer that way.
Senator Wallace: So when there is a need to evacuate people from a vessel in distress, is it a Coast Guard commander who would be there, or is it something that requires a callback to head office and it goes through bureaucracy? Is the person with the authority there at the scene?
Mr. Lick: Under the standards in which we operate a SARS, there is a designated person or, in this case, a vessel with a person on board, usually a commanding officer, who is designated as the on-scene commander. Either as they arrive they take control or the joint rescue coordination designates them as the on-scene commander.
They make the vast majority of decisions about what they can and can't do during that particular incident, because realistically they are the eyes on the water right at that point in time. They will also be in contact possibly with other vessels in the area. So they, as on-scene commander, have the ability to direct what they do, particularly in the rescue of individuals. But it is that on-scene commander role which is designated by a number of different ways.
Mr. Pelletier: The safety of the people on a ship is always the responsibility of the commanding officer as well. That is in the Canada Shipping Act. The decision to evacuate or abandon the vessel rests with the commanding officer of the vessel. It may be suggested that perhaps it's a good time to evacuate, but the ultimate decision always rests with the commanding officer of the vessel.
Senator Sinclair: The name of the division is search and rescue, so I assume if there is no rescue component you don't necessarily get involved in the search. You weren't involved in the search for the Franklin expedition, for example.
Mr. Pelletier: Actually, we were.
Senator Sinclair: I saw that in the newspapers, so I was going to ask. What was the resource allocation or time that was involved in your being involved in that?
Mr. Pelletier: We have a fleet operational plan that we do. We're planning for operation for a year ahead of time, and we have various clients that require our services as well. In this case, Parks Canada was the lead on the search expedition, and they used some of our ship time to do that.
Mr. Lick: In that particular case, the Sir Wilfrid Laurier, the vessel from the West Coast which does primarily the western Arctic, some of the aids to navigation and some of the icebreaking work, has been involved over the last three to four years in the search for the vessels of the Franklin expedition. In the previous years, we found the Erebus. In this case, the mission found the Terror. Soon after they found it, they were up there. The divers from Parks Canada, which, as Mr. Pelletier said, is the lead, were diving off the Sir Wilfrid Laurier investigating and confirming that it actually was the Terror.
Senator Sinclair: My question was really dedicated to resources. Was there a cost implication to that search and rescue?
Mr. Pelletier: Well, the priority is always search and rescue. Anyone who is doing anything else, if there is a search and rescue, the vessel will be tasked for the search and rescue.
As far as the cost of supporting Parks Canada, that was all provided by Parks Canada. The ship time we used during that time was paid for by Parks Canada.
Senator Sinclair: Is there a cost-recovery protocol in place for search and rescue with regard to operations not only like that but for commercial operators, for example, who engage in unsafe activities that result in a condition where search and rescue has to be involved?
Mr. Pelletier: No.
Senator Sinclair: I was curious when you talked about international conventions. There is a lot of dispute in maritime sea law as to Canada's claim to territorial jurisdiction in maritime areas, and I'm curious as to what the Coast Guard's territorial jurisdiction protocol is in terms of how you recognize when you're in international waters versus domestic waters.
Mr. Pelletier: The search and rescue zones are done through the search and rescue convention, and they extend way beyond our territorial water. I think it goes up to 600 nautical miles on both coasts. Those zones were determined through the development of the convention and have nothing to do with politics around whether it is Canadian waters or not.
Senator Sinclair: I'm not sure you can say the same thing with regard to the northern protocol that's just been signed. Are you able to say if it deals with that in a different way?
Mr. Pelletier: We're talking about the expedition to the North Pole to map the bottom. That's under UNCLOS, and that's in support of Canada's claim as to whether those waters will be Canadian waters or not for exploration of natural resources. But at the end of the day, if there's a search and rescue, if it's within our area of responsibility, then we will be deployed.
The Chair: Can any one of you give me an update on the status at the present time of the reopening of the St. John's Maritime Rescue Sub-centre in Newfoundland?
Mr. Pelletier: It is a mandate commitment and something we're committed to do. We've looked at how we can best implement this, and we're just presenting our options to our minister in order to move ahead with the implementation.
The Chair: With the Kitsilano Coast Guard station in British Columbia, is today's operation equal to what it was prior to November 2013? I think in 2013 sometime it closed down. With the reopening of that, there are some questions on whether the same operations are in place today as they were there then. Can you elaborate on that?
Mr. Pelletier: Right now I can tell you the operation we have out of Kitsilano today is exactly what was there before it was closed. The budget announcement said we will go beyond that, so there will be environmental response capacity at Kitsilano as well as to respond to pollution cases around Kitsilano, but it's also going to be used for training our own people and partners as well as First Nations. They will be able to use it as a command post, as well. If there is a major incident, it's going to be equipped with all the equipment and capacity to act as a command post.
The Chair: Back to St. John's, Newfoundland again, do you have any idea of a time frame of the reopening of the sub-centre?
Mr. Pelletier: Again, we've put our proposal and our options forward, so now the decision is pending on how we can do that. The issue with MRSC, Marine Rescue Sub-Centre — we've mentioned that the search and rescue coordinator job requires a lot of training, including coming in with some certification to start with. It also requires training on search and rescue tools that they use, the geographical area and on-the-job training as well.
In order to put that training in place and train everybody to the same level — because you cannot open a centre with only two people. If you open a stand, you need six people to offer 24-7. So this is why it would be taking a bit longer.
Senator McInnis: Senator Munson touched on what I was going to ask, but I just wanted to go a little further with it.
There was a news article I read early in the summer about one of your vessels limping back into port in Halifax. Listening to you this evening, I'm always amazed at how positive and professional you are in terms of your operation, the equipment and so on.
Our committee, as I mentioned earlier, is on a fact-finding mission, and if there are deficiencies, problem areas or challenges that you have, we should have them. I heard you talk about the cost of maintenance — you didn't get into details — but I was thinking as I sat and listening to you about an analogy with the Sea King helicopters. I forget the hours and hours of maintenance it takes to get them into the air for a few hours.
It was mentioned by Senator Munson. Are you being proactive enough? Are you pushing the case enough to ensure you have the new vessels? It's easy to say they operate and they operate well, but a 25- or 30-year-old vessel does not operate and would not have the same technologies as a new vessel.
We're giving you an opportunity here. I know you're professionals, and you are public servants and you have to be guarded somewhat as to what you say, but surely there must be some problem areas that you have with respect to this. Was the article wrong in the newsprint media that I saw?
Mr. Pelletier: I'm not sure which ship you refer to that was limping back to port.
Senator McInnis: It was during the summer.
Mr. Lick: I forget which one it was, but yes.
Mr. Pelletier: Yes, cost of maintenance has gone up, whether the ship is old or new. The cost of labour has gone up and everything else.
But there are some very strict standards we have to meet. We cannot put a ship to sea that is not safe. Our commanding officers and chief engineers have a responsibility to make sure we meet all of those standards. We have third parties auditing us, as well, and Transport Canada and a classification society. They look at our maintenance and make sure we meet the requirements.
So, yes, the cost of maintaining ships has gone up. There is more maintenance to be done as a ship gets older. That is why we've asked for funding for vessel life extension, for example. Through the infrastructure investment, too, we have received some money to increase our maintenance budget in order to do that critical maintenance.
Again, we classify our maintenance in three different categories. There's the regulatory requirement and safety. This is priority number one. Then there is the program requirement, under which is anything we need to deliver the program. That comes in second. Then is life cycle management, which is usually where we lack funding.
Mr. Lick: Maybe I'll add a little bit with the Sea King analogy. We know the analogy. The number of hours of maintenance per flying hour is huge. In the marine world, we're not in that sort of situation.
I'll just give an example. Traditionally, over the years for many of our large vessels, we've provided them with four to six weeks of maintenance — a solid maintenance period — per year. The rest of the year, the vessel is operational, delivering close to 300 days of operation at sea — training, exercising, whatever it might be. That will depend whether it's a seasonal vessel or not, depending on what environment it's operating in.
What we're looking at when we say the vessels need more maintenance, it may be a change from four to six weeks to six to eight weeks. So it's not in the same realm of requiring — and I don't know the numbers for the Sea King — but, say, 200 hours per flying hour of maintenance. It's not in that realm.
The other aspect of it is that like the Sea Kings, like a lot of military equipment, based on regulation or new technology coming along, we will periodically replace critical communications equipment that's on board and critical propulsion system equipment that's on board. We may equip the vessels with new radars that allow us to search better.
So, periodically, it's not just a simple means of changing the oil. I am exaggerating a bit. At different points in time through the life cycle of the vessel, it will be upgraded with the new technology. While it will still navigate and navigate well, and it will still move through the water, it will have much better capability on board to do the job we have to do.
Senator Munson: This may be an obvious question with an obvious answer, but I'm looking at your website, which is well done — "who we are, the Coast Guard.'' It talks about ensuring safe and accessible waterways. Right at the top, it says Canadians expect the federal government to protect the marine environment.
With that in mind, everything connects — fisheries, environment, sea and rescue and all those things — but I'm thinking of climate change. We are taking a look at that as part of our study, I believe. I would like to know what role does the Coast Guard play in observing this? For example, do you have scientists on board your ships each and every time you go out, or at specific times, from Environment Canada to look at receding oceans and all kinds of different things that are out there? If you are, could you explain what you're doing there? If you're not, why don't you have scientists?
I'd just like to get a better picture of what's happening out there besides protecting Canada's waterways. I think it would be important for our study.
Mr. Pelletier: Part of our mandate under the Oceans Act is to support DFO science and other government departments. Fisheries and Oceans has a huge science component to it, and some of our ships are dedicated to science. We have an offshore fisheries vessel and an offshore oceanographic vessel. Most of our vessels can multitask and deliver some of the science programs as well.
We have scientists who come on board, but they're under mission under the program. They're using us as a platform to gather their data and do their analyses. We do some of the surveys year after year in support of the science program, and the same applies to Environment Canada as well. They do get some ship time, as does NRCan, to conduct their analyses and studies.
Mr. Lick: Speaking about climate change, there are many missions aboard our more dedicated scientific vessels or some of our icebreakers, particularly in the Arctic, that bring scientists on board for their particular studies. The one going on right now, as we speak, is off the Canadian Coast Guard Ship Louis S. St-Laurent that is up in the Beaufort Sea doing what the scientists call the JOIS, the Joint Oceans Ice Study. I will not even try to explain the science behind it, but it is a study that looks at how the climate is changing in that particular area and its effect upon the oceans and ice and so on.
I think to answer your question very simply, senator, we very much support the scientific community with our vessels and the expertise that our crews bring. It may be as simple as with the commanding officer, particularly with the expertise in the Arctic, the chief scientists are always asking, "How can I get over to this area? Where would be the best position to place this particular ice buoy?'' They're always working together to be able to do that. They really couldn't do it without each other.
Senator Munson: I asked that because Senator McInnis alluded to the big cruise ships that are going through. While it has an opening for those who do live in the Arctic, the idea of leaving another polluted footprint in the North can be an unsightly scene, I would think, down the road if we're not careful with science and so forth. Would you agree with that?
Mr. Lick: Certainly the science is important to understand the impacts of larger vessels going through. I think we all can say that it's not simply on the waters themselves. It's on the aquatic wildlife that's in the water, whether it's mammals or fish, and it's on the economics of the environment up there.
It's about the economic and environmental security of the Arctic, and it's impacted by climate change and by the results of climate change: less ice through the Northwest Passage during certain times of the year. It's also about more adventurers wanting to go through and the impact that they leave behind, and the search and rescue issues that they cause when they go up there unprepared.
Climate change is a piece of it, but it is really the results of that climate change that are impacting both the economic and environmental security of the Arctic.
Senator Munson: With that in mind, not only yourselves being the platform, with your boats providing the venue for the scientists to do their work, do they tap into your expertise? Your crews have been out there for many years. The science we have now wasn't there 20 or 30 years ago. When they're doing their reports, are they tapping into you, and you having a sit-down basically to say, "Here is what we've seen. You may have the science, but here is what we've seen with the naked eye.'' Is that part of their report?
Mr. Lick: Absolutely. I can't speak to any specific reports, obviously, but they tap into experience not only for doing their current research, but they also tap into what the commanding officer is seeing.
Just as importantly, I know they're also tapping into First Nations communities and indigenous peoples who have lived in the Arctic much longer than our ships have ever been there.
Senator Enverga: You mentioned climate change, and it's been answered.
I know you have some conventions and agreements with different countries so we can have a proper search and rescue effort. My question is: How do you rate our Coast Guard compared to other Coast Guards in the rest of the world? Would you rate it number one, number two?
Mr. Lick: I think we think we're number one, but as Mr. Pelletier talked about certainly in the opening remarks and in some of the answers to your questions, we are — and I think that's confirmed by the countries that do come to us — a world leader amongst all of the countries around the world in many aspects of the search and rescue program. That is one of the avenues that we are going to talk about when we're here next week, as well, in terms of how we compare with other search and rescue systems across the world. We'll have a little more detail for you next week as well.
Senator Enverga: Perhaps next week you can let us know how you can make it better.
Mr. Pelletier: It's true for search and rescue. It's also true for Aids to Navigation. We call it e-Navigation. Canada is always quoted as a leader in this. It's true on icebreaking as well. Industry turns to us to find out the new technology or how we can best approach icebreaking.
The Chair: Just for clarification, a call goes in to the JRCC in regard to the requirement for search and rescue, and I realize there's a component that you are responsible for and then there's a component DND is responsible for. Would that be correct? Could you elaborate on how it works so we have it on record here and for those who may be listening? Sometimes people may be confused on how it all rolls out, so maybe you could give us an indication of how a call comes in, and how it is dealt with and in what way it is distributed with regard to the resources required for that rescue.
Mr. Pelletier: There are different ways a call can come in to JRCC. Typically, if it's at sea, it will be coming through the Marine Communications and Traffic Services. They are the ones who are listening out there. Once they see there is something happening, then they call the JRCC. It could also be *16 on a cellphone or through 911. It doesn't matter.
When a call comes into JRCC, there is a number of staff sitting around the desk, and the light comes on, and everyone picks up the phone unless somebody is already busy coordinating another search and rescue call. Normally, whoever is available will pick up the phone. They will all listen in to make sure they gather the information properly.
As soon as they start gathering the information, some of the people will start doing a search plan, and others are looking at contact information and who they can call to support or ask for immediate relay to be issued to see what other resources are in the area so they can support the call.
Mr. Lick has been in one of the JRCCs more recently.
Mr. Lick: As a call comes in, what we're primarily looking for is a lot of the information on what's happening: Who is aboard? Is there anyone hurt? What is the condition of the vessel? All the pieces of information that we need to properly respond. "Do you have propulsion power?'' All those type of things.
One of the first actions that occurs in terms of direct action, though, is what we call a MARB. A MARB will go out, which is essentially a marine assistance broadcast that goes out, and it will go out from the MCTS centre. It broadcasts over radio, in essence covering vessels in the area; "Can anyone assist?'' As we're saying, vessels of opportunity, in many cases, are the ones that are able to respond first. If somebody responds, they go and assist the vessel.
The search and rescue may stop right there, depending on what the situation is. If no one responds to a MARB, then a lot more action is taken. We start to task our own vessels. We may task a naval vessel. We may directly task a vessel we know is in the area but maybe didn't hear the call. There are different ways we can contact them to do that. That's another piece of the transaction that's important to recognize.
I think your question, Mr. Chair, was particularly around how the Canadian Armed Forces and Canadian Coast Guard work together. It very much works together. In fact, they're sitting right beside each other.
Our primary role and mandate for the Coast Guard is on the marine side of the house. We have the primary responsibility for marine search and rescue.
National Defence has two responsibilities. It has the overall responsibility for search and rescue coordination more generally and for the aviation response to a particular search and rescue incident.
Many of our search and rescue calls involve both. They involve both getting air assets out there quickly over the particular incident, starting search patterns and starting to understand what the problem is.
In the case of the fishing vessel Saputi, they actually dropped pumps to the vessel so that they could help with getting water out of the vessel.
Generally, ships are a little bit slower to get there than aircraft. Aircraft, in all cases, really can't help people in the water or in distress, so both work very cooperatively together. The important part is they are coordinated together, and that's done through the JRCC.
The Chair: Thank you very much. With the JRCC in Halifax and with regard to response times, I know there was some concern that they may be too far removed from up North. We had a senator with us, Senator Watt, who's not here right now, who raised the issue several times about the operation being located in Halifax and the absence of something up North.
Would you like to address that with regard to how that's dealt with? I know the call is still coordinated from Halifax, but I guess to relieve some of the concerns that have been raised by Senator Watt and others with regard to the absence of what they feel should be something on the ground up North, where the climate and everything else is so much different.
Mr. Pelletier: As we mentioned earlier, the listening on the water is done through marine communications and traffic services, and the centre is located in Iqaluit. They are the ones who maintain the listen and watch. The coordination effort is done through Halifax for a certain part of the Arctic. The other part of the Arctic is through Trenton.
At the end of the day, once the coordination effort starts, they can task whatever resources are available. That's really what matters, the resources. It doesn't matter if those resources are under the area of responsibility of another JRCC or anything like that. They have the authority to task the resources.
This is where we return to these questions: Is that a Coast Guard resource? Is that a vessel opportunity? Is that Coast Guard Auxiliary? These are all things available to the coordinator to make sure there's an efficient response. Most of the time local resources are used.
The Chair: Thank you very much. I think we're finished up on our questions now. On behalf of our committee, we thank you for your presence here this evening. It's been a great supplement to our study and certainly the information was great. As we go forward, if you think of anything you may have missed this evening that you think would be advantageous to us in our study, I would ask you to forward that to us at your convenience. Thank you for your work on behalf of Canadians from coast to coast to coast. We appreciate it.
I think Mr. Lick touched on it earlier; I know with my experience of Newfoundland and Labrador search and rescue, don't be caught out on the few bright and sunny days we have there.
We have some in camera business to take care of. Can we have agreement to go in camera?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you.
(The committee continued in camera.)