THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL FINANCE
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Tuesday, December 3, 2024
The Standing Senate Committee on National Finance met this day at 9 a.m. [ET] to study the Supplementary Estimates (B) for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2025.
Senator Claude Carignan (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: Hello, everyone. Before we begin, I would like to ask all senators and other in-person participants to consult the cards on the table for guidelines to prevent audiofeedback incidents. Please keep your earpiece away from all microphones at all times. When you are not using your earpiece, place it face down, on the sticker on the table. Thank you all for your cooperation.
I wish to welcome all of the senators as well as the viewers across the country who are watching us on sencanada.ca. My name is Claude Carignan, senator from Quebec and Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance. I will now ask my colleagues to introduce themselves starting on my left please.
Senator Forest: Hello and welcome. Éric Forest, Gulf senatorial division, Quebec.
[English]
Senator LaBoucane-Benson: Good morning. Senator Patti LaBoucane-Benson, Treaty 6 territory, Alberta.
Senator Loffreda: Good morning and welcome. I am Senator Tony Loffreda from Montreal, Quebec. Great to see you this morning.
[Translation]
Senator Dalphond: Hello and welcome to the committee. Pierre J. Dalphond, De Lorimier senatorial division, Quebec.
Senator Moreau: Hello. Pierre Moreau, The Laurentides senatorial division, Quebec.
[English]
Senator MacAdam: Welcome. Jane MacAdam, Prince Edward Island.
Senator Ross: Good morning. Krista Ross, New Brunswick.
Senator Smith: Larry Smith, Quebec.
[Translation]
The Chair: Thank you very much, honourable senators. We would like especially to welcome a new member, Senator Moreau, who is a former president of Quebec’s treasury board, if memory serves me correctly.
Senator Moreau: That’s right. Guilty as charged, Mr. Chair.
The Chair: You can see that this is a way to strengthen the committee. It is already very strong, but let us say that we are not diminishing its importance or the quality of its members. Thank you and welcome, Senator Moreau.
Today, we are resuming our consideration of the Supplementary Estimates (B) for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2025, which was referred to this committee on November 20, 2024, by the Senate of Canada.
We are pleased to welcome with us today senior officials from Indigenous Services Canada; Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada; and National Defence. Welcome and thank you for accepting our invitation to appear before the Senate Committee on National Finance. I understand that one official from each department will make a statement and the others may help answer questions.
With that, we welcome a regular at the committee, Philippe Thompson, Chief Finances Results and Delivery Officer; Manon Nadeau-Beaulieu, Chief Finances, Results and Delivery Officer; and Jonathan Moor, Assistant Deputy Minister and Chief Financial Officer. On that note, I give the floor to Philippe Thompson to give his opening statement, followed by Manon Nadeau-Beaulieu and Jonathan Moor.
Philippe Thompson, Chief Finances, Results and Delivery Officer, Indigenous Services Canada: Thank you for the invitation to discuss the 2024-25 Supplementary Estimates (B) for Indigenous Services Canada (ISC).
I am pleased to be here on the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people. As Chief Finances, Results and Delivery Officer at ISC, it is a great pleasure to join you today with several of my colleagues to discuss and answer any questions you may have on these estimates.
ISC’s Supplementary Estimates (B), 2024-25, reflect a net increase of $4.5 billion. With this increase, ISC’s total authorities for 2024-25 will be $27.8 billion. ISC will continue addressing First Nations, Inuit and Métis access to health services, community-based mental wellness services as well as non-insured health benefits support in addition to on-reserve education and critical infrastructure gap reduction.
[English]
The key initiatives in the Supplementary Estimates (B) 2024-25 include $956.6 million for reforms to the First Nations Child and Family Services program to help improve the lives and outcomes of First Nations children and families living on-reserve and in the Yukon by reducing the number of First Nations children in care and ensuring children can remain connected to their families, communities and culture.
Canada has made significant investments to reform the First Nations Child and Family Services program, including securing unprecedented levels of funding. In fact, the level of funding for the program increased from $680 million in 2015-16 to more than $3.8 billion in 2023-24. The department remains committed to successfully continuing the reforms of the program, in collaboration with Indigenous partners.
The continued implementation of Jordan’s Principle, through securing $725 million in these supplementary estimates, will ensure that First Nations children can access the health, social and education products, services and supports they need.
Since July 2016, over 7.8 million products, services and supports have been approved under Jordan’s Principle. The requests for these resources have steadily increased, with approved products, services and supports increasing from 488,000 in 2021-22 to over 672,000 in 2024-25.
Additionally, $562.5 million will provide supplementary health benefits to eligible First Nations and Inuit in accordance with the Non-Insured Health Benefits Program approved mandate.
The objective is to provide non-insured health benefits to First Nations and Inuit people in a manner that is appropriate to their unique health needs. That contributes to the achievement of an overall health status for First Nations and Inuit that is comparable to that of the Canadian population as a whole, and that facilitates First Nations and Inuit control at a time and pace of their choosing. In 2023-24, nearly 697,000 clients accessed the Non-Insured Health Benefits Program.
[Translation]
Equally important, the following are other key initiatives included in these supplementary estimates: $313.6 million for Indigenous mental wellness programming for First Nations, Inuit, and Métis, including a continuum of culturally relevant community-based mental wellness services. The overall objective of this funding is to renew investments in order to maintain communities’ existing access to quality and culturally-safe mental health services that are designed and delivered by Indigenous communities, and to continue the meaningful progress that has been made to date. Funding of $275.3 million to continue supporting First Nations elementary and secondary education on-reserve by ensuring that First Nations students benefit from levels of support directly comparable to those available to students in provincial schools.
So far, we have concluded 10 regional education agreements, supporting over 25,000 students across five provinces. There are currently 524 funded First Nations elementary and secondary education programs that are funded, supporting approximately 117,934 First Nations students attending school on and off reserve. Finally, $258.6 million to address critical infrastructure gaps in housing and community infrastructure, education and health facilities, and to improve two critical road networks by supporting various measures including, but not limited to, renovations and new construction. Thus far, 11,136 infrastructure projects have been undertaken, with 6,106 completed. Housing projects served approximately 479,000 Indigenous people. Of these, 5,300 projects supported housing through the development of new homes, renovations, upgrades, and lots.
As of November 7, 2024, 147 long-term drinking water advisories have been lifted. There remain 31 advisories in effect in 29 communities.
[English]
In addition to supporting these key initiatives, our department has continued to work closely with Indigenous partners and has made significant progress in closing socio-economic gaps.
Foremost, we have facilitated the exercise of jurisdiction by Indigenous governing bodies through 10 coordination agreements and one bilateral agreement, with an additional 18 coordination agreement discussions currently under way.
Furthermore, 52 community safety and well-being projects continue to be supported through investments in the Pathways to Safe Indigenous Communities Initiative.
[Translation]
In response to natural disasters, we have created 260 emergency management coordinator positions to enhance emergency management capacity in First Nations communities.
I look forward to discussing any aspects of these estimates with you and welcome your questions. Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you very much, Mr. Thompson. Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu, the floor is yours.
Manon Nadeau-Beaulieu, Chief Finances, Results and Delivery Officer, Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada: Thank you, Mr. Chair and honourable senators, for the invitation to discuss the 2024-25 Supplementary Estimates (B) for Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada.
Let me begin by recognizing that we come together here today on the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people. As CIRNAC’s Chief Finance, Results and Delivery Officer, it is a pleasure to be here this morning, along with my colleagues to answer and discuss any questions you may have on these estimates.
As you know, Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada is committed to continuing on the path towards reconciliation, namely by renewing the relationship with Indigenous peoples; furthering the modernization of institutional structures and governance in support of self-determination; acknowledging and addressing past wrongs; as well as advancing work enabling prosperity, sustainability and health in the North.
The 2024-25 Supplementary Estimates (B) reflect a net increase of $1.38 billion, including $780.7 million in new funding, and $609 million of reprofiled funding primarily for the settlement of specific claims. This will bring the total budgetary authorities for 2024-25 to $17.9 billion.
[English]
Mr. Chair, I welcome the opportunity to highlight some of the work that these supplementary estimates will allow the department to further in 2024-25, understanding that the majority will be used to recognize and resolve past injustices, a fundamental and concrete gesture of reconciliation that will support healing, rebuild trust and facilitate a brighter future for Indigenous peoples.
[Translation]
Specifically, $532.7 million in new funding will support the expedited settlement of land-related claims through negotiations.
As you know, the resolution of claims outside of the courts is instrumental in demonstrating the government’s commitment towards advancing Crown-Indigenous relations, which will not only reconcile the past, but support social wellness and stimulate economic growth within communities.
[English]
New funding will also be provided through the Residential Schools Missing Children Community Support Fund in the amount of $30.7 million to pursue the implementation of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Calls to Action 74 to 76 for missing children and burial information. These contribution agreements will support community-led initiatives to locate, document and memorialize burial sites in the hopes that this will enable healing and closure for the victims, families and communities by addressing the legacy of residential schools.
[Translation]
To further the government’s commitment to renewing the Inuit-Crown relationship, $25 million in funding will be provided to implement reconciliatory programming within Nunavik Inuit communities, in response to the Nunavik dog slaughter. Communities and regional partners will be able to access these funds and determine appropriate initiatives to support their healing and cultural revitalization.
I would also like to highlight that our department continues to work with partners to end the violence towards Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women, Girls, Two Spirit and gender diverse people. As such, new funding is being provided towards the implementation of Call for Justice 1.6, to support Indigenous partners in co-developing and assessing a regional pilot for a Red Dress Alert, thus contributing to the advancement of the National Action Plan.
[English]
As another key element of the reconciliation journey, the department continues to work with Indigenous partners to support a better future through self-determination. Renewed funding, in the amount of $46.6 million, will support the ongoing negotiations at over 170 active Recognition of Indigenous Rights and Self-Determination tables.
Enabling these co-development efforts will lead to tangible agreements with partners and ensure the Government of Canada can meet its obligations toward addressing Indigenous rights, priorities and interests. Ultimately, these actions will support Indigenous peoples in determining their own visions of political, economic, social and cultural development.
[Translation]
These Supplementary Estimates (B) will also support Canada’s Arctic and northern organizations, individuals, communities and governments in the pursuit of a strong, inclusive, vibrant, prosperous and self-sufficient North.
Of course, everyone deserves access to healthy and affordable food no matter where they live, and food security remains one of the department’s top priorities. Which is why $56.9 million in new funding will be invested in sustaining northern food sovereignty to address food insecurity in the North and make nutritious food and essential items more affordable and accessible to residents of isolated northern communities.
Building on the 2022 program expansions, these investments will flow funding to over 20 Indigenous governments and organizations, representing 112 communities across the North, in order to increase the number of harvesting activities, deepen supports for local food infrastructure and expand food-sharing networks through the onboarding of new recipients, such as food banks and non-profit entities.
[English]
Lastly, in support of the shared priority goals and objectives of the Arctic and Northern Policy Framework, and in alignment with the Task Force on Northern Post-Secondary Education’s Calls to Action, $2.6 million of new funding will be provided to support the Dechinta Centre for Research and Learning to continue their Indigenous land-based initiative in delivering post-secondary educational and research experiences in the North.
The increased access to Northern post-secondary education opportunities will strengthen communities as they prepare to respond to current and future socio-economic challenges.
[Translation]
Mr. Chair, these Supplementary Estimates (B) will allow the Government of Canada to recognize and resolve past wrongs as well as continue the concrete work to renew relationships between Canada and First Nations, Inuit and Métis, and to further advance the work in the North.
I am pleased to answer any questions. Thank you. Meegwetch. Marsee.
The Chair: Thank you, Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu.
[English]
Jonathan Moor, Assistant Deputy Minister and Chief Financial Officer, Finance, Department of National Defence: Good morning, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. Thank you for inviting me today to present these supplementary estimates on behalf of the Department of National Defence, or DND, and the Canadian Armed Forces. Today, I am joined by the Assistant Deputy Minister of Materiel, Nancy Tremblay; and Chief of Programme, Rear-Admiral Steve Thornton.
Through the Supplementary Estimates (B), the DND, is requesting over $3.3 billion, which will help fund a number of commitments announced in our defence policy along with other critical operational requirements. This includes ensuring that our military members have the tools and equipment they need to perform the vital tasks we ask of them.
Many of the investments we are seeking through these estimates are for capital expenditures, and I would like to highlight a few today. The Department of National Defence is seeking $659 million in support of the Royal Canadian Air Force, or RCAF, to fund the Future Aircrew Training Program for incoming pilots, air combat systems officers and airborne electronic sensor operators. This training will bolster our ability to secure a sufficient number of qualified aircrews to meet our operational requirements and ensure the RCAF maintains a multi-purpose and combat-capable air force.
The DND is also requesting $561 million for the Canadian Multi-Mission Aircraft project to replace our current fleet of Aurora aircraft with up to 16 next-generation Poseidon P-8A aircraft. For the Royal Canadian Navy, we are requesting $310 million in capital plus $5 million in operational funding to deliver the future joint support ships. Once these ships are complete and deployed on operations, they will provide naval ships with fuel, spare parts, food and other much-needed supplies. In the meantime, we are maintaining those capabilities through the Motor Vessel Asterix, for which we are proposing $15.3 million of funding through these estimates.
As was announced in Budget 2024 and reaffirmed in Our North, Strong and Free, the department will be allocating $299 million toward sustaining our existing fleet of Halifax-class frigates while we build the future River-class destroyers. Failing to maintain these vessels would significantly undermine our ability to meet our operational commitments into the next decade.
Furthermore, we remain committed to providing military assistance to Ukraine, and in these estimates, we are allocating $763.5 million for the munitions, training and tools they need. We are also requesting $202 million for the national procurement plan, which will help to ensure the readiness of about 100 existing CAF fleets, including aircraft, ships, tanks and other military equipment.
We are requesting $209 million toward science and technology research associated with our NORAD modernization plan. These estimates also include other initiatives to provide modern equipment and improved support services for members of our military, as well as a number of transfers to and from other departments and agencies.
The funding requested through these estimates will support National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces in carrying out its essential operations, programs and initiatives, in addition to the implementation of our defence policy Our North, Strong and Free.
In conclusion, Mr. Chair, the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces continue to deliver on our core national mandate, while ensuring financial accountability and effective resource management. The funding we are requesting through these estimates is critical to protecting Canadians and supporting our allies and partners against threats, now and into the future.
My colleagues and I would be pleased to address any questions or comments you may have. Thank you.
[Translation]
The Chair: Thank you very much for your statements.
Senator Forest: Thank you so much for your presentations. My first question is for Mr. Moor.
Mr. Moor, the Supplementary Estimates (B) provide $561 million for the Poseidon multi-mission aircraft project which, I must point out, was awarded without a call for tenders. Could we have an update on that project, as to the timelines and budget? Will the timelines and budget for the Poseidon project be respected?
Mr. Moor: Thank you very much for the question.
[English]
The funding is necessary to continue work on the P-8A Poseidon aircraft, which is now in its implementation phase. These have been acquired through the U.S. government’s Foreign Military Sales program, which requires quarterly payments, which are included in these supplementary estimates.
In addition, the funding is to help other aspects of the project and keep it on track, including infrastructure, training and support equipment. I can confirm that the project is on track and proceeding well.
[Translation]
Senator Forest: Given the initial specifications on the basis of which the contract was awarded, will there be any additions or changes in the course of the contract that will have a major impact on costs?
[English]
Mr. Moor: Perhaps I can ask Nancy Tremblay to join me. She is responsible for contracting at the Department of National Defence.
[Translation]
Nancy Tremblay, Assistant Deputy Minister, Materiel, Department of National Defence: To date, the project is within the timelines concluded with the U.S. government. We will accordingly take delivery of the first aircraft in Canada in 2026, and the aircraft are currently being built as part of an existing production line at Boeing. So it is a known configuration and the risks are limited.
Senator Forest: No changes have been made to the specifications since the contract was awarded?
Ms. Tremblay: None whatsoever.
Senator Forest: Thank you. I am trying to understand your objectives as to budget cuts. As part of the announced refocusing of $15.8 billion in spending across government, your objective was $900 million annually. Am I interpreting your objective correctly?
[English]
Mr. Moor: The Budget 2023 initiative required the Government of Canada to save $7.1 billion over five years, with 15% taken initially from professional services and travel.
The targets for the Department of National Defence started at $211 million in 2023-24, rising to $810 million this year and will reach $907 million in 2026-27.
DND is committed to working more efficiently and effectively in order to deliver best value for the taxpayer across all of our activities. We have developed a 10-year plan to deliver the savings over that period. We are managing that effectively through our reference levels.
We were not required to make a further saving in RGS2.0, but we still have to save $907 million and that work is progressing well.
[Translation]
Senator Forest: Can you give us a few examples of the savings you are able to make and the sectors of activity involved?
[English]
Mr. Moor: Yes. We have reduced $58 million from our travel budget. That is to encourage people to reduce discretionary travel overseas. In particular, we have asked people to travel alone, especially when attending meetings, so we don’t incur double costs. We have also asked people to use technology to engage on projects, so that can save money as well.
We have reduced around $200 million in professional services. We spend over $5 billion a year on professional services, the majority of which to maintain equipment and to provide operational support. However, we have reduced the number of people who are working on our projects who are contractors and consultants.
We are also looking at our accommodation plans. We are rationalizing our accommodation across the National Capital Region and in other locations. We have many examples of how we are doing this. It is a challenging target. We do need to manage this effectively, while also trying to attain our goal of 2% by 2032.
Senator Smith: I have a question for Mr. Thompson on a subject we have talked about for many years: drinking water infrastructure.
Despite significant investments and progress reported in your 2022-23 departmental results report, including the lifting of 138 long-term advisories since 2015, there are still 28 boil water advisories.
The 2024-25 plan outlines efforts to implement Bill C-61, the proposed First Nations Clean Water Act, and expand partnerships to address many issues, including those related to maintaining existing infrastructure.
What are the primary challenges that have prevented the resolution of all long-term drinking water advisories? How does Bill C-61 address these obstacles?
Mr. Thompson: Thank you for the question. Indeed, we have had that conversation on many occasions.
I will ask my colleague Paula Hadden-Jokiel to give you a more fulsome update on the situation of safe drinking water.
Paula Hadden-Jokiel, Assistant Deputy Minister, Regional Operations Sector, Indigenous Services Canada: Good morning, and thank you for the question. I’m pleased to be joining you today from the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabe people.
In the supplementary estimates, there is no dedicated funding for water this time. There was a significant investment of $1.5 billion in the 2023 Fall Economic Statement.
To update the numbers, there have been 147 long-term drinking water advisories lifted and over 280 short-term drinking water advisories lifted; 31 long-term drinking water advisories remain in 29 communities.
There are significant detailed action plans in place for each of those long-term drinking water advisories, and they span a number of issues in terms of getting to resolution. Infrastructure completion of water treatment plants is part of that, and operator capacity training is another.
There were some operational challenges: Sometimes the water treatment plant is completed but some operational challenges remain in terms of putting it into full implementation. We work closely with the communities on those detailed action plans.
In terms of Bill C-61, the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs released their report yesterday at 3 p.m. We have completed a detailed clause by clause. A number of significant amendments have been proposed. The draft bill was developed closely with First Nations’ voices at the forefront. There are some significant proposals in the bill that would improve long-term drinking water advisories.
One of the significant elements in the bill is the development of the First Nations Water Commission. It is like a resource centre — a centre of excellence. We haven’t predetermined what that is going to look like. We are going to co-develop the terms of reference with First Nations partners.
That is one example of what the bill proposes that would significantly improve capacity support for First Nations to develop and operate their water treatment facilities.
Senator Smith: Who maintains the infrastructure? Is it the local communities? Is it people who come in from outside these local communities? It seems to be a recurring issue that has existed since I have been on this committee, with Mr. Thompson coming in and talking with us.
Is there a way to ensure the community has the proper tools and horsepower, manpower or power of people to keep these installations operational and working to whatever required standard is needed?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: Absolutely. Thank you for the question.
There are different standards, depending on the capacity and sophistication of a water treatment plant. The operators required to operate those are commensurate, where there is a level one, two or three.
Senator Smith: Are people brought in?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: There’s a range of support. In some cases, local water operators maintain that. In many areas of the country, those operators are supported by additional capacity — second-level supports, if you will — at tribal councils.
Then there are other models, like the Atlantic First Nation Water Authority, whom you have heard directly from in the past. They support 12 or 14 communities in terms of supporting their operators. There are also national organizations that support the water operators in terms of training and support. There are a variety of models that support local operators.
Senator Smith: Are there specific investments or strategies planned to prevent short-term advisories from becoming long-term issues? This is a question we’ve asked for many years. I’m not sure whether we have a solution at this time.
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: Absolutely. A number of the targeted investments that were identified in the 2023 Fall Economic Statement are dedicated and designed to support communities facing short-term drinking water advisories to prevent them from becoming long-term drinking water advisories. As I said, over 280 have been lifted since 2015, including over 35 in the last year.
Senator Smith: In the long-term outlook, are we going to be able to get this cleaned up on a regular basis, which I’m sure would boost the morale in each of these communities? Is that a realistic expectation?
Are we going to have recurring problems because we don’t have enough local support or expertise that’s brought in to fix this problem once and for all?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: There are dedicated efforts to recruit and retain water operators. For many communities, that remains a challenge. There have been significant developments over the last years, particularly around salary models for water operators, ensuring that training is there and also the backup. For some operators, it’s a 24-7 vocation, and that’s not sustainable for communities.
A number of the investments we make are to support operators and recruit, train and support local people to ensure they’re in place and those second-level supports are there, whether at the tribal council or through other organizations to support them.
Senator Smith: Are you monitoring those things?
Ms. Hadden-Jokiel: Absolutely.
[Translation]
Senator Dalphond: My first question is for Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu.
I see that you are the chief finances, results and delivery officer. Last week, I asked Treasury Board some questions about two new items — not the ones in the budget —, but essentially there is an additional billion dollars in funding for child and family services programs. A further $700 million is allocated for Jordan Principle cases.
I asked Treasury Board what steps were being taken to ensure that past budgets — because those programs are from several years ago and additional funding is being allocated... What performance and results indicators does Treasury Board require? The Treasury Board officials said there are some requirements, but they wanted me to ask you. So I am glad that you are here today.
What performance indicators do you use, for instance, for Jordan Principle cases and for child and social services?
Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu: Thank you for your question, senator. I will let my colleague Philippe Thompson answer because Indigenous Services Canada is responsible for that.
Mr. Thompson: Thank you for the question. It is troubling that Treasury Board referred you to the wrong department.
Senator Dalphond: I was led astray by your title of “results officer.”
Mr. Thompson: Yes, I was joking, of course.
The Chair: There are nonetheless a number of departments that are responsible for Indigenous affairs.
Mr. Thompson: Indeed, and that always causes confusion. Those two programs, child services and Jordan’s Principle, are in fact the two biggest budget items in our supplementary estimates this year. There is $955 million for child services.
The funding for child services is to maintain the program while we negotiate the long-term reform of child services. So we will receive funding under the supplementary estimates. There is a base amount for the program, which is insufficient, to meet to the demand for the government’s commitments to provide child services. A lot of budget requests are based on requests; we receive requests and have to reimburse the actuals. We have to make additional requests every year.
As to performance indicators, what we look at is the number of children in the child support system, and we always try to reduce that number. We also measure the number of communities that enact their own laws under Bill C-92, and we report on our performance indicators in our departmental performance report. Indicators are identified in our departmental plan and in the departmental performance report. We also do a more qualitative analysis when we produce an information report and use additional data to provide more information about our progress in this regard.
Right now, we are waiting for our long-term reform partners to come back to the bargaining table and to continue negotiating the reform. In the meantime, we continue to provide services under the child support program.
Senator Dalphond: In terms of the indicators, if the number of children increases, the budget has to increase, but that is not necessarily an indicator of results. What results do you measure?
There might be children there, but it did not help them. There might be children that are no longer there because they dropped out... How do you measure the effectiveness of the services mentioned? Saying that there is an increase because the head count has risen, I understand that, but that is just the first stage, that is why you need a budget, but how do measure the results obtained from the expenditures, which are in fact in the billions of dollars?
Mr. Thompson: Absolutely. There are a lot of negotiations relating to performance indicators. Work was also done with outside partners. I can ask my colleague Catherine Lappe to come to the table to provide more details about the performance indicators used by the program.
While she is joining us, I can tell you quickly about Jordan’s Principle, for which we have been allocated $725 million this year. It is a similar concept in that we receive requests for products and services that are not provided by other risk programs and we meet the demand. It is a similar process: we have to request additional funding every year to meet the demand. It is really an annual process. In addition, we measure the products and services offered, we have service standards, we have requirements in terms of response time for Jordan’s Principle cases.
Now that Ms. Lappe is with us, I will ask her to provide further details about the performance indicators.
Catherine Lappe, Assistant Deputy Minister, Child and Family Services Reform Sector, Indigenous Services Canada: Good morning, everyone, and thank you for the question and the invitation.
During conversations with the parties present to come to an agreement, the idea was to have a results framework, called the Mesuring to Thrive Framework in English. We talked with experts to try and assess the reasons why children are taken into care, as well as how we can improve those conditions to reduce the number of children taken by the system, while also ensuring they are better supported in their culture, their community and their language.
We are trying to assess it all. We will keep working on the framework to make sure we are looking at it in a much more holistic and comprehensive way than before.
Senator Dalphond: Who does the evaluation? Is it officials from your department, or groups we fund, who then give you a report, saying: “Here is what we achieved”? Are the reports you receive verified?
Ms. Lappe: We negotiate the framework together. Afterwards, the department will work on the financial reports to determine if it reached the goals outlined in the framework. We will certainly work with partners, as well.
There’s also the idea of working over time, to look and see if these investments are, in fact, reaching the projected goals, and if not, to make adjustments.
Senator Loffreda: Welcome to our committee.
[English]
Once again, welcome to our committee.
My question is for the Department of National Defence, Mr. Moor.
I would like to address the funding requirements for science and technology research to modernize the North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD. There are three separate votes for NORAD, totalling nearly $209 million. I understand this funding envelope is part of the larger $36.8 billion to modernize NORAD over the next two decades that was announced in June 2022.
I’m interested in finding out more about Canada’s R&D regarding integrated air and missile defence. Can you share with us how these funds will be used to conduct research on understanding emerging missile threats and developing detection, monitoring, targeting and countermeasure technologies?
Mr. Moor: Thank you. While I’m answering initially, I’ll ask Rear-Admiral Thornton to join me. He may have more technical details. Taking June 2022, the NORAD modernization funding was received by the Department of National Defence, which included $4.23 billion for Defence Research and Development Canada, or DRDC, to create a science and technology program to assess new threats and co-develop technical solutions with the United States. In these supplementary estimates, we are requesting $210 million: $107 million in Vote 1 and $75 million in Vote 5.
The research is for space systems, integrated air and missile defence and countering uncrewed aerial systems, as well as continuing capabilities. The majority of this research is being done in collaboration with the U.S., but it is also encouraging Canadian innovators. Now that I’ve answered most of those questions, I’ll see if Rear-Admiral Thornton has more to add with regard to countersurveillance technology.
Rear-Admiral Steven Thornton, Chief of Programme, Department of National Defence: Thank you for the question. Just some more specifics on what the DRDC is working on in this space: One of the big parts to this threat is that we need to detect it. The DRDC is working on a couple of things in that space. One of the most important is the Polar Over the Horizon Radar. We’re also working on the Arctic Over the Horizon Radar, but the Polar Over the Horizon Radar is the one the DRDC is working most heavily on at this point. Once you’ve detected the threat, you need to have command and control capabilities, and that’s another space DRDC is working on, with various command and control capabilities and modernization efforts, working with the Americans in all of these fields so that we are with our allies in this.
The next phase will be effectors, either missiles or other things. The DRDC is working on that technology as well. Thank you.
Senator Loffreda: How closely are we working with the United Nations in establishing our list of R&D priorities? You mentioned that you asked about the new threats in the $4.23 billion. Are we working with the United Nations?
RAdm. Thornton: The United States.
Senator Loffreda: You’re working with the United States — you mentioned that — but what about the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO, for example. How closely are we working with NATO on that?
RAdm. Thornton: We’re starting to do more with NATO. Now that Finland and Switzerland are part of NATO, every single country that has Arctic territory except Russia is part of NATO. We are working together. There’s been a recent agreement with Norway and the U.S. on icebreaking capabilities, but I’m not sure of any other specific that we are doing in a DRDC science and technology space.
Mr. Moor: It would be worth saying that in the Our North, Strong and Free strategy, we received additional funding for contributing to the NATO Innovation Fund. This is an innovative approach to working with the U.S., actually, across the NATO 32 countries to actually encourage innovation and innovators in Canada and elsewhere.
Senator Loffreda: Thank you.
Senator MacAdam: I have a question for Mr. Moor. The proposed authorities to date, including these Supplementary Estimates (B), are about $34.6 billion. I’m just wondering if this includes any carryover of any unused funds from the previous year?
Mr. Moor: It doesn’t include it in the supplementary estimates, but we do receive additional allocations in the summer. If you look at the table — I’m not sure I have it in front of me — you’ll see our main estimates and the additional funds; those are the carryover. It’s about $700 million this year, and that is a Treasury Board vote, which we receive after the end of the financial year.
Senator MacAdam: But that’s included in the $34.6 billion?
Mr. Moor: It is included in the $34.6 billion once these Supplementary Estimates (B) are approved.
Senator MacAdam: Okay. Were there any lapsed funds last year?
Mr. Moor: Yes, there were lapsed funds. The Department of National Defence operates on a very large approach to capital projects in particular. We have over 300 capital projects within our program. Our lapse in 2022-23 was $1.57 billion, 92% of which — $1.45 billion — was available for future years. The majority of that is in our Capital Investment Fund. Our Capital Investment Fund is an accrual-based fund, which allows us to carry forward money for projects as and when needed. It allows us to move money between years, but also between projects.
In addition to that $1 billion in the Capital Investment Fund, we lapsed $240 million in standard carryover. We are allowed to carry forward 5% of our Vote 1. We actually carried forward about 1% of our Vote 1. We also carried forward $107 million, which was for the Heyder Beattie Settlement. That settlement was approved in the court, and those payments are now being made.
Senator MacAdam: Thank you. I want to talk about the Logistics Vehicle Modernization project. The supplementary estimates include $30 million for that project. Can you give me a little more detail on that project?
Mr. Moor: I’ll ask Nancy Tremblay to join me at the table with more details. This is to acquire a fleet of 1,000 light and 500 heavy logistics vehicles and equipment. The funding is to support the project and the milestone payments. The contracts were awarded in May 2024: $1.5 billion with General Dynamics Land Systems and also Marshall Aerospace Canada. The delivery is expected to start in 2027, but I’ll ask Ms. Tremblay to provide additional details.
Ms. Tremblay: Thank you very much. There’s not a lot to add here, as the contract was just awarded. I can say that the 1,500 vehicles are a mix between light duty and heavy duty, and the work is ongoing with the companies to deliver this equipment to the Canadian Armed Forces.
Senator MacAdam: With this project, is there a plan in place to make a modernized fleet greener?
Ms. Tremblay: This is always something that we look into as to how much we can become more environmentally friendly, but obviously, we need to take a look at the operational requirements for the Canadian Armed Forces. Depending on the use of the vehicles, sometimes we can and sometimes we cannot.
Senator MacAdam: Thank you.
Senator Ross: My question is for Mr. Moor. I’m interested in the Future Aircrew Training Program. The project was launched in 2018 and has an $11.2-billion budget. Can you tell us specifically what the $659 million in the Supplementary Estimates (B) is earmarked for on this project?
Mr. Moor: I’m very happy to answer that question. The contract was put in place of May 2024 with sky airline. That is a partnership between CAE and KF Aerospace, which are Canadian companies. It includes acquiring 70 training aircraft across five different fleets, but also infrastructure and equipment.
Although the training is due to start in 2029, which will actually also sustain 3,500 Canadian jobs, we need to start preparing for this by making interim payments, in particular, for setting up infrastructure and the other support functions, getting this contract operational and getting the aircraft acquired. It takes time to acquire the aircraft, and clearly, those orders are going in then.
Senator Ross: Have you acquired any of them yet?
Mr. Moor: I will ask Ms. Tremblay to reappear, and she’ll have the details of exactly where we are in the contract, but it has only recently been signed.
Ms. Tremblay: Thank you for the question. The Future Aircrew Training Program is on the go right now. The aircraft have not been acquired, but the companies are in the process of doing that. The intent is to acquire approximately 70 aircraft of five different types so the training can be provided to the pilots depending on the type of aircraft they will be expected to fly within the Canadian Armed Forces.
Senator Ross: I know this contract replaced two previous contracts. How is the winding down of those contracts going? Where are you on that?
Ms. Tremblay: The current contracts that are in place are still ongoing. Obviously, there is always a continuous requirement to train pilots for the Canadian Armed Forces. Those contracts are ongoing now and training aircrew.
The intent is for, as we ramp up the Future Aircrew Training Program, the other contracts will ramp down.
Senator Ross: Mr. Moor, you mentioned the program is going to train the future aircrew needed. Can you give me a sense of the increase that will include? Can you also give me a sense if any of this will happen in Gagetown? I’m a senator from New Brunswick. I’m very interested if there’s any impact there.
Mr. Moor: Again, this is one of two contracts. We have the Future Aircrew Training Program contract. We’re going through Treasury Board policy approvals at the moment for the Future Fighter Lead-in Training contract. Nancy will have more details on where the training will be happening.
Ms. Tremblay: Yes. Specifically for the Future Aircrew Training Program, the training will be happening in three places: Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan; Southport, Manitoba; and Winnipeg, Manitoba.
Senator Ross: Thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Moreau: My question is for the representatives of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada. I welcome you as well. I see you are requesting additional funding from the infrastructure lifecycle fund.
In the context of climate and permafrost changes, infrastructure lifecycle has been substantially altered. That is because connector tubes between infrastructure often move out of place, due to the ground melting.
In the fund we are discussing, do a certain number of appropriations deal with this specific situation? If not, did the original funding increase enough to account for the impact of climate change on the life of infrastructure?
Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu: Thank you for your question. I invite Heather McLean or Wayne Walsh to come and answer your question.
[English]
Wayne Walsh, Director General, Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada: Would you mind repeating the question?
Senator Moreau: Because of climate change, the lifespan of the infrastructure is shortened in the northern territories.
[Translation]
I see you have the fund for financing infrastructure lifecycles. Was this fund changed to account for climate change reducing infrastructure lifespan?
[English]
Mr. Walsh: Obviously, infrastructure in the North is a massive challenge under normal circumstances. Climate change is exacerbating that in terms of new construction and with existing infrastructure and adaptation.
It is definitely something we’re constantly looking at. We made budgetary adjustments accordingly.
Senator Moreau: I see it’s a massive situation because of climate change. I see the additional fund is only $5.5 million. That’s the reason why I’m asking the question.
Is the additional funding you’re seeking sufficient to see those particular situations out with the infrastructure because of climate change?
Mr. Walsh: Yes. In this particular instance, what we’re seeking is what was required at this time. It is fair to say that, as time moves on, those pressures will increase. You could likely see more pressure and demand as we look to adapt to and improve the infrastructure in the North.
[Translation]
Senator Moreau: Is this pressure reflected in higher appropriations allocated to this fund?
[English]
Mr. Walsh: I would anticipate that. However, that is something we will have to plan in the years ahead.
[Translation]
Senator Moreau: In the additional appropriations requested, are any specific amounts allocated to this situation?
[English]
Mr. Walsh: No. I wouldn’t say so.
[Translation]
Senator Moreau: Thank you. I see there is a fund for supporting food sovereignty. Is there a specific fund for housing?
[English]
Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu: Would you have an answer regarding the housing infrastructure in the North?
Mr. Walsh: Yes, I do. The housing infrastructure in the North is, again, very complex. There are many different layers. We work with ISC. We work with other areas within the department. There’s a mix of different housing. There’s what we call distinctions-based, so funding goes directly to Inuit, First Nation or Métis communities. There are also some gaps that creates in the North. We have worked in the past with territorial governments, Yukon, Northwest Territories and Nunavut, to address those gaps.
I don’t think there’s anything specific in this supplementary budget for housing.
[Translation]
Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu: If I may add something, in the 2024 budget, funds were specifically earmarked for housing in the Far North. We will come back for Supplementary Estimates (C), and we are currently developing Treasury Board submissions. It will be part of the next supplementary estimates. There were $62 million allocated to modern-day treaties, $370 million for Inuit communities and $60 million for Métis communities. The budgetary request will be in Supplementary Estimates (C).
Senator Moreau: Thank you very much.
[English]
Senator Pate: Thank you to all of our witnesses.
Mr. Thompson, my question is for you. The Supplementary Estimates (B) includes $171,719,732 for the On-Reserve Income Assistance Program in connection with spending announced in Budget 2024.
Can you please clarify what improvements will concretely result from this investment for First Nations people on-reserve below the poverty line and what indicators you will be using to measure the effectiveness of these investments?
Mr. Thompson: Thank you. Indeed, there is $171,719,000 in those supplementary estimates. That brings the total authorities for income assistance this year to $1.4 billion.
The funding is intended to address the current program pressures, provide new disability income supports and provide case management and pre-employment support.
I’m going to ask my colleague, Marc Sanderson, to come to the table to give you additional details on the work being done on income assistance and what that funding will achieve.
Senator Pate: Mr. Sanderson, how many people do you expect to be lifted out of poverty as a result of these measures?
Marc Sanderson, Assistant Deputy Minister, Education and Social Development Programs and Partnerships Sector, Indigenous Services Canada: My colleague Mr. Thompson entered at a high level for the first part of your question, senator.
Could you reframe what else you would like to dig into?
Senator Pate: The number of people who will be lifted above the poverty line and what indicators you will be using to measure the effectiveness of the investments.
Mr. Sanderson: Like many of the programs at Indigenous Services Canada, we work carefully and closely on an ongoing basis with communities to deliver, in this case, income assistance on-reserve for eligible individuals and their families and dependents, as the case may be. It’s a demand-driven program, as you can imagine.
There are any number of factors that put someone in the difficult situation of requiring income assistance, and, I dare say, there are almost as many programs as there are communities. There are certainly second-level supports — tribal councils, provincial organizations — that support that. The inputs to the program are constantly changing. What we’re focused on is supporting communities to ensure that there are case management supports, there are disability-related supports — and that’s addressed in these supplementary estimates as well — and to respond to the needs as they present themselves. That also involves pathways to employment, skills retraining, education and those sorts of things. It would be very difficult for me to put an absolute number on a target of individuals we’re seeking to lift out of poverty.
The grand outcome, I would say, would be that we have no one needing to receive these programs, but that’s, of course, a challenge across all parts of Canada.
Senator Pate: Do you track anything like downstream results, health results or education results? What data do you actually collect, and is there any of that that you can share with us?
Mr. Sanderson: Thanks again for the question. I would be very happy to provide a little bit of additional information at a later date through the clerk if that is possible. But I would say, again, working with communities is the most important part of this program — supporting communities to determine, again, types of supports and culturally relevant activities. The tracking that the senator is speaking of is something I wouldn’t necessarily say we are trying to move away from, but it is not a one-for-one. It is overall community well-being indicators that I think the senator might be interested in hearing more about. I don’t have those with me, but that’s something that we can definitely bring back to the committee through the clerk.
[Translation]
The Chair: I have a question, and I would ask Ms. Tremblay, perhaps, to come forward, because it focuses more specifically on procurement.
I just want to understand the issue of buying Poseidon aircraft. We operated government-to-government, so I imagine the American government has the same idea we do, with the Canadian Commercial Corporation (CCC) doing procurement in order to go from government to government. Did the American government buy 16 Poseidon planes from Boeing, then sell them back to us without a call for tender?
Ms. Tremblay: Thank you for the question. It is indeed a government-to-government agreement we call a “foreign military sale.” Our contract is with the American government, which has a contract with Boeing to provide the Poseidon aircraft.
I would like to make a small correction to what you said. Currently, we intend to buy up to 16 of them, but it will depend on the budgets available to us to do so.
The Chair: The estimated budget is 5.9 billion American dollars for 14 planes, which must be about 700 million Canadian dollars per plane?
Ms. Tremblay: I think we have to be careful not to break down the cost of the contract into different planes, because the contract will also include a training aspect.
The Chair: In the published figures, it goes up to $10 billion. The $5.9 billion is therefore for acquisition, and the $10 billion or so is for maintenance and useful life?
Ms. Tremblay: The $5.6 billion contract we have does include the planes, but also support.
The Chair: Perfect. Bombardier also sold three Global 6500 aircraft to the American army, with specifications and technical equipment, by going through a government-to-government agreement at around the same time.
Ms. Tremblay: Unfortunately, I cannot comment on that, because it is not a contract that involved the Department of National Defence.
The Chair: Could you explain to me why the Canadian government is buying end-of-the-line Poseidon aircraft from a factory that was going to close, whereas the American government and the American army are buying first-generation Canadian Bombardier planes?
Ms. Tremblay: Thank you for the question, Mr. Chair.
I think we have to be careful when comparing the two. You really have to look at operational needs. The Department of National Defence went ahead with purchasing the Poseidons specifically because of an operational need identified by the Royal Canadian Air Force, as well as the length of time they would in fact need this capability. We knew the Poseidons were a recognized configuration. Several of our allies used them, and they will continue to be supported for many years to come.
The Chair: And yet, the Poseidon aircraft will be delivered in 2026, so it is a matter of time. The first Bombardier aircraft was delivered to the American army on November 24. It was rather fast, anyway.
Ms. Tremblay: Mr. Chair, I will repeat some of what I said. I think we have to be careful when comparing the two, because they do not necessarily deal with the same mission systems required by the Canadian Armed Forces, compared to the American forces.
The Chair: If I look at statements from the U.S. government, particularly the Republican senator from Kansas, he is saying:
The partnership between Bombardier, the U.S. Army and the Wichita workforce has produced a next-generation aircraft equipped to meet the demands of warfare in a new era of technology [...].
The HADES aircraft has the tools needed to deter threats, conduct surveillance and help keep our country safe. This is the start of a new chapter in the aviation capabilities of our military and continues Kansas’s legacy of defence manufacturing.
Defence experts said that:
This aircraft gives us the range, payload capacity, speed and endurance to deliver timely, relevant and responsive capabilities for the full spectrum of Army and Joint collection requirements.
If it’s good enough for the American army, why isn’t it good enough for us?
Ms. Tremblay: Mr. Chair, I have absolutely no intention of denigrating the capability Bombardier has provided to the U.S. Army. I am also certain it is a very good capability that meets the needs of the American army. What I am saying is that this platform did not meet all the requirements identified by the Canadian Armed Forces and the Royal Canadian Air Force.
The Chair: Which ones?
Ms. Tremblay: You have to understand that with an aircraft that will be used by the Canadian Armed Forces, it’s not just a matter of taking the aircraft itself into consideration, but also all the systems inside the aircraft that enable it to meet its mission objectives. So there are differences there.
The Chair: Can you send us the list of systems and specifications you are talking about? Your answer is not clear.
Ms. Tremblay: I just want to make sure I fully understand your question. You want the list of systems on the Poseidon aircraft to meet the army’s needs—
The Chair: — compared to Bombardier’s aircraft, which did not meet the requirements.
Ms. Tremblay: I think it’s important to mention that the proposal made by Bombardier, when we were discussing the possibility of buying Poseidon aircraft, was for a craft that didn’t exist. The aircraft sold to the Americans was not what Bombardier recommended and was not what would have met the needs of the Canadian Armed Forces and the Royal Canadian Air Force.
The Chair: Will you be able to compare the two for us?
Ms. Tremblay: Yes.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
Senator Forest: Poseidon, what a project. We probably don’t fully understand the subtleties for this procurement.
In Supplementary Estimates (B), $15 million was earmarked for maintenance on the supply vessel, Astérix. At the time, this indicated that the Davie shipyard had also made a proposal, because a secondObélix ship was needed. It wasn’t fulfilled because the procurement service was subcontracted to other countries. Is that still the case? Does the vesselAstérix sufficiently meet the Royal Canadian Navy’s procurement needs, or do we still have to subcontract supply ships from other providers?
[English]
Mr. Moor: Maybe I’ll ask Ms. Tremblay to rejoin me. It is my understanding that the joint support ships, which are being constructed at the moment, will be sufficient for the Royal Canadian Navy. My understanding is that the MV Asterix is sufficient in the interim period, between now and when the joint support ships are delivered.
The first delivery of a joint support ship will happen in late 2025, and that’s being built at the Seaspan Vancouver Harbour. I will pass it over to Ms. Tremblay now to speak about the capabilities of Asterix.
Ms. Tremblay: Thank you very much. All I want to add is that Asterix is providing an interim capability to the Royal Canadian Navy right now. As Mr. Moor said, we’re getting very close to launching the first of the joint support ships later this month in Vancouver. This capability will go through tests and evaluations over the next year and will be delivered to the navy. In the interim, Asterix is meeting the requirements of the Royal Canadian Navy.
[Translation]
Senator Forest: Thank you. Mr. Thompson, seven years ago, we held consultations to reform the First Nations child and family services program. The Assembly of First Nations Quebec-Labrador emphasized the need to support the development of a network of foster families among each of these nations to meet short- and long-term needs and to respond adequately.
Are we now able to say that each nation is on its way to establishing its own foster family network?
Mr. Thompson: Thank you very much for the question. I will ask my colleague, Catherine Lappe, to join us to provide you with details on the issue.
Ms. Lappe: Thank you for the question.
I don’t have the specific answer about group homes, but what already happened with the reform is that now, each community receives funds for prevention and other services. That’s a big change from the past, when only agencies or authorities that provided protection received funding. Now, all First Nations in the country receive funding and have the flexibility to prioritize the services that matter to them.
As for group homes, I’d have to look into that in detail to get the answer to that question.
Senator Forest: Regarding group homes, I understand, but foster families were one of the fundamental objectives. A child would be placed with a family, and on that level, you don’t necessarily have any information yet?
Ms. Lappe: That means that we now give each community about $2,500 per person for prevention, which they can share with their service providers as they see fit. It gives them the opportunity to make those efforts. Also, when a child is at risk of being taken from a family, it is possible to set up voluntary agreements and place them with families close to home. There is an opportunity to work that way.
Senator Forest: Is it possible to send us a written assessment of the development of foster family networks, and not the group homes in the communities?
Ms. Lappe: Yes, we could see how many children stay in their community. Yes, we could look into that.
Senator Forest: Meegwetch
[English]
Senator Smith: Mr. Moor, I would like to ask a question on NATO spending and cost overruns.
Given Canada’s commitment to increasing defence spending to meet NATO targets, how does the DND plan to address the persistent cost overruns and delays in major procurement projects? What measures are being implemented to ensure that these procurement challenges do not hinder Canada’s ability to meet NATO capabilities and burden-sharing expectations?
Mr. Moor: I’m happy to answer that question, but maybe I will ask Ms. Tremblay to join me as well around the overruns on the contracts.
We are committed to meeting the 2% by 2032, and that’s very important for us in terms of delivering the capacity and capability required by the Canadian Armed Forces. I’m pleased to say that by next year, we will be meeting the 20% target, which is being spent on equipment for the Canadian Armed Forces.
Clearly, we have a pathway toward the 2%, and that’s really a question for the government to answer. Maybe I’ll hand it over now to Ms. Tremblay to talk about how we manage our contracts to keep them on track and on budget.
Ms. Tremblay: Thank you very much for the question. Obviously, a lot of projects are ongoing within the Department of National Defence right now, working very closely with the different companies that we’re involved with.
There have been a number of initiatives within Defence to improve on scheduling for the projects. There is a lot of professional development being done with our project managers and their respective teams. Also, we’re working more closely with Public Service and Procurement Canada and industry to ensure that there is earned value management practices involved in the major procurements to ensure there is good tracking of the progress of the projects compared to the level of spending.
It continues to be a challenge. Most of those projects are very complex in nature, but by using good governance and making sure that our project managers are professional and working closely with industry, we’re doing our best to ensure we deliver within the delays that are advertised.
Senator Smith: I think Mr. Moor mentioned earlier that there are 100-plus projects that you are managing at this particular time. In listening to feedback, what is your sense of prioritizing within that 100? What are the top 10 projects or the most important projects that you have to complete to link yourself to your NATO commitments at this time, because 100 projects is a huge gambit. Realistically, how do you manage them? Which ones do you start to scale back because you have reprioritized yourself?
Ms. Tremblay: Thank you very much for the question. It is true that it is complex and a big scope, but we have project teams assigned. Once a project gets to the point where we have the policy authorities and the funding authorities, we assign a team to do the project management, and they all advance.
If we come to a point where we have to make choices, we need to have those discussions with the Canadian Armed Forces. But for now, we have project teams that are dedicated to each one of those projects, and they are advancing.
Senator Smith: Do you have confidence in the fact that you are properly positioned from a management perspective to manage those 100 accounts and move them forward?
Ms. Tremblay: I am confident that we have the right individuals to progress with those projects. Obviously, as more projects come up in the future, we will have to ensure that we increase our capacity to deliver and manage them.
Senator Smith: Does your current capacity lead you to believe that you will be able to make your commitment to the NATO funding requirement that is being asked of Canada?
Mr. Moor: Maybe just to clarify a couple of things — first, I did refer to 100 assets, which, Ms. Tremblay manages as well. That’s our materiel management function. We have over 350 projects that we’re managing at the moment, so we do have a significant amount of workload involved in managing this.
In terms of the 2%, as I said before, it is for the government to answer questions on that matter. However, we are working on a number of different proposals and different options which are coming forward. In terms of our very big projects, probably our biggest projects are the F-35 program, the Future Fighter Capability Project and the River-class destroyer program. As Ms. Tremblay said, there are a large number of small projects as well as large projects, and all of them are under the same level of scrutiny and of control across the organization.
[Translation]
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator Dalphond: In your comments, earlier, you referred to $15 million for the vessel Asterix, If I understood correctly. Is National Defence still leasing that vessel, or does it belong to National Defence?
[English]
Mr. Moor: No. My understanding is it is still rented. I think it belongs to Davie shipyard, but Ms. Tremblay —
Senator Dalphond: That was my understanding.
Mr. Moor: But we are renting it, I think, until 2028, when the joint support ships will be operational, and then they will replace the MV Asterix.
Ms. Tremblay: That is correct. The vessel does not belong to the Canadian Armed Forces. It is a service that we’re renting.
Senator Dalphond: But the $15 million you are referring to is additional funding, so it’s not to pay for the rent. It is to do some update or maintenance on the ship?
Ms. Tremblay: So what happened is that the contract that we had in order to get the services from Asterix reached an expiry date that we have extended, but that decision was only made after the Main Estimates were submitted. This is why this is part of the Supplementary Estimates (B).
Senator Dalphond: Is the rental $15 million for this year?
Ms. Tremblay: I do not have those details right now, unfortunately. I have to come back.
Mr. Moor: We will have to come back with the details —
Senator Dalphond: Yes, I was going to ask you to come back on the rentals that we are paying for the extension of until 2028 and overall from the very beginning, because when I came here, the ship was just rented. Up to now, how much has the Department of National Defence paid for the maintenance, rental or whatever to Davie shipyard over the years? I would like to compare what it costs compared to the cost of buying the ship at the time.
Mr. Moor: I think maybe we can ask Rear-Admiral Thornton to answer this question.
RAdm. Thornton: The contract expired at some point this year, so the money was to top it up. We have extended it, as the ADM pointed out, to 2028. We have those costs. I don’t have them here today, but we can provide you with what we are paying for Asterix until 2028. Definitely.
Senator Dalphond: Can you also provide what we have paid from the very beginning of this arrangement?
RAdm. Thornton: Yes.
Senator Dalphond: My next question is for — I want to get the right department — Indigenous Services Canada, or ISC, so it is you, Mr. Thompson. So according to a September 2024 Global News report, Indigenous Services told an Indigenous council that they could upload any document, including pictures of a bunny, to prove that they qualify for procurement policy meant to boost First Nations, Inuit and Métis businesses. Can you please elaborate on this, and describe the safeguards that your department is implementing to make sure that we are dealing with proper Indigenous providers of services?
[Translation]
Mr. Thompson: Absolutely, thank you very much for the question. I’ll answer in French, if that suits you.
We have a number of mechanisms in place to ensure the integrity of companies listed in the registry. We have pre-award audits. There are three processes, including pre-award audits. When we add a company to the registry, mechanisms are in place to make sure several types of proof are requested. For example, it may be proof of registration with the registry, or proof of citizenship recognized by a Métis nation.
[English]
Also, membership with a recognized Indigenous organization, acceptance as an Indigenous person by a community covered under a land claim agreement — these are the requirements.
[Translation]
Sometimes external auditors will also work to support the Ministry in ensuring that applications are legitimate before they are included in the registry.
We therefore have pre-award audit processes when awarding the contract, based on its value. The department will then conduct an audit to ensure that those applying to the registry are legitimate.
Furthermore, after the contract, once the work assigned, if a government department asks us to carry out an audit, we can to do so at this stage of the process, and we can also carry out discretionary audits.
The program is currently working alongside Indigenous communities and leaders, because the aim is really to transfer the program. Currently, it’s the department.
Senator Dalphond: I understand that, but are there in situ visits? Do they go and see the facilities to see if a factory, a house or an office is actually located at the addresses provided?
Mr. Thompson: Yes, audits are carried out by the ministry or sometimes by an external auditor. However, during the auditing process, an audit can be carried out at any point in the process. Obviously, if there are doubts there, it can be reported to the program and a discretionary audit can be carried out.
Senator Dalphond: Are a lot of these audits done?
Mr. Thompson: For example, since 2023, 19 pre-award audits were carried out. For 2023-2024, I see a total of 798 audits and 7 pre-award audits.
One of the main functions of the program is to perform these checks and ensure legitimacy, because it’s essential to ensure the register’s credibility with regard to maintain the public’s trust. The best thing, however, would be for Indigenous communities to take control of the registry and carry out the work themselves.
Senator Dalphond: Thank you.
[English]
Senator Loffreda: My question is also for the Department of National Defence, or DND, on this second round. I would like you to elaborate on the funding in these estimates going toward the Department of National Defence’s commitment to modernizing our surveillance systems in the North. I am quite interested in Canada’s ability to preserve and safeguard our sovereignty in the Arctic. I noted investments and commitments in four areas: the Arctic Over the Horizon Radar, or A-OTHR; the Polar Over the Horizon Radar, or P-OTHR; the Crossbow; and the Defence Enhanced Surveillance from Space, or DESSP. According to your Departmental Plan for 2024-25, the Arctic Over the Horizon Radar is a priority. Can you speak to us about your collaboration with our American counterparts in ensuring that no gaps exist in planned coverage for a binational, integrated North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD, OTHR system?
Mr. Moor: Thank you very much for the question. Maybe I can call on one — I am not entirely sure which colleague. I think Rear-Admiral Thornton will be joining me. So these were projects which were funded in the NORAD modernization in June 2022. We received $9.6 billion for the Northern approaches surveillance systems, for the Arctic Over the Horizon Radar, the Polar Over the Horizon Radar. None of these projects are actually being funded in the Supplementary Estimates (B). But I’ll hand it over now to Rear-Admiral Thornton, who will give you more details about them.
RAdm. Thornton: Thank you for the question. We are very much lashed up, using a great naval term, with the Americans in all the efforts with respect to NORAD. We have to be. We are the two partners in this space.
From a surveillance perspective, you pointed out some of the technologies we’re investigating right now. So Arctic Over the Horizon Radar is probably the first of the things that are coming. The Polar Over the Horizon is much more complex based on the space it is trying to operate in, with the ionosphere and the polar region changing much more, so that’s the piece that will come probably later of the two.
Right now, there are also other things. The Americans are still figuring out what they want to do with the technology, but we are definitely going to be acquiring technology that is interchangeable and interoperable with them to ensure that the command and control systems that will be receiving the feeds of these sensors will be able to integrate that picture so that we can respond appropriately and quickly to any threat that could come from that area.
Senator Loffreda: Thank you.
Senator Pate: Mr. Thompson, you may want to get your colleague up again. I want to follow up in terms of what steps have been taken since Budget 2024, in particular, to evaluate and move toward implementation in the financial assistance area, a national guaranteed livable income, as required by Call for Justice 4.5 of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, or MMIWG, and as was highlighted as a short-term priority in the MMIWG National Action Plan.
I’m also curious as to what indicators Indigenous Services Canada are using to evaluate its performance with respect to Jordan’s Principle. I know you’ve talked a bit about that, but if there’s anything more concrete in addition to what you told Senator Dalphond, that would be appreciated.
Also, can you advise — either within these supplementary estimates or more broadly — if you’re connecting with other departments to ensure that priorities are in place to allow you to meet the goal of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, or TRC, and the MMIWG to eliminate the mass incarceration of Indigenous peoples by next year, by 2025, and what specific measures are being taken to achieve that goal?
Mr. Thompson: I will ask my colleague Marc Sanderson to join us to talk about income assistance and the performance measures that are being used. With regard to Jordan’s Principle, perhaps my colleague Candice St-Aubin can come to the table and give you some details as well.
With regard to the work being done on incarceration, I don’t know if one of my colleagues has any information on that. We don’t have direct programming. Of course, with regard to all of our programming in terms of mental support, there’s a lot of work being done in the department to address the situation, but we don’t have direct programming with regard to corrections. Maybe we can start with you, Ms. St-Aubin.
Candice St-Aubin, Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, First Nations and Inuit Health Branch, Indigenous Services Canada: Hello. Thank you, Senator Pate, for the question.
Regarding Jordan’s Principle, as Mr. Thompson was saying, there are a series of measurements that we are taking on now. When it comes to Jordan’s Principle being on a demand-driven initiative, it is not something for which it is easy to measure impact and outcome, given that the scope and the demand have tripled and quadrupled over the previous few years.
Our indicators are around the number of supports and services provided to the individual request. It’s not the number of children being served because it’s not just children at this point. It can be moms, caregivers or respite care. We measure the initiative and the effectiveness, and outcome and effectiveness are very different when it comes to data and impact.
Certainly, our current indicators are around the number of supports and services that have been funded to date. Further — and Mr. Thompson was explaining this a bit more — the department is looking at a more robust fashion to measure impact, for example, the number of communities who take that over to serve their children and citizens directly as opposed to a government official deciding what an urgent request or need is. It is something we are quite focused on, given our mandate. Also, and we talked about this last time I was here, this is where Supplementary Estimates (B) comes into play: getting those requests done and dealt with quickly to not allow for elapsed time.
Senator Pate: If you can provide more detail and some of that data, that would be extremely useful.
Ms. St-Aubin: We have the numbers year to year, and we can provide that, senator.
Senator Pate: Thank you.
Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu: My colleague will enlighten you.
Mary-Luisa Kapelus, Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada: Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada, or CIRNAC, plays more of a coordination role. MMIWG, specifically, has over 20 federal departments, one of which is Public Safety Canada. We are working on our next annual progress report, and every year, we’re showing concrete results, but our role is to coordinate those results and roll them up in a more friendly centralized format. We’re working with other departments on the progress they’re making, including incarceration rates.
Senator Pate: Are there targets in terms of reduction?
Ms. Kapelus: We can share with the Senate the actual progress report. We’re working on the current version and just taking in information now. It will be each year annually, but we can definitely provide you a copy.
Mr. Thompson: The formula being used for the organization, we are matching provincial rates for income assistance and providing pre-employment support for individuals who are receiving income assistance. We will be measuring those measures and seeing if this is supporting reintegration into the workforce. As you know, with the current environment, unfortunately, there are many Canadians who are being challenged with inflation and other aspects, so even if we are doing our best to match provincial rates, there are far too many people living on income assistance. We hope that, in the future, we will be able to come back with a reform program that’s going to have a greater impact than just providing basic support right now.
Senator MacAdam: My question is for Mr. Moor. In the supplementary estimates, $5.6 million is being requested for an electronic health record platform project. I understand this was a Budget 2024 announcement. I’m wondering if you can elaborate on this project in terms of who will be developing the platform, the timelines for implementation and how it’s going to assist the Royal Canadian Air Force, or RCAF, or the Canadian Armed Forces, or CAF, members.
Mr. Moor: Certainly, I’m happy to answer this question. We’re asking for the initial funding for the development stage for the electronic health care record platform. Just to remind everybody, health care for the Canadian Armed Forces is divided internally by the CAF itself. This is about modernizing the system to provide records, in particular, for well-being and for health reasons to ensure we have these records available across the whole organization at the right time. We have over 27 different health care centres across the CAF, including 2 that are overseas.
My understanding is that this is going to be developed in-house, but I will look to Nancy to confirm that. I think Nancy can’t confirm that, but I’m happy to come back and give you that in writing. My understanding is that this is to be developed in-house. It’s a project we’re working closely with the Treasury Board on as well, because this will ultimately be leading into enterprise resource planning systems as well to make sure we have completely joined up, but also confidential and segregated information for all of our CAF members.
Senator MacAdam: Do you know what the timeline will be?
Mr. Moor: I’ll have to get back to you on the timeline for delivery, but we’re certainly starting implementation, which is why the request has come in for this money.
In terms of Our North, Strong and Free, or ONSAF, we were awarded $281 million over 5 years and $497 million over 20 years. That would imply that the length of time will be more than five years. Maybe Rear-Admiral Thornton will have more detail.
RAdm. Thornton: Regarding the electronic health record platform, a critical system for us, the previous platform failed a couple of times in the not-recent past, so it’s important we get this moving. By late 2028, the replacement of the current system will be complete. That’s the timeline I have right now. This is a priority. It’s in ONSAF. It’s one we have money for now, and it is in the definition phase. It’s far down the path, almost into implementation.
Senator MacAdam: Thank you.
Senator Ross: Just to follow up on the questions, Mr. Moor, about the electronic health record platform, do you have a sense of how that data will be used, to whom it will be available and if it will be shared with Veterans Affairs, considering veterans’ health is often related to occupational health?
Second, if you’re developing this in-house, how do you sense that it will interface with electronic medical records, or EMRs, once someone is no longer military? Will they be able to interface those records with other EMRs provincially?
Mr. Moor: Thank you very much for the question. I’m not an expert on this, but what I can say is, clearly, confidentiality and privacy are our number one priority for this system.
I think our second priority is really around commercial, off-the-shelf systems. We won’t be developing this in house. We will be using a commercial system to actually implement, so that should give us the ability to be able to share records with Veterans Affairs or provincial or territorial health care providers if somebody leaves the service and goes elsewhere, not dissimilar to, actually, other individuals who come in from different providers. I’m personally British. Clearly, there wasn’t any real sharing of my health records between Britain and Canada, but it’s important that we have that interoperability, especially with Veterans Affairs and elsewhere.
Senator Ross: Have they worked on starting to develop the analytics that will be used in tracking the data?
Mr. Moor: It would probably be easiest for us to come back with a more detailed briefing because this is not really any of our centres of expertise. We have an ADM for digital services who is responsible for this project, but it is a crucial project. Also, our Surgeon General is very involved in this to ensure they have the right information at the right time for the right individuals.
Senator Ross: Thanks very much.
[Translation]
Senator Moreau: My question is for Mr. Moor. We’ve spoken a great deal about National Defence equipment. We’ve recently seen in the news that one of defence’s main issues is recruitment for the armed forces. It was said, I think, that you are about 17,000 troops short of your targets. I’ve learned not to believe everything written in the papers. Am I to understand that you have major recruitment issues? How far are you from your targets? Can you tell me whether these recruitment problems are the same for the air force, the navy or the land forces?
[English]
Mr. Moor: As I start to answer the question, I will ask Rear-Admiral Thornton to join me, who may have more specific figures.
The Canadian Armed Forces did suffer a drop in recruitment during the COVID years and is now seeking to recover. There are two statistics, which I think Rear-Admiral Thornton might have. One is around the number of Armed Forces members, and the second one is the number of Armed Forces members who are readily deployable, who have been fully trained. Those two numbers do differ. From recollection, it’s about 52,000 who are ready to deploy, but I think there are over 60,000 actual members, so people who are in training and who are available to be trained and deployed to date.
What I am pleased to say is that in 2024-25, year to date, 4,619 individuals have joined the Regular Forces and the Primary Reserve, and 18% of those are women and 3% Indigenous, which are also targets to meet across those two groups. I’m also pleased to say that 142 permanent residents have also been appointed to be involved in the Armed Forces, and there are 13,817 permanent residents in the chain.
It is an issue. We are dealing with it. In fact, we have set up a separate board to actually consider this, chaired by the chief. This is our opportunity to look at our policies and programs for how we not only recruit but deal with individuals during training. We’ve instigated a probationary period, which is one of our requirements under Our North, Strong and Free, and also, we are looking at bringing in recruits to basic training who have reliability status but not secret status, and they will then achieve secret status during the training period. I’m sure Rear-Admiral Thornton has a bit more detail to add to that.
RAdm. Thornton: Thanks, Jonathan. It shouldn’t be a surprise that people are core to the Canadian Armed Forces’ mission of readiness and culture. That’s why we are definitely prioritizing this area.
As Jonathan pointed out, for a long time we were reducing the overall strength of the Armed Forces. The stats are around 14,000 short right now when you add the Canadian Armed Forces Regular Forces and the reserves. We are prioritizing recovering to our 71,500 effective strength we’re supposed to be at. That’s why we have just put out a directive that is focused on making sure that we strengthen our critical recruiting and retention initiatives.
As Jonathan pointed out, we’re working on a bunch of initiatives to streamline our recruiting efforts. One of the things we’re doing is an online applicant portal. We’re digitizing the space, which is important. If you look at the people we’re looking at recruiting, generally younger people, they’re in the digital space, so we’re trying to pivot. There’s some really good work there.
There are also Canadian Forces aptitude tests that we’ve stopped and replaced with a scored employment application form that evaluates and examines the essential qualities of an applicant, such as physical fitness, teamwork and leadership skills and bilingualism. It’s really about a faster path to enrolment without compromising standards. That’s very important to us. We still need amazing Canadians to be enrolled in the Armed Forces.
The other two things Jonathan already pointed out are the probationary periods for both the medical and the security clearance. Those are other things we’re doing right now. Thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Moreau: Are recruitment problems the same, whether it be the air force, the navy or ground troops?
RAdm. Thornton: All three forces experienced different circumstances in this area. As far as the air force is concerned, recruitment is going better. We can see that the air force is undergoing significant modernization in this area, which is helping them.
Senator Moreau: Technologies?
RAdm. Thornton: People want to join organizations with very modern capability levels. The air force underwent a level of modernization not seen since World War II. For the army, things are not going as well as they are for the air force, but it’s not going too badly. The navy is the one facing the biggest challenges. We’re deploying a significant effort to help the navy. That capability is very close to my heart and is very important for Canada.
Senator Moreau: Does it explain the fact that the navy is having more significant problems with recruitment than the land army, for example? What, in your opinion, explains why the navy is having more problems with recruitment?
RAdm. Thornton: I’m not an expert in this field. Recruiting is very complicated. Canadians who come to a recruiting centre already have a certain perception of the armed forces. They also have their own wants, and understanding why someone will choose one field over another is complex. The air force is obviously doing better; we can understand what’s happening in that area. The navy has older equipment and the army is similar. These are things we’re trying to understand. Canadians are different too. Perhaps fewer of them want to live the adventure of being in the navy, because seeing the world through deployments and everything that goes with it is complex.
Senator Moreau: What efforts are you deploying to identify the causes of the recruitment problem?
RAdm. Thornton: We are trying to find out why a Canadian chooses one occupation rather than another. We are also trying to find out why some do not completely fill out their application. We are trying to develop digital tools to identify it, but we are just taking our first steps to do so. The digital portal will soon be up, and it will help us to do more significant analyses in the future.
The Chair: Thank you. I’d like to continue along this line. Do you have any comparative analyses of salaries and benefits between the Canadian army and the other G7 armies, such as the American army and the French army? Do you have a comparative analysis to determine whether our salaries and benefits are competitive? Does that exist?
RAdm. Thornton: I can’t give you the details about the differences, but our military personnel organization is in very close contact with our allies. This is an area that is not only difficult for us, the Canadian Forces, but our allies as well.
All of them experienced challenges in the area of personnel recruitment. We are all trying to find systems that work and stay in contact. It’s a very complex area. It’s not just a matter of pay or benefits—
The Chair: I understand, but do you have a comparative analysis of the salaries and benefits of the Canadian army compared to G7 countries or our NATO allies? I would be curious to do see an analysis.
Secondly, is a comparative study of the civilian positions in Canada compared to the same job in the army? For example, a military lawyer compared to a regular lawyer, or a military office clerk compared to a regular office clerk. If you had this type of analysis between civilian and military, it would be interesting.
RAdm. Thornton: I’m not sure I have a complete report on our allies. I know we talk about it and we have data, but I’m not sure there’s an analysis.
The Chair: That was why I referred to the G7, but it would be interesting to at least have an idea about countries that are comparable to ours. I understand that Australia is not NATO member, but in my opinion, it is a comparable country.
RAdm. Thornton: I agree entirely. We probably have data on this, which we could send to you.
The Chair: So you could send us that, the comparative data between other countries’ armies and data between the civilian sector and the army in Canada—
RAdm. Thornton: It would be easier to provide the information on civilians versus members of the military because our pay is directly tied to the pay in the public service. A military lawyer earns approximately the same as a lawyer in the public service, but certain levels have additional pay increments. For example, the lieutenant-colonel rank is lower. At a specific level, the person is paid….
The Chair: I understand. You don’t have to go into detail, because I’ll get the information in the list, which will be shared with everyone. That way, we’ll be able to compare how competitive the compensation is. I wasn’t using my speaking time for those questions, though. I was just following up. Now my turn begins.
I would like some information, but I don’t know who in DND could provide it. At one time, the national shipbuilding or ship procurement strategy announced in 2013-14 was at around $40 billion, but that number has no doubt gone up with the cost increase.
Is it possible to find out how much has been invested in the shipbuilding strategy to date since it was announced, in or around 2013 or 2014, and what the projection for that spending is in the future? What I’d like to know is how much the shipbuilding strategy will contribute to the 2% spending target.
I’d like to find out the same thing for the F-35s. This is what I’d like to know: How much has the government spent on the F-35 procurement strategy, and how is that investment projected to factor into the 2% spending target? I’m sure it’s taken into account in your calculation.
I’d like you to pull those two pieces of information. How much has been spent to date from the time the project was announced, and how is that investment projected to factor into the 2% target? Is that something you would be able to provide?
[English]
Mr. Moor: I think it’s very possible for us to provide the data by service for the projects that have been completed or are under way. For example, in the naval area, we have the Arctic offshore patrol vessels, the last one of which is going to be launched next year. We also have the joint support ships, and we’re now starting the project around the River-class destroyer.
So we can certainly provide that information on the projects that are already approved and under way, but it is more difficult for us to provide information toward the 2% because that has not yet been settled in terms of what projects fit within that. For example, in Our North, Strong and Free, we were asked to look at and explore options around submarines, Arctic vehicles, Maritime helicopters and land-based air defence. None of those have been actually settled yet, but we can certainly provide information on existing projects.
[Translation]
The Chair: You can send us those figures as well, but what I am most interested in are the numbers to date for the shipbuilding strategy, obviously since it was announced in 2013-14. I’d like to see how the increased cost is projected to factor into the 2% target, and the same for the aircraft procurement or F-35 development project.
The second issue I wanted to ask about is the safety of our coasts, the Coast Guard, everything related to the monitoring of our ocean borders. Do you factor those expenditures into the 2% target?
[English]
Mr. Moor: Yes, I think you’re referring to the National Shipbuilding Strategy, which clearly covers the Royal Canadian Navy but also the Coast Guard. That’s certainly something we keep under regular review.
Not all of the Coast Guard costs are included in the 2%, but a large proportion of the costs are.
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator Pate: I just wanted to finish off what I was looking for in my last question to Indigenous Services Canada.
One of the things that struck me is that, in your discussion, you mentioned a number of diverse economic portfolios and income support programs. I’m curious if there’s been an analysis of whether Call for Justice 4.5 of the National Inquiry Into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls regarding a guaranteed livable income has been analyzed in terms of potential cost savings over this multiplicity of supports.
Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu: I think this question will be for me, so I will invite my colleague Mary-Luisa Kapelus to come forward to answer your question.
Actually, maybe we can take that question and come back with a written answer.
Senator Pate: Okay, thank you.
Mr. Sanderson: Thank you for the question. The short answer is that I can’t give you a clear answer today. The Calls to Action and Calls for Justice are, of course, integral parts of all the work we do across Indigenous Services Canada programs. The annual report my colleague mentioned earlier plays out in a very structured way as to how all those Calls to Action and Calls for Justice are being measured.
I will have to get back to the committee with a bit more information specifically about guaranteed livable income.
Senator Pate: And vis-à-vis the other income supports?
Mr. Sanderson: Right.
Senator Pate: Thank you.
[Translation]
The Chair: That concludes today’s meeting. Thank you all for a very informative meeting and discussion.
Thank you for being here. Thank you to the department officials, who are always efficient and effective in providing us with information. You are always ready to answer our questions, which are sometimes tinged with politics, making things a bit trickier for you, shall we say.
Those who said they would get back to the committee with information are asked to provide it by the end of the day on Wednesday, December 18, 2024. We ask that you respect that deadline.
I just want to remind senators that our next meeting would normally take place on Wednesday at 4:15 p.m., but it is possible — highly probable, in fact — that if Bill C-78 is referred to us for study, our next meeting will take place this evening, from 7 to 9. Witnesses are already confirming that they can attend, but obviously we need an order of the Senate to do the study. There’s an asterisk, but in theory, it should work. Thank you very much.
I would also like to thank all of our support staff, including the clerk, who is working very hard these days with all the changes. Thank you everyone. We will probably see each other this evening at seven o’clock.
(The committee adjourned.)