3 New Thematic Calls for Prototypes / 3 nouveaux appels thématiques pour les prototypes

On the same subject

• 

  September 3, 2024 | Local, Land

  Minister Blair to travel to Germany for 24th Ukraine Defense Contact Group Meeting

  The Honourable Bill Blair, Minister of National Defence, will visit Germany on September 5-6, 2024 to participate in the 24th Ukraine Defense Contact Group meeting hosted by the United States at Ramstein Air Base.

• 

  July 20, 2020 | Local, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  Why it is time for smart protectionism

  Put simply, Canadian governments have a responsibility to practise smart protectionism where the risks to Canadians' personal security and national security are high. Free trade is good economics. Protectionism is bad. Global supply chains are efficient. Favouring domestic goods, services and industries is inefficient. Canada has long adhered to these orthodoxies. And most of the time it makes sense to do so. However, through the COVID-19 pandemic, both the public and private sectors have seen weaknesses associated with heavy or total reliance on foreign sources and global supply chains for essential goods, notably personal protective equipment (PPE). As of June 2, for example, the Government of Canada had ordered close to 122 million N95 masks from international suppliers, yet 12 million had been received and 9.8 million of those failed Canadian standards. We are learning the hard way that foreign sources cannot necessarily supply the products we need in the time, quantity or quality required during a national or global emergency. China, as the dominant global producer of many of these PPE supplies, has become the focal point for an emerging debate around domestic control over certain goods, technologies, and services. A recent report from the Henry Jackson Society in the U.K., for example, has argued the “Five Eyes”—the U.S., U.K., Canada, Australia and New Zealand—are far too reliant on Chinese sources for all kinds of strategically important goods, and that this is a threat to the national security of those countries. The Canadian Security Intelligence Service, too, has warned that Canadian companies that produce certain critical technologies are vulnerable to foreign takeovers by entities with agendas hostile to Canada's interests. This is not just an issue with China, though. In Canada, we like to believe that in national or global crises we can rely on the U.S. or other allies for help. Canada, in other words, would be at or near the front of the line with allies. The COVID-19 pandemic, and the behavior of the U.S. and European countries, suggests this is naive. Italy, a founding EU member, requested and was denied face masks from the EU's stockpile at the peak of their COVID-19 outbreak. In April, a presidential executive order gave the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency the power to “allocate to domestic use” several types of PPE that would otherwise be exported. U.S. produced masks bound for Germany, a close American ally, were reportedly diverted back while in transit. Ultimately, Canada was exempt from the U.S. order, but this episode should tell us that global emergencies can lead to “home front comes first” attitudes, even among our closest allies. Fundamentally, the issue comes down to one of efficiency versus necessity. Sometimes, in some areas of the economy, security of supply is more important than efficiency. While this thinking is new to most companies and governments in Canada, it is not new to Canadian companies working in defence and national security. The Canadian defence industry has long highlighted the need for focused sovereign production and control in key national security capabilities—in part to ensure security of supply—as our allies in the U.S., Europe and elsewhere have been doing for generations. The argument has fallen largely on deaf ears. There seems to be a greater aversion in Canada to any kind of protectionism than among our more pragmatic allies. There is also a belief that Canada can always rely on obtaining critical supplies from the U.S., owing to both our close trading relationship and bi-lateral defence agreements dating from the 1950s that purport to establish an integrated North American defence industrial base. Canada puts too much faith in these beliefs, to our peril. While we can still hold free trade and integrated global supply chains as the goal, we also need to recognize that this view of the economy does not always serve our national interests. Put simply, Canadian governments have a responsibility to practise smart protectionism where the risks to Canadians' personal security and national security are high. Christyn Cianfarani is president and CEO of the Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries (CADSI). The Hill Times https://www.hilltimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/072020_ht.pdf

• 

  September 24, 2020 | Local, Security, Other Defence

  Project to buy new pistols for Canadian Forces is once again underway

  David Pugliese The project to purchase pistols to replace the Canadian military's Second World War-era handguns is once again underway and National Defence hopes to have the new weapons by the summer of 2022. The project had been stalled for years after small arms firms rejected in 2011 the federal government requirement that the guns be built at Colt Canada in Kitchener, Ont. In addition, the companies balked at the stipulation they had to turn over their proprietary firearms information to Colt, a firm that some saw as a competitor. But with small arms companies reluctant to bid on the Canadian pistol project, the federal government has had no choice but to drop those requirements and have an open competition. A request for bids will now be issued in early 2021, DND spokeswoman Jessica Lamirande confirmed to this newspaper. She said a “minimum of 9,000” handguns will be purchased. “These are mainly intended for the Canadian Army, and will be issued as required,” she added. The department hopes to have a contract in place by the summer of 2021, with initial deliveries by the summer of 2022, she added. The DND declined to discuss the amount of money that taxpayers will spend on the project. The new handguns will replace the Second World War-era Browning Hi-Power pistols used by the Canadian Forces. The replacement program for the 9mm Browning Hi-Power pistols has been on the books for years. In the fall of 2011, the DND abruptly cancelled plans for the purchase of 10,000 new pistols. The decision to shut the process down came after international firearms companies balked at the stipulation the firms turn over their confidential technical data to Colt Canada so the guns could be manufactured in Canada. Colt is the country's Small Arms Strategic Source and Centre of Excellence. The DND was told at the time by industry representatives that it didn't make economic sense to have Colt manufacture the guns in Canada or to have parts shipped to Colt so the guns could be assembled in Canada. The handgun replacement project has been seen as an example of a highly dysfunctional military procurement system. At one point the DND tried to prevent small arms companies from talking to journalists about the bungled procurement but the department's decree was largely ignored. Under the Munitions Supply Program sole source deals have been directed to Colt Canada to maintain a small arms expertise in the country. In late January Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan announced the purchase of more than 3,600 new C6AI FLEX General Purpose Machine Guns from the company. The $96-million order was a follow-on deal to the 2017 contract for 1,148 of the same machine guns. Some spare parts are included along with cleaning kits and carrying slings in the purchase. Critics pointed out that the cost of each gun worked out to around $27,000, at least twice the amount that other militaries are spending. In February and April two other contracts were directed to Colt to produce a semi-automatic rifle in 7.62 calibre to be used by Canadian Forces sniper teams as an auxiliary weapon. Lamirande said in 2018 changes were made to improve the Munitions Supply Program. Under those changes, new business was no longer automatically given to members of the supply program. Instead a thorough analysis is to be done to decide whether it is better to open a project up to competition or sole source the deal to firms in the Munitions Supply Program. “Factors that are considered include performance, value for money, flexibility, innovation potential, and socio-economic benefits,” Lamirande explained. “We also include considerations for current availability within timeframes and the long term sustainability of the solution.” https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/project-to-buy-new-pistols-for-canadian-forces-is-once-again-underway