May 10, 2019 | Local, Aerospace
OTTAWA, ON (May 6, 2019): In a hard-hitting new Macdonald-Laurier Institute report, MLI Senior Fellow Richard Shimooka takes a critical look at the government's approach to replacing Canada's aging fleet of CF-18 fighters. In the report, titled The Catastrophe: Assessing the Damage from Canada's Fighter Replacement Fiasco, he argues that Ottawa's performance on this file mirrors the SNC-Lavalin Scandal and the Mark Norman Affair.
“At their heart, these two incidents represent attempts by the Liberal government to circumvent established processes to meet their partisan interests,” Shimooka explains. “This description is just as apt for the fighter program.”
Canada is a participant in the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Program that has been developing the F-35s. These fighter jets were slotted to replace the RCAF's aging CF-18s, but after the program was mired in political scandal under the previous government, the Liberal government changed plans.
“During the 2015 election campaign, the Liberal Party promised not to buy the F-35 jets, but instead to use a competition to identify and subsequently purchase a lower-cost competitor... this decision proved to be impossible, unethical, and potentially illegal,” writes Shimooka.
From billions of dollars being wasted on a procurement process to fix a contrived capability gap to potentially threatening Canada's defence relationship with the US, the report finds that political interests have consistently been put above Canada's defence needs.
Shimooka argues that “the decisions made [regarding fighter jet replacement] were purely for reasons of political interest: not a single one could be claimed as being in the country's national interest.”
The “fiasco,” as Shimooka describes it, has caught the attention of both Canada's Office of the Auditor General (OAG) and senior US officials. According to documents never before seen by the public, the OAG had specifically cautioned the government against its chosen course of purchasing Australian Hornets as an interim measure in a draft report – and the final OAG report was heavily revised to obscure that recommendation.
Worse still, letters from US officials reveal that “resentment and distrust towards the government of Canada had grown, particularly within the US Air Force.” These letters, which again have not been made public until now, outline the significant strategic and economic benefits that have already been accrued from being part of the JSF Program. Yet they also contain an implicit (but clear) threat that Canada could be kicked out of the Program – if Ottawa continues with its current policy of trying to obtain guaranteed industrial benefits that, by their very nature, are not allowed under the JSF Program.
“There was a complete lack of logic of Canada's policy, which seemed to ignore basic facts about membership in the JSF program, including clear advantages in cost and capability that the F-35 provided.”
Despite these persistent, high-level issues with the government's chosen approach on the fighter jet replacement, the file has avoided serious public scrutiny. Shimooka finds that this happened in large part due to the successful gag orders levelled by the government.
“The government has also suppressed negative viewpoints within and outside the Department of National Defence, allegedly up to and including the deletion of portions of Memos to Cabinet that highlighted why certain decisions should not be taken.”
Moving forward on the file may prove to be difficult; defence procurement woes have plagued Canada since Confederation, and the issues with the fighter jet replacement are deeper than just purchasing the right aircraft. Worse still, Shimooka says that the brunt of the burden of consistently poor decision-making in Ottawa will be borne by the RCAF itself.
“While the negative consequences are clear for Canada as a whole," Shimooka explains, "no community has felt the impact more than the RCAF. As a result of this government's policies, its ability to conduct its most basic function, the defence of Canadian sovereignty and that of our allies, is diminishing rapidly.”
“It is a sad state of affairs.”
To read the commentary in full, click here.
https://www.macdonaldlaurier.ca/assessing-damage-canadas-fighter-replacement-fiasco-new-mli-report/
May 9, 2024 | Local, Naval
Ukraine, a nation with virtually no navy, humiliated Russia's mighty Black Sea Fleet using cheap, fast, disposable drones. Combined with artificial intelligence, drones are set to change the nature of naval warfare. But are the world's militaries prepared for the risks?
December 1, 2017 | Local, Naval
By Kevin Dougherty. Published on Dec 1, 2017 10:46am QUEBEC – Chantier Davie in Lévis, across the St. Lawrence from Quebec City, will be forced to lay off 800 shipyard workers before Christmas without a new contract to build a second supply vessel for the Canadian navy. “We're not taking no for an answer on that,” Davie CEO Alex Vicefield said in a telephone interview on Thursday, after Defence Minister Harjit Singh Sajjan told Le Journal de Québec last week through his press attaché that the government does not plan to buy a second supply ship. In an email response Thursday, Sajjan's press attaché Bryne Furlong reiterated that, “Navy and Coast Guard supply requirements have been extensively studied and are subject to long-term planning, which does not include a second supply vessel‎.” The layoffs have begun, now that the Davie workforce has completed — on time and on budget — conversion of the German-built container ship Asterix into a supply ship to deliver fuel, water, food and supplies to the ships of the Royal Canadian Navy. Davie's plan now is the $600 million conversion of the Obelix, a sister ship to the Asterix, into the navy's second supply ship. Vicefield said Ottawa's plan calls for paying $2 billion each for two new supply vessels, the first of which will only be available 10 years from now. “Why do we need to build these ships for $2 billion each?” Vicefield asked, noting the Asterix and Obelix cost $600 million each and are superior vessels. “I'm not a political activist but we believe in the project and we delivered,” Vicefield said. In 2011, the Harper government unveiled its National Shipbuilding Procurement Program, awarding $38-billion in contracts to build ships for the Navy and Coast Guard to Irving Shipbuilding Inc. of Halifax and Seaspan Shipbuilding of Vancouver. Davie, emerging from bankruptcy at the time, is Canada's largest shipyard and was excluded. Cost estimates have risen since then, Vicefield noted, with the cost ballooning to over $100 billion. And in the six years since the plan was announced, the two winning shipyards have delivered no ships. Officially, Seaspan is to launch its first replacement supply ship in 2021. But Vicefield noted that Andy Smith, the official responsible for shipbuilding in the federal department of fisheries and oceans, told a Commons committee Nov. 7 that Seaspan has a backlog of three ships to build before work on the first supply ship can begin in 2023, for delivery in 2027. Vicefield said that in spite of granting the lion's share of shipbuilding contracts to Halifax, the Conservatives where shut out in Atlantic Canada in the 2015 election, and Steven Blaney, the Conservative MP representing Lévis, was re-elected even though Davie was excluded from the National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy. “The key point here is that shipbuilding contracts do not win votes,” Vicefield said. “But major procurement scandals bring down governments. “If I was in government, I would be worried about a major procurement scandal, where you are spending five, six times the cost to buy a ship than any other country in the world pays and nothing is being delivered.” The Asterix is also a hospital ship and can deliver humanitarian aid in the event of major natural disasters, such as a tsunami or a devastating hurricane. Davie stepped into the breach in 2014, when the navy's two existing supply ships were scrapped and plans by Seaspan to build two replacement supply ships were a distant prospect. The Harper government granted Davie a contract to convert the Asterix into a supply ship for about $600 million as a private-public partnership, with Davie managing the project from stem to stern, its financing, as well as providing its civilian crew and leasing the ship to the federal government for five years. When Justin Trudeau led his Liberals to power in 2015, Irving Shipbuilding leaned on Liberal ministers from the Maritimes to have the contract cancelled. But the work was underway and Ottawa did not block the Asterix project. The Halifax-based and crewed Asterix will supply Canadian navy ships off the east coast, while off the west coast Canadian naval vessels will be supplied by Chilean and Spanish navy supply ships. “Why would you do that when you can put the money back into Canada and ensure the jobs of 800 people here for another two years?” Vicefield said. “It makes no sense.” Vicefield regards the Harper government's plans, renamed by the Liberal government as the National Shipbuilding Strategy, as “mind-boggling” and “a bit of a joke.” And he believes Canada can have three shipyards, including Davie, to build and maintain naval and Coast Guard vessels. “There are about 50 large ships that need replacing,” he said, noting the average age of the Coast Guard fleet is 40 years. “So there is enough work for sure for three shipyards for the next 30 years.” “We haven't been pushing against the National Shipbuilding Strategy,” Vicefield said. “I think it is going to fall on its own.” Irving, which is now building ships in Romania, and Seaspan, which has ordered two ferries to be built in Turkey, are defending the plan, and so far have political support. “They see the writing on the wall,” Vicefield said. “They want to destroy the competition. They see that now they have the upper hand. “But we're not going to let that happen,” he insists. “We're convinced the new government, the Liberals, will actually see sense. “But it is taking time for them to get their feet under the desk.” https://ipolitics.ca/article/chantier-davie-wont-take-no-answer/
April 17, 2020 | Local, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security
Bruxelles) Les adversaires potentiels des pays de l'OTAN vont tenter de profiter de la crise économique provoquée par la COVID-19 pour essayer de prendre le contrôle d'entreprises ou d'infrastructures stratégiques et de saper l'unité de l'Alliance, a averti mercredi son secrétaire général Jens Stoltenberg. Publié le 15 avril 2020 à 14h41 AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE « Cette crise pourrait avoir des effets géopolitiques majeurs », a-t-il affirmé au cours d'un point de presse à l'issue d'une réunion en vidéoconférence avec les ministres de la Défense de l'Alliance. « La crise économique pourrait permettre des investissements dans des industries et des infrastructures stratégiques », a-t-il expliqué. « Il est important de protéger ces entreprises », a-t-il insisté. Jens Stoltenberg n'a pas cité les États ou les groupes impliqués dans ces prises de contrôle, mais la mise en garde vise surtout les importants investissements réalisés par la Chine dans les infrastructures portuaires et les télécommunications en Europe. « La vente d'infrastructures stratégiques par les pays les plus vulnérables pourrait saper la capacité de résistance des pays de l'Alliance en cas de nouvelle crise », a estimé le secrétaire général de l'OTAN. Les pays de l'OTAN ont « besoin d'infrastructures et de télécommunications fiables en temps de crise », a souligné le Norvégien. Jens Stoltenberg a également insisté sur la nécessité de combattre la désinformation sur les actions menées par les alliés et leur unité. « Nous devons contrer les campagnes de désinformation menées par des acteurs étatiques et non étatiques sur les réseaux sociaux qui visent à nous diviser et à nous fragiliser avec de fausses informations sur l'aide mutuelle que nous nous apportons », a-t-il dit. « La meilleure réponse passe par une presse libre qui vérifie les faits et pose des questions parfois difficiles », a-t-il soutenu. « Il est encore trop tôt pour tirer les enseignements de cette crise, mais nous devons être préparés pour la prochaine », a-t-il affirmé. « La croissance est touchée et les dépenses publiques également », a-t-il reconnu. Les membres de l'Alliance se sont engagés à consacrer 2 % de leur PIB national à leurs dépenses de défense en 2024. Jens Stoltenberg a toutefois expliqué l'importance des investissements dans les capacités militaires, car elles viennent « comme une capacité d'appoint ». « L'OTAN n'est pas le principal intervenant en cas de crise sanitaire, mais elle peut soutenir les efforts du secteur civil », a-t-il soutenu. « La principale leçon de cette crise est le lien étroit entre les efforts civils et la capacité de soutien des forces militaires. Il faudra voir comment l'améliorer avant la prochaine crise », a déclaré Jens Stoltenberg. Il s'est refusé à tout commentaire sur la suspension de la contribution américaine à l'Organisation mondiale de la santé. https://www.lapresse.ca/affaires/entreprises/202004/15/01-5269469-les-pays-de-lotan-doivent-proteger-leurs-entreprises-strategiques.php