Canada ups Arctic surveillance capabilities to protect North America

On the same subject

• 

  November 5, 2019 | Local, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  A new Defence Procurement Agency – Would it solve anything?

  By Brian Mersereau Defence Watch Guest Writer During the recent federal election, the issue of considering a new Defence Procurement Agency or DPA surfaced again. The Liberals made such an organization part of their defence platform this time around as part of their plan to improve military procurement. While positive outcomes could result from a new organizational structure, simply installing one will not in and of itself create an efficient procurement model. It most certainly will not address in any substantive manner why taxpayers pay far too much to acquire the defence capabilities Canada needs to protect our sovereign interests in a world that has become increasingly unstable in recent years. It appears that, in many cases, Canada pays more per unit of capability to satisfy its defence needs than most of its allies. Unfortunately, though quite logically, this phenomenon has effectively shrunk the size of our armed forces as the number of platforms we can afford to acquire continues to dwindle due to high costs. While this approach can create short-term jobs, they are ultimately unsustainable since there is no international market for our higher-priced solutions. This is not the direction in which Canada should be headed. Before Canada decides to move ahead with a new procurement agency, it should assemble a “smart persons” panel or forum to thoroughly review the existing system and establish the mandate and objectives of whatever type of organization results from said review. Such a review group must be composed of people from the public and private sector with significant experience, not skewed with staff whose procurement experience primarily consists of exposure to the Canadian “way”. During this review, the panel must examine various issues which are currently perceived to be an impediment to the efficiency of Canada's procurement system. Based on my own years of experience on both the buy and sell sides of the procurement equation, the following areas merit some serious thought: Organizational Structure The fewer individuals, departments and oversight committees with their fingers in the “procurement pie”, the quicker and more coherently things will get done. Even at today's interest rates, time really is money for all involved in the process. Adding more time to a schedule for another management review quite often has a negative impact. While I understand governance and oversight committees have their place, their overinvolvement can produce negative outcomes if mandates are not absolutely clear and if individuals on these committees have limited experience with respect to the issue at hand. Risk Canada's ongoing method for defence procurement is that it will not assume any risk on their side of a contract. If Canada insists the private sector must accept all risk, the private sector will so oblige – but at a significant price and to the detriment of schedules and timelines. As contract prices necessarily increase, so do governments costs to manage the contract. In reality, the most efficient procurement solution for Canada would see some elements of risk managed by the buyer, rather than entirely borne by the seller. More consideration needs to go into balanced risk-sharing formulas. Process Canada has an extremely hands-on procurement process for major systems during the competitive phase, as well as during the implementation of the contract. Even in this digital age, Canada hamstrings its own progress with the sheer degree of detail and bureaucracy it requires; unbelievably, freight trucks are still required to deliver proposals. It seems as though, on occasion, the buyer thinks it knows more about designing and engineering the defence systems Canada needs than the actual designers and engineers for whom it is a primary occupation. Requirements of little or no consequence are painstakingly spelled out in the greatest of detail. Such an approach has a tremendous impact on the amount of time consumed by both the buyer and seller, again driving up costs and extending schedules. Less “hand holding” by the customer must be seriously considered. Sole Source In the procurement world, “sole source” is often viewed as a dirty phrase. Frequently, Canada attempts to run competitions in scenarios where the chances of achieving any meaningful savings or benefits related to competition are low at best. This takes years and drives costs higher at no measurable gain for the buyer. The parameters of when and under what circumstances Canada should move directly to a sole source should be thoroughly reviewed. Significant resources are being wasted managing nearly meaningless processes. Skills Canada's internal skill set for managing large, complex defence procurements does not appear to be adequate. As a result, it turns more and more often to the expertise of external third parties in order to keep up with large private sector firms at the negotiation table from a knowledge and experience standpoint. While there will always be a need for some third-party expertise, project managing many external suppliers in the negotiation phase – each of whom have their own agendas – only further complicates the already convoluted procurement process. Canada would be much better off with an enhanced internal core staff. If Canada takes the time to review the appropriateness of some form of DPA model, it must cast the net wider and review other critical aspects of the procurement process – or else any organizational changes will inevitably succumb to the systematic inertia of the overall process. A failure to do so means Canada will continue struggling mightily to stand-up the level of defence and security necessary to secure its citizens in an increasingly turbulent world. https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/a-new-defence-procurement-agency-would-it-solve-anything

• 

  May 13, 2020 | Local, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  ‘Hard decisions are going to have to be made’: can vital defence procurements survive in a post-pandemic world?

  By NEIL MOSS MAY. 13, 2020 'When you are trying to fix a fiscal problem, inevitably national defence is part of the way governments have tended to try and fix that,' says defence procurement expert David Perry. In the midst of critical procurements that will set the framework for the Canadian military for years to come, questions remain on how the COVID-19 pandemic will affect the oft-delayed projects. The pandemic has already impacted the two most high-profile defence procurement projects with another delay in the replacement of Canada's fighter fleet as well as a reduced capability at the shipyard that will be building the 15 new warships that will serve as the backbone of the Canadian Navy for decades to come. “Companies and government are always generally working hard trying to meet [the] schedule, and make up time wherever they can afterwards, but there's a limit what you can do to replace a few lost weeks of work,” said David Perry, a defence procurement expert and vice-president of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. “The impacts are going to be tangible,” Mr. Perry said, adding that the picture is still murky about the final impact on the current procurements as defence companies are still trying to get a handle on the pandemic. The high-profile $19-billion project to replace Canada's fleet of CF-18 fighter jets was delayed a second time in 100 days last week, over a bidder's concern over completing its bid on time, according to a Canadian Press report. Irving Shipbuilding's Halifax shipyard, which has been tasked to build two central pieces for the future of the Canadian Navy in six Arctic and Offshore Patrol Ships and 15 Canadian Surface Combatants, is running at half capacity with around 650 people working at the shipyard and 300 remotely, according to a CTV report. The two projects are projected to cost upwards of $4.3-billion and $60-billion, respectively. Mr. Perry also said the impact on the procurements will depend on what stage the project is in, with less effect for those still in design and requirement phases and more impact on projects in the midst of construction. He added that the impact will also depend on where the facilities are located, as the Irving shipyard in Nova Scotia faced a three-week shutdown, opposed to the Seaspan shipyards in B.C., which has continued relatively normal operations. A spokesperson for the Department of National Defence told The Hill Times that progress is still being made “where possible” on current and future equipment for the Canadian Forces. “While our focus must be on responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, we remain committed to the National Shipbuilding Strategy and other defence projects under Strong, Secure, Engaged,” the spokesperson said in an email. “We continue to meet regularly with PSPC [Public Services and Procurement Canada] to address the delivery of ongoing and future major procurement projects, and to assess and address the impact of the pandemic on these projects. However, given that the extent of COVID-19, or how long this situation will last, cannot be assessed at this time, it is not yet possible to determine the impact this situation will have on our projects,” the statement read, adding that the focus remains on continuing essential services, which include “domestic operations and search and rescue.” Former Air Force pilot Alan Stephenson said that there is “no doubt” that there will be “a huge impact” to defence procurement caused by the pandemic, pointing to the government's ballooning spending. Mr. Stephenson, a retired colonel who is now a senior associate at David Pratt and Associates, said the problem with the fighter jet procurement is being compounded by successive governments' use of military spending to solve other problems. “Now we find ourselves with ... fighters that will be over 50 years old,” he said. “And we'll be flying [the CF-18s] into the future.” “COVID has changed the game,” Mr. Stephenson said, adding that the focus on the Liberals' 2017 defence policy, Strong, Secure, Engaged, will still be present, but there will be fiscal questions of its feasibility. “Hard decisions are going to have to be made,” he said, as the government will balance military requirements with economic needs. Mr. Perry said historically when the government has needed to slash spending, it has looked at the military. “When you are trying to fix a fiscal problem, inevitably national defence is part of the way governments have tended to try and fix that,” he said, adding that given the size of the defence budget, it is “virtually impossible” to address an economic situation without making some fiscal changes at the Department of National Defence. But he said that historical pattern may not continue as it's a different kind of fiscal problem for the government. “In a dynamic where you have real big impacts on consumer confidence and there's also, I think, fairly serious concerns about the availability of financing and liquidity in the civilian economy, potentially there's more of a room for DND and the Government of Canada writ large to be part of the economic solution here and not just part of the fiscal problem,” Mr. Perry said. Former naval officer Norman Jolin, who served in the Canadian Navy for 37 years and commanded the Halifax-class HMCS Montréal, said the last thing the government will want to do is cancel projects that it has already announced at the expense of Canadian workers. “The last thing [the government] would want to do in a world where we've lost so many jobs is to cause more people not to have jobs by cutting things,” he said. Mr. Jolin compared the National Shipbuilding Strategy to the construction of a trans-Canada railway in the 19th century. “This is jobs across Canada,” he said, adding that it is not just jobs at shipyards but throughout the supply chain including manufacturing jobs in southern Ontario. Mr. Jolin said with the procurements under the National Shipbuilding Strategy, the lengthy timeline will mitigate the pandemic's impact. For the Canadian Surface Combatant procurement, the first ship isn't projected to be completed until the mid-2020s and the final delivery date for the entire fleet is in the late 2040s. He said while there may be minor delays in the short term, it shouldn't have much impact on when the ships are delivered in the end. But he said there is still much unknown about how the pandemic has affected the procurement process. Charles Davies, a retired colonel in the Armed Forces who spent time as the senior director responsible for procurement and equipment management policy at the Department of National Defence, also said the long timeline on projects should reduce the impact of any delay. “In the inherently long gestation periods of the major programs, the net impact should be limited,” he said. Mr. Davies, a CDA Institute fellow, said now can be a time for the government to look to make key investments in capabilities that will be needed in the future to defend its borders while at the same time keeping the economy afloat. He said unlike in the mid-1990s during the budget cuts under then-prime minister Jean Chrétien, Canada is not in the geopolitical position to allow its defence budget to dissipate. “We're in a different world now,” he said, citing the “strategic environment” with more aggressive behaviour being seen from the Chinese and Russian governments. https://www.hilltimes.com/2020/05/13/hard-decisions-are-going-to-have-to-be-made-can-vital-defence-procurements-survive-in-a-post-pandemic-world/247826

• 

  September 26, 2018 | Local, Aerospace

  Transport Canada looking at used German drone to patrol Arctic

  Murray Brewster · CBC News A used German drone is one of a handful of aircraft under consideration by Transport Canada for its long-delayed Arctic surveillance program. A spokeswoman for the department said no decision has been made about the kind of remotely-piloted system the department will purchase. Marie-Anyk Cote said the plan is to buy an aircraft to detect and monitor oil spills, survey ice levels and marine habitats and keep track of shipping and ice movement in Canada's far northern waters. "As part of its technical assessment, the government sought information from suppliers to better understand the technology and the solutions available," Cote said in an email. The Associated Press reported on Monday that Canada was negotiating with Germany to purchase a secondhand Global Hawk surveillance drone, which originally cost the Germans $823 million. 'Premature' Cote said "it is still premature to speculate which remotely piloted aircraft system will be purchased" and that the evaluation is still underway. In a statement issued to AP, Germany's defence ministry said talks with Canada were planned, but declined to comment on a possible sale price or closure date. The news surfaced in a response to lawmakers tabled by the German government in the Bundestag, Germany's parliament. It stated that Germany has decided to "begin concrete negotiations with Canada for the sale of the Euro Hawk aircraft, two ground stations and possibly certain spare parts." Northrop Grumman, the maker of the Global Hawk, pitched the Canadian military on buying the high-altitude surveillance system a few years ago. New, the aircraft cost more than US $131 million each. National Defence has its own, separate drone program which is not expected to start delivering aircraft until 2021. That new fleet will not be fully operational until 2023. The drone under consideration by Transport Canada is a prototype that was purchased by the Germans in 2000, according the AP report. It has flown only a handful of times; the program was cancelled because of skyrocketing costs and the German government's inability to get it certified to fly in Europe. According to 2013 German media reports, the manufacturer had refused to share technical data with the German government and the drone lacked an anti-collision alarm required by European regulators. According to the German government's written response, the drone has now been "demilitarized" — meaning it has been stripped of its U.S.-made radio equipment, GPS receiver and flight control system. Drone or missile? There could be more complications ahead if Ottawa is successful in negotiations with the Germans. A year ago, CBC News reported the Arctic drone surveillance program had been delayed because of complex international arms control rules that would categorize the unmanned aircraft as a missile. The federal government approved $39.5 million for a technical assessment in 2015 — and the plan had been to have a small fleet airborne by last spring. Officials told CBC News last year that they were not expecting delivery of the drones until 2020. The Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), adopted by Canada and 34 other countries, was intended to prevent the spread of weapons systems that can deliver nuclear missiles. Drones were added to the list recently and the rules restrict missiles and drones from carrying a payload of more than 500 kilograms or travelling more than 300 kilometres. A fully loaded Global Hawk can carry a sensor suite payload weighing up to 540 kilograms. With files from the Associated Press https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/transport-canada-looking-at-used-german-drone-to-patrol-arctic-1.4838364