CarteNAV and Sentient Vision collaborate on PAL Aerospace winning aerial surveillance bid

On the same subject

• 

  December 31, 2018 | Local, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  A year-end Q&A with Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan

  By Charlie Pinkerton Federal Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan spoke with iPolitics for a year-end interview. Here's what he had to say. Q: During your time as Canada's defence minister, what are you most proud of? A: The thing I'm most proud of is that our defence policy is focused on looking after our people. I've always said our Number 1 asset is our people; if we look after them, everything else will start to fall into place. I'll give you an example of this: putting the tax-free allowance in the defence policy; if you're deployed on an operation internationally, it's tax-free. That gives families back home tremendous flexibility with what they can do. That's one of the things I'm proud of. We also include families as part of our defence policy. We're seeing tangible results. We've done some work, we've got more work to do. As you can see, this is what I'm focused on. Those procurement projects — ships, jets — are absolutely important, right? But the thing is, if we don't look after our people, those ships and jets don't mean anything. And that's probably what I'm most proud of: turning into a reality our focus in the defence policy, which is to our people. Q: What do you regret during your tenure as defence minister? A: Sometimes things can't move as fast as you want. I wouldn't call it a regret, but you want to see progress as fast as possible, and sometimes you end up pushing so hard, like with procurement: Why aren't we moving faster? We have these questions, and we're reminded that we need to hire enough people to move on these files. And so it's a reminder — it's not a regret — to never put your people in a position to over-extend themselves. You need to have a holistic Canadian Armed Forces that will look after itself. This whole conversation of more teeth, less tail — I hate that. In reality, making sure your pension cheques are given on time is just as important. Q: Is there something you really want to accomplish during the time remaining in your mandate? A: It goes back to my first point: making sure we have enough momentum that we're able to start executing all the things that we want, and having the right number of people to be able to move our projects forward. Also, making it a reality that, from the time somebody joins the military, we're focusing on resilience and that they know the country has their backs. For example, with the Transition Group, we've ensured that no future government can ever take that focus away from the people ever again. Q: Whether you or someone else takes over in a year's time, what will be the most pressing issue he or she faces? A: For me, a Number 1 priority will be making sure the environment inside the Canadian Armed Forces is one that's inclusive, that's harassment-free, and I know it seems very idealistic to say this, but any other goal is unacceptable, because it leaves leeway for things, because when you create that environment, you'll be able to get the best potential out of your people at the same time. That's the challenge we're working on. General (Jonathan) Vance is aggressively dealing with this, and Operation Honour is showing results. To me, it's a challenge, and a challenge that has to be met, regardless of who's in this position. Q: Is there something you wanted to accomplish that was pushed aside by larger or more pressing priorities? A: There's one thing I was really looking forward to doing, which is learn French. I sort of underestimated the time required of the job. However, I am still committed to learning French. I do what I can in my own time, and I'll learn it when I leave politics, because I think it's important for all Canadians to be able to speak both official languages. Q: You're up for re-election. You've been defence minister for three years, which is a relatively long time. Aside from Peter MacKay, who held the job for about six years, you've had one of the longest tenures of the past 20 years. If re-elected, will you seek re-appointment? A: I got into politics because I wanted to represent the neighbourhood I grew up in of Vancouver South, and I was very privileged to have that honour. When it comes to the next election, my job is going to be to make sure I connect with my community in my riding. That's the Number 1 job that I'm fighting for: to become the member of Parliament for Vancouver South. If the prime minister thinks again that my skills are needed, regardless of portfolio, I'd be honoured and privileged to serve. Q: Considering you got into politics to represent Vancouver South, is there something that being defence minister prevented you from doing, and that, given another term, you'd like to take on? A: In Vancouver South, my focus has been a lot on the youth, and I've done a lot of things in the riding, but I always feel like I wish I could do more. I want people to know that I — a person who grew up in that riding — can do some interesting things, and reach this portfolio, and that every single (constituent) can reach the highest levels. So that's the one thing I wish I had a little bit more time to do. But at the end of the day, if I still had that time, I would still have that regret, because I want to make sure we inspire the next generation, because I see so much potential in them. https://ipolitics.ca/2018/12/31/a-year-end-qa-with-defence-minister-harjit-sajjan/

• 

  December 30, 2022 | Local, Land

  Canadian Army eyeing new weapons in response to lessons learned from Ukraine war

  The war in Ukraine has identified critical gaps in the Canadian Army's ability to fight and survive on the battlefield, leading to an unanticipated rush to buy new military equipment.

• 

  May 25, 2020 | Local, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  Defence procurement won't be so easy to cut in a time of COVID-19

  As governments around the world reassess national security, Ottawa could find it harder to delay plans for new ships, helicopters and fighter jets. Jeffrey F. Collins May 22, 2020 A few months into the COVID-19 pandemic, the first signs of impact on Canada's defence procurement plans are showing. The government has been following an ambitious multi-decade blueprint, starting in 2010, to kick-start the domestic shipbuilding sector, but some yards have had to scale back their workforces under public health orders. What this means for the National Shipbuilding Strategy and its more than $85 billion (by my calculations) in ongoing and planned construction of large ships is as yet unclear. The $19-billion Future Fighter Capability project, designed to replace the four-decade-old CF-18 fighter with 88 new jets, could also be affected. Government officials were adamant until early May that the June submission deadline for bids remained unchanged — before granting a 30-day extension. But with industry and public sector workers largely stuck at home, it is difficult to see how even the new July deadline can be met. In earlier times of economic strain, Ottawa found defence spending an easy target for cuts. This time could be different, as governments around the world reassess what national security means and how best to achieve it. Heading into 2020, things were still looking up for the capital spending plans of the Department of National Defence (DND) and the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF). The Trudeau government's 2017 Strong, Secure, Engaged (SSE) defence policy had allocated $108 billion in capital expenditures over a 20-year timeframe, 2017-37. Then came the pandemic. There were more than a million job losses in March alone, and as of early May, the Parliamentary Budget Office was predicting a $1-trillion debt by 2021. Given the rapid drop in both domestic and global consumer demand, the price collapse in the country's key commodity, oil, and the accompanying decline in the Canadian dollar, the country is now in a recession for an unknown period. If past is prologue and the virus persists without a vaccine for the foreseeable future, the likelihood of the government delaying or cancelling projects or trimming its orders for ships and planes is growing. When faced with economic pains in the past, federal governments scaled back procurement plans. The staggering debt and deficit in the late 1980s and 1990s led the Brian Mulroney government to drop its ambitious bid to acquire up to a dozen nuclear submarines in 1989, a mere two years after announcing the project in the 1987 defence White Paper. In 1993 the Jean Chrétien government infamously scrapped the contract to replace the 1960s-vintage Sea King helicopter (at a cost of $478 million in penalties). The following year's defence White Paper outlined $15 billion in delays, reductions and cancellations to the DND's procurement budget; this was in addition to large-scale base closures and 20 percent reductions in both CAF regular force personnel and the overall defence budget. The ostensibly pro-military Stephen Harper Conservatives announced 20-year funding plans, as ambitious as the SSE, in the 2008 Canada First Defence Strategy but deviated from them in the aftermath of the 2008-09 global recession. With a goal of returning to balanced budgets after $47 billion in stimulus spending, the Harper government delayed or cut over $32 billion in planned procurement spending and laid off 400 personnel from DND's procurement branch. Among the casualties was the army's $2.1-billion close-combat vehicle. There are several reasons why this pattern has repeated itself, but two stand out. First, defence is a tempting target for any government belt-tightening drive, typically accounting for a large share of discretionary federal spending. With most federal money going to individual citizens (employment insurance, pensions, tax benefits) and provinces (health and social transfers), there simply is little fiscal room left outside of defence. To remove money from these politically popular programs is to risk voter resentment and the ire of provincial governments. In short, when past federal governments confronted a choice between cutting tanks and cutting transfers, they cut the tanks. Second, Canada's geostrategic position has helped. Sitting securely atop North America in alliance with the world's pre-eminent superpower has meant, in the words of a defence minister under Pierre Trudeau, Donald Macdonald, that “there is no obvious level for defence expenditures” in Canada. Meeting the terms of our alliances with the United States and NATO means that Canada has to do its part in securing the northern half of the continent and contributing to military operations overseas, but generally in peacetime Ottawa has a lot of leeway in deciding what to spend on defence, even if allies growl and complain. Yet it is this same geostrategic position that may lessen the impact of any cuts related to COVID-19. Unlike the Mulroney and Chrétien governments, who made their decisions amid the end of Cold War tensions, or the Harper government, which was withdrawing from the combat mission in Afghanistan, this government must make its choices in an international security environment that is becoming more volatile. The spread of the virus has amplified trade and military tensions between the world's two superpowers and weakened bonds among European Union member states as they fight to secure personal protective equipment and stop the contagion at their borders. Governments worldwide are now unabashedly protectionist in their efforts to prevent the export of medical equipment and vital materials. As supply chains fray, pressures mount for each country to have a “sovereign” industrial capability, including in defence. In fact, the Trump administration has turned to the 1950 Defense Production Act to direct meatpacking plants to remain open or to restrict the export of health products (three million face masks bound for Canada were held up, then released). The pandemic is intensifying the Trump administration's skepticism of alliances and international institutions; in late March, there was even discussion of stationing US troops near the Canadian border (the plan was eventually abandoned). Smaller powers like Canada that have traditionally relied on American security guarantees will have to maintain their defence spending, or even increase it, as they try to strengthen old alliances and create new ones. As Timothy Choi, a naval expert at the University of Calgary, has told me, an irony of the pandemic is that it may see the National Shipbuilding Strategy become a “major destination for stimulus spending in times of recession.” Either way, by the time the pandemic subsides, Canadians may yet find out that there is indeed an “obvious level” to defence spending. This article is part of the The Coronavirus Pandemic: Canada's Response special feature. Photo: The Halifax-class navy frigate HMCS Fredericton in the waters of Istanbul Strait, Turkey. Shutterstock.com, by Arkeonaval. https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/may-2020/defence-procurement-wont-be-so-easy-to-cut-in-a-time-of-covid-19/