Entreprises canadiennes détenues ou dirigées par des personnes LGBTQ2+ : Aidez nous à trouver des moyens d’accroître votre participation aux marchés publics fédéraux en nous parlant de votre entreprise

On the same subject

• 

  August 31, 2023 | Local, Land

  Canadian Army surveillance vehicle project costing $533 million years behind schedule and facing 'multiple deficiencies'

  $500 million project to provide Canadian Army with reconnaissance vehicle now years behind schedule and plagued with multiple deficiencies

• 

  September 20, 2021 | Local, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  Canada caught off guard by new security pact between U.S., Australia and Britain

  ROBERT FIFEOTTAWA BUREAU CHIEF STEVEN CHASESENIOR PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER OTTAWA PUBLISHED SEPTEMBER 17, 2021 The Canadian government was surprised this week by the announcement of a new security pact between the United States, Britain and Australia, one that excluded Canada and is aimed at confronting China's growing military and political influence in the Indo-Pacific region, according to senior government officials. Three officials, representing Canada's foreign affairs, intelligence and defence departments, told The Globe and Mail that Ottawa was not consulted about the pact, and had no idea the trilateral security announcement was coming until it was made on Wednesday by U.S. President Joe Biden, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison. The defence ministers from the U.K. and Australia reached out to Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan to inform him of the decision shortly before the late-afternoon announcement. Foreign Affairs Minister Marc Garneau received a call from his Australian counterpart. Daniel Minden, a spokesperson for Mr. Sajjan, said Ottawa had been kept in the loop on talks between the countries. One of the Canadian officials referred to the pact as the new “Three Eyes” and said it's clear that Canada's closest allies consider Ottawa to be a “weak sister” when it comes to standing up to China. The Globe and Mail is not identifying the officials because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly. Three Eyes is a reference to what is becoming a smaller club within the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing alliance, which includes the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada and New Zealand. The Five Eyes pact dates back about 75 years. Members share signals intelligence gleaned from intercepted communications, as well as military intelligence and intelligence gathered directly from human sources. The new trilateral alliance, dubbed AUKUS, after the initials of the three countries, will allow for greater sharing of information in areas such as artificial intelligence and cyber and underwater defence capabilities. The U.S. and U.K. have also agreed to help Australia acquire nuclear-powered submarines, which would allow it to conduct longer undersea patrols. Australia will become only the second country, after Britain in 1958, to be given access to U.S. nuclear propulsion technology. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on Thursday played down Canada's exclusion from the Indo-Pacific security deal, saying it is merely a way for the U.S. to sell nuclear submarines to Australia. Speaking to reporters in Montreal, Mr. Trudeau said Canada will still have access to defence and intelligence sharing as a member of the Five Eyes alliance. “We continue to be strong members of the Five Eyes,” he said. “This is a deal for nuclear submarines, which Canada is not currently or any time soon in the market for. Australia is.” Retired Vice-Admiral Mark Norman, who once commanded the Royal Canadian Navy, said Canada should have been part of this defence pact, which he described as a “somewhat unprecedented” trilateral arrangement. He said he was surprised to hear Mr. Trudeau play down the pact as merely a submarine purchase deal. “I think it's misleading and concerning ... I would like to believe he was poorly briefed by his staff,” Mr. Norman said. The retired naval flag officer said that, if Mr. Trudeau was fully briefed, “he doesn't understand what is going on internationally and he doesn't understand what the significance of an arrangement like this is as it relates to international security.” He said the agreement goes far beyond access to U.S. submarine technology. “This is about accessing both current and emerging technologies, from cyber and artificial intelligence, to acoustics and underwater warfare – a whole range of very important strategic capabilities.” Mr. Norman said Canada has many national interests in the Indo-Pacific – including trade, promoting the rule of law and democracy, and countering China's aggressive behaviour and posturing – but he suspects close allies do not take Canadian defence commitments seriously. “I don't think our allies think we are serious when it comes to defence. I think they have concerns not just about our defence expenditures, but also the extent to which our [international] commitments are both lasting and meaningful,” he said. Stephanie Carvin, a former national security analyst and an associate professor of international relations at Carleton University, said the U.S.-U.K.-Australia defence pact is the latest evolution of military and intelligence co-operation between those three countries. “Three Eyes is very real,” Prof. Carvin said. “Australia is strategic in making its presence known in Washington, arguably much more than Canada despite it being geographically closer.” She said Canada not being a part of the new agreement is consistent with the country's low engagement in the Indo-Pacific. “We haven't been part of a military alliance in the Pacific since the Korean War. And the government has never addressed the question of if this is still the correct security posture.” The leaders of the Conservative and New Democratic parties criticized Mr. Trudeau for Canada's exclusion from the pact. AUKUS, they said, could put added pressure on China to respect international norms and rein in its expansionism. “This is another example that Mr. Trudeau is not taken seriously by our friends and allies around the world,” Conservative Leader Erin O'Toole told reporters at a campaign stop on Thursday. “Canada is becoming more irrelevant under Mr. Trudeau.” Mr. O'Toole said he would seek to join the new Indo-Pacific security arrangement if the Conservatives are elected on Monday. NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, speaking to reporters on Thursday, questioned whether Mr. Trudeau had given serious thought to the importance of the new trilateral pact while preoccupied with campaigning. By joining this arrangement, Canada could have ratcheted up pressure on China to free Canadians Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig, Mr. Singh said. “The pact seems like a potential avenue to add more pressure [on China]. Canada was absent. Another reason why this election should not have been called,” Mr. Singh told reporters. The U.S., U.K., Australia and Indo-Pacific countries have been growing alarmed about how Beijing is rapidly modernizing its armed forces and increasing its military presence in the disputed waters of the South China Sea and the East China Sea. China reacted harshly to the new partnership. The three countries are “severely damaging regional peace and stability,” said Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian. White House spokesperson Jen Psaki defended the U.S. decision, saying “we do not seek conflict with China.” Instead, she said, this is “about security in the Indo-Pacific.” The submarine deal also represented a blow for France, because Australia intends to tear up a $40-billion agreement to buy French conventional submarines. French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian called the loss of the deal a “stab in the back.” Speaking at a news conference after meetings between the U.S. and Australian foreign and defence ministers in Washington, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said France remains a “vital partner” in the Indo-Pacific region. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-canadian-government-surprised-by-new-indo-pacific-security-pact/

• 

  July 31, 2020 | Local, Aerospace

  Companies highlight jobs, economic spinoffs as fighter-jet competition closes

  OTTAWA — Fighter-jet makers are leading with promises of jobs and other economic spinoffs as they make their final pitches for why Canada should buy their planes to replace the military's aging CF-18 fleet. Friday marks the deadline for U.S. aerospace companies Lockheed Martin and Boeing, as well as Swedish firm Saab, to submit their bids in the current fighter-jet competition, which will see Canada spend up to $19 billion on 88 new planes. The closing of the competition marks a major milestone in Canada's decade-long effort to buy new fighter jets for the Royal Canadian Air Force, which has been plagued by government mismanagement and political controversy. While the combat capability of each of the three competing planes — Lockheed Martin's F-35, Boeing's Super Hornet and Saab's Gripen — will be the main focus as the government evaluates each bid, there will also be a lot of focus on the economic benefits of buying each plane. To that end, Lockheed Martin commissioned a report in February that found up to 4,200 jobs will be created or sustained each year if Canada buys its F-35 stealth fighter, which the company equated to more than 150,000 new jobs over the life of the plane. The analysis provided to The Canadian Press, which was compiled by Toronto-based OMX, also predicted the Canadian economy will see roughly $15 billion in additional activity between now and 2058 if the F-35 is selected to succeed the CF-18 as Canada's primary fighter jet. That is in addition to the $2 billion in economic benefits that Canada has already received since 2007 as one of nine partner countries in the development of the F-35, which lets Canadian companies compete for work associated with the stealth fighter. Canada has contributed US$541 million since 1997 to be a partner in the F-35 program. "Lockheed Martin has prepared a comprehensive proposal," the company said in a statement on Thursday. "The F-35 is the most capable, best-value fighter to strengthen defence, enhance ally partnerships and contribute to economic growth in Canada with significant, long-term industrial opportunities." Lockheed Martin isn't the first to toot its own horn on the potential economic benefits of its fighter. Boeing last month released its own commissioned report showing its existing operations in Canada created $5.3 billion in economic spinoffs last year and supported 20,000 jobs. Boeing says the numbers will go up if the Super Hornet wins, though it has not revealed its exact estimates. The emphasis on jobs and money — rather than combat capability — comes as Canada's economy has been battered by the COVID-19 pandemic, forcing the federal government to spend tens of billions in financial support for Canadians. Defence analyst David Perry of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute said it makes sense for companies to highlight the potential economic benefits of their bids. He said it helps to make the cost more palatable to the public and is also important in determining the winner. "In any competition like this, you're always looking for any potential partial point that you can get," Perry said. "Companies, if they're going to invest this significant time and significant amount of money preparing a bid like this, then they don't leave anything to chance. You make sure you try to wring every single last partial point you can get out of your proposal." This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 30, 2020. Lee Berthiaume, The Canadian Press