Launch of public consultations on potential new measures to advance and defend Canada’s economic security interests

On the same subject

• 

  September 16, 2022 | Local, Land

  As Ukraine war rages on, U.S. examines whether Canadian firms can replenish ammunition stockpiles

  The U.S. wants to gather information on firms to determine which might be able to help build 12,000 rounds of 155mm ammunition a month.

• 

  June 25, 2019 | Local, Naval

  Cost of 15 new Canadian warships rises to $70 billion: PBO report

  By Christian Paas-Lang Canada's 15 new warships will cost almost $70 billion over the next quarter-century, according to Parliament's budget watchdog, and the cost could change further depending on the final design of the ships and when they actually get built. The estimate, released in a report by the parliamentary budget office Friday, is up substantially from a Canadian government estimate in 2017 that pegged the price of the project at between $56 billion and $60 billion. The 2017 estimate was itself a revision of the project's original $26-billion price tag. Also in 2017, the PBO estimated the total cost of the ships to be $61.8 billion, but its report released Friday updates that to reflect the design of the ships — frigates known as “Type 26” — which wasn't known at the time. It also accounts for delays in the project. The Canadian government will now pay out $69.8 billion over 26 years, the PBO estimates. In a statement released shortly after the PBO report, the Department of National Defence said it remained “confident” in its 2017 estimate, and that the “vast majority” of the difference between the estimates came from the PBO's choice to include taxes in its projections. Taking away taxes brings the two estimates to within 10 per cent of each other, the DND said. But the department conceded that any small difference means hundreds of millions of dollars in costs for taxpayers. The PBO report says the difference in the estimates is due to a later start date for construction and a heavier ship design. The report assumes ships will start being built by the 2023-2024 fiscal year, three years later than its 2017 projection. As the timeline extends into the future, costs increase due to inflation. The PBO originally projected a displacement, or weight, of 5,400 tonnes for each ship but the Type 26 design is a heftier 6,790 tonnes per ship, an increase of more than 25 per cent. The report also includes an analysis of what effect further significant delays would have on the project. For a one-year delay, the PBO estimates, an extra $2.2 billion will be added to the project cost, and a two-year delay would cost the government $4.5 billion. In an interview Friday, the top bureaucrat in charge of procurement at the DND expressed skepticism that the heavier ships will result in as much increased cost as the PBO suggests, but he did say the potential for delays was something he is “watching more carefully.” “The labour piece is always where uncertainty can remain,” said Pat Finn, the department's associate deputy minister for material, noting labour can make up around 40 per cent of the cost of a ship. Finn said the DND is in the “same place” as the PBO on the cost of “slippage” — delays in the project — but that he is confident the structure of the National Shipbuilding Strategy will mean the project could benefit from a skilled workforce and ongoing expertise. The purchase of additional Arctic patrol ships, announced last month, means there will not be a lapse in efficiency at Irving's Halifax shipyard, which is building the warships, Finn said. He set a goal for start of construction earlier than the PBO assumes in its report. “We would say between mid-2022 and mid-2023, we're in-contract and cutting steel,” Finn said. Potential delays would certainly increase costs, and it would be “absolutely no shock if there was additional delays,” said Dave Perry, a procurement expert with the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. “To this point in time, the government has not been able to meet any of the timelines that have been put forward publicly,” he added. Still, the closer you get to construction, Perry said, the less uncertainty there should be about costs and the potential for further delay. The last thing that might change the final cost of the ships is the specifics of what components are chosen to fill out the design — which radar equipment, for example, Perry said. The DND is deciding on those components as it reconciles the requirements of the ships with costs. “You could potentially get a few-percentage-point swing” in price in either direction based on those choices, said Perry. “But if you're talking about several tens of billions of dollars, a few-percentage-points swing is real money.” https://globalnews.ca/news/5418997/canada-warships-cost/

• 

  May 31, 2019 | Local, Aerospace

  Fighter RFP delayed again pending official review of industrial benefits policy

  by Ken Pole Shortly before Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan announced on May 29 that a formal request for proposals (RFP) to supply 88 new Canadian fighter jets would be delayed again — this time to mid-July — two potential contenders said that a proposal to scrap the customary industrial benefits element of the procurement is problematic. Jim Barnes, director of Business Development in Canada for Boeing Defense, Space & Security and Roger Schallom, the company's St. Louis-based vice-president of International Business Development, along with Patrick Palmer, vice-president and head of Sales at Saab Canada Inc., expressed their common concern during briefings at CANSEC, the annual Ottawa trade show organized by the Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries (CADSI). Boeing's contender to replace the RCAF's legacy fleet of CF-188 Hornets is the F/A-18 Super Hornet, while Saab's is the JAS 39 Gripen (the company had a full-scale replica parked front-and-centre outside CANSEC's main entrance). The other contenders are Lockheed Martin's F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) and Airbus Military's Eurofighter Typhoon. Barring any further hiccups in a program fraught with political indecision and already years behind the original schedule, the RFP process overseen by Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC) is expected to lead to two finalists being chosen next year with a view to making a final selection in 2022. The government had been expected to issue its RFP by May 31 after years of indecision, but that latest deadline in the troubled procurement was postponed as officials at DND, PSPC and Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada review the industrial benefits element. “This is proof that your feedback is heard and acted upon,” Sajjan told the CANSEC audience. The proposed industrial benefits change was disclosed earlier this month by Richard Shimooka, a senior fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute (MLI), an Ottawa-based think tank. He said in a report published by the MLI (May 6) that the Canadian government was yielding to pressure from the United States by changing the long-established requirement that companies bidding for contracts agree to investing an equivalent amount in Canada. The fighter procurement, including in-service support, is expected to cost at least $18 billion. Shimooka cited letters from U.S. officials that indicate “resentment and distrust towards the government of Canada had grown, particularly within the U.S. Air Force.” The letters evidently focused on the “significant strategic and economic benefits that have already been accrued from being part of the JSF program.” However, he added, the letters also contained “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.” In his CANSEC briefing, Barnes admitted to having been “surprised by the recommended changes” in the shift in the long-standing requirement. “That policy's been in place for decades and it's been very successful for Canadian industry,” he replied, questioning what he called the government's decision to “accommodate a competitor.” Schallom added that adhering to the historic requirement for direct industrial offsets, rather than simply offering “non-binding” bidding opportunities on future contracts, would be better for Canada's economy over the expected 30 years or more of the new fighter program. “You're probably missing out on $30 billion-plus in guaranteed work.” Saab's Palmer echoed that position 30 minutes later, saying that he is concerned that the “non-binding requirement may not necessarily give Canadians the best value over the long term,” but, “until we see the final RFP (request for proposals), I'll reserve final judgment.” However, when asked how Saab had responded formally to the proposed change on industrial benefits, he said, “We've asked them for some more information as it relates to the specifics of how items are going to be measured,” but had “definitely indicated that it doesn't necessarily encourage the best solution for Canada at the end of the day.” https://www.skiesmag.com/news/fighter-rfp-delayed-again-pending-official-review-of-industrial-benefits-policy