February 7, 2019 | Local, Naval
DAVID PUGLIESE, OTTAWA CITIZEN
The Liberal government is pushing ahead to try to get the Canadian Surface Combatant deal signed with Irving and the Lockheed Martin-BAE consortium either Thursday or Friday, sources say.
That $60 billion project will see the eventual construction of 15 warships in the largest single government purchase in Canadian history.
Lockheed is offering Canada the Type 26 warship designed by BAE in the United Kingdom. Irving is the prime contractor and the vessels will be built at its yard on the east coast.
Public Services and Procurement Canada did not respond to a request for comment.
But some industry representatives are questioning why the government is moving so quickly to get the contract signed. They say with a deal of such financial size – and potential risk to the taxpayer – federal bureaucrats should move slowly and carefully.
The entry of the BAE Type 26 warship in the competition was controversial from the start and sparked complaints the procurement process was skewed to favour that vessel. Previously the Liberal government had said only mature existing designs or designs of ships already in service with other navies would be accepted, on the grounds they could be built faster and would be less risky. Unproven designs can face challenges as problems are found once the vessel is in the water and operating.
But that criteria was changed and the government and Irving accepted the BAE design, though at the time it existed only on the drawing board. Construction began on the first Type 26 frigate in the summer of 2017 for Britain's Royal Navy, but it has not yet been completed.
Company claims about what the Type 26 ship can do, including how fast it can go, are based on simulations or projections. The two other bidders in the Canadian program had ships actually in service with other navies so their capabilities are known.
Both Irving and the federal government have insisted the procurement was conducted in a way that ensures all bidders are treated equally, overseen by a fairness monitor with no unfair advantage given to any individual bidder.
Nonetheless, while three consortiums submitted bids for the surface combatant program, several European shipbuilders decided against participating because of concerns about the fairness of the process. Others raised concerns about BAE's closeness with the Halifax firm.
The Canadian Surface Combatant program has already faced rising costs. In 2008 the then-Conservative government estimated the project would cost roughly $26 billion. But in 2015, Vice-Admiral Mark Norman, then commander of the navy, voiced concern that taxpayers may not have been given all the information about the program, publicly predicting the cost for the warships alone would approach $30 billion.
Last year, Alion, one of the companies that submitted a bid on the project, filed a complaint with the Canadian International Trade Tribunal alleging the process was flawed and that BAE's Type 26 can't meet Canadian requirements. Alion has also filed a legal challenge in federal court, asking for a judicial review of the decision by Irving and the government to select the BAE design. Alion argued the Type 26 cannot meet the stated mandatory requirements, including speed, that Canada set out for the new warship, so it should be disqualified.
The CITT, however, rejected that complaint on Jan. 30. “The Canadian International Trade Tribunal has determined that Alion Science and Technology Canada Corporation and Alion Science and Technology Corporation did not have standing to file a complaint before the Canadian International Trade Tribunal,” it noted in a statement.
November 14, 2023 | Local, Aerospace
Now Bombardier wants to provide Canada’s air force a new Canadian Multi-Mission Aircraft, based on its existing Mach 0.90 Global 6500 business jet, flying just below the sound barrier, with a range of 12,223 kilometres.
June 11, 2018 | Local, Naval
DAVID PUGLIESE, OTTAWA CITIZEN Taxpayers will have to spend $1.1 billion extra on new navy supply ships that are going to be built starting this summer, the Liberal government now acknowledges. Previously the cost of building the two ships at Seaspan shipyards in Vancouver, BC had been pegged at $2.3 billion. But the government ordered a review of that cost figure and in an email to Postmedia, Procurement Minister Carla Qualtrough's office now confirms the cost for the Joint Support Ships, or JSS, is set at $3.4 billion. Pat Finn, the head of procurement at the Department of National Defence, said the new price tag came as the government decided to do an additional analysis of the project and include other items it had not previously included. In some cases equipment for the ship has been purchased so there are better costs available on those items, Finn said in an interview Monday. Also taken into account was new infrastructure and the delays with the program, which, in turn, drove up the price as the cost of material increased over the years. “The build period has changed quite dramatically,” Finn acknowledged. At one point, the first ship was supposed to arrive in 2012. That has been changed a number of times with the government later hoping for a 2018 delivery and then a 2019 arrival for the first vessel. The Department of National Defence is now hoping for the delivery of the first ship in 2022 or 2023. Construction will begin at Seaspan this summer of some initial portions of the vessels, Finn said. The government hopes starting construction on the supply ships in the summer will head off any potential layoffs of skilled employees at Seaspan. Finn said of the $3.4 billion figure, the actual cost of building the two ships accounts for a little more than 60 per cent. Finn said the new costing model for the JSS is more akin to the one used by the parliamentary budget office. That office had an even higher estimate for JSS when it concluded in 2013 that the final tally for taxpayers would be $4.13 billion. The Joint Support Ships are critical for the navy as they provide fuel and supplies for warships at sea. But the Royal Canadian Navy retired its last two aging supply ships years ago. One was damaged beyond repair in a fire. The other was removed from service because of excessive corrosion. The Canadian military had been relying on the Spanish and Chilean navies to provide supply vessels for short periods of time to help fuel up Canadian warships at sea. Because of the delays in the JSS program, the previous Conservative government entered into agreement with Davie Shipyards in Quebec to lease a commercial vessel that had been converted into a refueling and supply ship. That ship, the MV Asterix, is at the heart of federal government's case against Vice Admiral Mark Norman. Norman has been accused by the RCMP of warning Davie in the fall of 2015 that Liberal cabinet ministers wanted to derail the Asterix project. Word of the Liberal plan leaked out to the news media and the resulting embarrassment forced the Trudeau government to back down on its plans and the conversion of Asterix proceeded. Norman was put under investigation and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau predicted on two occasions the officer would ultimately end up in court. In March, the RCMP charged Norman with a single count of breach of trust. A date for the trial has not yet been set. Norman denies the charge and has said he looks forward to clearing his name. Asterix is considered a rare achievement in Canadian military procurement in that it was delivered on time and on budget. The supply ship is now at sea with Royal Canadian Navy and is headed to a major military exercise to begin later this month. http://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/joint-support-ship-cost-up-by-1-1-billion-taxpayers-will-now-spend-3-4-billion-on-project
February 6, 2020 | Local, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security
BY RAHUL VAIDYANATH Modernizing outdated North Warning System not funded as part of defence budget No sooner had a gathering to discuss modernizing the defence of North America taken place than two Russian strategic bombers approached Canadian airspace from the Arctic. The menace underscores the message to the Canadian government and public that the country is at greater risk than it has been in decades. North American Aerospace Defence Command (Norad) reported the Russian activity on Jan. 31, just two days after the Canadian Global Affairs Institute (CGAI) hosted a major defence conference in Ottawa. “They [the Russians and Chinese] have the weapons systems and we are increasingly seeing the intent, so we haven't caught up to that yet,” University of Calgary political science professor and conference panelist Rob Huebert said in an interview following the incident. The Russian aircraft stayed in international airspace and didn't enter U.S. or Canadian sovereign airspace, but it nevertheless highlighted the threat. Huebert says what's been holding Canada back is a decades-long multi-faceted problem of attitudes. Canada is accustomed to playing the “away game” instead of the “home game,” meaning it prefers to face its threats as far away from its borders as possible. Thus the protection of the North American continent requires a change of mindset given the advanced capabilities of the Russians and Chinese. It's also naive on Canada's part to think it can simply talk to Russia and China and get them to play nice. “We have to be a lot more honest with Canadians,” Huebert said. A government can favour certain initiatives, and the current one has shown it can generate broad public buy-in for its environmental initiatives. But even if the public isn't clamouring for better military capabilities—as seen in the lack of interest the topic garnered during the election run-up—experts say the government can no longer ignore the military threat from Russia and China. “What this government has shown no willingness to deal with is a much more comprehensive understanding of security that encapsulates both environmental security and military security,” Huebert said. For example, the Liberals didn't put forth their Arctic policy until a day before the election was called. ‘People have to recognize there is a real threat' Canadian governments have put a lower priority on defence spending for decades, and that has left a consistent drop in capability compared to potential rivals. A case in point is that Canada opted in 2005 to not be a part of the U.S. ballistic missile defence program. Contrast that attitude with the Russians or the Chinese and their imperialist goals. Russia wants to destroy us and China wants to own us, said John Sanford of the U.S.'s National Maritime Intelligence Integration Office, at the CGAI forum. A power play is shaping up between the United States, China, and Russia, and the Arctic is the epicentre of the military conflict. That makes it Canada's business, according to defence experts. “People have to recognize there is a real threat,” said conference opening speaker Commodore Jamie Clarke, Norad's deputy director of strategy. “We are defending our entire way of life.” At risk is Canada's economy and infrastructure, not to mention that of the United States. At the heart of the matter is an outdated detection and deterrence system with no comprehensive replacement in the works. https://www.theepochtimes.com/canada-unprepared-for-military-aggression-via-arctic-say-defence-experts_3228565.html