July 7, 2024 | Local, Land
Trudeau should expect criticism at NATO summit over defence spending: analysis
At issue is the NATO two per cent doctrine. That calls for NATO nations to spend two per cent of their GDP on defence.
December 17, 2020 | Local, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security
Matt Gurney: Supporting local industry shouldn't be the first consideration in military procurement
Rather than worrying about where things are built, a better question is: will Canadian soldiers be properly equipped? That's all that matters
Matt Gurney
Dec 16, 2020 • Last Updated 22 hours ago • 5 minute read
It is almost a truism in Canadian public policy: We are terrible at military procurement.
You hear that often. I've said it often. But it really isn't true. We only think we're terrible at military procurement because we are confused about what we're trying to do. Our military procurements are not about actually procuring equipment for the military. They're about creating jobs and catapulting huge sums of money into key ridings across the country.
Once you shift your perspective and look at it that way, you realize very quickly that our military procurement system is amazing. It bats a thousand. The problem isn't with the system. We've just labelled it badly. If it were called the Domestic Defence Industry Subsidy Program instead of our military procurement system, we'd all be hailing it as a shining example of a Canadian public policy triumph.
This is terrible. It has cost us the lives of our soldiers, and probably will again. But it's undeniable. Canadian politicians, Liberals and Conservatives alike, have long had the luxury of seeing defence as a cash pool, not a solemn obligation. And they sure have enjoyed that pleasure.
Two recent stories by my colleague David Pugliese for the Ottawa Citizen have explored this theme: Our efforts to replace our fleet of frigates with 15 newer, more powerful ships is turning predictably complicated. The 15 new combat ships are part of a major overhaul of the Canadian fleet, which was neglected for many years and now must be modernized all at once. In February of 2019, the government chose American defence giant Lockheed Martin to produce the ships in Canada, using a British design. (How Anglosphere of us.) Companies that weren't selected to be part of the construction or fitting out of the ships are unhappy, Pugliese noted, and aren't bothering to hide it, even though they've abandoned their legal challenges.
The sniping has continued, though, with spurned industry figures talking to the media about problems with the program. Jody Thomas, deputy minister of the Department of National Defence, reportedly told industry leaders to knock it off. “There's too much noise,” she reportedly said, adding that it was making the job of getting the new fleet built “very difficult.”
Some of Thomas's irritation is undoubtedly the automatic hostility to scrutiny, transparency and accountability that's far too common for Canadian officials — our bureaucrats are notoriously prone to trying to keep stuff tucked neatly out of public view. But some of what Thomas said is absolutely bang-on accurate: Defence industry companies know full well that the government mainly views military procurement as a jobs-creation program, so are understandably put out to not get what they think is their fair share.
Some Canadian companies have designed and developed critical communication and sensor gear for modern warships, Pugliese noted. This gear was developed with taxpayer assistance and has proven successful in service with allied fleets, but was not chosen for the new Canadian ships. And this is, the companies believe, a problem. Why aren't Canadian ships using Canadian-made gear?
It's a good question, until you think about it for a moment. Then you realize that the better question is this: will the Canadian ships be properly equipped?
That's it. That's all that matters.
Will the new ships be capable of doing the things we need them to do? If yes, then who cares where we got the gear? And if no, well, again — then who cares where we got the gear? The important thing isn't where the comm equipment and sensors were designed and built. It's that the systems work when our ships are heading into harm's way. Assuming we have many viable options to choose from, then there are plenty of good ways of making the choice — cost, proven reliability, familiarity to Canadian crews, and, sure, even whether it was made in Canada.
But supporting the local industry needs to be the last thing on the list. This stuff is essential. The lives of our sailors may depend on it working when needed. Cost matters, too, of course, because if the gear is too pricey, we won't have enough of it, but effectiveness and reliability are first.
Treating military procurement as just another federal jobs-creation program is engrained in our national thinking
But we talk about them last. Because we value it least. There probably is some value in preserving our ability to produce some essential military equipment here in Canada. The scramble earlier this year to equip our frontline medical workers with personal protective equipment is instructive. In a war, whether against a virus or a human enemy, you can't count on just buying your N-95 masks, or your torpedoes and missiles, from your normal suppliers. Unless Canada somehow gets itself into a shooting war without any of our allies in our corner, any time we are suddenly scrambling to arm up, our much larger allies are probably also scrambling to arm up, and they'll simply outbid us. (See again our current efforts to procure vaccines for an example of this unfolding in real time.)
But we aren't at war now, and we can buy the damn ships from anyone. To the government's credit, it seems to be doing this; the pushback against the program seems mostly rooted in the government's decision to let the U.S.-British consortium chosen to build the new ships equip them as they see fit. The program may well derail at some point — this is always a safe bet with Canadian shipbuilding — but insofar as at least this part of the process goes, we're doing it partially right. Yes, we're insisting on building the ships here, but we aren't getting picky about the equipment that goes into them. That's probably wise.
But that's about as far as the wisdom goes. Treating military procurement as just another federal jobs-creation program is engrained in our national thinking. It would have been good if COVID had knocked a bit of sense into us and forced us to, at long last, grow up a bit. But no dice. Oh well. Maybe next time.
On the same subject
-
-
August 4, 2020 | Local, Naval
Quebec shipyard is setting up an Arctic icebreaking research centre
Centre to serve as hub for innovation in Canadian Arctic, Davie Shipyard executive says Murray Brewster · CBC News · Posted: Aug 04, 2020 4:00 AM ET | Last Updated: 8 hours ago Describing itself as Canada's polar partner, the Chantier Davie Shipyard in Quebec plans to announce the creation of a national centre on Tuesday focusing on icebreaking in the country's Arctic. It is, according to a senior executive at the Levis, Que., company, more than just an engineering centre and will encompass the climatic, economic and social factors that will drive the region for the next 30 years and beyond. "It is a bigger discussion," said Spencer Fraser, the director of business development for the Inosea Group of Companies, which owns the shipyard. "It's not just around icebreaking and shipbuilding in Canada." The Arctic icebreaking centre is intended to bring together community and business leaders as well as scientists and engineers — from both northern and southern Canada — in a conference later this year. Shaping the Arctic economy of the 21st century They'll be asked to envision and debate what kind of ships and infrastructure are needed to drive future economic and social development in Canada's Arctic, which is being transformed by climate change and shifting geopolitics. "We're getting together to ask: In 2050, the North is going to look like this, what do we want the economy to look like? And what do we need to do today to get the wheels in motion so we can achieve that?" Fraser told CBC News. More than that, he said, the centre is intended to be a place of ongoing dialogue that will hopefully produce the kind of innovation needed to restore Canada as a world-leader in Arctic operations. By tapping into a wide range of expertise, he said the Chantier Davie initiative intends to showcase Canadian Arctic ingenuity on the world stage, which has for the last 20 years been dominated by Finland and Norway. The company, which is on track to be the federal government's third go-to shipyard under the National Shipbuilding Strategy, intends to carve out a place as the country's premier icebreaker-builder. The other two strategic shipbuilding partners are Irving Shipbuilding in Halifax, which concentrates on the construction of warships, and Vancouver's Seaspan, which is building fisheries science vessels and naval support ships. Chantier Davie was given a federal contract worth up to $827 million to convert three existing commercial icebreakers for use by the Canadian Coast Guard. The first vessel — CCGS Captain Molly Kool — was delivered, but the other two — CCGS Jean Goodwill and CCGS Vincent Massey — have been delayed, the Fisheries Department recently told The Canadian Press. The federal government wants to see its third strategic yard concentrate on building icebreakers and intends to funnel the construction of six ships to the company in the coming year. Concurrently, it has asked the wider shipbuilding industry to build a case for the construction of heavy icebreakers in the Far North. Centre should focus on changes facing the Arctic: expert Rob Huebert, a professor at the University of Calgary and an Arctic expert, said an icebreaking centre of excellence is a novel and important idea. He said the country was, until the 1980s, a world leader in the field, but interest and investment waned after Far North oil and natural gas development plans were shelved. However, he said it needs to be more than just window-dressing and a business vehicle for Chantier Davie. "If they're being serious, they'll not just be focused on their product," Huebert said. "If it is just simply, 'look at what good icebreakers we have and look at how we can provide work' then that, in my mind, will really be just a PR exercise." Appointment of U.S. Arctic co-ordinator may signal more muscular American policy Liberals guarantee immediate icebreakers work for new entrant in federal shipbuilding program What the centre needs to do is go beyond what one company or another produces and focus on how the changing Arctic will be affected by a myriad of circumstances and conditions and the technology Canada will need to address them, he added. Climate change and shifting geopolitical rivalries are but two examples. The Trump Administration recently appointed a career diplomat to become the country's first Arctic co-ordinator — a sign that the country is taking the region more seriously. The U.S. Air Force also recently published an Arctic strategy intended to counter Russia and China's growing influence and ambitions in the region. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/arctic-icebreaking-centre-1.5672800
-
March 29, 2019 | Local, C4ISR
Rheinmetall Canada Awarded a Major Land C4ISR Program Support Contract by the Government of Canada
The Government of Canada has recently awarded Rheinmetall Canada a major support contract pertaining to Intelligence, Surveillance, Target Acquisition, and Reconnaissance (ISTAR). The frame contract is currently worth up to CAD 57 million. The contract will take place over the next five years and will be expensed using a task mechanism over this period. The contract is part of the sustainment of the Land Command, Control, Communication, Computing, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) program and as the prime contractor, Rheinmetall Canada is to provide ISTAR in-service support services (ISS). “At Rheinmetall Canada, we are delighted to provide an important part of the ISTAR program” said Mr. Stéphane Oehrli, President and CEO of Rheinmetall Canada. “This contract represents a great opportunity to showcase our knowledge and capabilities in this high-end area of advanced technology”, he added. The ISTAR capabilities of the Rheinmetall Group are well established around the world. The goal of the ISTAR ISS contract is to provide the Canadian Armed Forces with an ISTAR Command and Control Information System (C2IS) capability. Rheinmetall Canada will maintain and enhance the specialized capability through the support contract. Rheinmetall Canada was selected under a competitive process where Value Proposition and the Industrial and Technological Benefit Policy (ITB) were applied. As one of the few companies to have reached over 1 billion dollars in ITB transactions since the inception of the policy, Rheinmetall Canada has put forward an outstanding Value Proposition. The Canadian supply chain of Rheinmetall Canada will benefit from this contract over the next years. About Rheinmetall Canada Rheinmetall Canada is a proud member of Germany's Rheinmetall Group, one of Europe's largest suppliers of systems and equipment for the armed forces. With approximately 300 employees at locations in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu and Ottawa, Rheinmetall Canada has demonstrated expertise in the development, integration, and production of platform-independent systems for more than 30 years. https://www.rheinmetall-defence.com/en/rheinmetall_defence/public_relations/news/latest_news/index_19712.php