Canada Extends CAE’s NFTC Contract Through 2027 Valued at More than $550M CAD

On the same subject

• 

  November 26, 2019 | Local, Other Defence

  U.S. sent ‘blunt’ letter to Canada criticizing defence spending: sources

  BY MERCEDES STEPHENSON AND KERRI BREEN Canada has been officially called out by the United States over how much it spends on the military, Global News has learned. A “blunt” letter from the U.S. government was delivered to the Department of National Defence that criticized Canadian defence spending levels and repeated American demands that Canada meet NATO targets. Global News has not seen the letter — said to have a frustrated, critical tone — but multiple sources have confirmed it was sent and received. U.S. President Donald Trump has long called for members of the 29-nation military alliance to beef up their budgets for defence. His national security adviser Robert O'Brien, who spoke Saturday at the Halifax International Security Forum, said getting NATO members to meet the established target — two per cent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) — is an urgent priority. “There are very serious threats to our freedom and our security and if NATO is going to be effective, and if we want to put our money where our talk is, we got to spend that money to defend ourselves,” he said. Nations including Canada agreed at the 2014 NATO summit in Wales​ to move towards the military spending target within a decade, he noted. “We expect our friends and our colleagues to live up to their commitments and their promises,” he said. He also praised Canada's plan to build and deploy Arctic patrol vessels. The North, he said, is going to be the new “frontline” of defence, as Russia and China have made it clear they are going to militarize the Arctic. One Canadian source told Global News that the U.S. is concerned that Canada does not take the threat from those countries in the Arctic seriously and wants the country to boost its contributions in that area. Just seven countries — including the U.S. and the U.K. — have met NATO's two per cent of GDP spending goal, according to figures released in June. NATO's estimates show Canada is expected to spend 1.27 per cent of its GDP on the military this year, up from about one per cent in 2014. Canada does fare better when you look at its defence budget in dollars and cents, said Dave Perry, vice president of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. The country spends the sixth highest amount overall among NATO members on its military. As for meeting the percentage of GDP target, Perry's not optimistic despite planned increases in the defence budget. “Canada is not on a path to live up to the commitments that we were signing up for in 2014 in Wales,” he said. Last year, Canada spent about $22.9 billion on the Department of National Defence. But Ottawa intends to dramatically boost military spending in the coming years. In 2017, the government released a plan to increase the budget to almost $33 billion annually within a decade. Asked about the letter from the U.S., Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan touted this plan to strengthen spending. Discussions around “burden sharing” within the bloc have been happening for some time, he said. He noted that under the government's plan, the defence budget would see an increase of 70 per cent, a “significant amount.” “The relationship with Canada and the U.S., the defence relationship, I think, is even stronger now, because they see a tangible plan that we have created,” he said on an episode of The West Block that aired Sunday. “It's working, actually, extremely well.” The U.S. sending such a letter is an unusual, formal means of relaying a message, and it represents an escalation from previous attempts to get Canada to spend more on its military. That pressure has been increasing in recent weeks ahead of the NATO summit in London starting on Dec. 3. In fact, the same message has been conveyed in multiple ways to the federal government, a diplomatic source said, and NATO itself also wants to see more military spending from Canada. In July, however, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg suggested publicly he was happy with improvements in Canadian defence spending. “Under your leadership,” he said to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, ​​”Canada has stepped up its contributions to our NATO alliance including with forces for NATO missions and operations and increased spending.” But one former defence minister said the letter from the U.S. — NATO's leader in defence spending in relation to its GDP — was not a good sign. Peter MacKay said such a letter amounts to “a very serious diplomatic slap — not on the wrist, but in the face.” During his time in government, the former Nova Scotia Conservative MP said he had talks with defence secretaries regarding Canadian military spending and the country's goal of reaching two per cent. “Those discussions can be forceful and frank but they took place face to face,” said MacKay, who was defence minister for six years under former prime minister Stephen Harper. “Sending a démarche (diplomatic letter) is really ratcheting it up a notch.” https://globalnews.ca/news/6210623/canada-defence-spending-nato/

• 

  October 7, 2019 | Local, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  With billions of dollars at stake, all parties promise to fix defence purchases

  Every election, would-be prime ministers promise to cancel bad military purchases or processes, hurry along good ones, fix the mess once and for all OTTAWA — The seemingly endless effort to replace Canada's CF-18s fighter jets passed a tiny milestone Friday: fighter-jet makers participating in the $19-billion competition were required to explain how they planned to make their aircraft compliant with U.S. intelligence systems. For nearly a decade, Canadians have been inundated with talk of fighter jets without Canada ever buying them, an ever-worsening symbol of the failures of Canada's military procurement system. Every election, would-be prime ministers promise to cancel bad purchases or processes, hurry along good ones, fix the mess once and for all. Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer this week promised to “de-politicize” military procurement with new oversight bodies in cabinet and the Privy Council Office while working toward multi-partisan consensus on procurement projects in Parliament. The Liberals promise to establish a new agency called Defence Procurement Canada, which suggests taking the entire function away from the four departments that now share responsibility for buying military kit. The New Democrats and Greens promise, without detail, that they will ensure Canada's military gets the equipment it needs. The origins of what we face today can be traced back to the end of the Cold War when Canada and its allies began to cut defence spending after a decades-long arms race with the Soviet Union. There were concerns about whether or not you're getting the right kind of economic benefits “We deferred purchasing new fighter planes and did the same thing with our frigate fleet,” says David Perry, vice-president of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute and one of Canada's foremost experts on defence spending and procurement. “We just kicked the can down the road on fixed-wing search-and-rescue aircraft. There was a bunch of other projects that fit the same vein.” The military had to use equipment for years longer than it was supposed to and the Department of National Defence lost most of its procurement experts. But in the mid-2000s, the Forces' equipment problems were revealed in Kandahar: the military lacked transport aircraft to resupply its Afghanistan mission, artillery and tanks to support troops on the ground and helicopters to move them around. Ottawa rushed into gear, purchasing transport planes, howitzers, helicopters and tanks in short order — in most cases without competitions. New equipment flooded in but there were some big failures, starting with accusations defence officials rigged the requirements for a new search-and-rescue plane to select a specific U.S. plane. There was also a failed effort to buy new supply ships for the navy and, most explosively, a plan to buy new fighter jets, Lockheed Martin's F-35s, without a competition. In 2012, auditor general Michael Ferguson blasted the Defence Department for failing to communicate the stealth fighter's risks, including escalating costs and schedule delays, to Parliament and decision-makers. Dan Ross, who was the department's head of military procurement at the time, would later say defence officials had all the information and were willing to share it — the Harper government just wouldn't let them. Either way, the public's confidence in the system and the government's ability to manage it were shaken. The F-35 purchase was scrapped. The Tories imposed new constraints to keep costs under control and ensure Canadian industry and communities benefit from defence contracts. “There were concerns about whether or not you're getting the right kind of economic benefits, some significant concerns about whether or not process was being adhered to until you had this system recalibration where you had an injection of additional rules and governance,” Perry says. That recalibration imposed a fundamental tension on the system: the need to get the best equipment possible, with the most benefit to the economy or local industry, at the lowest cost. Every big procurement is partly about the military's needs and partly about national industrial policy — and, that means, partly about politics. Most procurements are still completed with minimal fuss. The problems largely lie with big, once-in-a-lifetime contracts like fighters and warships that are worth billions of dollars and are not only essential for the military to operate, but have the potential to benefit Canadian businesses and communities for years. The ones that involve billions of public dollars. “You're trying to get the best bang for the buck for as little buck as possible,” says Queen's University professor Kim Nossal, who wrote a book entitled “Charlie Foxtrot: Fixing Defence Procurement in Canada” in 2016. “The one comforting thing is that very few countries have got the balance right. All industrial countries, all of our allies, faces these kinds of pressures. They worry about jobs and costs and capability.” Efforts to combine the three competing priorities can lead to bickering among federal departments, lawsuits from companies and politicians sticking their fingers in things. Seconds after saying he would de-politicize the military procurement system this week, Scheer promised to negotiate the purchase of an interim naval supply ship from Quebec's Chantier Davie shipyard, which lobbied the Liberal government for years to ink such a contract without success. Davie is one of Canada's big players in shipbuilding — and it's in much-contested political territory just outside Quebec City. Alan Williams, who was the Defence Department's head of procurement from 1999 to 2005 and now advises companies on procurement matters, compares Scheer's promise on Davie to Justin Trudeau's promise in 2015 not to buy the F-35. That's because while a government can decide to purchase a piece of military equipment, procurement laws — and Canada's international trade obligations — forbid it from choosing or excluding a specific product or supplier except under extreme circumstances. Upon taking office, the Liberals twisted themselves in pretzels to get around the legal implications of their promise. That twisting led to a plan to buy Super Hornets from a competing vendor. When that fell through, four years passed before an actual competition was launched — with the F-35 now one of three planes still in contention. In the meantime, the CF-18s will fly until 2032, reinforced with second-hand Australian F-18s to buy time. https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/election-2019/with-billions-of-dollars-at-stake-all-parties-promise-to-fix-defence-purchases

• 

  December 17, 2020 | Local, Aerospace

  Saab offers two aerospace centres in Gripen E proposal for Canada’s Future Fighter

  By Garrett Reim14 December 2020 Saab is offering to open two new aerospace centres as part of its Gripen E proposal for Canada's Future Fighter Capability Project. The aerospace facilities, the Gripen Centre and the Aerospace Research & Development Centre, would be based in the greater Montreal region, the company announced at Aero Montreal's International Aerospace Innovation Forum 2020 on 14 December. Mission system software and hardware development, as well as integration, for the proposed Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) Gripen E would be done at the Gripen Centre. The Aerospace Research & Development Centre would focus on a variety of aerospace technologies, including automation, artificial intelligence and “greening” technologies. That work may or may not be directly related to the Gripen E. Rather, the research and development would focus on next-generation aerospace technologies more generally. Saab is also in talks with undisclosed local universities about partnerships related to the aerospace centres, it says. Saab has only about 50 people working in Canada currently, across various businesses such as maritime traffic management and army training and simulation work. However, between the two aerospace centres, the company anticipates at least 3,000 people being directly employed. The RCAF is looking to buy 88 advanced fighters to replace its fleet of Boeing CF-18 Hornets. Canada's Department of National Defence estimates acquisition of the aircraft, related equipment and entry into service will cost C$15-19 billion ($11.8-14.9 billion). A contract is scheduled to be awarded in 2022 after evaluation by the RCAF. The air force wants the first jets received as soon as 2025. The new fleet is expected to fly beyond 2060. In addition to Saab, the RCAF received bids in July from Boeing, which is offering its F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, and Lockheed Martin, which is offering F-35 Lightning II stealth fighters. Canada is also part of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter programme, spending more than $500 million on the effort since 1997, an investment that has allowed Canadian companies to secure C$1.8 billion in contracts from the project. However, Ottawa has not yet committed to buying F-35s, hence the acquisition competition. Politicians objected to F-35s in part due to the high cost of early examples of the stealth fighter. The cost of the F-35A has fallen to $77.9 million per unit, though operating costs remains high, at $35,000 hourly. Lockheed has promised to lower that figure to $25,000 hourly by 2025. For its part, Saab has proposed that Canada's IMP Aerospace & Defence would handle in-country production of the Gripen E, and provide support over the lifetime of the fleet. The company says initial aircraft would be produced in Sweden to meet Ottawa's goal of first fighter delivery in 2025. It is still evaluating how many aircraft could be made in Canada, but says it aims to “maximise” the number. The rest of the Saab Gripen for Canada team would include CAE, which is to provide training and mission systems; Peraton Canada, which is to supply avionic and test equipment, as well as component maintenance, repair and overhaul, and material management; and GE Aviation, which is set to provide and sustain the fighters' turbine engines. https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing/saab-offers-two-aerospace-centres-in-gripen-e-proposal-for-canadas-future-fighter/141602.article