Canada has wildfires every year. Why won’t it create a firefighting force?

Sur le même sujet

• 

  7 décembre 2017 | Local, Terrestre, Sécurité

  Contrat octroyé à une entreprise de Longueuil - De nouveaux camions d’incendie pour les Forces armées canadiennes

  Le 6 décembre 2017 – 8e Escadre Trenton (Ontario) – Défense nationale/Forces armées canadiennes La nouvelle politique de défense du Canada, Protection, Sécurité, Engagement, réaffirme l'engagement du gouvernement à fournir aux femmes et hommes des Forces armées canadiennes l'appui et le matériel dont ils ont besoin pour effectuer leur travail. Aujourd'hui, à l'appui de cet engagement, le député Neil Ellis, au nom du ministre de la Défense Harjit Sajjan, a annoncé que la 8e Escadre Trenton est le premier emplacement à prendre possession des nouveaux véhicules d'incendie. Appelé véhicule aérien d'extinction des incendies, ce camion moderne fournit des capacités anti-incendie et est capable de procéder à des sauvetages et à l'évacuation de blessés à une hauteur de 35 mètres. Il est muni d'une plateforme de récupération des blessés, contrairement aux précédents véhicules. Ces véhicules ont été acquis dans le but de combattre les incendies sur des infrastructures modernes qui se trouvent dans les bases et les escadres, y compris des incendies dans les zones de confinement de carburant et de munitions. Ces nouveaux camions remplaceront certains des véhicules actuellement utilisés, qui sont en service depuis le milieu des années 1990, et qui ont excédé leur durée de vie utile. De plus, les véhicules s'ajouteront aux flottes de lutte contre l'incendie qui ne possèdent pas les capacités que présenteront les AFFV. Au mois de juin 2016, un contrat a été octroyé à la société Aréo-Feu, basée à Longueuil (Québec), pour fournir les véhicules. En tout, neuf nouveaux véhicules seront livrés aux bases et aux escadres partout au Canada. Le dernier AFFV devrait être livré au mois d'avril 2018, avec l'option d'en acheter trois autres. Citations « La modernisation du matériel auquel les Forces armées canadiennes se fient pour réaliser leur travail est une priorité clé pour le gouvernement du Canada. Je suis heureux de voir que les nouveaux véhicules aériens d'extinction d'incendie sont livrés aux bases et aux escadres partout au pays. » – le ministre de la Défense Harjit S. Sajjan « Ce sont d'excellentes nouvelles que la première livraison des véhicules aériens d'extinction d'incendie a lieu ici à la 8e Escadre Trenton. Surtout, ce sont d'excellentes nouvelles pour les pompiers et les travailleurs des services d'urgence qui se serviront de ce véhicule moderne au service de la communauté de la 8e Escadre Trenton. » - Neil Ellis, député de la baie de Quinte Faits en bref Ce contrat d'une valeur de 18,7 millions de dollars a été octroyé à la société Aréo-Feu, basée à Longueuil (Québec), à la suite d'un processus concurrentiel équitable, ouvert et transparent. Au total, neuf véhicules seront livrés sur les bases et dans les escadres partout au Canada, et le contrat comprend une option visant l'achat de trois véhicules de plus. La première livraison a débuté en novembre 2017 et la dernière est prévue pour avril 2018. Les bases et les escadres suivantes obtiendront chacun un nouveau véhicule aérien d'extinction d'incendie : 4e Escadre Cold Lake; 3e Escadre Bagotville; 8e Escadre Trenton; 19e Escadre Comox; 14e Escadre Greenwood; BFC Suffield; BFC Shilo; BFC Gagetown et BFC Esquimalt. Personnes-ressources Byrne Furlong Attaché de presse Cabinet du ministre de la Défense nationale 613-996-3100 Relations avec les médias Ministère de la Défense nationale Tél. : 613-996-2353 Sans-frais : 1-866-377-0811 https://www.canada.ca/fr/ministere-defense-nationale/nouvelles/2017/12/de_nouveaux_camionsdincendiepourlesforcesarmeescanadiennes.html

• 

  14 avril 2020 | Local, Terrestre

  ANALYSIS: Cloud lifted from GDLS Saudi deal, but future business uncertain: analyst

  Canada's $14-billion deal to sell armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia is going ahead and will keep a London defence giant rolling, but some say questions remain about future business between General Dynamics Land Systems Canada (GDLS) and the desert kingdom. NORMAN DE BONO Canada's $14-billion deal to sell armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia is going ahead and will keep a London defence giant rolling, but some say questions remain about future business between General Dynamics Land Systems Canada (GDLS) and the desert kingdom. The federal government said it's lifting a moratorium on new permits for military exports to Saudi Arabia, a critical step for London since GDLS, with about 2,000 employees in London, has a nearly 40-year relationship supplying armoured vehicles to the Saudis. But Ottawa also said it's appointing an advisory panel of experts to review Canada's arms export process and to push for an international inspection for arms sales. That could threaten future business, warned analyst David Perry, vice-president of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. The Canadian-Saudi deal, with GDLS at the centre, negotiated by the former Conservative government and inherited by the Liberal successor, had come under sharp attack, with some critics calling for it to be scrapped, amid concerns about Saudi Arabia's poor human rights record. “If I was a worker I would be tremendously relieved and happy they made the decision,” Perry said of the federal government. He stressed reviews of the contract determined there was no indication GDLS vehicles were involved in human rights violations. “This went back and forth for a few years, and the government reviewed and threatened to cancel this contract outright. I think there has been irreparable harm. If you're another country open to exports, they may be thinking twice about doing business with Canada,” said Perry. “They (Saudi Arabians) have options when it comes to sourcing. I think they may be thinking in the future about where they source (their military equipment).” Lifting the cloud from the Saudi deal comes at a critical time on the London business landscape, with the fallout of the coronavirus pandemic and the lockdowns that have brought new uncertainty for many employers. In clearing the air on the deal, the federal government also revealed it would have been on the hook for up to $14 billion if it had cancelled the contract to sell light armoured vehicles to the Saudis, a deal that dates to 2014. The review panel, however, poses a level of uncertainty in future business dealings, Perry noted. “A new export panel will offer another layer of review. I don't know how to interpret that. It depends on who is appointed to that panel,” he said. In 2018, after news broke that the Saudi government had ordered the murder of dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi, the Trudeau Liberals announced a review of all Canada's existing arms sales to Saudi Arabia. Ottawa also slapped a moratorium on new export permits for shipments of military goods to Riyadh. Existing military contracts, such as the GDLS deal, were not affected by the moratorium. But in 2018 Prime Minister Justin Trudeau publicly talked about trying to find a way to end shipments of armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia. Thursday, Foreign Affairs Minister François-Philippe Champagne and Finance Minister Bill Morneau said the suspension of approval of new Saudi permits is now lifted. They cited a government review last September that found no credible evidence linking Canadian exports of military or other controlled goods to Saudi human rights violations. But the moratorium on trade with the Saudis has already affected the Canadian defence sector to the tune of about $2 billion, according to a memo sent to the foreign affairs minister from two top foreign affairs and international trade officials. “(Twenty) companies that have a history of exporting to KSA (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) suggest that approximately $2 billion in trade has been affected since August 2018. A number of Canadian exporters to KSA have suspended their business development operations . . . The open-ended nature of Canada's moratorium on new export permits, and the lack of identified conditions that would allow a resumption of permit issuance, present a high commercial risk for Canadian companies,” the memo says. Perry, who shared the memo with The Free Press, said he has heard similar concerns from the Canadian defence sector. “I have spoken to businesses that have lost business opportunities” from the moratorium on arms trade with Saudis. “This is welcome news,” he added of the lifting of restrictions, “but the government has introduced uncertainty into Canadian defence industry and exports.” Political scientist Erika Simpson at Western University also questioned the role of the panel, saying there are few details about its authority and adding that only Global Affairs has the authority to impact trade agreements. She also questioned why the contract appears to have been reduced by $1 billion in value. When the Conservatives announced it in 2014, it was worth $15 billion. Ottawa now says it is a $14-billion contract. “I think $1 billion is a lot of money. What happened to $1 billion?” asked Simpson, an associate professor of international politics. “This is good news, but I want to know where the $1 billion went.” GDLS Canada declined comment Friday. Perry also questioned the timing of the announcement. With more than three million Canadians expected to be left unemployed due to the COVID-19 crisis, Ottawa could not jeopardize thousands of jobs across Canada, he said. “As important as this is in Southwestern Ontario, it is not just Southwestern Ontario,” he said. London Liberal MP Peter Fragiskatos downplayed down the idea the review panel could dampen further GDLS business. “I don't think so. This government is behind this contract, this workforce, 100 per cent. On the contrary, I would say a review is a good thing. It will bring greater transparency to the arms program. I welcome it,” the London North Centre MP said. He also stressed the Saudi deal is only about half complete, meaning about six more years of work may remain before there needs to be a discussion about future contracts. “I am pleased to say the least. It was in the making for some time, but it is a very good result not just for the company and its workers, but for the city,” said Fragiskatos. It's too soon to draw conclusions about the future of work by GDLS for the Saudis, since that depends largely on who is at the table negotiating future deals, said Bill Pettipas, former president of GM Defence, which General Dynamics bought and renamed. Pettipas bargained several arms contracts with foreign powers, including a multi-billion dollar deal with the U.S. army to supply it with Stryker armoured vehicles. “It depends on individuals, on relationships. It will get resolved. It will normalize eventually. That relationship has been going on since the early 1980s,” said Pettipas. “Time takes care of things.” Officials with Unifor Local 27, the union for many GDLS workers in London, couldn't be reached for comment Friday. Unifor's national office declined comment. https://lfpress.com/news/local-news/analysis-cloud-lifted-from-gdls-saudi-deal-but-future-business-uncertain-analyst

• 

  17 décembre 2020 | Local, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

  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. https://nationalpost.com/opinion/matt-gurney-supporting-local-industry-shouldnt-be-the-first-consideration-in-military-procurement