9 juillet 2020 | Local, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

Canadian Armed Forces equipment delivered late half the time, auditor general finds

By . Published on Jul 8, 2020 10:32am

Half of all late requests for military materials and equipment arrived in Canadian soldiers' hands more than two weeks behind schedule because of a problem-ridden supply chain that often forced the military to incur extra shipment costs, a new report from the Auditor General has found.

“We concluded that National Defence often did not deliver on time the materiel the Canadian Armed Forces requested, and that it did not have the right controls in place to determine whether it avoided needless transportation costs,” said the report authored by Auditor General of Canada Karen Hogan, which was released on Wednesday.

During the period of the audit, there were approximately 1 million requests for materiel — military materials and equipment — submitted and fulfilled by National Defence. The audit oversaw all materiel covered by the National Defence Act, with the exclusion of ammunition, bombs, missiles and large equipment like aircraft, vessels and vehicles.

The Auditor General found that 50 per cent of all late materiel requests were delayed by at least 15 days and 25 per cent were at least 40 days late.

Of the highest priority requests — of which there were about 86,000 observed — 60 per cent were late. Fifty per cent of all were at least six days late, and 25 per cent were at least 20 days late.

The Auditor General found that 162,000 requests, about 16 per cent of all it tracked during its audit, were more than one year late, having been stalled at some point in the supply chain.

The goal of National Defence's supply chain is to “fulfill materiel requirements in the most economical and timely manner possible,” the Auditor General's report says. It attempts to achieve this by keeping equipment nearby where it thinks it will eventually be used.

However, most equipment bought by the military is initial delivered to Canadian Armed Forces supply depots in Edmonton and Montreal. They then supply regional warehouses, which supply smaller localized military units. Materiel is transferred at units' requests, which are made in a number of ways, but are defined as being of one of three levels of priority — high priority, essential and routine.

“We found that National Defence's systems and processes often did not ensure the timely and efficient delivery of military supplies to the Canadians Armed Forces,” Hogan's report says.

Stock shortages caused delays, National Defence poorly managed priorities and costs for transportation were bungled.

Per it's report, the Auditor General made three recommendations.

It suggested that National Defence review its materiel forecasting to ensure it sufficiently stocks items at the correct locations, that it improve its oversight of high-priority requests so that the categorization is only used when necessary, and that it provide clear guidance on how to select the proper mode of transportation for items to ensure that decisions about shipments are based on fully understanding how much it'll cost.

In a statement released shortly after the Auditor General's report, Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan said he “welcome(s)” its findings and accepts all recommendations.

Similar concerns were raised a few years ago by the Auditor General's office about National Defence's equipment supply. In the fall of 2016, it raised issues with the military's ability to properly account for its inventory. The same fiscal year, National Defence announced a 10-year inventory management plan to address the Auditor General's concerns. The Trudeau government also released its multi-decade defence policy in the spring of 2017.

One of the focal points of Strong, Secure, Engaged was to ensure the military was properly equipped.

“Providing (the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces) the training, equipment and care they deserve is the most important objective of this policy,” reads a line from the opening paragraph of Sajjan's opening message in more than 100-page policy.

Upon being re-elected, Sajjan was again reminded of his responsibility to “ensure the Canadian Armed Forces have the capabilities and equipment required to uphold their responsibilities,” in the mandate letter assigned to him by Trudeau.

In an emailed statement to iPolitics, Conservative Defence Critic James Bezan said “effective and efficient supply chains are crucial to the operating capability of the Canadian Armed Forces.”

“Our military heroes rely on these supply chains to defend Canadians at home and abroad. It is clear that more work needs to be done in order to make these supply chains better for our men and women and uniform,” Bezan said.

“The delivery of supplies must be timely so that materiel reaches military members when they need it,” Hogan's recently released report said.

Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan said in a statement Wednesday that the Canadian Armed Forces will enhance its data analytics capabilities and “rely on real data to ensure” the military has the right supply chain approach for its ever-evolving requirements and to help better anticipate future needs.

“These steps will make sure that we have the right equipment, in the right quantities, at the right places to meet the challenges we ask our members to face now and in the future,” he said.


Sur le même sujet

  • Purchase of three spy planes from the U.S. could cost Canada $140 million more than planned

    11 octobre 2018 | Local, Aérospatial

    Purchase of three spy planes from the U.S. could cost Canada $140 million more than planned

    DAVID PUGLIESE, OTTAWA CITIZEN Canadian companies had wanted to provide the aircraft, but the Canadian military decided it needed the planes quicker than they believed Canadian firms could deliver The cost of three small surveillance aircraft Canada is buying from the U.S. could be $140 million more than the Canadian military had originally estimated. The three Beechcraft King Air planes, to be based at CFB Trenton in Ontario, will be outfitted with sensors and equipment to intercept cell phone and other electronic transmissions. Canadian special forces and, potentially, other government departments will use them for missions overseas and in Canada. On Oct. 1 the Canadian Forces told Postmedia the three outfitted planes and initial in-service support would cost between $100 million and $249 million, as outlined in the Liberal government's defence policy documents. However, on Oct. 4 the U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency revealed the final tally, informing Congress that the deal was underway with an estimated cost of US $300 million — around $389 million. Canadian companies had wanted to provide the aircraft and on-board equipment, and several have formed alliances with U.S. firms who supply the Pentagon with the same or similar aircraft. But the Canadian military decided it needed the planes more quickly than they believed Canadian companies could deliver, and that U.S. security regulations governing the on-board sensor equipment might cause delays. As a result, it determined the U.S. government was the only supplier capable of providing the planes. The Canadian Forces says it hopes to get a better deal. The cost the U.S. government agency presented to Congress is not the final tally and the “final cost is anticipated to be much lower,” the Canadian Forces claimed in an email. “Over the coming months, we will work to more clearly define our interests and requirements for the purchase, and negotiate an acceptable price with the U.S.,” the email said. Department of National Defence spokeswoman Ashley Lemire said in an email to Postmedia that the delivery of the first plane would take place sometime between 2020 and 2021. The final delivery of the three aircraft would be wrapped up by 2022. The main contractor is Beechcraft in Wichita, Kan. The Canadian government will run a separate program to allow companies to compete to provide in-service support for the planes. The government expects to ask for bids for that 20-year contract sometime in the spring of 2019, said Lemire. DND declined to provide an estimate of what that long-term support would cost taxpayers. Industry representatives have complained over the years that the Canadian Forces cut domestic firms out of the project and reduced the role they could play. Lemire rejected that claim, saying Canadian firms would have a role in servicing the planes. https://calgaryherald.com/news/purchase-of-three-spy-planes-from-the-u-s-will-cost-canada-140-million-more-than-planned

  • U.S. threatens to pull F-35 from jet competition over industrial requirements

    7 mai 2019 | Local, Aérospatial

    U.S. threatens to pull F-35 from jet competition over industrial requirements

    By Lee Berthiaume, The Canadian Press OTTAWA — U.S. officials have threatened to pull the F-35 out of the competition to replace the Royal Canadian Air Force's aging CF-18 fighters over the Liberal government's plan to ask bidders to re-invest some of the giant purchase contract in Canadian industry. The warnings are in two letters sent to the government last year and obtained by defence analyst Richard Shimooka. They were released in a report published Monday by the Macdonald-Laurier Institute think-tank. They say the requirement is incompatible with Canada's obligations as a member of the group of countries working together to develop the F-35 stealth fighter in the first place. While the re-investment requirement is standard for most Canadian military procurements, the U.S. officials note Canada agreed not to include it when it signed on as one of nine F-35 partner countries in 2006. Companies in those countries must instead compete for work associated with the plane — only companies from those countries are eligible, but they're supposed to compete on equal footing. The U.S. officials say conditions on bidders that would privilege Canadian companies will mean the F-35 won't be entered in the race. The F-35, which is built by Lockheed Martin, had been expected to go up against the Eurofighter Typhoon, Saab Gripen and Boeing Super Hornet for an 88-plane procurement worth about $19 billion. French company Dassault pulled its Rafale from contention late last year. "In summary, we cannot participate in an offer of the F-35 weapon system where requirements do not align with the F-35 partnership," U.S. Vice-Admiral Mathias Winter, program executive officer for the Pentagon's F-35 office, wrote on Dec. 18. "Such an offer would violate (the F-35 agreement) and place the entire F-35 partnership at risk." In his letter to Paula Folkes-Dallaire, senior director of the fighter-jet program at Public Services and Procurement Canada, Winter asked for clarity by Jan. 31 as to the government's decision on the re-investment requirements. Winter's letter followed a similar one from Ellen Lord, the Pentagon's head of military procurement, on Aug. 31, 2018. In a statement, Public Procurement Minister Carla Qualtrough's spokeswoman said the government has engaged in several rounds of discussions and exchanges with potential bidders, which included providing them with opportunities "to ask questions, raise concerns and provide suggestions. "Our government has been hard working to address as much of the supplier feedback as possible to ensure a level playing field and a fair and open competition with as many eligible suppliers as possible," added Ashley Michnowski. "This stage of the process is not yet complete, though is nearing its conclusion and a final (request for proposals) will be issued soon." The Pentagon's F-35 office did not return requests for comment. Stephen Harper's Conservatives first announced plans to buy 65 F-35s without a competition in 2010, but backed off that plan over questions about cost and concerns over the Defence Department's tactics in getting government approval for the deal. During the 2015 federal election campaign, Justin Trudeau's Liberals promised they would immediately launch an open and fair competition to replace the CF-18s, but not buy the F-35. The Trudeau government has since said the F-35 will be allowed to compete while officials had been expecting to finally launch that competition in the coming weeks. That the re-investment requirement remains unresolved is both surprising and unsurprising given defence experts have long warned it would be a significant obstacle to running a fair and open competition that includes the F-35. Canada, which has already contributed roughly $500 million over the past 20 years toward developing the F-35, could in theory quit as a partner country, but would have to pay more for the stealth fighters if the F-35 won the competition. Canada could also be on the hook for hundreds of millions more in development fees despite quitting the program, while Canadian companies would not be allowed to compete for work related to the aircraft. In a recent interview, the Department of National Defence's head of military procurement, Patrick Finn, said the government is trying to strike the right balance between military and economic priorities when it comes to the fighter-jet competition. "The feedback we're seeing from some suppliers some are quite content, some would like to see some more flexibility in other areas," he said. "So it's making all of that work, respecting (companies') strengths, keeping everybody in the competition and doing it in a way that brings the right capability to the air force for decades to come." —Follow @leeberthiaume on Twitter Lee Berthiaume, The Canadian Press https://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2019/05/06/ottawas-planned-fighter-competition-incompatible-with-f-35-obligations-u-s-3

  • Protecting Canada and improving cyber defence: three challenges
Toutes les nouvelles