Cyberrisques: pas le moment de baisser la garde

Sur le même sujet

• 

  21 octobre 2018 | Local, Naval

  Feds give Lockheed Martin first shot at $60-billion warship contract

  By Canadian Press OTTAWA — The federal government is giving U.S. defence giant Lockheed Martin the first crack at inking a contract to design Canada's $60-billion fleet of new warships. Government officials say Lockheed's proposed design beat out two rival submissions in what has been a long and extremely sensitive competition to design replacements for the navy's entire frigate and destroyer fleets. While the announcement marked the start of an important new phase in the largest and most expensive military purchase in Canadian history, it could also prove to be extremely controversial as some had questioned why the bid was allowed in the first place. Still, Lockheed executives may not be popping the champagne just yet. Negotiators for both sides as well as Halifax-based Irving Shipbuilding, which will actually build the vessels, must now work out details — including the final cost — before an actual contract is awarded. The stakes will be high for both sides, with hundreds of millions of dollars in play as well as pressure to make up for lost time as numerous delays — including in the design competition — have pushed the schedule for construction. Irving has warned that it could be forced to lay off hundreds of employees if work on the warships is not ready to start by the time it finishes building the navy's new Arctic patrol ships in 2021 or 2022. The Defence Department's head of military procurement, Patrick Finn, acknowledged the need for urgency. But he also noted the need for care as whatever decisions are taken during the negotiations could have ramifications on the navy and taxpayers for decades. “So it behooves us to stop and make sure we do the final checks in all of the areas,” Finn said this week in an interview. Lockheed's victory is likely to be contentious as the federal government had originally said it wanted a “mature design,” which was widely interpreted as meaning a vessel that has already been built and used by another navy. But the Type 26 frigate, upon which Lockheed's proposal is based, is only now being built by the British government and has not been used on operations. The federal government has reserved the right to walk away from the talks — if Lockheed drives too hard a bargain — and negotiate with the second-place bidder, which was not identified. However, officials hope that won't be necessary and a contract will be signed this winter. “We have notional time frames allocated,” said Andre Fillion, who oversees military and naval projects with Public Services and Procurement Canada. “And should everything go according to plan, we're looking at winter 2019 for the award of the contract. If it doesn't go according to plan, then we go to Plan B — and obviously that would take longer.” Lockheed's design was up against a pitch by U.S.-based defence company Alion, which proposed a design based on a Dutch frigate, and Spanish firm Navantia's proposal, which was modelled on a frigate used by the Spanish navy. One of the big questions heading into the negotiations will be how much of Lockheed's design will need to be changed to reflect the navy's needs and how much the navy will have to shift its requirements because changing the design will take more time and money. Government negotiators are also facing a potential battle over the amount of intellectual property that Lockheed will be required to hand over, which Ottawa wants so it can operate and maintain the vessels on its own after they are built. Companies had originally been told that the winner would be required to turn over the full blueprints, but after significant resistance the two sides agreed the matter would be negotiated before a contract is awarded. Officials remain focused on getting “the intellectual property access and rights that we need to not only build the ship but also to operate and maintain it for its entire life cycle,” Fillion said. — Follow @leeberthiaume on Twitter https://ipolitics.ca/2018/10/19/feds-give-lockheed-martin-first-shot-at-60-billion-warship-contract/

• 

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

  Why it is time for smart protectionism

  Put simply, Canadian governments have a responsibility to practise smart protectionism where the risks to Canadians' personal security and national security are high. Free trade is good economics. Protectionism is bad. Global supply chains are efficient. Favouring domestic goods, services and industries is inefficient. Canada has long adhered to these orthodoxies. And most of the time it makes sense to do so. However, through the COVID-19 pandemic, both the public and private sectors have seen weaknesses associated with heavy or total reliance on foreign sources and global supply chains for essential goods, notably personal protective equipment (PPE). As of June 2, for example, the Government of Canada had ordered close to 122 million N95 masks from international suppliers, yet 12 million had been received and 9.8 million of those failed Canadian standards. We are learning the hard way that foreign sources cannot necessarily supply the products we need in the time, quantity or quality required during a national or global emergency. China, as the dominant global producer of many of these PPE supplies, has become the focal point for an emerging debate around domestic control over certain goods, technologies, and services. A recent report from the Henry Jackson Society in the U.K., for example, has argued the “Five Eyes”—the U.S., U.K., Canada, Australia and New Zealand—are far too reliant on Chinese sources for all kinds of strategically important goods, and that this is a threat to the national security of those countries. The Canadian Security Intelligence Service, too, has warned that Canadian companies that produce certain critical technologies are vulnerable to foreign takeovers by entities with agendas hostile to Canada's interests. This is not just an issue with China, though. In Canada, we like to believe that in national or global crises we can rely on the U.S. or other allies for help. Canada, in other words, would be at or near the front of the line with allies. The COVID-19 pandemic, and the behavior of the U.S. and European countries, suggests this is naive. Italy, a founding EU member, requested and was denied face masks from the EU's stockpile at the peak of their COVID-19 outbreak. In April, a presidential executive order gave the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency the power to “allocate to domestic use” several types of PPE that would otherwise be exported. U.S. produced masks bound for Germany, a close American ally, were reportedly diverted back while in transit. Ultimately, Canada was exempt from the U.S. order, but this episode should tell us that global emergencies can lead to “home front comes first” attitudes, even among our closest allies. Fundamentally, the issue comes down to one of efficiency versus necessity. Sometimes, in some areas of the economy, security of supply is more important than efficiency. While this thinking is new to most companies and governments in Canada, it is not new to Canadian companies working in defence and national security. The Canadian defence industry has long highlighted the need for focused sovereign production and control in key national security capabilities—in part to ensure security of supply—as our allies in the U.S., Europe and elsewhere have been doing for generations. The argument has fallen largely on deaf ears. There seems to be a greater aversion in Canada to any kind of protectionism than among our more pragmatic allies. There is also a belief that Canada can always rely on obtaining critical supplies from the U.S., owing to both our close trading relationship and bi-lateral defence agreements dating from the 1950s that purport to establish an integrated North American defence industrial base. Canada puts too much faith in these beliefs, to our peril. While we can still hold free trade and integrated global supply chains as the goal, we also need to recognize that this view of the economy does not always serve our national interests. Put simply, Canadian governments have a responsibility to practise smart protectionism where the risks to Canadians' personal security and national security are high. Christyn Cianfarani is president and CEO of the Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries (CADSI). The Hill Times https://www.hilltimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/072020_ht.pdf

• 

  5 septembre 2019 | Local, Aérospatial

  Lightning strikes twice in Ottawa

  Two Lockheed Martin F-35A Lightning II fighter jets touched down at Ottawa's Macdonald-Cartier International Airport on Sept. 4, ahead of their appearance at this weekend's AERO Gatineau-Ottawa airshow. The show, which runs from Sept. 6-8, will feature a flying display performed by the U.S. Air Force F-35 flight demonstration team. The fighter jets will not be on static display. Other performers include aircraft from Vintage Wings of Canada, the Canadian CF-18 Hornet Demo team, the Canadian Forces Snowbirds aerobatic team, and more. For details, visit the show's website. Skies photographer Mike Luedey was waiting in Ottawa for the aircraft to arrive. Here are a few shots of the team making a (loud) entrance! https://www.skiesmag.com/news/lightning-strikes-twice-in-ottawa