9 février 2018 | Information, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

Faire affaire avec l'OTAN

Canada has a new representative at the NATO Communications and Information Agency (NCIA / NCI Agency). Ms Joanna Glowacki started this fall and is ready to help Canadian companies connect with NATO ICT business opportunities. She can be reached at joanna.glowacki@ncia.nato.int or +32 (0)2 707.82.27

As you know, Canada has established a new Liaison Officer at the NATO Support and Procurement Agency (NSPA) in Capellen, Luxembourg. Lieutenant-Colonel Martin Bedard arrived in the summer and some of you have already been engaging with him. Martin's email address is calo@nspa.nato.int

Canadian companies are encouraged to continue to track NATO business opportunities on the websites of the two NATO Acquisition Agencies – NCI Agency and NSPA.

For companies tracking ICT business opportunities at NATO, it is recommended that you follow the NCI Agency Bulletin Board website https://www.ncia.nato.int/Industry/Pages/Home.aspx for the latest updates on current business opportunities. If you see an opportunity of interest, shown on the website as a Notice of Intent (NOI), notify the Canadian Delegation to be added to the bidders list. There is no cost to receive the bid package and no commitment to bid once on the bidders list, although for each and every opportunity you must notify Canada's Delegation to NATO at BNATO.industry@international.gc.ca to be added to the bidders list.

For NATO business opportunities in the area of logistics and maintenance, the NATO Support and Procurement Agency (NSPA) website is: http://www.nspa.nato.int/en/index.htm. You should also register your company as a supplier of NSPA – there is no cost and no commitment to register your company – so you start to receive notices of NSPA business opportunities in your domain. You can register at the following link: http://www.nspa.nato.int/en/organization/procurement/supplier.htm. You can also view “Future Business Opportunities” on the NSPA database: http://www.nspa.nato.int/en/organization/procurement/fbo.htm. Right click on an item of interest for more detail. Check out as well the “Request for Proposal” opportunities at the same site – right side of page.

You can also look at the following webpages for general information:

Guide to navigating NATO procurement: http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/business-connecting-foreign-markets/nato-faqs-guide-procurement.page

Answers to Frequently Asked Questions about NATO business opportunities: http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/business-connecting-foreign-markets/canadian-industry-doing-business-nato-faqs.page

Guide pour la navigation- Acquisitions au sein de l'OTAN: http://www.forces.gc.ca/fr/faire-affaires-acceder-marches-etrangers/otan-faqs-guide-acquisition.page

Réponses aux questions fréquemment posées sur les opportunités d'affaires de l'OTAN: http://www.forces.gc.ca/fr/faire-affaires-acceder-marches-etrangers/industrie-canadienne-faqs-otan.page

Sur le même sujet

  • National Defense Industrial Association gets new chief

    6 avril 2022 | Information, Autre défense

    National Defense Industrial Association gets new chief

    The National Defense Industrial Association has named former Deputy Secretary of Defense David Norquist as its new president and CEO, the trade group announced Thursday.

  • The real obstacle for reforming military spending isn’t in the defence ministry. It’s the Treasury Board

    14 novembre 2019 | Information, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

    The real obstacle for reforming military spending isn’t in the defence ministry. It’s the Treasury Board

    KEN HANSEN Ken Hansen is an independent defence and security analyst and owner of Hansen Maritime Horizons. Retired from the Royal Canadian Navy in 2009 in the rank of commander, he is also a contributor to the security affairs committee for the Royal United Services Institute of Nova Scotia. For people inside the Department of National Defence, a minority Parliament – coupled with election promises for increased social spending and tax cuts – represents an uneasy calculus. Defence spending is always on the chopping block because it represents the largest pool of discretionary spending in the federal budget, and every party spent the recent federal election campaign being vague about military policy – offering some kind of oversight-body reform or scrutiny over the billions of dollars that have been earmarked, even as they lent their support to ensuring the military has the equipment it needs. In particular, the single largest program in Canadian defence history – the Canadian Combat Ship plan for 15 warships – will be a tantalizing target for politicians looking to get rid of perceived fat. Such cuts to shipbuilding programs have even already become normalized: The order for Halifax-class frigates were trimmed to 12 from 18 in 1983 and the Iroquois-class destroyers to four from six in 1964, to name just two. The political leaders weren't wrong when they said the military procurement system is broken. But regardless of which party had won this past election, and no matter what tweaks at the edges that the Liberal minority government and its potential supporters pursue, the reality is that the core issue remains unaddressed: Treasury Board's bulk approach to purchasing the country's military kit. Treasury Board policy states that bulk buys are how military procurement should be done, to ensure the lowest per-unit cost. But this forces tough decisions about what to buy, since the larger the order, the longer it will take to produce them all – not to mention the problems involved with trying to predict the future of warfare. Information systems become outdated in five years; weapons and sensors in 10. With a planned operating life of 25 years, any ships ordered today will be out-of-date by the time the first are delivered, and fully obsolete by the time the last one arrives. Block purchasing leads to block obsolescence. Traditionally, when technological change threatens to render military systems obsolete, the best way to hedge was to order in batches of the smallest number acceptable. In the years before the world wars, for instance, countries working to build competent naval forces put less emphasis on fleet numbers and more on technology and industrial capacity until the last moments before conflict. Technological competence was as important as numbers for fleet commanders. Another outcome of bulk buys is that the volume means that they happen only every two to three decades (or longer, in the worst cases). With such lengthy dry spells between purchases, it is impossible to retain corporate knowledge in either the defence or civilian branches of government. More frequent purchasing keeps the process alive in both practice and concept, with lessons learned that can be implemented by the same people who made the mistakes in the first place. Such irregularly timed purchases have created desperation among defence planners whose vision of the future consists of short golden days of competence and pride, followed by long years of rust-out and irrelevance. Unwittingly, the dark decades were in large part of the military's own making because of its desperate desire to acquire the absolute best model available – a practice known as “gold-plating” – instead of working steadily to build capacity and skill that would address long-range fleet needs. This is a collision of interests. The Treasury Board looks only at capital-acquisition decisions from the perspective of the buyer. It's left to the military to worry about how long they may have to operate obsolescent or obsolete equipment and systems, and to do the necessary mid-life upgrading, which is partly why costs balloon spectacularly. Life-cycle cost data is actually far more important that the initial sticker shock of the newest and shiniest model advocated by the military's leadership. The mindset needs to change. Politicians who implement bureaucratic change will probably see some improvements in decision-making. But the biggest obstacle to defence procurement is that bulk purchasing is our lone approach, and that it happens only every few decades. Regular, planned capital acquisition is the best path forward, but all paths to the future must first run through the Treasury Board. No amount of political policy adjustment can change that. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-the-real-obstacle-for-reforming-military-spending-isnt-in-the-defence/

  • Approvisionnement en matière de défense - Air

    2 février 2018 | Information, Aérospatial

    Approvisionnement en matière de défense - Air

    Services publics et Approvisionnement Canada supervise de grandes initiatives d'approvisionnement en aéronefs, notamment : Remplacer et compléter la flotte de CF-18 du Canada Secrétariat national d'approvisionnement en chasseurs Projet de remplacement d'aéronefs de recherche et sauvetage à voilure fixe Autre grands projets - Air Le ministère est aussi chargé de l'acquisition d'un large éventail de systèmes aérospatiaux complexes, c'est-à-dire des aéronefs militaires et civils ainsi que les éléments connexes suivants : systèmes mécaniques, équipement, aéronefs d'entraînement, simulateurs et pièces de rechange. Il est également chargé de l'acquisition de divers services, notamment des services d'ingénierie, de réparation et révision, de maintenance, de modification, de réparation de composants ainsi que de tenue à jour et de révision des publications. https://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/app-acq/amd-dp/air/index-eng.html

Toutes les nouvelles