Le CP-140 Aurora survolera le Grand Prix de Trois-Rivières

Sur le même sujet

• 

  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

• 

  12 juin 2020 | Local, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

  Experts say COVID-19 hasn’t hurt Canada’s campaign for UN security council seat

  By Rachel Emmanuel. Published on Jun 12, 2020 12:00am Experts say COVID-19 hasn't negatively impacted Canada's bid for a seat on the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), though the final result is still anyone's guess. The UN General Assembly will vote on June 17 on what countries will join the powerful body as non-permanent members for two-year terms. Canada is facing stiff competition from Norway and Ireland, who both entered the race earlier, to fill the two Western European and other states seats. Adam Chapnick, deputy director of education at the Canadian Forces College and a professor of defence studies at the Royal Military College of Canada, said the coronavirus pandemic has changed Canada's narrative in the race — it can now portray itself as a large, wealthy country capable of helping smaller, less affluent nations emerge from the COVID-19-induced economic downturn. “We have more money to give and as a result we can demonstrate, in a time like this, the value of having us at the centre of global power,” he told iPolitics on Thursday. “[The COVID-19 pandemic] has allowed Canada to highlight some of the factors that differentiate it from its competitors, in a way that it would otherwise not have been able to do.” Prime Minister Justin Trudeau first announced Canada would pursue a seat on the UNSC back in 2016, just months after the Liberals bounced the Harper government from power. An outline of Canada's campaign is displayed on the Global Affairs website and points to commitments like addressing climate change, promoting economic security and advancing gender equality. While Canada announced its campaign long before the global COVID-19 pandemic, Andrea Charron, an associate professor and director of the Centre for Defence and Security Studies at the University of Manitoba, said the crisis could end up benefitting Canada's bid. Coming out of the coronavirus pandemic, she said Canada can signal that they'll be there to help struggling countries as they recover from their own economic crises. “It does no good if some states recover beautifully and others fall hopelessly behind,” Charron said. Like most other public gatherings, the vote will also be impacted by COVID-19 restrictions. In other years, all delegates would show up to UN headquarters in New York City and vote in person, with each round of voting taking a couple minutes. But this year, because of the pandemic, Chapnick said delegates now have a designated time to arrive and voting in the first round will take around 10 hours. Because a country requires two thirds of the vote to be elected, Chapnick said delegates will likely be asked to return to the building to vote again the following day or days, in the case that two countries aren't elected in the first round, which he said is probable. At a certain point, Chapnick said delegates might stop showing up to cast their ballots, with the bid becoming a “get out and vote campaign” that would never happen in a normal election year. “We've never had anything like this before,” he explained. Charron, who's also a Canadian Global Affairs Institute fellow, said it will be interesting to see how countries revamp their second ballot strategy, which refers to a country's plan to win the second seat if they didn't win in the first voting round. She said in a typical election, all the delegates are milling around and candidates can easily speak with particular countries in a last minute push to win their vote. However, because of COVID-19 restrictions, countries won't have quick access to make their case to the 192 UN delegates in one room. Chapnick said this new process has major implications for the second ballot strategy. Traditionally, he said Canada has had trouble creating a second ballot strategy because, as a G7 country, it assumes it will win in the first round. He said Canada is committed to the UN and views itself as a country that belongs on the security council, whereas smaller countries may ask to be considered in the second round if they lost to a more powerful country in the first run. “For a G7 country normally to have a second ballot strategy would suggest weakness,” he explained. But, by entering the race late, he said Canada now has wiggle room to develop a second ballot strategy — it can ask countries who pledged support to Norway or Ireland before Canada entered, to vote for the country in the second round, if there is one. Chapnick also said the Canadian team can spend the longer gap in between rounds calling delegates and asking for their support. Still, he warned that there's a “discount rate” of 15 to 35 per cent of countries who promised the Canadian government they'd vote for them, but won't. He said even the Canadian government cannot be sure who's voting for them. “Countries lie all the time,” he said. In fact, Chapnick said part of the reason the countries are voting in-person is because a number of countries refused to participate in electronic voting at the risk that someone could hack the system and realize a country broke their voting promises. He said countries break promises in one of two ways; countries make individuals deals to support all three countries but can only vote for two, or the head of government makes a promise and the ambassador then goes “freelance” when it comes time to vote. “You can never actually tell how a campaign is doing,” he warned. “Really strange things happen in these elections.” Charron said the good news is that all the UNSC candidates are excellent. She said there's concern that Canada will let this election define itself, with lots of national “gnashing of teeth” and deciding on the fate of the government in general, which she said is overblown. “It's just one of the organizations to which we belong,” she said. “We've won six times, we've lost times, we've survived, carried on in all cases.” https://ipolitics.ca/2020/06/12/experts-say-covid-19-hasnt-derailed-canadas-campaign-for-un-security-council-seat/

• 

  2 août 2018 | Local, Aérospatial

  Federal auditor general to dive into contentious fighter-jet 'capability gap'

  Study will also look at how Canada will meet its 'obligations as it transitions to a new fighter fleet' Lee Berthiaume Canada's auditor general has started to dig into one of the Trudeau government's most contentious claims, upon which rests the fate of hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars: that the country is facing an urgent shortage of fighter jets. The claim was first made in November 2016 when the Liberals announced that Canada didn't have enough fighter jets to defend North America and simultaneously meet the country's NATO commitments, and that a stopgap was urgently needed until the entire CF-18 fleet could be replaced. The government originally planned to buy 18 interim Super Hornets from Boeing for $6.4 billion before the deal was scuttled late last year in favour of buying 25 used jets from Australia for $500 million. But critics, including opposition parties and former air force commanders, accuse the government of fabricating an urgent "capability gap" — as the shortfall is known — by changing the military's requirements to avoid having to buy the F-35 stealth fighter. Auditor general Michael Ferguson is now scrutinizing this "capability gap" as part of an overall fighter-jet review, according to an internal memo written by officials at the federal procurement department and obtained by The Canadian Press through access to information legislation. The memo to Public Services and Procurement Canada deputy minister Marie Lemay references a meeting with Ferguson's staff in December in which they laid out the objectives of their audit. Full article: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/auditor-general-fighter-jets-1.4763444