28 octobre 2022 | Local, Naval

Le Navire canadien de Sa Majesté Margaret Brooke est mis en service

Aujourd'hui, la Marine royale canadienne (MRC) a officiellement accueilli le Navire canadien de Sa Majesté (NCSM) Margaret Brooke dans le service naval lors d'une cérémonie de mise en service.

Cette cérémonie marque une réalisation importante tant pour la MRC que pour l'industrie canadienne de la construction navale. La mise en place d'un deuxième navire de patrouille extracôtier et de l'Arctique (NPEA) remis dans le cadre de la Stratégie nationale de construction navale, qui maintient des milliers d'emplois chaque année au Canada, améliorera la capacité de la MRC de renforcer la souveraineté et de relever les futurs défis de défense dans les eaux extracôtières et arctiques du Canada.

Une cérémonie de mise en service de navire est une tradition navale de longue date et une activité spéciale pour l'équipage du navire – de fiers marins qui reviennent tout juste du premier déploiement du navire où ils ont aidé des collectivités du Canada atlantique touchées par l'ouragan Fiona.

La mise en service du NCSM Margaret Brooke comprenait la remise symbolique de la flamme de mise en service, et la remise symbolique des « clés de navire » au commandant, la capitaine de frégate Nicole Robichaud.

https://www.canada.ca/fr/ministere-defense-nationale/nouvelles/2022/10/le-navire-canadien-de-sa-majestemargaret-brooke-est-mis-en-service.html

Sur le même sujet

  • Canada should think again about having the ability to use offensive cyber weapons: Expert

    13 juin 2019 | Local, Sécurité, Autre défense

    Canada should think again about having the ability to use offensive cyber weapons: Expert

    Howard Solomon Canada's electronic spy agency will soon get new authority to launch cyber attacks if the government approves legislation that is in the final stages of being debated. There's a good chance it will be proclaimed before the October federal election. But a discussion paper issued Wednesday by the Canadian Global Affairs Institute says Canadians need to debate the pros and cons of using this new power. “This direction not only opens up new possibilities for Canadian defence, it could also represent significant new risks,” says the report. “Without good answers to the difficult questions this new direction could raise, the country could be headed down a very precarious path.” Among the possible problems: Cyber retaliation. Another: While Canada might try to target a cyber attack, the impact might be bigger than expected — in fact, it might boomerang and smack us back. Third is the lack of international agreement on the use of cyber weapons (although this is a double-edged sword: Without an agreement there are no formal limits on what any country is forbidden from doing in cyberspace). “To move forward at this point to implement or even formally endorse a strategy of cyber attack would be risky and premature,” concludes the report's author, computer science professor Ken Barker, who also heads the University of Calgary's Institute for Security, Privacy and Information Assurance. “There are challenging technical controls that must be put in place as well as a critical international discussion on how cyber weaponry fits within the rules of war.” Barker's paper is in response to the 2017 strategy setting out Defence Department goals, where the possibility of Canada having a cyber attack capability first raised. It wasn't written with Bill C-59 in mind — now in its final stage before Parliament — which actually gives Canada's electronic spy agency, the Communications Security Establishment (CSE), the power to use what's called “active” as well as defensive cyber operations. In an interview Tuesday, Barker said “in the desire to push this thing they need to have more carefully thought about the questions I raise in this paper.” “Maybe it's late, but at least it's available.” He dismisses the argument that by announcing it has an offensive cyber capability Canada will cause other countries to think twice about attacking us with cyber weapons. “They would attempt to find out what Canada is doing to create cyber attack capabilities,” he argued. “One of the risks once we do endorse this,” he added, “is we open ourselves up to other countries to using Canada as a launching pad for cyber attacks to cover up their involvement, and [then] say ‘That was done by Canada.'” Nation states are already active in cyberspace. Ottawa has blamed China for the 2014 hack of the National Research Council, Washington suspects China was behind the massive hack of employee files at the Office of Personnel Management, and there is strong evidence that Russia mounted a sophisticated social media attack against the U.S. during the 2016 federal election. According to the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, The U.S. the U.K. and Australia say they have used offensive cyber operations against the Islamic State. The U.S.-based Council on Foreign Relations notes that Germany increased its offensive cyber capability after a 2016 attack on the country's legislature blamed on Russia. Last year the New York Times reported the U.S. Cyber Command has been empowered to be more offensive. Meanwhile in April the CSE warned it's “very likely” there will be some form of foreign cyber interference during the run-up to October's federal election here, The most commonly-cited interference in a country were two cyber attacks that knocked out electrical power in Ukraine — in December 2015 and again in December 2016 — largely believed to have been launched from Russia. All this is why some experts say Canada has to have an offensive cyber capability to at least keep up. In January, Ray Boisvert, former assistant director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), told a parliamentary committee that “the best defence always begins with a good offense ... “When more than five dozen countries are rumoured to be developing active cyber capabilities, in my view that means we must develop capabilities to respond and in some cases that includes outside our borders.” Background In 2017 the Trudeau government announced a new defence strategy that included the promise of “conducting active cyber operations against potential adversaries in the context of government-authorized military missions.” The same year the government introduced Bill C-59, which in part would give the CSE, which is responsible for securing government networks, the ability to take action online to defend Canadian networks and proactively stop cyber threats before they reach systems here. This would be done as part of new legislation governing the CSE called the Communications Security Act. That act would give CSE the ability to conduct defensive and “active” cyber operations. Active operations are defined as anything that could “degrade, disrupt, influence, respond to or interfere with the capabilities, intentions or activities of a foreign individual, state, organization or terrorist group as they relate to international affairs, defence or security.” Both defensive and active cyber operations can't be used against any portion of the global information infrastructure within this country. And they have to be approved by the Minister of Defence. C-59 has been passed by the House of Commons and slightly amended by the Senate. It was scheduled back in the House last night to debate the Senate amendments. Despite all the cyber incidents blamed on nation states, Barker is reluctant to say we're in an era of low-level cyber war right now. Many incidents can be characterized as cyber espionage and not trying cause harm to another state, he argues. https://www.itworldcanada.com/article/canada-should-think-again-about-having-the-ability-to-use-offensive-cyber-weapons-expert/418912

  • To maintain or replace? That is the question for Canada’s tank fleet.

    3 octobre 2023 | Local, Terrestre

    To maintain or replace? That is the question for Canada’s tank fleet.

    Canada is deploying tanks on an overseas mission for the first time in more than a decade, but the future for the country’s armored fleet is uncertain.

  • After The Shock: Implications For M&A In The Aerospace & Defense Market

    29 juin 2020 | Local, Aérospatial

    After The Shock: Implications For M&A In The Aerospace & Defense Market

    By Adil Khan, Jim Adams and Steve Beckey Forbes; KPMG Contributor Jun 23, 2020 The current economic disruption—coming on the heels of the 737MAX suspension—has varying impact across A&D segments. The impact on commercial aerospace has been immediate and extensive, while the defense sector has largely remained unscathed. However, it is hard to see how it will remain so, given the extensive fiscal measures being taken. What will this mean for M&A in A&D? Some trends are beginning to emerge that will affect the entire deal life-cycle (from deal strategy through integration and value creation). Yet, as in other times of economic disruption, new opportunities will emerge, which leads us to believe that the slowdown of M&A activity will be short-lived. As we enter this next phase, deal makers who adapt quickly to the realities of the new industry landscape could be well positioned to maximize value. Pre COVID-19 environment Not too long ago, commercial aerospace was booming, with year-over-year ramp ups in build rates and record backlogs. There were expectations of another golden decade — further extending the unprecedented 14-year “super up-cycle”, defying the long-standing cyclicality of the sector. However, in 2019, the historic correlation between GDP, air-traffic growth, carrier profitability, orders and build rates was suddenly disrupted. GDP and airline profitability levels remained relatively healthy, but new orders and build rates dropped as the industry grappled with the 737MAX shock, as well as a slowdown in the twin-aisle segment. Other undercurrents also emerged — slowdowns in world trade from escalating tariff tensions, weakness in high-growth geographic markets such as China and India, and declining consumer confidence. In contrast, U.S. defense spending was on the rise, averaging 4 percent1 annual growth over the past 5 fiscal years; the $738 billion FY2020 defense bill2 ensured this momentum would continue. The government services sector was also set to benefit from continued funding increases to modernize IT infrastructure and address evolving national security challenges. With general confidence in the long-term fundamentals of the sector and a favorable budgetary environment, players in certain A&D segments pursued M&A to build scale. Others “re-realized” that content matters and initiated vertical and horizontal integration strategies to capture more value and drive cost competitiveness, or acquired targeted niche capabilities and emerging technologies. We also saw the emergence of Super Tier I's through scale-driving consolidation aimed at broadening capabilities and potentially exerting greater influence on OEMs. Deal volume in the A&D sector reached record levels — almost doubling over the last 5 years and outpacing the broader M&A market by 40 percent.3 Valuations remained elevated on the strength of high bidder interest, limited supply of attractive assets, high A&D stock valuations (which outperformed the S&P 500 by 8 percent),4 as well as healthy balance sheets and strong cash positions. TEV/EBITDA multiples for A&D transactions averaged 11x,5 outpacing increases in the overall M&A market. Although, deal volumes moderated in the second half of 2019, amid elevated uncertainty about defense spending heading into a presidential election year, the overall outlook remained optimistic. COVID-19 impact COVID-19 caused a precipitous collapse in air traffic. With travel restrictions and stay-at-home orders, carriers around the globe made unprecedented cuts to capacity, idled fleets, and began deferring or canceling new aircraft deliveries. Also, the MRO (maintenance, repair, and overhaul) and aftermarket segments, which had benefited from the prolonged 737MAX grounding and high fleet utilization, suddenly faced stiff headwinds. Thus far, the defense industrial base has not experienced a COVID-19 demand shock. There is no noticeable disruption in appropriations or major delays and cancellation of military programs. However, as in the commercial sector, defense contractors are actively monitoring their supply base and taking steps to preserve liquidity, minimize supply chain disruption, and taking measures to comply with CDC and local government guidelines. The range of scenarios for defense spending is bookended by two scenarios: an elevated national security threat that would preserve or accelerate funding, or a reordering of budget priorities to fund social and other mandatory programs, resulting in sequestration-type measures, similar to 2011. With these developments, volatility in the financial markets, lack of access to financing, alternative more pressing liquidity needs by corporates and most importantly, uncertainty in the marketplace, deal flow in A&D has come to an immediate standstill. Several “in-flight” processes have been halted, new deals in the pipeline have been deferred, and even some announced transactions terminated. Access to the new public offering market is effectively closed. The gap in expected valuations between buyers and sellers has widened considerably, due to disparate perceptions of the extent of economic disruption caused by COVID-19; contrasting views on reopening of the economy and the pace of return to normal; and diverse perspectives on what the post-COVID-19 new reality looks like. This has rendered financial forecasts and pre-COVID-19 market perspectives obsolete. Further, the extent and nature of unusual and non-recurring events6 impacting financials, present considerable challenges for deal makers to form a credible view of normalized earnings and cash flows. With the lack of reliable projections, it is nearly impossible to form a credible view on valuations let alone bridge this gap. Additionally, although M&A teams have attempted to navigate through practical challenges with offsite due diligence, virtual facility tours, video conferences, etc., adapting to a virtual M&A environment, especially for cross-border deals, has been challenging. Developments to watch as economies reopen Given the health concerns, changes in social behaviors (some of which may be slow to reverse) and anticipated lead-time to an effective vaccine, a V-shape recovery in air traffic appears increasingly unlikely. As governments move from combating coronavirus to reopening economies, the pace and extent of the economic recovery is expected to vary significantly around the world. Further, some long-lasting or permanent developments may trigger some dramatic shifts in the sector: KPMG Implications for M&A trends and outlook KPMG Although we probably do not expect to see M&A activity return to the pre-crisis levels immediately, we expect M&A activity to drive realignment of the industry landscape in the post COVID-19 environment. Implications for M&A Capabilities As we enter the next phase, deal makers will need to adapt to the realities that impact how deals get done. Examples include: KPMG While the challenges are intimidating, the opportunities will be vast, and those who move quickly and decisively are likely to be rewarded for years to come. Those who take this unique opportunity to prepare and are ready to act will stand ready to reshape the A&D industry. 1. 2019 DoD Comptroller Data (Green Book) 2. Department of Defense 3. CapIQ, Institute for Mergers, Acquisitions, and Alliances 4. Year return, S&P A&D index vs S&P 500 5. Trailing 12-month average to June 2019 and avg. 16x for deals >$500M in value; CapIQ, Dacis Company reports and Press releases 6 Worker furloughs, facility shut-downs, loss of business or order cancellation, idled or underutilized facilities, CARES Act funding, changes to performance-based compensation structures or payouts, health and sanitization related measures, IT infrastructure investments to adapt to remote working environment, deferral of payroll taxes, carryback of NOLs, increased interest expense tax deduction, etc KPMG Contributor

Toutes les nouvelles