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

New defence procurement agency would be disruptive, costly

It almost seemed like a throwaway line at the end of the Liberal Party's 2019 election platform, in a section on proposed approaches to security: “To ensure that Canada's biggest and most complex defence procurement projects are delivered on time and with greater transparency to Parliament, we will move forward with the creation of Defence Procurement Canada.”

Little was said about the proposal during the election campaign, but in the mandate letters to ministers that followed, National Defence (DND), Public Services and Procurement (PSPC), and Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard were tasked with bringing forward options to establish Defence Procurement Canada (DPC), a priority, the Prime Minister wrote, “to be developed concurrently with ongoing procurement projects and existing timelines.”

Whether DPC would be a department, standalone agency or new entity within an existing department isn't clear. Nor is it apparent how the government would consolidate and streamline the myriad procurement functions of multiple departments.

Jody Thomas, deputy minister of National Defence, acknowledged as much during an address to the Canadian Global Affairs Institute (CGAI) Jan. 29 when asked about DPC progress.

“I don't know what it is going to look like ... We're building a governance to look at what the options could be and we are studying what other countries have done,” she said, noting that a standalone agency outside the department of defence has not necessarily worked particularly well in other countries. “Everything is on the table. We're looking at it, but we haven't actually begun the work in earnest.”

The idea of moving defence procurement under a single point of accountability is hardly new. Alan Williams, a former assistant deputy minister of Material (Adm Mat), made the case for a single agency in a 2006 book, Reinventing Canadian Defence Procurement. And the Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries (CADSI) issued a report in 2009 calling for a “separate defence procurement agency reporting through a single Minister ... [to] consolidate procurement, industrial, contracting and trade mandates into one new department, like a Defence Production Department, reporting to a minister.”

More recently, an interim report on defence procurement by the Senate Committee on National Defence in June 2019 argued that “a single agency could simplify the complex procurement governance framework. Serious consideration could also be given to empowering project officials and making the Department of National Defence the lead department.”

Williams remains a strong proponent. In a presentation to a CGAI conference on defence procurement in the new Parliament in late November, he greeted the DPC decision with a “hallelujah,” pointing to the high cost created by overlap and duplication when multiple ministers are involved in a military acquisition decision, and the tendency to play the “blame game” when delays or problems arise and there is no single point of accountability.

But he cautioned that the initiative would falter without better system-wide performance measures on cost, schedules and other metrics. “If you don't monitor and put public pressure on the system, things will [slide],” he said.

Williams also called for a defence industrial plan, backed by Cabinet approval, to help identify where to invest defence capital, and “a culture that recognizes and demands innovative creativity, taking chances.”

Other former senior civil servants, many with decades of experience in public sector organizational reform, were less optimistic about the prospects of a new agency or departmental corporation.

“There is always a good reason why things are the way they are,” said Jim Mitchell, a research associate with the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Ottawa and part of massive reorganization of government departments undertaken by Prime Minister Kim Campbell during her brief tenure in 1993.

“If you want to change things, you first have to understand, why do we have the current situation that we have in defence procurement and who are the people who have a major stake in the status quo and why? If you don't understand that, you are going to get into big trouble,” he warned the CGAI audience of government and industry leaders.

At a time when the departments are moving a record number of equipment projects, including CF-188 Hornet replacement, through the acquisition process under the government's 2017 defence policy, any restructuring could significantly delay progress.

“Organizational change is always disruptive, it's costly, it's difficult, it's hard on people, it hurts efficiency and effectiveness of organizations for a couple of years at minimum,” said Mitchell. “It is something you do very, very carefully.”

It's a point not lost on CADSI. “The sheer scale of the change required to make DPC real should give companies pause. It could involve some 4,000-6,000 government employees from at least three departments and multiple pieces of legislation, all while the government is in the middle of the most aggressive defence spending spree in a generation,” the association wrote in an email to members in December.

A vocal proponent of improving procurement, it called DPC “a leap of faith,” suggesting it might be “a gamble that years of disruption will be worth it and that the outcomes of a new system will produce measurably better results, including for industry.”

Gavin Liddy, a former assistant deputy minister with PSPC, questioned the reasoning for change when measures from earlier procurement reform efforts such as increased DND contracting authority up to $5 million are still taking effect.

“You really need an extraordinarily compelling reason to make any kind of organizational change. And every time we have attempted it ... it takes five to seven years before the organization is up and standing on its feet,” he told CGAI. “If you want to do one single thing to delay the defence procurement agenda...create a defence procurement agency. Nothing would divert attention more than doing that.”

While few questioned the need for enhancements to the defence procurement process, many of the CGAI participants raised doubts about the logic of introducing a new entity less than three years into the government's 20-year strategy. Thomas described a number of improvements to project management and governance that are already making a difference.

“The budgeting and project management in defence is really extraordinarily well done. If I am told by ADM Mat they are going to spend $5.2 billion, then that is what they spend. And we have the ability to bring more down, or less, depending on how projects are rolling,” she explained. “We are completely transparent about how we are getting money spent, what the milestones are on projects ... The program management board is functioning differently and pulling things forward instead of waiting until somebody is ready to push it forward.”

“And we are working with PSPC. I think it is time to look at the government contracting [regulations], how much we compete, what we sole source, the reasons we sole source. I think there is a lot of work there that can be done that will improve the system even more.”


Sur le même sujet

  • Canada Needs New Aircraft, Could The F-35 Fit The Bill?

    21 février 2020 | Local, Aérospatial

    Canada Needs New Aircraft, Could The F-35 Fit The Bill?

    As part of its commitment to NATO, Canada also must be prepared for high-tech warfare in Europe. by David Axe Follow @daxe on TwitterL Key point: Canada, like Switzerland, likely can't afford to fail again to buy new planes. Canada for the third time in a decade is trying to replace its aging F/A-18A/B Hornet fighter jets. With every year the acquisition effort drags on, the condition of the Royal Canadian Air Force's fast-jet fleet grows direr. “The politically-charged competition to replace Canada's aging fleet of fighter jets will rocket forward at the end of May [2019] as the federal government releases a long-anticipated, full-fledged tender call,” Murray Brewster reported for CBC News. Four companies are vying for the multibillion-dollar contract for as many as 88 fighters that would replace the RCAF's 1980s-vintage Hornets, which in Canadian service are designated “CF-18.” Saab, Airbus, Boeing and Lockheed Martin all are in the running, respectively offering the Gripen, Eurofighter, F/A-18E/F and F-35A. The manufacturers will have until the end of 2019 to submit bids, CBC News reported. But the RCAF hardly can wait. The RCAF acquired 138 F/A-18A/Bs from McDonnell Douglas starting in 1982. In early 2019, 85 of the original Hornets, all more than 30 years old, comprise Canada's entire fighter fleet. The Canadian Hornets are unreliable and lack modern systems. In 2010, Canada's Conservative Party government announced plans to acquire 65 new F-35 stealth fighters by 2020. But the government never fairly compared the F-35 to rival fighter types such as the Eurofighter Typhoon, the Auditor General of Canada concluded in a 2018 report. "National Defense did not manage the process to replace the CF-18 fleet with due diligence." In 2015, Liberal Party candidate Justin Trudeau made the F-35 a major issue in his campaign for prime minister. Trudeau won. And in 2017, Ottawa backed off its proposal to purchase F-35s and, instead, launched a new competition to acquire 88 fighters. The aircraft would enter service in 2032, meaning the old Hornets would have to continue flying 12 years longer than the government originally planned. Ottawa briefly considered acquiring 18 F/A-18E/Fs from Boeing in order to bolster the early-model Hornets, but the government canceled the plan during a U.S.-Canada trade dispute in 2017. Canada was left with its original Hornets. In December 2017, the government announced it would spend around $500 million buying up to 25 1980s-vintage F/A-18s that Australia was declared surplus as it acquired its own fleet of new F-35s. The RCAF would add some of the Australian Hornets to the operational fleet and use others as sources of spare parts. But the government has no plan to keep its Hornets combat-ready as they enter their fourth and even fifth decade of service." We found that the CF-18 had not been significantly upgraded for combat since 2008, in part because [the Department of] National Defense expected a replacement fleet to be in place by 2020," the government auditors found. "Without these upgrades, according to the department, the CF-18 will become more vulnerable as advanced combat aircraft and air-defense systems continue to be developed and used by other nations." Against this backdrop, Brewster assessed the current fighter contenders, in particular, the Swedish Gripen and the American F-35. “There has been a rigorous political and academic debate about whether Canada should choose a legacy design from the 1990s, such as the Gripen, or the recently-introduced Lockheed Martin F-35 stealth fighter,” Brewster wrote. “The Swedish air force is about the same size as the Royal Canadian Air Force,” Brewster pointed out, adding that Sweden and Canada also share geographic concerns. “The Gripen is intended for operations in rugged environments, such as Sweden's Arctic region,” Brewster wrote. “Canada's CF-18s occasionally operate from forward bases in the north, but those deployments are infrequent compared with the routine activity of the Swedes.” As part of its commitment to NATO, Canada also must be prepared for high-tech warfare in Europe. The Gripen lacks the radar-evading stealth features that in theory allow the F-35 to penetrate the most dangerous Russian-made air-defenses. But Brewster cited a March 2019 Swedish study that claimed Russian defenses are less fearsome than many observers believe. “Besides uncritically taking Russian data at face value, the three cardinal sins have been: confusing the maximal nominal range of missiles with the effective range of the systems; disregarding the inherent problems of seeing and hitting a moving target at a distance, especially targets below the horizon; and underestimating the potential for countermeasures against [anti-access area-denial]-systems,” Robert Dalsjo, Christopher Berglund and Michael Jonsson explain in their report "Bursting the Bubble." The stakes are high. If Canada fails a third time to buy a new fighter, it might find itself in the same unfortunate situation in which Switzerland has found itself. In April 2019 the Swiss air force is down to just 10 ready fighters with full-time pilots. The crisis is the result of the Swiss public's decision in a 2014 referendum to reject the air force's proposal to buy 22 new fighters to begin replacing 40-year-old F-5 Tigers. The Swiss air force in 2019 plans to remove from service 27 Tigers. The 26 Tigers that remain will perform limited duties. With the F-5 force shrinking and flying part-time, the Swiss air force increasingly relies on its 30 F/A-18C/Ds. To last that long, the F/A-18s need structural upgrades. The upgrade work has sidelined more than half of the Hornet fleet. Switzerland like Canada has relaunched its fighter competition. The same companies and designs that are competing in Canada, plus Dassault with the Rafale, are in the running in Switzerland. Intensive flight testing began in April 2019. Canada like Switzerland likely can't afford to fail again to buy new planes. The old Canadian Hornets probably won't last much longer. "The CF-18 will be disadvantaged against many potential adversaries, and its combat capability will further erode through the 2020s and into the 2030s," Ottawa's auditors warned. David Axe serves as Defense Editor of the National Interest. He is the author of the graphic novels War Fix, War Is Boring and Machete Squad. (This first appeared last year.) https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/canada-needs-new-aircraft-could-f-35-fit-bill-125556

  • Ottawa lance des négociations pour acheter des F-35 | La saga entourant le remplacement des CF-18 tire à sa fin

    29 mars 2022 | Local, Aérospatial

    Ottawa lance des négociations pour acheter des F-35 | La saga entourant le remplacement des CF-18 tire à sa fin

    Il aura fallu presque sept ans pour que les libéraux de Justin Trudeau arrivent à la même conclusion que l’ancien gouvernement conservateur de Stephen Harper : les avions de chasse F-35 représentent la meilleure option pour remplacer la flotte vieillissante des CF-18.

  • Canada’s defense minister: Our investment in defense is an investment in North American security

    11 janvier 2021 | Local, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

    Canada’s defense minister: Our investment in defense is an investment in North American security

    By: Harjit Sajjan For any military force, maintaining an advantage requires innovation and investment. It is why Canada is modernizing our Army, Navy and Air Force while putting our serving members in the Canadian Armed Forces at its core. To ensure our people have the most advanced capabilities and tools for the future, Canada is putting a greater focus on research and development, supporting innovators in industry and in government, and building a closer relationship between these two worlds. Since 2017, when we published our fully funded 20-year defense policy “Strong, Secure, Engaged,” we have seen significant changes in the global security environment. These new challenges underscore the need to invest in defense as a matter of national security and economic vitality. “Strong, Secure, Engaged” was released at a time when the dominant forces of the current security environment were just beginning to take shape. Today, Canada faces a world defined by great power conflict, rapid military modernization by states set on upending the international rules-based order, and advances against disruptive technologies in which North American geography no longer affords the protection it once did. While we have traditionally been able to address threats abroad before they reach our shores, our security requires reinforcement. While this new space has many unknowns, we know that multilateralism and supporting the rules-based international order is critical to our success and our safety. Since 2017, Canada has increased our support to NATO partners through Operation Reassurance — which has seen Royal Canadian Navy ships deployed in the Black Sea region, the Royal Canadian Air Force supporting air policing in Romania, and Canadian Armed Forces members leading the Enhanced Forward Presence Battlegroup in Latvia — as well as through our work leading NATO Mission Iraq and our support for the coalition. We also know that this changing security landscape means we need to take a thorough look at how we can secure North America against the threats of today and the future. It is why Canada continues to work with our American partners on the modernization of North American Aerospace Defense Command to build continental resiliency. This critical work will ensure that Canada and the United States of America have the ability to detect, deter and respond to threats, and that the only binational command in the world can meet the challenges of the 21st century. For many years now, the Department of National Defence has worked hard to keep defense industries informed of future investment opportunities that will continue generating jobs and improving Canada's capacity for innovation. It is one reason that we have a forward-looking, 10-year defense investment plan that is updated every three years. This engagement with industry has become an integral part of the procurement process, providing critical insights while showing industry that we are a predicable partner. Despite the unexpected challenges during 2020, Canada reached important milestones for key defense projects. In July 2020, the first Arctic and offshore patrol ship was delivered to the Royal Canadian Navy, followed in the fall by delivery of the first new fixed-wing search and rescue aircraft to the Royal Canadian Air Force. Construction of armored combat support vehicles for the Canadian Army began in May 2020, with the first vehicle delivered to the Armed Forces in December 2020. We also continue to invest hundreds of millions of dollars into equipping members of our armed forces. We now see unprecedented innovation in all corners of the world, which militaries can harness to quickly understand and respond to potential threats before they cause harm. It is why new and emerging technologies in cyber and artificial intelligence are becoming an integral part of defense projects. Canada is growing its defense industry by leveraging research and development from both industry and government to achieve the best results. By working together, we can come up with innovative solutions to increase Canada's operational effectiveness while showing that defense is forging a path to the future. In addition to embracing innovation within defense institutions and industry, more work is needed to support our people. The Canadian Armed Forces is a diverse institution, and our equipment needs to recognize that. It is why the Gender-based Analysis Plus process looks at factors such as gender, race, religion and ethnicity so that our defense projects better meet the needs of armed forces members. These changes help get the best out of our people, producing meaningful results. For example, changes made to the brake pedal assembly in the new armor-protected cab of the Standard Military Pattern vehicle ensure all soldiers, no matter their size, can safely operate these vehicles. By building an agile, well-educated, flexible, diverse, combat-ready military, we will be able to deal with threats abroad to protect stability at home. This historic investment through “Strong, Secure, Engaged” allows Canada to modernize our military by putting our people at its core as we continue to step up our contribution to North American and global security. When our partners and allies call upon Canada, we will be there for them. Harjit Sajjan is Canada's minister of national defense. https://www.defensenews.com/outlook/2021/01/11/canadas-defense-minister-our-investment-in-defense-is-an-investment-in-north-american-security/

Toutes les nouvelles