16 mars 2021 | Local, Aérospatial

Canada awards Wing support services and facilities maintenance contract for 5 Wing Goose Bay

Well-maintained infrastructure and well-supported operations are essential to ensure Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) defence capability and capacity. To...

https://www.miragenews.com/canada-awards-wing-support-services-and-528420/

Sur le même sujet

  • How the U.S. election outcome could affect Canada's environment and energy future

    7 octobre 2020 | Local, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité, Autre défense

    How the U.S. election outcome could affect Canada's environment and energy future

    Alexander Panetta Biden, Trump have deep differences — and each could significantly impact Canada This story is part of a five-part series looking at how the policies of the two U.S. presidential candidates, Joe Biden and Donald Trump, differ when it comes to the major issues of interest to Canada, including energy, defence, trade and immigration. The old truism that elections have consequences is doubly apt for the United States, a country whose politics reach beyond its borders. It's certainly so for Canada. Specific policy issues in a U.S. election hold particular stakes for Canada, including energy and the environment, national defence, the border and migration and U.S. relations with China. In advance of the U.S. presidential election on Nov. 3, CBC will run stories on these five issues, and how they might play out if the winner is current President Donald Trump or his Democratic challenger, Joe Biden. Our first instalment examines one of the most striking differences between them: energy and the environment. If Biden wins Biden drew attention in Canada for promising to cancel the Keystone XL pipeline from Alberta, then doubling down on it. Rory Johnston, an energy analyst at Price Street in Toronto, said a president clearly has the legal power to revoke a permit. What's not clear to him is whether Biden would, in precarious economic times, actually cancel a big project, which would cost jobs and anger construction unions. The Democratic nominee has a sweeping environmental platform that goes far beyond that one pipeline pledge. For starters, he said he'd re-join the Paris climate accord on Day 1 of his presidency. Then he would convene, shame and potentially punish other countries that slack on their carbon emissions commitments. Within 100 days, Biden said he'd hold a global climate summit to push countries to join the U.S. in toughening their climate objectives. He said he would also demand a worldwide ban on government subsidies for fossil fuels. INTERACTIVE Will Biden or Trump be the U.S. president? These states will decide Biden also intends to grade countries on their performance. He promises a global climate change report, similar to the State Department's annual report on human rights and human trafficking. It would rank countries' performance in meeting their Paris commitments. If that doesn't work, he's threatening to wield the stick of trade tariffs. Biden said he wants to impose what he calls "carbon-adjustment fees," or perhaps quotas, on carbon-intensive products from countries that fail to meet climate and environmental obligations. It's not clear how many countries Biden would target. "We can no longer separate trade policy from our climate objectives," says Biden's platform. Canada is projecting a lowering of emissions but not nearly by enough to meet its Paris commitment. Implementing such a tariff could be tricky. To become embedded in U.S. law, it would have to get through Congress — and receiving the 51 to 60 per cent of votes required in the Senate would be a tall order. Some trade analysts believe such a tactic would also be illegal protectionism under international trade law unless the U.S. imposed a similar carbon tax domestically — also a tall order. However, other analysts say there's one tool Biden could use, which has become famous in the Trump era: declare carbon emissions a national security matter and apply the same trade weapon the current president used against foreign steel and aluminum. Any regulatory moves could face another hurdle in a more hostile Supreme Court. Speaking of the environment and trade, Biden is proposing a massive, $2 trillion green-infrastructure plan aimed at new transit, vehicles and a carbon-free power grid by 2035. Biden says the construction would be done by U.S. firms under Buy American rules. He would also re-establish policies from the Obama era that Canada has signed onto, from methane and auto regulations to an Arctic drilling ban. Gerald Butts, who was a former senior aide to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and worked on some of those agreements with the U.S, said Biden's climate policies go far beyond Obama's and reflect a growing recognition of the environmental threat. "Biden's plan would have been unthinkable for a presidential nominee for a major party even one cycle ago," said Butts, now vice-chair of the political risk consultancy Eurasia Group. Bob Deans, a spokesman for the political action committee of the Washington-based Natural Resources Defence Council, called climate change a defining issue for this election. "The American people are facing a stark choice in this election. Two completely different energy futures," Deans said. "We need to be reducing our reliance on oil and gas, not locking future generations into this climate nightmare." If Trump wins In his 2016 platform, Trump promised more oil drilling, more pipelines — and less regulation. He delivered that on several fronts. Just last month he announced a border permit for a multi-purpose rail project that, if built, could eventually ship Canadian oil through Alaska. Trump ditched a number of Obama's climate rules, and left the Paris Accord. (His pullout from the Paris agreement officially goes into effect the day after this year's election.) Trump hasn't published a platform for the next four years. His campaign website simply lists things he's done to slash regulations and promote fossil-fuel development. He's promising no major policy changes. "We would continue what we're doing," Trump told The New York Times, when asked about his overall second-term plans. As far as Canada is concerned, that means a continued commitment to the still-unbuilt Keystone XL pipeline, which would carry nearly one-fifth of the oil Canada exports to the U.S. each day. Johnston said that pipeline isn't, on its own, a make-or-break issue for the Canadian oilpatch, but it would help, he said. He said the oilsands likely need two pipelines completed over the next few years out of the three major projects underway — Trans Mountain to the Pacific Coast, the Line 3 expansion to the Great Lakes and Keystone XL to the Gulf of Mexico — to avoid the type of transportation bottlenecks that have previously devastated Canadian oil prices. "It's never ideal to be just at the limit of your [transportation] capacity," Johnston said. Even with the current president's support, Keystone XL faces challenges. The ground has been cleared for only 100 kilometres of pipe to be laid inside Canada. A border-crossing segment has been built, and 17 pump stations out of an eventual 36 along the route are under construction. That leaves the project about two years, many hundreds of kilometres and some legal and regulatory fights shy of completion. A Supreme Court decision this summer allowed a Montana ruling to stand, which forced the pipeline company to get permits for crossing waterways. Permit hearings were scheduled for late September in Montana and North Dakota. It's an uncertain moment for oil — and the financial stakes for Canada are considerable. It's Canada's top export to the U.S., in dollar figures; Canadian oil accounts for about half of U.S. oil imports, following years of growth. But energy giant BP projects that global oil demand has peaked. The U.S. Energy Information Administration projects U.S. imports will flatten out and even decline a bit. That's happening as several automakers say they will keep building vehicles to the stricter emissions standards set in California — standards that are backed by Ottawa. California, the largest U.S. vehicle market, recently announced it planned to ban sales of gasoline-powered cars by 2035. Some of these changes in energy markets will proceed regardless of who's president. Johnston's own projection? Barring a sudden change in the market, Canadian oil production will grow a bit for two to five years, then plateau at similar levels for decades. https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/us-issues-canada-environment-1.5746288

  • Davie souhaite une «grappe maritime»

    24 janvier 2019 | Local, Naval

    Davie souhaite une «grappe maritime»

    JEAN-MICHEL GENOIS GAGNON Le Soleil En prévision du passage du premier ministre du Canada dans la capitale vendredi, deux joueurs de l'industrie maritime du Québec dressent leurs demandes à Justin Trudeau en lien avec la Stratégie nationale de construction navale. Si rien n'est fait, de l'expertise et des emplois sont en danger. Chantier Davie souhaite que le Québec s'inspire de l'Europe pour faire évoluer sa stratégie navale. L'entreprise demande au gouvernement provincial de mettre sur pied une grappe maritime qui «permettrait de générer des milliards de dollars en retombées économiques», a appris Le Soleil. Dans un document présenté à l'occasion des consultations prébudgétaires, Davie dresse le portrait de sa situation ainsi que ses prévisions pour les années à venir. Si rien n'est fait, le chantier maritime de Lévis pourrait connaître de nouveau des jours sombres entre 2019 et 2020. Période où le carnet de commandes est presque à sec. De 1331 travailleurs en 2017, Davie sert de gagne-pain aujourd'hui à environ 200 personnes. Rappelons qu'au moment où le groupe Inocea, nouveau propriétaire, a pris les commandes en 2012, il n'y avait qu'une poignée de salariés, notamment des agents de sécurité et des employés d'entretien. Pour éviter d'autres problèmes de santé, Davie propose de faire du Québec un centre d'excellence pour l'Arctique spécialisé dans une niche de technologies et de classes de navires. Davie lance comme idée la création d'une grappe maritime, comme on retrouve en Finlande, en Norvège, aux Pays-Bas, en France et en Italie. «L'avantage concurrentiel d'une grappe maritime réside dans son intégralité et ses connexions, dans ses connaissances et compétences avancées ainsi que dans sa spécialisation régionale», notent des responsables du chantier maritime. «Les fournisseurs qui font affaire avec l'industrie maritime, même s'ils ne sont pas traditionnellement liés à celle-ci, augmentent considérablement leurs opportunités d'exportation», ajoutent-ils. Ces derniers estiment que le Québec possède actuellement tous les ingrédients pour créer une grappe maritime prospère. «Davie a construit le premier traversier au GNL en Amérique du Nord, Chantier Forillon a construit le premier traversier à piles en Amérique du Nord et Terragon de Montréal est le leader mondial des technologies de déchets marins écologiques». Stratégie maritime Pour y parvenir, Davie demande toutefois au gouvernement provincial de faire davantage pression sur Ottawa afin que le Québec obtienne sa juste part des 100 milliards $ investis dans la Stratégie nationale de construction navale. L'organisation réitère que ses rivaux n'ont toujours pas livré la marchandise. L'entreprise de Lévis juge que 23 % de la cagnotte de 100 milliards $ aiderait à faire de la province un leader à l'international. Un montant qui générerait «50 milliards $» en retombées économiques pour le Québec sur une période de 20 ans et qui assurerait le maintien de 8000 à 12 000 emplois directs et indirects. «Munie d'une telle base, la chaîne de valeur de la construction navale au Québec pourrait rivaliser avec les grands pays constructeurs navals européens», fait valoir Davie. «En 2016, la grappe maritime norvégienne a rapporté plus de 9,7 milliards $, a atteint une création de valeur de 2,7 milliards $ et a employé 18 000 personnes.» En décembre dernier, l'Assemblée nationale a adopté à l'unanimité une motion visant à appuyer la croisade du chantier maritime. Québec, qui reconnaît ainsi l'expertise de l'entreprise, réclame qu'Ottawa ajuste sa Stratégie nationale de construction navale et octroie, à court terme, à Davie un contrat pour un second navire ravitailleur de la classe Resolve. Cet accord qui vise la construction du navire Obelix pour la Marine royale canadienne — son jumeau l'Asterix avait coûté 650 millions $ — pourrait agir comme bouée de sauvetage et assurer du boulot à 1500 travailleurs. Sans le feu vert pour la construction de ce nouveau navire, Davie ne cache pas que certaines périodes pourraient être plus difficiles, et ce, même si des contrats ont récemment été signés. Contrat mal présenté Dans son document, la direction du chantier maritime affirme que le contrat de 610 millions $ lui étant octroyé par Ottawa pour la construction de trois brise-glaces pour la Garde côtière a été «faussement présenté». «En réalité, la vaste majorité de ce montant a servi à l'achat des navires déjà construits à l'étranger, et non pas pour les travaux ni pour des emplois au chantier». Quant aux travaux annoncés pour l'entretien des 12 frégates de la classe Halifax de la Marine royale canadienne, des contrats de 7 milliards $, Davie rappelle que ces chantiers ne commenceront que vers la fin 2020 et que le travail sera réparti entre les trois grands joueurs au pays, Davie, Irving Shipyards (Halifax) et Seaspan Shipyards (Victoria). «Les intervalles entre les travaux pour chacun de ces trois navires peuvent atteindre jusqu'à 9 mois. Cette charge de travail sporadique n'est pas suffisante pour maintenir le plus grand chantier naval canadien ni pour assurer des emplois stables et de valeur aux travailleurs de près de 900 entreprises locales», prévient Davie. https://www.latribune.ca/actualites/le-fil-groupe-capitales-medias/davie-souhaite-une-grappe-maritime-afc7b5ef4a1d96e31263d006e57e7b8a

  • Canada: Defence Procurement Canada: Is It ‘Back To The Future' For Defence Procurement?

    6 janvier 2020 | Local, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

    Canada: Defence Procurement Canada: Is It ‘Back To The Future' For Defence Procurement?

    Article by Marcia Mills and Paul Burbank Capital Perspectives Last Updated: January 3 2020 The issues surrounding defence acquisition took a backseat in the run up to the 2019 federal election. As noted by the Canadian Global Affairs Institute, this occurred despite the fact that two of the largest defence procurements in Canadian history – the Canadian Surface Combatants (warships) project and the Future Fighter Capability Program (fighter jets) – are in active procurement mode, spending is falling short of forecast and roughly 70 per cent of the approved projects under the 2017 implementation of the Strong, Secure, Engaged Defence Policy have seen schedule delays 1. Canadian defence procurement is a many-layered affair. Spread across three departments and a central agency (the Department of National Defence; Public Procurement and Services Canada; Innovation, Science and Economic Development; and Treasury Board, respectively), the need to coordinate and align this much bureaucracy is often viewed as one of the significant problems in defence procurement. The two main political parties offered very different solutions to these issues during the election, but provided few details. The Platforms The Conservatives focused on the need to "de-politicize" the procurement process, which would in turn deliver greater value for money and better resources for the Canadian military. To accomplish this, new oversight mechanisms, both in Cabinet and in the Privy Council Office, would be created. 2 Major defence procurements are already subject to oversight by the Defence Procurement Secretariat, a Deputy Ministers Governance Committee and a Ministers Working Group. It is not entirely clear how additional layers of oversight would reduce delay and improve efficiencies, unless the new mechanisms replaced all or some of the current oversight layers. The Liberal platform included a portion on defence procurement that pointed to the creation of "Defence Procurement Canada," to ensure defence projects were delivered on time and with greater transparency. The structure of Defence Procurement Canada was not explained. A bit of speculation is now in order as to what this could mean for defence procurement. The New Cabinet The Liberals formed a minority government and announced their new Cabinet on Nov. 20. While the Ministers of Defence (Harjit Sajjan) and Innovation, Science and Economic Development (Navdeep Bains) remain the same, Treasury Board has a new President and Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC) has a new Minister – Jean-Yves Duclos and Anita Anand, respectively. Treasury Board President Duclos moves from a smaller, specific portfolio within Employment and Social Development Canada to now preside over one of the federal government's most powerful central agencies and cabinet committees. He will have a considerable role in ensuring effective financial management and government spending. Minister Anand is a new face in Cabinet and a first-time Member of Parliament for the riding of Oakville, Ont. She is assuming responsibility for, amongst other things, the two single largest purchasing organizations in the federal government (PSPC and Shared Services Canada (SSC)). Going Forward Defence procurement in Canada follows a general ebb and flow – resources are increased during times of conflict and are reduced in times of peace. Restructuring occurs in response to these influences, as well as perceived redundancies, desired efficiencies and the odd scandal or two. Various Minsters and departments have been responsible for defence procurement and production over the past 100 years, including boards or commissions set up during times of war. A new independent department for defence procurement would result in three different departments (SSC, PSPC and the Defence Procurement Canada) managing the vast majority of federal acquisition. This approach would be similar to the stand up of the Department of Defence Production in the '50s. The DDP had a short life. Established in 1951, it was expanded to become the central purchasing organization in 1963 as an interim measure, then disbanded in 1969 with the establishment of the Department of Supply and Services. The amalgamations of various entities continued until 1993, with the creation of the Department of Public Works and Government Services (a.k.a. PSPC). PSPC operates as a central purchasing agent for the government, with exclusive authority under the Defence Production Act to acquire defence supplies for DND. If Defence Procurement Canada is to exist as a departmental corporation or agency, the government would want to launch this new entity early in its mandate so that it can lay claim to any degree of efficiency or success achieved. If so, the new entity would likely remain within PSPC, as the Minister has existing statutory authority to create a supporting departmental corporation or agency under the Defence Production Act. Creating this entity outside of PSPC's current authority would require a significant reorganization of the public service and change to the operations of government of a magnitude greater than that required to establish Shared Services Canada – this would include deciding whether to maintain or decentralize the functions of defence procurement and defence production, as well as significant statutory amendments to provide or reduce, as required, the authority of all Ministers involved. Ministerial mandate letters, which were released in mid-December, shed no additional light on the specific operational structure or corporate identity that Defence Procurement Canada is expected to take. Notable in these letters, however, is a prevailing theme: Minister Anand has the clear responsibility for bringing forward options to Cabinet, but that effort will be supported by a host of respected, senior ministers, including Minister Sajjan (National Defence), Minister Jordan (Fisheries & Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard), and Minister Bains (Innovation, Science and Industry). As all of these Ministries are already involved in defence procurement, their continued support is not surprising. Throughout the history of defence acquisition and production in Canada, large-scale reorganization has been predicated by one of three events: war, post-war reconstruction or scandal. Absent one of these triggers, a minority government may have little appetite (or be able to drum up support from any other party) to stand up a wholly new department, or even a departmental corporation or agency within PSPC itself, on the basis of efficiency and economy alone, particularly in light of the on-going Phoenix debacle and the continued issues at Shared Services Canada. As no new Minister for Defence Procurement Canada was named in the new Cabinet nor were any Additional Ministers within PSPC named for defence or Defence Procurement Canada, it appears that, at least for now, any defence acquisition reorganization is likely to remain on the backburner. Marcia Mills is procurement counsel with the Fasken Ottawa office and has 20+ years of private and public sector experience. She provides clients with legal and strategic advice for all aspects of government procurement, as well as advice on government policies and procurement processes. Paul Burbank is an associate with the Fasken Ottawa office. He works with the Communications Law group to provide advice on telecommunications and broadcasting in Canada. Paul also works with Fasken's Government Relations and Political Law group on strategy and compliance matters. Footnotes 1 The Defence Procurement Outlook for Canada's 43rd Parliament by David Perry, The Global Exchange, 2019 Volume XVII, Issue III; Canadian Global Affairs Institute 2 Global News: With billions at risk, federal parties promise to fix defence, procurement

Toutes les nouvelles