Canada News & Updates | World Defense

Canada News & Updates

Khafee

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 17, 2017
Messages
12,324
Reactions
24,463 1,293 0
1602017162600.png

Dear @Zeeman @GRANNY001 @Mingle @PewPew and other Canadians I thought it was time we had a dedicated Canada thread.
 

Khafee

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 17, 2017
Messages
12,324
Reactions
24,463 1,293 0

Raj Grewal, former Liberal MP accused of breach of trust, makes first court appearance

Ex-Brampton East MP faces 4 counts of breach of trust
CBC News : Oct 06, 2020

1602017851700.png

Liberal MP Raj Grewal rises in the House of Commons in Ottawa on Friday, June 3, 2016. Grewal left the Liberal caucus in 2018, weeks after the Prime Minister's Office said he was receiving treatment related to a gambling problem. (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press)

Raj Grewal — the former Liberal MP accused of failing to disclose $6 million in funds to the ethics commissioner — today saw his case adjourned until the new year.

The Crown and lawyers for the former Brampton East MP, who was charged last month with fraud and breach of trust, agreed to have the case return to court Jan. 6 during a virtual hearing this morning.

According to court documents, police allege that between Oct. 19, 2015 and April 23, 2019, Grewal — then serving as an MP — received about $6 million in funds he failed to disclose to the ethics commissioner, which is considered a breach of trust.

He is accused of soliciting funds by "deceit, falsehood or other fraudulent means" and soliciting funds for his own personal benefit in connection with the use of his public offices, according to the charge sheet.

Grewal is also accused of using his constituency office budget for his own purposes and soliciting payment to him from an employee in that office in a manner "that constitutes a fraud or breach of trust," according to the court documents.

Grewal's lawyer said today that his team has received 10 gigabytes of disclosure materials from investigators so far and he's asked the Crown for more.

The RCMP says its investigation started back in September 2017, after it received proactive disclosures from the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada, known as FINTRAC, about "suspicious transactions" involving Grewal.

Grewal left the Liberal caucus in 2018, weeks after the Prime Minister's Office said he was receiving treatment from a health professional "related to a gambling problem that led him to incur significant personal debts." He then sat as an Independent and didn't run during the 2019 election.

With files from the Canadian Press
 

Khafee

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 17, 2017
Messages
12,324
Reactions
24,463 1,293 0

Here's how Trump and Biden differ on U.S.-Canada trade tensions

Canada has plenty at stake in this uncertain moment for American trade policy
Alexander Panetta · CBC News : Oct 06, 2020

1602018293700.png

Canadian and American flags fly near the Windsor-Detroit Ambassador Bridge, a major trade link between the two countries. (Rob/Gurdebeke)


The anthology of catchphrases summarizing the Canada-U.S. relationship runs the gamut from John F. Kennedy's solemnity to Pierre Trudeau's comedy.

But when it comes to trade these days, perhaps the best example of the genre manages to be a bit of both.

"The Americans are our best friends," Robert Thompson, a Canadian MP in the 1960s, once told the House of Commons. "Whether we like it or not."

Canada is extraordinarily dependent on the U.S. market, which buys nearly three-quarters of our exports. That means decisions in American trade policy at this highly unpredictable moment hold considerable consequences.

1602018532200.png

If Trump wins

It's well-known that Trump loves tariffs and resents American trading partners for their own trade barriers.

Since becoming president, he has triggered tariff feuds that have slowed the growth of international trade; forced Canada and Mexico to renegotiate NAFTA; engaged in multiple feuds with China while also signing an agreement; and basically paralyzed the World Trade Organization's top dispute body.

The threat of aluminum tariffs continues to linger over Canada. The Trump administration could impose new penalties after the election.

Canadians are well aware of Trump's tweets and threats, but they may be less familiar with the architect of his trade policy. Robert Lighthizer is the trade representative who got into heated negotiating sessions with Canadian NAFTA negotiator Chrystia Freeland.

Lighthizer is notoriously media-averse, which makes his recent 5,000-word essay in Foreign Affairs magazine so interesting, as it lays out his longer-term objective.

1602018596600.png

The Trump administration has withdrawn tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum but is threatening to re-impose aluminum tariffs after the Nov. 3 election. (Tara Walton/CP)

He is threatening prolonged paralysis at the WTO while demanding several sweeping changes at the world body — namely, reduced tariffs in developing countries; limits on trade deals between countries that don't share a border; a crackdown on Chinese state-funded capitalism; and less powerful dispute mechanisms.

For all the complaints about U.S. protectionism, American tariffs are among the lowest in the world, and Lighthizer wants a more even playing field.

Canada is directly affected by this WTO standoff. Canada recently won a case at the WTO over softwood lumber duties. Yet the process appears to be sabotaged.

That's because the U.S. is appealing the case to a panel that will perhaps never meet: the WTO appeals body. The reason it can't meet is that the Trump administration, unhappy with the WTO, started blocking the appointment of its judges. The Canadian government says it's "surprised" and "deeply concerned" about what the U.S. is doing to the global trading system.

Lighthizer has made clear he'd be perfectly fine with the WTO appeals body being gone forever.

Based on his Foreign Affairs essay, Lighthizer's view of trade can be boiled down to this: In order to preserve manufacturing jobs that sustain stable working-class communities, an ideal trade policy sacrifices some of the efficiency of international imports, even if it occasionally increases the cost of goods. Lighthizer also brushes off a non-economic argument for trade advanced by Freeland and many others — that it encourages world peace. Lighthizer lists examples of trading partners going to war and, conversely, of peace between countries embroiled in protectionist fights.
Lighthizer's main point is that the ideal is a middle path between free trade and protectionism, "somewhere between the openness of the 1990s and the barriers of the 1930s," he wrote in a subsequent essay in Foreign Affairs.

"Neither old-school protectionism nor unbridled globalism.… Instead, as the United States confronts future trade challenges, it should chart a sensible middle course — one that, at long last, prizes the dignity of work."

A former Obama White House official criticized Lighthizer's essay, saying the current administration is great at breaking systems but hasn't shown much interest in fixing anything.

"I would expect it to be more of the same [in a second term]," said Chad Bown, now a senior fellow at Washington's Peterson Institute. "Highly disruptive, really unclear as to what the end game would look like."

Bown countered in an essay of his own that there are better ways to support workers than Trump's approach to trade, which he said does more harm than good.

Take the new NAFTA. Those negotiations put considerable strain on relations with Canada and Mexico for a gain of 0.12 per cent in U.S. employment, according to the U.S. federal agency that did an independent estimate.

There's limited evidence of a manufacturing boom under Trump — on the national level, and in key states like Michigan, Pennsylvania and Ohio, the employment trend line between the 2009 and 2020 recessions was pretty stable.

Charles Benoit, a Canadian-born trade lawyer who lives in Washington, said Canada should not instinctively recoil at some of the things Trump is doing.

1602018636700.png

Benoit, who has called Lighthizer's ideas for WTO reform "genius," said forcing changes in international tariff schedules would be transformative — and could be to Canada's benefit.


Benoit said Canada has experienced versions of the phenomena Lighthizer bemoans, albeit on a smaller scale than in the U.S.: Canada also has trade deficits with most of the world, a long-term decline in manufacturing employment and a multi-decade dip in male labour-force participation.

"Every nation should pursue greater self-reliance to boost employment, wages and shared prosperity. This was how Canada was founded: [with] Sir John A. Macdonald's National Policy," said Benoit, trade counsel at Coalition for a Prosperous America, led by former steel executive and Trump administration ally Dan DiMicco.

"Both the U.S. and Canada have seen production bleed off-shore for half a century.... People in both countries have had enough."

He said Pierre Trudeau would have respected the Trump administration's departure from "neoliberal" trade assumptions and suggested the current Trudeau government should do the same.

1602018659200.png

Canadian deputy PM Chrystia Freeland not only encountered tense NAFTA negotiations with Trump's top trade official, Robert Lighthizer, but they revealed sharply different philosophies about international affairs. (Yuri Gripas/Reuters)

It's not clear the 73-year-old Lighthizer would stay on as U.S. trade representative for a second Trump term. What does seem clear: the tariff threats would continue, as would tensions at the WTO.

If Biden wins

"I am a free trader and a supporter of globalization," Biden said in a speech in his final days as vice-president. But, he added, "Globalization has not been an unalloyed good."

A Biden win would not, by any stretch of the imagination, signal an end to trade disputes with the U.S. He has already said he intends to pursue Buy American policies as aggressively — or even more so — than Trump when it comes to public works.

Biden has, however, promised some changes. His trade platform hints at dropping the national-security tariffs against allies' steel and aluminum — the so-called 232 tariffs popular with Trump.

Susan Rice, who was on Biden's short list of running mates, told CBC News she was "offended" by Trump's national-security tariffs against Canada, and said Biden would not impose them.

Biden's platform says he would avoid picking fights with allies and would instead work with them to limit Chinese state-directed overproduction in areas like steel, aluminum, fibre optics and shipbuilding.

Another potential change could have significant implications for Canada: Biden has said he would consider re-entering the agreement formerly known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, with some modifications.

As vice-president, Biden worked on that agreement (which Trump refused to enter), though Biden has signalled it would not be a first-year priority, as his administration deals with more urgent matters.

A U.S. re-entry would potentially neutralize one of the most destabilizing elements of the new NAFTA from the Canadian government's perspective. The Trump team insisted upon a so-called sunset clause — Article 34.7 requires new negotiations, starting every six years, and without a new deal in 16 years, the agreement is cancelled.

Canadian officials said one reason they were willing to live with that perpetual threat was the belief that the U.S. might someday sign onto another pact, likely the new CPTPP.

Bown said several things would be unlikely to change under Biden.

1602018687800.png

Buy American policies are one area where Trump and Biden agree. Here is Trump at a White House event in 2019 where he signed one of numerous Buy American policies he's enacted. (Jonathan Ernst/Reuters)

Softwood lumber is a perpetual irritant that would continue. Bown said he expects Biden would also insist on some changes at the WTO before agreeing to new panelists. And he expects the trans-Pacific pact is low on the list of priorities.

But he expects that under Biden, there would be far less combativeness toward allies.

One former WTO official said a Biden win would achieve one major objective: preventing Trump trade policy from establishing itself as the new American norm.

"I think the stakes [of this election] are really big," said Simon Lester, now a trade-policy analyst at the pro-free-market Cato Institute, based in Washington, D.C.

"Trump has a traditional, old-style, 19th-century view of trade," said Lester, which holds that "tariffs are good, they make the economy better; international organizations, international trade agreements are, at best, tolerable."

Lester's assessment: "We can undo four years of Trump much easier than we can undo eight years."

Lester also addressed an apparent paradox in U.S. attitudes toward trade: Americans tell pollsters they support free trade (arguably more than ever) yet also support protectionist policies like Buy American.

His view? Americans don't pay close enough attention to trade to have a strong opinion. "It's just not driving people to vote," he said.

1602018782300.png

Biden is seen with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau during a trip to Ottawa in December 2016 when he was vice-president. Biden may be friendlier to Canada on some trade issues, but several important irritants will persist. (Chris Wattie/Reuters)

Chris Sands, the head of the Canada Institute at the Washington-based Wilson Center, said the revised NAFTA gives Canada an opening to pursue new objectives. The agreement creates new Canada-U.S.-Mexico committees that will work on agriculture, labour and economic competitiveness.

He believes that North America will eventually have freer mobility of workers, so that people can more easily cross the border for a job.

In the meantime, he said, Canada needs to think about its objectives for this continent, and pursue those ideas in the new NAFTA committees.

"Canada should bring its A-game, and a sense of what it wants for North America," Sands said. "I think Canada needs to have a strategy for that."
 

GRANNY001

Professional
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
341
Reactions
289 25 0
Country
Canada
Location
Canada

Here's how Trump and Biden differ on U.S.-Canada trade tensions

Canada has plenty at stake in this uncertain moment for American trade policy
Alexander Panetta · CBC News : Oct 06, 2020

View attachment 16810
Canadian and American flags fly near the Windsor-Detroit Ambassador Bridge, a major trade link between the two countries. (Rob/Gurdebeke)


The anthology of catchphrases summarizing the Canada-U.S. relationship runs the gamut from John F. Kennedy's solemnity to Pierre Trudeau's comedy.

But when it comes to trade these days, perhaps the best example of the genre manages to be a bit of both.

"The Americans are our best friends," Robert Thompson, a Canadian MP in the 1960s, once told the House of Commons. "Whether we like it or not."

Canada is extraordinarily dependent on the U.S. market, which buys nearly three-quarters of our exports. That means decisions in American trade policy at this highly unpredictable moment hold considerable consequences.

View attachment 16811

If Trump wins

It's well-known that Trump loves tariffs and resents American trading partners for their own trade barriers.

Since becoming president, he has triggered tariff feuds that have slowed the growth of international trade; forced Canada and Mexico to renegotiate NAFTA; engaged in multiple feuds with China while also signing an agreement; and basically paralyzed the World Trade Organization's top dispute body.

The threat of aluminum tariffs continues to linger over Canada. The Trump administration could impose new penalties after the election.

Canadians are well aware of Trump's tweets and threats, but they may be less familiar with the architect of his trade policy. Robert Lighthizer is the trade representative who got into heated negotiating sessions with Canadian NAFTA negotiator Chrystia Freeland.

Lighthizer is notoriously media-averse, which makes his recent 5,000-word essay in Foreign Affairs magazine so interesting, as it lays out his longer-term objective.

View attachment 16812
The Trump administration has withdrawn tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum but is threatening to re-impose aluminum tariffs after the Nov. 3 election. (Tara Walton/CP)

He is threatening prolonged paralysis at the WTO while demanding several sweeping changes at the world body — namely, reduced tariffs in developing countries; limits on trade deals between countries that don't share a border; a crackdown on Chinese state-funded capitalism; and less powerful dispute mechanisms.

For all the complaints about U.S. protectionism, American tariffs are among the lowest in the world, and Lighthizer wants a more even playing field.

Canada is directly affected by this WTO standoff. Canada recently won a case at the WTO over softwood lumber duties. Yet the process appears to be sabotaged.

That's because the U.S. is appealing the case to a panel that will perhaps never meet: the WTO appeals body. The reason it can't meet is that the Trump administration, unhappy with the WTO, started blocking the appointment of its judges. The Canadian government says it's "surprised" and "deeply concerned" about what the U.S. is doing to the global trading system.

Lighthizer has made clear he'd be perfectly fine with the WTO appeals body being gone forever.

Based on his Foreign Affairs essay, Lighthizer's view of trade can be boiled down to this: In order to preserve manufacturing jobs that sustain stable working-class communities, an ideal trade policy sacrifices some of the efficiency of international imports, even if it occasionally increases the cost of goods. Lighthizer also brushes off a non-economic argument for trade advanced by Freeland and many others — that it encourages world peace. Lighthizer lists examples of trading partners going to war and, conversely, of peace between countries embroiled in protectionist fights.


"Neither old-school protectionism nor unbridled globalism.… Instead, as the United States confronts future trade challenges, it should chart a sensible middle course — one that, at long last, prizes the dignity of work."

A former Obama White House official criticized Lighthizer's essay, saying the current administration is great at breaking systems but hasn't shown much interest in fixing anything.

"I would expect it to be more of the same [in a second term]," said Chad Bown, now a senior fellow at Washington's Peterson Institute. "Highly disruptive, really unclear as to what the end game would look like."

Bown countered in an essay of his own that there are better ways to support workers than Trump's approach to trade, which he said does more harm than good.

Take the new NAFTA. Those negotiations put considerable strain on relations with Canada and Mexico for a gain of 0.12 per cent in U.S. employment, according to the U.S. federal agency that did an independent estimate.

There's limited evidence of a manufacturing boom under Trump — on the national level, and in key states like Michigan, Pennsylvania and Ohio, the employment trend line between the 2009 and 2020 recessions was pretty stable.

Charles Benoit, a Canadian-born trade lawyer who lives in Washington, said Canada should not instinctively recoil at some of the things Trump is doing.

View attachment 16813
Benoit, who has called Lighthizer's ideas for WTO reform "genius," said forcing changes in international tariff schedules would be transformative — and could be to Canada's benefit.


Benoit said Canada has experienced versions of the phenomena Lighthizer bemoans, albeit on a smaller scale than in the U.S.: Canada also has trade deficits with most of the world, a long-term decline in manufacturing employment and a multi-decade dip in male labour-force participation.

"Every nation should pursue greater self-reliance to boost employment, wages and shared prosperity. This was how Canada was founded: [with] Sir John A. Macdonald's National Policy," said Benoit, trade counsel at Coalition for a Prosperous America, led by former steel executive and Trump administration ally Dan DiMicco.

"Both the U.S. and Canada have seen production bleed off-shore for half a century.... People in both countries have had enough."

He said Pierre Trudeau would have respected the Trump administration's departure from "neoliberal" trade assumptions and suggested the current Trudeau government should do the same.

View attachment 16814
Canadian deputy PM Chrystia Freeland not only encountered tense NAFTA negotiations with Trump's top trade official, Robert Lighthizer, but they revealed sharply different philosophies about international affairs. (Yuri Gripas/Reuters)

It's not clear the 73-year-old Lighthizer would stay on as U.S. trade representative for a second Trump term. What does seem clear: the tariff threats would continue, as would tensions at the WTO.

If Biden wins

"I am a free trader and a supporter of globalization," Biden said in a speech in his final days as vice-president. But, he added, "Globalization has not been an unalloyed good."

A Biden win would not, by any stretch of the imagination, signal an end to trade disputes with the U.S. He has already said he intends to pursue Buy American policies as aggressively — or even more so — than Trump when it comes to public works.

Biden has, however, promised some changes. His trade platform hints at dropping the national-security tariffs against allies' steel and aluminum — the so-called 232 tariffs popular with Trump.

Susan Rice, who was on Biden's short list of running mates, told CBC News she was "offended" by Trump's national-security tariffs against Canada, and said Biden would not impose them.

Biden's platform says he would avoid picking fights with allies and would instead work with them to limit Chinese state-directed overproduction in areas like steel, aluminum, fibre optics and shipbuilding.

Another potential change could have significant implications for Canada: Biden has said he would consider re-entering the agreement formerly known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, with some modifications.

As vice-president, Biden worked on that agreement (which Trump refused to enter), though Biden has signalled it would not be a first-year priority, as his administration deals with more urgent matters.

A U.S. re-entry would potentially neutralize one of the most destabilizing elements of the new NAFTA from the Canadian government's perspective. The Trump team insisted upon a so-called sunset clause — Article 34.7 requires new negotiations, starting every six years, and without a new deal in 16 years, the agreement is cancelled.

Canadian officials said one reason they were willing to live with that perpetual threat was the belief that the U.S. might someday sign onto another pact, likely the new CPTPP.

Bown said several things would be unlikely to change under Biden.

View attachment 16815
Buy American policies are one area where Trump and Biden agree. Here is Trump at a White House event in 2019 where he signed one of numerous Buy American policies he's enacted. (Jonathan Ernst/Reuters)

Softwood lumber is a perpetual irritant that would continue. Bown said he expects Biden would also insist on some changes at the WTO before agreeing to new panelists. And he expects the trans-Pacific pact is low on the list of priorities.

But he expects that under Biden, there would be far less combativeness toward allies.

One former WTO official said a Biden win would achieve one major objective: preventing Trump trade policy from establishing itself as the new American norm.

"I think the stakes [of this election] are really big," said Simon Lester, now a trade-policy analyst at the pro-free-market Cato Institute, based in Washington, D.C.

"Trump has a traditional, old-style, 19th-century view of trade," said Lester, which holds that "tariffs are good, they make the economy better; international organizations, international trade agreements are, at best, tolerable."

Lester's assessment: "We can undo four years of Trump much easier than we can undo eight years."

Lester also addressed an apparent paradox in U.S. attitudes toward trade: Americans tell pollsters they support free trade (arguably more than ever) yet also support protectionist policies like Buy American.

His view? Americans don't pay close enough attention to trade to have a strong opinion. "It's just not driving people to vote," he said.

View attachment 16816
Biden is seen with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau during a trip to Ottawa in December 2016 when he was vice-president. Biden may be friendlier to Canada on some trade issues, but several important irritants will persist. (Chris Wattie/Reuters)

Chris Sands, the head of the Canada Institute at the Washington-based Wilson Center, said the revised NAFTA gives Canada an opening to pursue new objectives. The agreement creates new Canada-U.S.-Mexico committees that will work on agriculture, labour and economic competitiveness.

He believes that North America will eventually have freer mobility of workers, so that people can more easily cross the border for a job.

In the meantime, he said, Canada needs to think about its objectives for this continent, and pursue those ideas in the new NAFTA committees.

"Canada should bring its A-game, and a sense of what it wants for North America," Sands said. "I think Canada needs to have a strategy for that."
Wow Khafee! Love your new "Canada" thread!!! I will try to contribute when I can. Perhaps a new "USA" thread as well or is that "over-doing" it?
 

Khafee

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 17, 2017
Messages
12,324
Reactions
24,463 1,293 0
Wow Khafee! Love your new "Canada" thread!!! I will try to contribute when I can. Perhaps a new "USA" thread as well or is that "over-doing" it?
Please feel free to start one, in this section.

 

GRANNY001

Professional
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
341
Reactions
289 25 0
Country
Canada
Location
Canada
Please feel free to start one, in this section.

Sorry Khafee. I think too much USA (Trump) is jut that..... Too Much!!! Perhaps when we have a more "civilized" administration after Nov 3rd, I might take you up on that. Until then, my first sentence stands. ;)
 

GRANNY001

Professional
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
341
Reactions
289 25 0
Country
Canada
Location
Canada
Canada’s Failed Defence Procurement Policy – Time To Decide……Now!!

This is an opinion piece by the author for Forum member discussion only and not to be disseminated to any other media.

Since the recent Federal Election, it is useful to look back at the two major political parties to review their defence procurement policies. The Conservative Party platform has a commitment for a fast-track replacement of the ageing CF-18s for the RCAF, and to ensure ships promised to the RCN and Canadian Coast Guard are delivered much sooner under the 2010 National Shipbuilding Strategy (NSS) and the 2017 Strategic document entitled “Strong, Secure and Engaged.” The Liberal defence policy stated that it will “ensure complex defence procurements are delivered on time, and that the government will create a new bureaucracy called “Defence Procurement Canada”. The question to be addressed here is, will there be substantial organizational change in the offing by the newly-minted Liberal Minority Government in the way defence procurement is currently conducted? I would argue that our current defence procurement system is broken and needs to be fixed…now! To add another failed plan to try to and decrease defence procurement time-lines when all it will do is create another failed defence procurement system and again, will be a strategic failure!

In 2018 the Auditor-General delivered an ugly and daming report on the Liberals’ handling of the fighter jet procurement program – specifically, the plan to buy interim warplanes from Australia until the CF-18 fleet can be replaced. The report described the purchase of these “interim fighters” as an all-out assault on evidence-based policy making. Ottawa can’t carry on with business as usual any longer when it comes to Defence Procurement Policies. The current government must quickly deliver on defence procurement, instead of doubling down on rhetoric. The problem is that past governments haven’t really paid a heavy price for botched military procurement projects. There was no political pain for the agony of the Sea King replacement, in the two-decade long process to replace the helicopter. With respect to the acquisition of 15 new warships for the RCN, it took up to two years of endless consultations with bidders, with the government making up to 88 amendments to the original tender document. In the end, the preferred bid was challenged by a competitor arguing not all of the navy’s criteria were met. The acquisition of the CSCs went from initial costs estimates of $14 billion CAD to estimates now from the Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO) of $77 billion CAD with not a single CSC frigate produced since 2018 and the design phase still not finished by Lockheed Martin (LM) in 2021. The recently announced New Submarine Procurement Project by the RCN to replace the Victoria class fleet is something else for the government to decide upon. Let us hope this project will not take another twenty years for the government to make a decision.

Canada has the worst military procurement system in the world with no fifth-generation fighters or RCN/Canadian Coast Guard vessels to show for it. Since 2012, Public Services and Procurement Canada has assumed responsibility for the overall control and management of major defence procurements. This has introduced a crushing burden of bureaucratic structures that added a superficial ability to provide knowledgeable project management decisions. Despite there being only one realistic supplier for many defence capability requirements, the overriding preference has been to run competitions, increasing program costs and delaying capability delivery. Canada’s fighter replacement program has gone well over 16 years under the present government’s timeline. Most NATO countries required only two to four years to select the F-35. Canada’s air force is obsolescent and will become even more so over the next decade as most of our allies, and the US in particular, equip themselves with fifth-generation fighters. Meanwhile, we will continue to fly the CF-18s we currently have or the F-18s we acquire from Australia. As for maritime operations, here too procurement problems will plague the navy for at least the next decade. Certainly, for reasons of inadequate infrastructure alone, not to mention ongoing procurement problems that plague governments to keep pushing back completion dates, it will be impossible to meet the NATO target of two per cent of GDP on defence spending standard any time soon.”

One of the significant problems in acquiring new capital equipment for both the Canadian Forces and the Canadian Coast Guard is that some direction and decisions have to be quickly made by our politicians in Ottawa soon. For example, why is it taking so long to make a decision on acquiring a new fighter jet to replace the ageing CF-18 fleet. The facts before our “so-called” decision-makers are as follows:

(1) Canada has already spent over $600 million to remain a partner in the F-35 development costs since 1997 to the builder Lockheed Martin (LM) for the aircraft;

(2) Canada’s participation in this program allows Canadian companies to benefit from these contracts and allows Canada to buy the aircraft at a lower cost and a priority access to the production line;

(3) NATO countries have already purchased and are now operating the F-35, such as the US, Britain, Norway and Denmark. Other countries purchasing this fifth-generation fighter aircraft are Australia, Japan and Switzerland; and

(4) Canada purchasing the F-35 will make future RCAF operations compatible with their NATO allies. Even now the RCAF will be years behind operationally with the NATO partners in eventually purchasing 88 F-35s.

Although the Conservatives want to speed up the replacement programs for the capital projects for both the Canadian Forces and the Coast Guard, they fail to clearly address the causes of the current procurement bottlenecks to create faster delivery of defence projects. The Liberals say they are going to establish a new “organization” from the existing scheme, which will only add another layer of bureaucracy to the current regime but again have failed to describe how the current processes can be improved. In My Opinion (IMO), it is critical that Canadian governments quickly carry out a comprehensive review to improve and streamline our defence procurement system within the next 6 months! Ottawa must make a real effort to make decisions much sooner in acquiring capital equipment for the Canadian Forces and Coast Guard. Our operational capability is being seriously affected by the inability to get new equipment into the hands of our Canadian service members much sooner. It is time the federal government made decisions much more quickly to improve our embattled procurement regime that has not worked for many years now.

The Conservative Party platform seems to more adequately capture the urgency associated with the need to procure a number of key weapon system platforms necessary for the CAF to fulfill its mandates required by all Canadians. By extension, this suggests a Conservative government would quickly make some of the hard decisions related to the procurement initiatives, something the current Liberal government appears reluctant to do. Furthermore, the Liberal policy merely chooses to create another layer of bureaucracy to the procurement process, and doesn't serve notice it is prepared to deliver on procurement budgets previously committed, something of importance when it comes to how it intends to fund announced covid-related social support programs. Historically, defence-related budgets or procurement programs are first on the chopping block when it comes to re-allocating budgets. Neither party, however, proposes that a fundamental review of the procurement process is required within the next 6 months in order to fix systemic and structural challenges and inadequacies associated with the current Defence Procurement process.
 
Top