Items Big and Small Delayed for Years
When the Conservatives were first elected in 2006, they listed new naval supply ships as a priority, predicting the fuel-carrying vessels would be in the water by 2012. Now, “We won’t see a supply ship until at least 2020,” according to Political Science Professor Elinor Sloan.
It’s a stark example of a defence procurement strategy that is delayed by unrealistic and, in some cases, not-yet-developed requirements.
“It is evident in its Defence Procurement Strategy that the government is seeking both to maximize Canadian industrial opportunity…improve procurement outcomes and equip the CAF in a timely fashion,” writes Sloan in her report, Something Has to Give: Why Delays are the New Reality of Canada’s Defence Procurement Strategy. “But some would argue that these two objectives are in tension.”
In her recently released report, Sloan looked at 16 defence projects that are considered imperative for the Canadian Forces in the short to medium term and cost more than $100 million.
They range from Arctic/offshore patrol ships to Chinook helicopters and a Canadian space surveillance system.
“The government is not forthcoming on what’s happening, so my goal was to create a readily understandable reference of the decisions made,” explains Sloan, who, as a fellow of the Canadian Defence Foreign Affairs Institute, collaborated with the School of Public Policy at the University of Calgary on the report.
In her extensive research of government documents, Sloan identified five themes that help to explain why so many defence projects remain on the shelf, while forces in the field may lack the equipment and vehicles they need.
She cites:
- The pursuit of ambitious developmental projects to fulfill requirements: DND often requests new products that are not yet developed.
- In-house preferences that are exposed as such once they leave DND: Statement of preferences are written with one vehicle or aircraft in mind, denying due process.
- Changing requirements as a result of battlefield experience.
- Rough order of magnitude costs that do not change over time: Cost estimates remain artificially low, leading to the rejection of bids.
- No single point of accountability: three federal departments oversee procurement decisions.
The defense procurement report is released annually. Sloan notes that 14 of the 16 major projects in the 2014 report were also in the previous year’s report as little had changed.
Wednesday, November 26, 2014 in News
Share: Twitter, Facebook
