Procurement Challenges Threaten Canada's Defence Industrial Strategy
OTTAWA — For Canada's newly unveiled defence industrial strategy to achieve its ambitious goals, the federal government must confront and resolve deep-seated bureaucratic obstacles that have long plagued military acquisitions. This warning comes from Joe Varner, a defence expert and former defence policy director, who emphasizes that without fixing procurement, the strategy risks stagnation.
Urgent Need for Procurement Reform
Prime Minister Mark Carney recently introduced Canada's first Defence Industrial Strategy, a landmark initiative designed to strengthen national sovereignty and resilience. However, Varner cautions that this long-overdue program will falter unless Canada addresses its procurement inefficiencies. "It's key for Canada to get its act together on the procurement front, there's no two ways about it," Varner stated in an interview. "We have to really look hard at how we procure things."
In his announcement, Carney acknowledged that Canada's defence procurement has historically been "too complicated, too slow, and too reliant on international suppliers," which has stifled the growth of domestic defence industries. Varner points out that while Canada can expedite procurement when motivated, such as with equipment for Ukraine, this urgency often does not extend to the Canadian Forces, raising questions about political will.
Historical Scandals and Systemic Issues
Canada's military procurement history is marred by scandals and cost overruns, including the prolonged Sea King helicopter replacement debacle and expensive contracts for Canadian Surface Combatant warships. Varner highlights that bureaucratic silos within government departments have led to poor communication and inflated budgets, undermining efficiency.
Developing a robust defence industrial strategy is crucial, Varner asserts, as it serves as a keystone for enhancing Canada's security. He notes that Canada has traditionally purchased major equipment like tanks and aircraft from offshore sources, such as the United States and Europe, rather than fostering domestic production. "We did manufacture those types of equipment during the Second World War and after, but today if you're buying fighter planes you're buying either American or European fighter planes. If you're buying helicopters, you're buying American helicopters," he explained.
Ambitious Goals and Realistic Constraints
The defence strategy outlines ambitious targets, including $6.6 billion in spending over five years, a 240% increase in industry revenues, 125,000 new jobs, and a 50% boost in exports. Varner describes it as "an ambitious document" but stresses that Canada cannot achieve these goals independently in the short term. "It's great to have a defence industrial strategy, it's key to rebuilding our defence industries, but we don't have a lot of time to rearm and retooth the Canadian Forces, and we have to buy off-the-shelf proven equipment from the United States and our NATO and Asian partners," he said. "I don't see any way around that."
Many defence contractors in Canada are subsidiaries of American firms, though exceptions exist. Varner's insights underscore the need for a balanced approach that combines strategic domestic development with necessary international partnerships to ensure Canada's defence capabilities are strengthened effectively and promptly.
