The army says “cancel the purchase ($2 billion).
And the Government says “No, you are not going to cancel the purchase”.
When reading “Army tried to scuttle . . ” (below) I am reminded of
” . . . the opportunities for Canadian businesses to make money from our military strategy is prominent …”
I don’t have time now to look for an article we circulated – – a firm has set up in Canada to manufacture armoured vehicles.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Army tried to scuttle combat vehicle purchase amid deep cuts
By DAVE PUGLIESE, Ottawa Citizen
The Canadian Army tried to cancel the purchase of a new armoured vehicle fleet, wanting to use the $2 billion instead to offset budget cuts that are hurting its combat readiness.
But the Conservative government decided against scuttling the Close Combat Vehicle project, worried that the cancellation would give it yet another military procurement black eye. Instead, it is proceeding with the purchase of the new armoured fighting vehicles the military’s leadership is not overly keen to acquire.
The army is facing a 22-per-cent cut in its budget and has been trying to figure out how to deal with those reductions. It is scaling back on training and cutting some support programs for the troops.
The government has already announced billions of dollars in contracts to purchase new tactical armoured patrol vehicles for the army, refurbished Leopard tanks, and an upgrade to the military’s fleet of light armoured vehicles. Some in the Canadian Forces leadership saw the Close Combat Vehicle (CCV) as something that, while nice to have, is not essential at a time of cost-cutting.
Defence and industry officials say that senior military leaders looked at a number of scenarios on where the $2 billion for the CCV project could be better used. One included using the money to offset the government-ordered cutbacks the army is required to make. Another was to use the money for the government’s multi-billion dollar naval shipbuilding program, which some inside DND fear is underfunded.
There was initial interest among Treasury Board officials for the cancellation of the CCV project but that initiative was shut down by the Conservatives.
The CCV, announced with great fanfare in the summer of 2009, has already fallen two years behind schedule, according to industry officials.
The government will buy 108 of the vehicles. There would be an option for the purchase of up to 30 more. The army originally argued that the vehicles, which would accompany its Leopard tanks into battle, are a priority for future missions.
The Defence Department did not answer Citizen questions about why the army wanted to put a halt to the CCV project. Instead it emailed a link to a public relations information sheet on the CCV project, which notes that the contract will be awarded sometime this year.
Industry representatives have been told that a winning bidder has been identified. That winning company will be announced when it suits the Conservative government’s public relations plan.
But there are concerns inside the department and industry about the government announcing yet more purchases of armoured vehicles when the Conservatives have yet to move ahead with the acquisition of a new and much-needed search-and-rescue aircraft fleet. That project is estimated to cost a little more than $3 billion and the ongoing delays on that purchase were criticized in a recent report from the country’s auditor general.
Meanwhile, the government is spending $1 billion upgrading the army’s light armoured vehicles and has its $1 billion program for second-hand but modernized Leopard 2 tanks. It is also spending more than $600 million to buy 500 new tactical armoured patrol vehicles for the army.
Alan Williams, a former assistant deputy minister for matériel at DND, said the government is taking the position that it knows what is best for the military. “Here you have a government again politicizing the acquisition of military hardware,” said Williams.
He said instead there needs to be an internal debate to examine the effect that cancelling the CCV would have on Canadian defence policy as well as why the army has now changed its view that such a vehicle fleet is no longer essential.
The army is bearing the brunt of government cost-cutting in the Canadian Forces and will see its budget drop from $1.5 billion to just under $1.2 billion by 2015.
Those reductions will cut into how the army trains as well as its operations. To deal with the cuts, it wants to scale back on costly Arctic exercises, noted a Jan. 31 planning document from army commander Lt.-Gen. Peter Devlin.
The document points out that deployments overseas will also be scaled back to involve smaller groups and certain specialized training will stop entirely.
In December, Devlin warned a Senate committee that the 22-per-cent cut to the army’s budget would mean significant changes, although he did not get into many of the details. “We are training to a lower level than we trained, when we were training for combat operations,” he acknowledged.
At the time, Defence Minister Peter MacKay’s office released a statement noting that training is expected to slow since the Canadian Forces are no longer in combat missions in Afghanistan or Libya and their contribution to missions such as the one in Haiti has been substantially reduced.
© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen