Canada's Defence Industrial Strategy Faces Criticism for Lack of Specifics
Canada's recently unveiled defence industrial strategy has sparked debate among industry experts, with many praising its ambitious vision while criticizing its lack of concrete policy details. The federal government's plan, which aims to leverage an $82 billion investment to boost the economy, has been described as a document strong on aspiration but weak on implementation specifics.
Ambitious Goals Outlined
The 57-page strategy document establishes several key objectives for the coming decade. These include increasing the share of government defence contracts awarded to Canadian companies to 70 percent, boosting defence exports by 50 percent, and creating approximately 125,000 new jobs in the process. Additionally, the strategy commits to an 85 percent increase in government investment in defence-related research and development over the next ten years.
"The entire thing is predicated on building up our industrial capacity," said Naresh Raghubeer, managing partner and co-founder of the Sandstone Group, a lobbying firm with extensive experience in defence procurement. "It's a nice general document and its implementation will be interesting to watch."
Criticism Over Vagueness
Despite these ambitious targets, the strategy has drawn criticism for what some describe as excessive generality. The document identifies ten areas where Canada plans to establish "sovereign capabilities," ranging from aerospace and communications to uncrewed autonomous systems. However, critics argue this approach may be too broad to be effective.
Alan Williams, a former government official who now advises companies on defence procurement matters, expressed disappointment with the lack of specificity. "I was hoping to see specifics in terms of what areas our country wants to be best in," he stated.
Williams raised particular concerns about the potential consequences of prioritizing Canadian procurement without clear implementation policies. He warned that "the 'best' equipment for the military may be sacrificed in order to buy Canadian" if the government pursues its 70 percent domestic contract target without proper safeguards.
Specific Policies Questioned
The strategy does include some specific policy measures that have already generated debate. One notable provision establishes that a newly created Defence Investment Agency will be responsible for defence contracts exceeding $100 million. This agency will be established through legislation at a later date.
Williams questioned the logic behind this particular threshold, noting that "it is hard to understand why a $95-million acquisition should be treated differently from a $105-million acquisition." He suggested this approach might add unnecessary bureaucracy to the procurement process.
Instead, Williams recommended that the federal government consider publicizing "a long-term Cabinet-approved capital plan" for organizing defence expenditures. Such transparency would allow Canadian companies to better position themselves to compete for future contracts.
Positive Developments Noted
Despite the criticism, some industry observers have identified positive elements in the new strategy. Dana O'Born, chief strategy officer at the Council of Canadian Innovators, expressed optimism about the government's apparent attention to intellectual property protection.
O'Born noted that the document mentions intellectual property approximately six times, a significant increase from previous defence strategies where the term was rarely, if ever, included. This suggests the government may be heeding advice about protecting intellectual property created through its investments and spending.
The strategy also includes principles aimed at making it easier for Canadian companies to navigate and become accredited for defence procurement processes, potentially addressing long-standing criticisms about bureaucratic barriers.
Implementation Challenges Ahead
As Canada moves forward with its defence industrial strategy, the tension between ambitious goals and practical implementation will likely remain a central challenge. The document represents a significant shift in how the federal government approaches defence procurement and industrial development, but its ultimate success will depend on the specific policies and mechanisms developed to achieve its stated objectives.
Industry stakeholders will be watching closely as the government begins to implement the strategy, particularly regarding how it balances the desire to support Canadian industry with the need to provide the military with the best possible equipment. The creation of the Defence Investment Agency and the development of detailed implementation plans will be critical next steps in determining whether this ambitious strategy can deliver on its promises.
