Preserving capacity, General Tom Lawson, Chief of the Defence Staff, Keys to Canadian SAR
Issue link: http://vanguardcanada.uberflip.com/i/407740
P PROCUREmENT www.vanguardcanada.com OCTOBER/nOVEMBER 2014 13 of S&T expertise in DRDC and the warfare centres, for example, that could help in how a VP is weighted and rated. First and foremost, Industry Canada has the lead in terms of iden- tifying key industrial capabilities and they have done some good work in further refining the six key industrial capabilities in the Jenkins report to 14 or so key market segments. From a value proposition perspective, there are certain segments within those 14 that may be a higher priority for DND, and that could in- fluence the evaluation process. We are still working through the details of how that would work, but you are right, DRDC could undoubtedly bring some valuable expertise to the table. Q What is your role within the governance structure? We have governance at all levels, right up to the ministers. The governance is based on what we put in place for the National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy, which was used to good ef- fect, and the maritime helicopter project. In my view, the new governance will allow us to get to the source of the issues earlier and address them in a whole-of-government fashion. It has al- ready streamlined decision-making on some complex files with lots of issues at play. We will contribute to the governance at all levels, but under the DPS, project governance, when it applies at the Minister, Deputy Minister and Assistant Deputy Minister levels, will be led by Pub- lic Works and they have responsibility for making sure that the process works, that we are doing it in a joined up fashion, and that individual accountabilities of the three ministers and departments are respected. So far, based on NSPS and MHP, we have some good examples of a governance structure that is working well. Q Given that your priority is procuring the right equipment, is there a concern that another department has the lead on this? No, I think it is very clear to all three ministers that the over- arching objective remains getting the right equipment in a timely manner to the Canadian Forces and that the setting of require- ments is the sole accountability of the Minister of National De- fence. That is the messaging I have repeated and heard at all levels throughout the governance. Q What has been the reaction, especially from industry, to the first iteration of the Defence Acquisition Guide (DAG)? The DAG is produced by the VCDS and it encompasses the projects that will deliver on the requirements to satisfy the policy objectives of the Canada First Defence Strategy. So it is not a procurement plan, it is what the government and DND currently plan to invest in to deliver on the policy. If the policy changes, the DAG could change. It provides a level of predictability about what we are going to do, but not 100 percent certainty. We've had something like 20,000 hits on the DAG website since it was posted. The feedback I have heard from industry is that while they would probably like more information, they appreciate the point of contact with whom they can follow up directly. They also now have a level of assurance that, if a requirement is not in the DAG, it is probably on a wish list as opposed to something that has been approved by internal governance processes. The other thing I have heard that they very much like is the timelines. We have mapped everything out to five year timeframes. In the past there would be industry engagement and people would show up with bid proposal teams to hear what was going on and discover that the project was something we weren't really looking at until 2020 or beyond. I also think it levels the playing field a bit. For the bigger com- panies that have well established business development teams, there's probably nothing in the DAG they didn't already know. But some of the smaller to medium sized enterprises that don't have a lot of BD resources can see what is coming up and focus their efforts on projects that might be of interest to them. Q What will a Defence Analytics Institute mean for you? I think it is going to help identify and refine the strengths or ca- pabilities within the Canadian defence industrial base. When com- panies come forward with value propositions, it will help focus the market segments to which the Crown would attach the greatest value. It will also help us as we sit with our Industry Canada and Public Works colleagues to know how a particular value proposi- tion is going to benefit the industrial base and potentially benefit DND in an area where we would want to encourage investment. I think one of its tasks will also be to evaluate the DPS down the road to see if it is actually delivering on its three key objectives. Q What kind of leverage does an increase in delegated author- ity give ADM MAT? Given that many SMEs are seeking ways to get new technology into DND outside of major capital procure- ment projects, could this help? We're still going to have to go through competitive processes as the default process regardless of what the delegation of authority is, but I do think the increase is going to be very significant for DND. We're looking for an increase from $25,000 up to $5 million for goods and services. Since a $5 million delegated authority would represent about 90 percent of the current number of transactions that we do with Public Works, if it were now done in house, we should be able to process transactions and contracts in a much more streamlined manner. Not that PW isn't doing a good job – they are – it's just that every time you put an additional pair of hands on a file it slows things down. From a DND perspective, a $5 million delegated authority would still tend to comprise procurements that are lower risk and less risk. So in theory, there is huge potential to streamline those procure- ments and free up resources at PW and DND to focus on the higher dollar value and more complex projects.