Bureaucrats tried to scuttle ship purchase
Perception of problems feared: documents
Defence Department bureaucrats fought against a plan to purchase outright the commercial vessel now being converted as a naval supply ship because they worried it would make the government’s shipbuilding program look bad.
While bureaucrats acknowledged buying the ship after a five-year lease would help the navy, they worried that would create a perception that there were problems with the federal shipbuilding strategy, according to documents obtained by the Ottawa Citizen.
The interim supply ship, which the Liberal government tried to derail in the fall of 2015, is at the heart of the case of Vice Admiral Mark Norman. Norman, a respected officer, was suspended from his job as vice chief of staff earlier this year after the RCMP alleged he leaked information about Liberal plans to scuttle the $700 million supply vessel deal.
Davie shipyards in Quebec is converting the commercial vessel under what it calls Project Resolve. It will then lease the vessel to the Canadian government so it can be used to refuel and supply warships at sea.
Canada has been without such a capability since 2015 after it removed from service its aging resupply vessels.
Officials at Public Works, since renamed Public Services and Procurement Canada, asked the Defence Department to consider inserting an option to allow for the purchase of the Project Resolve ship after the lease period was up.
Defence bureaucrats acknowledged that option had advantages since it addressed the navy’s long-term needs and provided the department with the flexibility to buy the vessel at a pre-determined cost.
But they rejected the idea warning that such a move could call into question the government’s shipbuilding plan.
Under that plan, the navy will eventually receive two Joint Support Ships, known as JSS. Those will be built on the west coast but the program has faced delays. Construction has yet to start but the government hopes those two vessels will be delivered in 2021-2022.
Buying the Project Resolve ship, “could create a perception that there are JSS delivery issues,” the bureaucrats warned in a September 2015 briefing note obtained by the Citizen under the Access to Information law.
“It would draw much needed resources away from projects under the National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy,” the officials added.
That procurement strategy, which will see the construction of dozens of warships and federal vessels, has already been plagued with excessive cost overruns and delays.
The Conservative government ultimately overruled the bureaucrats and an option to purchase the supply ship after the lease was inserted into the contract.
It is not yet known whether the government will exercise that option.
Project Resolve is front and centre in the ongoing saga involving Vice Admiral Norman.
Details were leaked to the news media about a Liberal government plan to put the project on hold in late November 2015. That leak embarrassed the new Trudeau government and sparked outrage in Quebec about the potential loss of hundreds of jobs if Davie were to lose the ship deal. The Liberals beat a quick retreat and shortly afterward, Project Resolve went ahead.
But the RCMP was brought in to find whomever had embarrassed the Liberals by leaking information.
Police allege Norman provided updates to Davie on the Liberal plan to derail the supply ship program. They allege Norman did that in the hope making the news public would influence the government to proceed with the delivery of the vessel, seen as critical to naval operations.
Norman has not been charged and the RCMP has yet to produce any evidence proving their claims.
Acting on the unproven allegations from the RCMP, Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Jon Vance removed Norman in January from his job as second in command of the Canadian Forces.
Norman remains on full salary.
Norman’s lawyer Marie Henein has released a statement in which the vice admiral unequivocally denied any wrongdoing. Instead she noted Norman has been “caught in the bureaucratic cross-fire” but did not elaborate.