Volume 30 Issue 1
By David Pugliese
Public Services and Procurement Canada has a well-earned reputation in Ottawa for trying to hide or downplay information about defence acquisition projects, particularly when it’s not good news.
Sharp readers may recall the PSPC announcement June 30, 2022 – just before a long weekend – that the delivery of the Royal Canadian Navy’s new Joint Support Ships would be delayed another two years and taxpayers would be hit with additional costs.
So to start off 2023 in a similar fashion, PSPC decided to release on Jan. 3 a brief statement about “contract amendments” for the troubled Arctic and Offshore Patrol Ship (AOPS) program.
That amendment included the fact the cost of AOPS had jumped by another $780 million over the last year.
CBC journalist Kimberly Gale covered the development with a Jan. 4 story worthy of an Irving Shipbuilding news release. She highlighted Irving’s talking points that the approval of an already announced project to provide the Canadian Coast Guard with two AOPS would add 500 employees to the shipyard workforce. Gale buried the price increase in the body of the article.
She also quoted “Timothy Choi, a naval affairs specialist at the University of Calgary” with an explanation for the extra cost.
“It is actually a more complex vessel than the Royal Canadian Navy version,” Choi claimed, referring to the two AOPS Irving will build for the coast guard. “Due to a large number of additional sensors and equipment that the Canadian Coast Guard requires to fulfil its science missions.”
Choi’s claim Coast Guard AOPS are more complex than the RCN’s AOPS might come as a surprise to none other than the Canadian Coast Guard. On Dec. 11, 2019 the Coast Guard and Liberal government reassured the House of Commons only “minimal modifications” were needed on the AOPS for it to meet Coast Guard missions.
In addition, Gale didn’t inform readers that Choi is also fellow of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute (CGAI), a defence industry sponsored think tank that has received funding from both AOPS builder Irving and its AOPS sub contractor Lockheed Martin.
It was up to veteran CBC defence reporter Murray Brewster to salvage the coverage. Brewster filed his Jan. 6 story not only leading with the significant cost increase but as well pointing out to readers that PSPC delivered the bad news at a time when Members of Parliament were on holidays. Brewster noted that left “MPs with absolutely no opportunity to question federal officials about the reasons for the higher price tags.”
The bigger news in the world of defence media, however, was the fact Canada was moving ahead with its F-35 purchase. The announcement was supposed to have been made by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in early December. But that plan was scuttled when Liberal officials raised concerns Trudeau would face some tough questions from journalists over his about-face on the F-35. (Trudeau had claimed in 2015 a Liberal government would never purchase the stealth fighter.)
So, a new plan was put into action. An initial leak was coordinated by the Liberals to military-friendly journalist Lee Berthiaume of The Canadian Press news service. Berthiaume was shown documents outlining the purchase of the first tranche of aircraft, reporting Dec. 20 that the Liberals would spend $7 billion for 16 F-35s. But that backfired when critics started noting the $7 billion initial cost was significantly higher than the price tag Canada’s allies were being charged for the same aircraft.
So it was back to the drawing board for Berthiaume who on Dec. 21 produced an article with “defence experts” warning the public against drawing conclusions on the $7 billion figure.
Berthiaume quoted “F-35 expert Richard Shimooka of the Macdonald-Laurier Institute” and former RCAF commander retired lieutenant-general André Deschamps. Berthiaume did not inform his readers Shimooka’s organization had previously received money from F-35 manufacturer Lockheed Martin. Berthiaume did note that CFN consultants (the firm Deschamps works for) does lobbying for Lockheed Martin. What he didn’t tell readers was that CFN helped National Defence in co-ordinating the public relations campaign to originally sell the F-35 during the Harper government period.
The F-35 love-in continued after Defence Minister Anita Anand made her announcement Jan. 9 of the aircraft purchase. In a Jan. 10 article Berthiaume reported some activists had questioned the need for a new fighter jet. But beyond that he didn’t outline any of those concerns. Instead, Berthiaume turned to David Perry of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute to highlight the value of the F-35. Again, no mention was made of the CGAI receiving funds from Lockheed Martin. In the same article, Berthiaume interviewed Choi who was this time described as a University of Calgary defence analyst. Again, no mention was made of Choi’s CGAI connection nor the Lockheed Martin funding.
Mackenzie Gray of Global News had his report on the announcement and quoted the CGAI’s David Perry and former Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Tom Lawson. “I think in the end the government made the right decision,” Perry told Global.
“Canada looks more serious as an ally and defence partner,” added Lawson.
Gray did not interview any critics and didn’t inform his viewers Lawson had worked as an advisor for F-35 manufacturer Lockheed Martin. Gray was also silent on the Lockheed Martin connection to Perry’s organization.
The audience listening on Jan. 10, 2023 to Shaye Ganam show at Calgary radio station 770 CHQR might be forgiven for thinking they were tuning into a Lockheed Martin info commercial. Instead it was Timothy Choi, who spent around seven minutes highlighting the attributes of the F-35. Ganam introduced Choi as a CGAI fellow but, similar to other media outlets, did not reveal to his listeners Lockheed Martin’s funding contribution to the institute.
Overall, the largely unquestioning and at times fawning news media coverage of the F-35 purchase announcement was a glowing success for Lockheed Martin.
(Analysis)