VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight

[jollyjacktar]

Our Admirals have this unfortunate habit of publicly calling out the government's bullshit when it really affects the fleet. Hence the Navy's lack of representation at the CDS level. IMHO of course!

Is there ever a good time to go tilting at windmills to slay the dragons?  I suppose you could say that at least they have the balls to stand up and fight.

 

[jollyjacktar]

Outside of what we know about this siutation, does that still make it ok for serving officers to help third parties twist government arms on policies they're personally not in line with?

Tough question, but if it's for the good of the service and country and should be done... then yes.  Too many times we've been saddled with shit just because it buys votes here and there.  LSVWs and Kim Campbell comes to mind.

 

[MilEME09]

To often we see flag officers hold back until they are retiring, they let it all out and get 15 seconds of fame and it's gone. Now a public battle over political interference, that would give the government a black eye, imagine if the CDS stood with the forces and called out the governments BS, firing him would make the government look guilty by removing a critic.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Tough question, but if it's for the good of the service and country and should be done... then yes.  Too many times we've been saddled with shit just because it buys votes here and there.  LSVWs and Kim Campbell comes to mind.

Ah, but who defines the "good of the service and country"?  And what if there's a conflict between good of the service and good of the country?  Remember "loyalty up & loyalty down"?  In the example I gave earlier, different people would have very different answers depending on the government in power and the solution being proposed.

... imagine if the CDS stood with the forces and called out the governments BS, firing him would make the government look guilty by removing a critic.

But if the same CDS stood up to the previous government, would he have been seen as a hero or disloyal?  That's what I mean about "good for the goose, good for the gander" -- naive as it sounds, "right" and "wrong" can coloured in a pretty partisan way in such situations.

 

[jollyjacktar]

Ah, but who defines the "good of the service and country"?  And what if there's a conflict between good of the service and good of the country?  Remember "loyalty up & loyalty down"?  In the example I gave earlier, different people would have very different answers depending on the government in power and the solution being proposed.But if the same CDS stood up to the previous government, would he have been seen as a hero or disloyal?  That's what I mean about "good for the goose, good for the gander" -- naive as it sounds, "right" and "wrong" can coloured in a pretty partisan way in such situations.

You missed the third proviso, "and should be done".  I know, I know, you'll respond "who decides that..."  all I can say as don't ask me, I'm not an Admiral, just a plebe.

 

[FSTO]

Ah, but who defines the "good of the service and country"?  And what if there's a conflict between good of the service and good of the country?  Remember "loyalty up & loyalty down"?  In the example I gave earlier, different people would have very different answers depending on the government in power and the solution being proposed.But if the same CDS stood up to the previous government, would he have been seen as a hero or disloyal?  That's what I mean about "good for the goose, good for the gander" -- naive as it sounds, "right" and "wrong" can coloured in a pretty partisan way in such situations.

Okay I'll bite.
I wasn't too pleased with the Davie proposal when it first came out because my perception was coloured by previous Davie production issues and I was worried about the product and timeline. I have been proven wrong and now see that there is tangible evidence that this way of getting a critical piece of capability may just work. Seeing that blatant politics are involved in attempting to pause or kill this project caused the Admiral to put his career on the line. I hope I would have the same opinion if this was team blue in the spotlight not team red, although the real enemy (IMHO of course) is Irving and the faceless bureaucrats at DND/TB/Public Works.

 

[jollyjacktar]

Project Resolve won me over too.  We need this ship's capability and if what the Admiral did, saved the day and all, then I support his actions 100%.

 

[Stoker]

Project Resolve won me over too.  We need this ship's capability and if what the Admiral did, saved the day and all, then I support his actions 100%.

I agree but sadly that won't save his career. What he did was wrong but he did it for the right reasons in my opinion.

 

[Rifleman62]

To often we see flag officers hold back until they are retiring, they let it all out and get 15 seconds of fame and it's gone. Now a public battle over political interference, that would give the government a black eye, imagine if the CDS stood with the forces and called out the governments BS, firing him would make the government look guilty by removing a critic.

The CDS, the Command of the RCAF (and the CFCWO/CCWO) re the CF-18 replacement Super Hornet/ F-35?

 

[Navy_Pete]

Was Davie actually in contract at this point if it was awarded by the Conservative government before the election?  Not clear if the contract decision was made but not actually signed between Canada and Davie.

I can see why this would be potentially considered unprofessional, but the duty to the elected officials vice Canadian interests can get fuzzy.  Certainly don't see anything suggesting this was for anything but the benefit of the Navy though.

 

[Kirkhill]

37. On July 31, 2015, the Government of Canada signed a Letter of Intent with
Chantier Davie and Project Resolve Inc. (Chantier Davie) to start negotiations for
the procurement of services agreement for an interim AOR ship. The relevant
clauses of the Letter of Intent are set out as follows:
i. The Government of Canada will enter into a non-competitive
Contract with Chantier Davie to retrofit an AOR for approximately
$667M.
ii. Should the Government of Canada decide to not award the contract
To Chantier Davie by November 30, 2015, the Government of
Canada is to reimburse Chantier Davie’s costs up to $89M.

(Transcribed from the RCMP deposition referenced here - http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/rcmp-allege-mark-norman-leaked-cabinet-secrets-to-pressure-government-1.3385461?autoPlay=true )

 

[Kirkhill]

An even more interesting piece of information, IMO, is on page 49 of 97, under Appendix A.
http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/rcmp-allege-mark-norman-leaked-cabinet-secrets-to-pressure-government-1.3385461?autoPlay=true

It is the "Briefing Note - Project Resolve AOR Gap Filler Solution" dated November 19, 2015.

It states "In December 2014 (Redacted) Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) invited the domestic and international marine industry to provide solutions to cover the Royal Canadian Navy's five-ten year operational gap in Auxiliary Oiler Replenishment ship (AOR) capability:

A competitive process, including a thorough industry consultation and industry event, was completed by PWGSC, the Department of National Defence (DND) and the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) in January 2015.

As a result Canada selected Davie's solution, Project Resolve and has been negotiating with Davie on contract terms and conditions since June 24th, 2015 and terms and conditions are now agreed."

So the claim here is that in December 2014 the Government of Canada requested solutions from industry at large.
Industry was consulted and submissions received and decision made in favour of Davie by January 2015.
Terms and conditions were hashed out by St-Jean Baptiste Day, June 24 2015 and a Letter of Intent signed.

This from Irving Shipyard

Statement from Irving Shipbuilding Regarding CTV Power Play Report on Refitting Commercial Ships to meet Canada’s Navy Need

May 25, 2015 : Statement from Irving Shipbuilding Regarding CTV Power Play Report on Refitting Commercial Ships to meet Canada’s Navy Need

CTV host Mercedes Stephenson and participants in the panel, along with CTV's online story, suggested that "Quebec's Davie Shipyard will be granted the contract." However, Irving Shipbuilding understands that the Government has not yet fully evaluated all industry proposals and has not determined which proposal will be selected.

At the request of the Federal Government in the fall of 2014, Irving Shipbuilding submitted a comprehensive proposal and we have collectively spent a significant amount of time and money developing an innovative, low-risk, rapid, and low-cost ship conversion and crewing proposal. We expect that our proposal will be evaluated by the Government in an open, transparent, and fair manner and that the proposal that offers the best value to Canada will be selected.

We are very confident that our proposal is superior. It provides tremendous capability and flexibility to meet the needs of Canada's Navy in the shortest possible time, with the lowest risk based on modular construction in our new $350 million world-class shipbuilding facilities in Halifax.

We currently have over 400 workers on layoff. The conversion of a commercial ship to meet Canada's needs by the qualified Irving Shipbuilding team will allow us to recall workers on layoff, leveling our work force needs over the next two years and ensuring a smooth transition to building the Arctic Offshore Supply Ships.

Our workforce is ready and anxious to come back to work. Canada can rely on the reputation and the proven track record of the Irving Shipbuilding team to deliver this much needed capability.

We eagerly await the completion of this procurement by Canada in an open, transparent, and fair manner that achieves the best value for Canada.

-END-

CONTACT:

Mary Keith
Vice President, Communications
Irving Shipbuilding
(506) 632-5122 office
keith.mary@jdirving.com

http://www.irvingshipbuilding.com/BlogPage.aspx?id=604&blogid=315

Not only is this job being done cheap and fast (the third leg of the triangle, well, remains to be seen) but it also appears to have broken records for managing a "competitive" process.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Tough question, but if it's for the good of the service and country and should be done... then yes.  Too many times we've been saddled with crap just because it buys votes here and there.  LSVWs and Kim Campbell comes to mind.

As long as they passed the online CTAT training, just like every Class A rookie, they should be good to go, right?

 

[TCM621]

Ah, but who defines the "good of the service and country"?  And what if there's a conflict between good of the service and good of the country?  Remember "loyalty up & loyalty down"?  In the example I gave earlier, different people would have very different answers depending on the government in power and the solution being proposed.But if the same CDS stood up to the previous government, would he have been seen as a hero or disloyal?  That's what I mean about "good for the goose, good for the gander" -- naive as it sounds, "right" and "wrong" can coloured in a pretty partisan way in such situations.

The answer to that is easy. Rick Hillier is seen as a hero by most. I like the idea that Norman was willing to fight to get us what we need but he should have done it publicly. He tried to get what he wanted and not have any of the consequences that come with it. If he had taken all of this public and resigned we would be having a very different conversation.

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

 

[FSTO]

The answer to that is easy. Rick Hillier is seen as a hero by most. I like the idea that Norman was willing to fight to get us what we need but he should have done it publicly. He tried to get what he wanted and not have any of the consequences that come with it. If he had taken all of this public and resigned we would be having a very different conversation.

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

There would have been no conversation at all because everything would be buried by the government and bureaucrats. GOFO's have resigned before over principles and nothing has changed. Admiral Norman may go down in flames but at the very least he has opened the door on the seedy underbelly of defence procurement.

 

[NavyShooter]

Not only is this job being done cheap and fast (the third leg of the triangle, well, remains to be seen) but it also appears to have broken records for managing a "competitive" process.

Even if the 3rd leg of the triangle ends up just being 'good enough'  I think we'll be ahead on this one.

 

[Monsoon]

Mckay's comment to Brison to "Get your head out of your ***" proves (to me) that the Liberals were going to kill the project on purely partisan reasons and not for the best interests of the Navy and the Canadian public.

Remember that Brison is the ranking member of cabinet from Atlantic Canada, and as such is the de facto "Minister Responsible for J.D. Irving" (and is thick as thieves with them). He also seems to have been the minister who officially sicced the RCMP investigation on Norman, and despite the leak that attributed the decision to Trudeau, I have a hunch the idea originated with Brison (and the leak blaming Trudeau too).

The Globe article goes out of it's way to highlight the curious fact that the RCMP didn't bother to interview as part of their investigation the very journalist who produced the article that contained the alleged cabinet confidence. Almost as if they already knew what he'd have to say...

 

[The Bread Guy]

A couple of more renditions of the story, based on the same source document (via Scribd.com - well done CTV for sharing) - one from The Canadian Press ...

The military's second-in-command leaked cabinet secrets to a shipbuilding executive as a means of pressuring the Liberal government to approve a $700-million contract, the RCMP alleges in newly disclosed court documents.

The Mounties say Vice-Admiral Mark Norman used his position to provide cabinet confidences to Spencer Fraser, chief executive of a special arm of Quebec City shipyard Chantier Davie that was in charge of a tentative project to convert a civilian ship into an interim navy supply vessel.

In turn, Fraser passed the information on to lobbyists and the media with the aim of ensuring final federal approval of the project, RCMP Cpl. Matthieu Boulanger says in his Jan. 4 request for a warrant to search Norman's house.

Ontario Superior Court had released a heavily censored version of the documents earlier this month. A fuller version was disclosed Wednesday after the Globe and Mail and other media successfully argued in court that the public had a right to know more about the allegations.

The RCMP request for a search warrant was part of a months-long investigation into how details of a Liberal cabinet meeting in November 2015 were passed on to defence lobbyists and the media.

During that meeting, Liberal ministers decided to push pause on the controversial ship conversion project.

"Norman was opposed to the delay in the (project) process proposed by cabinet and leaked information subject to cabinet confidence in order to achieve the result that he wanted personally," Boulanger alleges in his request for the warrant.

The Conservative government had awarded the $700-million project to Chantier Davie without a competition after the navy's previous two resupply vessels were forced into early retirement.

The request to search Norman's house came after the RCMP had already interviewed several senior Liberal cabinet ministers as well as influential Ottawa lobbyists about the alleged leak.

In his request, Boulanger says there were "reasonable grounds" to believe there had been a "breach of trust by a public officer," a crime punishable by up to five years in prison.

No charges have been laid against Norman, who was appointed as vice-chief of the defence staff in August 2016, then abruptly suspended from that role without explanation on Jan. 16 by his superior officer, defence chief Gen. Jonathan Vance.

Norman's lawyer, Marie Henein, said in a statement in February that the 36-year military officer "unequivocally denies any wrongdoing." ...

... and one from the Toronto Star:

Vice-Admiral Mark Norman leaked secret cabinet confidences to an executive with a Quebec shipbuilding firm and coached him on how to use the media to pressure the Liberal government to move ahead with a supply ship contract that he favoured, a court document alleges.

An RCMP affidavit made public Wednesday sheds new light on the police investigation that forced Norman’s surprise removal as the second-in-command of Canada’s military in January.

And it provides a window into the cutthroat, high-stakes world of military procurement, where companies wield political influence and backroom discussions in the fight for lucrative contracts.

But now Norman’s long military career is under a cloud and in limbo as Mounties probe his alleged role in leaking classified information to Spencer Fraser, CEO of Project Resolve Inc., which was created by the Chantier Davie shipyard in Quebec to manage construction of an interim supply ship for the Canadian navy.

In the affidavit, RCMP Cpl. Matthieu Boulanger alleges that Norman, “contrary to his obligation” as a public official, used his position as a senior navy officer to “willfully provide, on an ongoing basis, information subject to cabinet confidence” to Fraser.

“I believe Norman did this to influence decision-makers within government to adopt his preferred outcome,” the police officer states.

Norman gave Fraser “continuous updates” of secret information related to the supply ship, known as auxiliary oiler replenishment (AOR), directed the executive to discredit a critic of the project and “advised Fraser on the amount of pressure to apply toward government through the media.”

Boulanger alleges that Norman leaked confidential information about the ship contract to Fraser so that he could compel the new government to approve the deal for the new ship without delay.

“Norman was opposed to the delay in the AOR process proposed by cabinet and leaked information subject to cabinet confidence in order to achieve the result he wanted personally,” Boulanger wrote.

Boulanger, attached to the RCMP unit that handles sensitive and international investigations, says he has “reasonable” grounds to suspect two individuals leaked classified information, though the other person is not named.

According to the affidavit, the RCMP are investigating potential wrongdoing that includes breach of trust by a public officer, under the Criminal Code, and wrongful communication of information and allowing possession of document, two offences under the security of information act.

At the heart of the leaks is a contract given to Chantier Davie shipyard in Quebec to retrofit a private ship to serve as an ocean-going delivery vessel to carry fuel and supplies to Canadian warships deployed on missions.

There was an urgent need for the stopgap measure after two resupply ships were taken out of service in 2014, leaving the navy with no means to replenish its vessels at sea.

The RCMP say they suspect Norman leaked the classified cabinet information to Fraser, who in turn provided updates to the shipbuilding team in Quebec.

“A review of Fraser’s emails demonstrates that Fraser had a source of information he referred to as ‘our friend’ and that this source, I believe, was Norman,” the affidavit states.

Norman, it’s alleged, supplied Fraser with insider knowledge of the ship contract, providing the shipyard with “insight” on how to mitigate concerns ...

 

[The Bread Guy]

You missed the third proviso, "and should be done".  I know, I know, you'll respond "who decides that..."  all I can say as don't ask me, I'm not an Admiral, just a plebe.

Just caught this - if it's any comfort, you're in good company in being a plebe (myself included in that group)  ;D

 

[Rifleman62]

Boulanger, attached to the RCMP unit that handles sensitive and international investigations, says he has “reasonable” grounds to suspect two individuals leaked classified information, though the other person is not named.

Why has the second person not been named? A Liberal MP from PQ, or the PQ riding where Davie is located? (I am not PQ bashing). There has to be a reason why the name has not been released.