Strengthening trust in Canada’s defence partnerships

Canada’s framework is set. Now comes the harder part: making it work at speed

In January 2026, we outlined how procurement is Canada's most powerful lever for defence transformation. Realizing its potential requires reinventing the relationship between government and industry. Six months later, the government put the architecture in place to do exactly that.

Canada’s strategic partnership framework operationalizes an ambitious new model: government commits operational priorities and funding; industry commits capability, investment, and delivery; and both sides commit to measurable outcomes over five-year cycles. The Defence Investment Agency (DIA) coordinates the partnership. The model is already in operation. MDA Space and Telesat were designated as strategic partners for the Enhanced Satellite Communication Project – Polar (ESCP-P) in December 2025. The partnership will deliver secure MILSATCOM capabilities essential to the Canadian Armed Forces’ (CAF) Arctic sovereignty operations. More recently, the government named General Dynamics Land Systems–Canada a strategic partner as part of an agreement to deliver 190 armoured combat support vehicles to the CAF. The strategic partnership framework now faces real-world tests: defence capability requirements, operational timelines, and fiscal accountability demands.

Here’s the tension: the DIA has unprecedented power to move at speed—but no established playbook for accountability. Without clear governance, partnerships could collapse publicly. Parliamentary scrutiny would follow. Industry confidence wanes. Canada loses the strategic partners it needs. Get the architecture right now, and both sides can win.

Three structural requirements in particular will determine whether the model delivers: translating dialogue between government and industry, building trust through accountability, and defining measurable commitments upfront.  

Strategic partnerships layer a relationship above individual contracts. Within each partnership, directed procurements will still produce binding contracts with enforceable terms. But the strategic relationship that governs which procurements are directed and how the partnership evolves sits in a non-binding memorandum of understanding (MOU). There’s no fixed specification to bid against and no contract to adjudicate misalignment. Instead, there’s dialogue: government sharing CAF priorities and requirements; industry bringing capabilities and innovation.

The translation challenge lives here. Government and industry operate in fundamentally different environments. Government prioritizes responsible stewardship of public dollars, decision-making accountability, and strategic flexibility. Industry prioritizes return on capital, speed to market, and investment certainty. These different operating environments shape how each side communicates and what they infer from what the other says. This challenge is especially acute for two company categories the framework targets: manufacturers with deep industrial capability but no defence track record, and international firms establishing new Canadian entities to meet the framework’s “Canadian company” definition.

Both government and industry can benefit from intermediaries who convert their strengths into the framework’s language while honestly representing their constraints. A trusted advisor with deep experience working with government and industry can help each side understand what the other is actually asking for and what it can realistically deliver. This keeps conversations focused on capability and removes miscommunications that create friction.

The result: the conversations between industry and government stay focused on capability delivery rather than defaulting to cost disputes. Government gains confidence that it understands industry’s requirements and capabilities. Industry can make long-term investments with confidence because expectations are clear from the start. And the partnership moves faster because both sides share a common understanding from day one.  

The MOU is the connective tissue of a strategic partnership. The framework provides general expectations but no template. Each MOU must define key performance indicators (KPIs), establish reporting cadences and escalation mechanisms, define the evidentiary standards that constitute proof of investment or intellectual property development, and create flexibility for when CAF requirements change mid-cycle.

The five-year review is the framework’s enforcement mechanism. Its credibility depends entirely on what’s written into the MOU at the outset. Vague commitments, such as investing “meaningfully” in R&D and contributing “substantively” to supply chains, produce vague reviews. Specific, measurable commitments with agreed evidentiary standards produce reviews that support clear decisions to continue, expand, or terminate the relationship. But getting from vague to measurable requires more than good intentions.

The DIA has finite capacity and faces an inherent tension: it’s both a partnership advocate and accountability steward. A qualified third party can bridge this gap. They help both sides translate ambition into measurable terms, then monitor whether commitments are being met. This removes a significant adversarial dynamic and gives government the objective assurance it needs.

The initial MOUs will set the precedent for every partnership that follows. Getting the architecture right now will help the DIA execute its mandate effectively.  

The first strategic partner designations are in place. Further designations will follow as the DIA scales its capacity. Future MOUs will be shaped by what works, and what doesn’t, in these first relationships.

Partnerships that fail to deliver value undermine public confidence. And once that confidence erodes, the momentum behind Canada’s defence investments could stall.

But public trust can grow if partnerships deliver new capabilities to the CAF on time and on budget, if strategic partners help grow the Canadian economy, and if government demonstrates it can steward defence dollars more effectively. Our industrial base gains strength. Public-private collaboration helps accelerate Canada’s advantage.

The vision and architecture are in place. What’s needed now is the expertise and objectivity to make it work.  

We bring deep defence, public-sector, and industry experience to help government navigate the complexities of strategic partnerships. This includes:

• Strategic translation: Helping government and industry communicate clearly across their different operating environments and reducing friction points in their relationship. We help translate operational needs into industrial requirements and communicate industrial constraints that can inform procurement decisions.
• Financial and performance verification: Prospective price assurance and ongoing MOU-level performance monitoring that gives the five-year review an evidentiary foundation.
• Governance design: MOU architecture, KPI frameworks, and review methodology built before the partnership begins, so accountability is embedded from day one rather than improvised at year five.