Arms Exports
The Accountability Gap

01 — CANADA’S ARMS INDUSTRYThe Country That Sells Weapons and Pretends It Doesn’t

Canadians like to imagine their country as a peacekeeper. The men who fought at Vimy, cleared the Scheldt, liberated Holland, held the line in Korea — they built a reputation with blood. That reputation is now used as a sales brochure for defence contractors. Canada is the 16th-largest arms exporter globally, shipping $3–4 billion in military goods annually to buyers on every continent.^[1]

The Red Ensign generation built Canada’s defence industry to defend. Not to profit from other people’s wars. Not to arm regimes that bomb school buses. The men who landed at Juno Beach would be sick to see what’s been done with the industrial base they built.

The scale of Canada’s arms exports is deliberately obscured. GAC reports use opaque categories (“Group 2 military goods”), publish data 18+ months late, and aggregate figures that make it difficult to trace specific equipment to specific conflicts. This is not accidental. Transparency is the enemy of arms deals that cannot survive public scrutiny. The data below is drawn from the most recent available sources and represents the clearest picture publicly available.

Top Military Export Destinations (2022)

The LAV — What It Actually Is

Canadians are told these are “light armoured vehicles.” The word “light” is doing heavy lifting. The LAV 6.0 is a 28-tonne infantry fighting vehicle armed with a 25mm chain gun, a 7.62mm coaxial machine gun, and capable of mounting anti-tank missiles. It carries a crew of three and seven infantry soldiers. It is designed to advance under fire, suppress enemy positions, and deliver troops into combat. It is not a jeep. It is not a patrol vehicle. It is a weapon of war.^[4]

Every Canadian veteran who served in Afghanistan knows the LAV III — the predecessor. They rode in them through Kandahar Province. They fought from them. They lost friends in them. The LAV 6.0 sold to Saudi Arabia is a more capable version: better armour, better optics, better survivability. When you sell 928 of them to a country bombing Yemen, you are not selling “equipment.” You are selling combat capability to a regime conducting airstrikes on civilian infrastructure.

Key Defence Industry Players

02 — THE SAUDI LAV DEAL$15 Billion in Armoured Vehicles to a Regime That Beheads Dissidents

In 2014, the Harper government signed the largest arms export contract in Canadian history: $15 billion for 928 LAV 6.0 light armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia. The manufacturer: General Dynamics Land Systems Canada (GDLS-C), based in London, Ontario. The broker: the Canadian Commercial Corporation (CCC), a Crown corporation that acts as prime contractor on government-to-government defence sales.^[4]

Export permits were approved by Global Affairs Canada (GAC). When Trudeau took office in 2015, the deal continued. When Saudi agents murdered journalist Jamal Khashoggi inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on October 2, 2018, calls to cancel the deal surged. Trudeau refused, citing contract penalties estimated at $10 billion or more.^[6]

In 2019, Canada ratified the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) and passed Bill C-47 to update export controls. The Saudi deal continued anyway. The ATT requires states to deny export permits where there is a “substantial risk” of serious violations of international humanitarian law. Canada ratified the treaty and then ignored it.^[7]

Timeline: The Saudi LAV Deal

03 — YEMENWhere Canadian Weapons Kill

Every veteran who served in a Canadian uniform knows what a LAV can do. The LAV III carried Canadian soldiers through Kandahar. It is a serious weapon of war. When you sell 928 of them to a country actively bombing its neighbour, you know what happens next. You know.

The Saudi-led coalition began its military intervention in Yemen in March 2015. What followed is what the United Nations has called “the worst humanitarian crisis in the world.”^[5]

The School Bus

On August 9, 2018, a Saudi coalition airstrike hit a school bus in Dahyan, northern Yemen. 40 children were killed. The youngest was six years old. The bomb was traced to a Lockheed Martin MK-82 guided munition sold to Saudi Arabia by the United States. Canadian LAVs were deployed with the same coalition forces conducting these operations.^[13]

A veteran who cleared mines in Afghanistan so that Afghan children could walk to school — imagine telling that veteran his country is selling armoured vehicles to the coalition that bombs school buses. That is what Canada has done.

The Scale of Civilian Harm

The numbers above are not abstractions. The Yemen Data Project tracked over 23,000 airstrikes by the Saudi-led coalition between March 2015 and March 2022. One-third hit non-military targets: markets, hospitals, schools, water infrastructure, and funeral halls.^[5]

• October 8, 2016 — Coalition airstrike hits a funeral hall in Sanaa. 140+ killed, 500+ injured. The deadliest single strike of the war. UN Panel of Experts found it constituted a violation of IHL.^[5]
• March 2016 — Mustaba market, Hajjah province: 97+ civilians killed by coalition airstrikes on a crowded market.^[12]
• August 2018 — Dahyan school bus strike: 40 children killed. The youngest was six.^[13]
• January 2022 — Saada detention centre airstrike: 91+ killed, including migrants and detainees.^[12]
• Ongoing — Saudi-imposed blockade restricts food, fuel, and medicine. 17.4 million people food-insecure. Cholera outbreaks: 2.5 million+ suspected cases since 2016.^[12]

This is the coalition Canada armed. These are the forces using equipment made in London, Ontario. Every LAV that rolled off the GDLS-C production line and onto a ship bound for Saudi Arabia contributed to the military capability of a coalition that the UN has found to have committed systematic violations of international humanitarian law.

Canadian Weapons Documented in Conflict

Amnesty International and open-source investigators have documented Canadian-made LAVs deployed in the Yemen conflict zone and in Saudi Arabia’s military operations against Shia communities in the Eastern Province. In 2016, video footage emerged showing what appeared to be Canadian-made LAVs deployed in Awamiyah, Eastern Province.^[8]

End-use certificates: Global Affairs Canada requires them for all military exports. Saudi Arabia signed end-use assurances that the vehicles would not be transferred to third parties and would be used in accordance with international humanitarian law. Enforcement of these assurances is virtually non-existent. Canada has no personnel on the ground verifying end-use. The certificates are paper promises from a regime that murdered a journalist with a bone saw.^[9]

04 — EXPORT CONTROLSThe Paper Tiger

Canada has export control laws. On paper, they look thorough. In practice, they are a rubber stamp. The men who served in the Korean War would recognize this: officers who file paperwork instead of making decisions. Bureaucratic cowardice dressed up as process.

The Legal Framework

• Export and Import Permits Act (EIPA) — The primary legislation governing military exports. Requires permits for all Group 2 (military) goods. Minister of Foreign Affairs has final authority on permits.^[14]
• Bill C-47 (2019) — Implemented Canada’s obligations under the Arms Trade Treaty. Added a “substantial risk” test: if there is a substantial risk that exported goods would be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international humanitarian law, the permit must be denied.^[7]
• Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) — Canada signed in 2013, ratified in September 2019. Articles 6 and 7 require risk assessment before authorizing arms exports. Canada ratified the treaty while continuing to export LAVs to Saudi Arabia.^[7]
• Automatic Firearms Country Control List — Restricts exports of automatic weapons to approved countries. Does not cover LAVs.^[14]
• Area Control List — Restricts all exports to designated countries. Saudi Arabia was never placed on this list despite the Yemen war.^[14]

What the Auditor General Found

The Auditor General of Canada has examined the export permit process and found systemic weaknesses:

• Risk assessments were incomplete and inconsistent across permits.
• No systematic post-export monitoring of end-use compliance.
• GAC lacked sufficient staff and resources for thorough human rights assessments.
• Export reports were chronically delayed — often published 18+ months after the reporting period.
• Information provided to Parliament was incomplete, making meaningful oversight impossible.^[15]

Canada vs. Allied Export Controls

The Netherlands suspended arms exports to Saudi Arabia in 2013. Germany suspended them in 2018 after the Khashoggi murder. Canada — which ratified the same Arms Trade Treaty — continued shipping LAVs throughout. The “substantial risk” test in Bill C-47 was written to sound rigorous. It has been applied to deny almost nothing.^[7][9]

The “Substantial Risk” Test — How It Fails

Bill C-47 states that the Minister “shall deny” an export permit if there is a “substantial risk” that the goods would be used to commit or facilitate:

• Serious violations of international humanitarian law (IHL)
• Serious violations of international human rights law
• Acts of terrorism
• Serious acts of gender-based violence or serious acts of violence against women and children^[7]

The problem: “substantial risk” is not defined in the legislation. There is no threshold, no criteria, no independent review mechanism. The Minister makes the determination based on internal GAC assessments that are not made public. When Saudi Arabia is bombing funeral halls and school buses with the same coalition forces using Canadian equipment, and the Minister determines there is no “substantial risk” — the test is meaningless.

Furthermore, Bill C-47 includes a grandfather clause: permits issued before the legislation came into force were not subject to the new test. The Saudi LAV deal permits, signed years earlier, continued without reassessment under the new criteria. The law was written to look good while protecting the deal that mattered most.^[7][9]

Hansard Record: Parliamentary Debate

When Bill C-47 was debated in Parliament, opposition MPs pressed the government on whether the new law would affect the Saudi deal. The government declined to provide a clear answer. NDP MPs repeatedly called for the deal’s cancellation. Conservative MPs defended the deal they had originally signed. The bill passed with bipartisan support — and changed nothing about the Saudi contract. Hansard records these debates in full, and they make for instructive reading on how both major parties prioritize defence industry revenue over human rights commitments.^[7]

05 — THE LOBBYING MACHINEHow Defence Contractors Buy Policy

The men who served in the Second World War came home and built things. They didn’t lobby. They didn’t hire former generals to open doors. They built factories and communities. What replaced them is a lobbying machine that treats the Canadian Armed Forces as a customer base and Parliament as a sales floor.

Defence Industry Lobbying — Commissioner of Lobbying Data

The Commissioner of Lobbying of Canada maintains a public registry of all registered lobbying communications between organizations and federal officials. The defence industry is one of the most active sectors in this registry. The data paints a clear picture: defence contractors maintain constant, systematic access to the officials who approve their export permits and procurement contracts.

• Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries (CADSI) — The industry’s primary lobby group. Represents 900+ member companies. Registered lobbyists communicate regularly with DND, GAC, PMO, and Industry Canada. Hundreds of registered communications annually.^[16]
• General Dynamics — Parent company of GDLS-C. Multiple registered lobbyists in Ottawa. Direct communications with the Minister of National Defence, Minister of Foreign Affairs, and PMO staff on the Saudi contract and export permits.^[16]
• Canadian Commercial Corporation (CCC) — The Crown corporation that brokered the Saudi deal itself lobbies other departments on defence export policy. This means a government entity is lobbying other government entities to continue a deal that benefits the first government entity. The conflict of interest is structural and documented.^[16]
• L3Harris Technologies, CAE, Lockheed Martin Canada, Boeing Canada — All maintain active lobbying operations in Ottawa. Their combined lobbying communications number in the hundreds per year across multiple government departments.^[16]

The Revolving Door

Senior Department of National Defence officials and Canadian Forces officers retire and move directly into defence contractor positions. This is not speculation — it is registered in the Commissioner of Lobbying database. It is the same pattern the Red Ensign generation would recognize from wartime profiteering: people who were supposed to serve the public interest instead serve the companies that sell to the government they just left.

• Former DND Assistant Deputy Ministers have taken positions with major defence contractors within months of leaving government. They bring institutional knowledge of procurement timelines, pending contracts, and decision-maker preferences.^[16]
• Retired generals and flag officers routinely join defence industry boards and advisory roles. Their Rolodex of serving officers and civilian officials is the primary asset they offer.^[17]
• The Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner has flagged concerns about post-employment cooling-off periods being inadequate for senior defence officials. The current one-year cooling-off period for most officials is trivially short for deals that take 5–10 years to finalize.^[17]
• CADSI’s annual conference — CANSEC — is the largest defence trade show in Canada. Serving DND officials, military officers, and politicians attend alongside contractors who sell to the same department. It is a networking event where relationships are built that later become lobbying channels.^[3]
• The revolving door does not just create perceived conflicts of interest — it creates structural ones. Officials making export permit decisions know that their future employers may be the companies applying for those permits.^[17]

Campaign Finance and the Defence Sector

Under Elections Canada rules, corporations cannot donate directly to federal political parties. However, executives and employees of defence companies donate individually, and the industry funds advocacy organizations and events that provide access to politicians. CADSI members collectively represent a significant source of individual political donations across both major parties.^[18]

The result: when the Khashoggi murder created public pressure to cancel the Saudi deal, both parties had financial and political incentives to keep the LAVs flowing. The $15-billion contract meant jobs in London, Ontario — a swing riding. It meant revenue for a major employer. And it meant continued access and goodwill from the defence lobby.

06 — OTHER CONTROVERSIAL EXPORTSSaudi Arabia Is Not the Only Problem

The Saudi deal is the largest and most visible case. It is not the only one. Canada has a pattern of exporting military goods to countries with serious human rights concerns, then claiming ignorance when those weapons appear in conflict zones. The pattern is consistent across governments: permit the export, collect the revenue, issue a statement of concern when media attention peaks, then quietly resume permits when the news cycle moves on.

07 — JOBS VS. ETHICSThe Defence Industry’s Moral Hostage-Taking

The argument is always the same: if we cancel the Saudi deal, the plant closes and 2,700 people lose their jobs. It is the argument of a hostage-taker. “Do what we want or people get hurt.” The Red Ensign generation would call it what it is: blackmail.

General Dynamics Land Systems Canada — London, Ontario

• 2,700+ direct jobs at the GDLS-C plant in London, Ontario.^[4]
• Thousands more in the Canadian supply chain — parts, components, sub-assemblies from companies across Ontario and Quebec.^[3]
• London, Ontario, is a swing riding. Both parties are acutely aware that cancelling the deal would cost votes in a city already hit by manufacturing decline.^[6]
• General Dynamics (parent company) reported $42.4 billion in global revenue in 2023. The Canadian operation is a fraction of the company’s business. The “plant closure” argument assumes the parent company would abandon its Canadian facility entirely rather than pivot to other contracts.^[21]

The Counter-Argument: Norway and Sweden

Countries with comparable populations and industrial bases maintain defence industries without selling to human rights violators:

Norway has 5.5 million people and maintains a world-class defence industry. Sweden has 10.5 million and does the same. Both refuse to sell to Saudi Arabia. Their defence workers still have jobs. The “jobs or ethics” framing is a false choice manufactured by the industry and amplified by politicians who lack the courage to say no.

The Veteran’s Perspective

The men who served in the LAV III in Kandahar — who watched friends die in those vehicles, who trusted their lives to Canadian-made armour — have a right to ask: what is being done with the next generation of the vehicle we bled in?

Canadian veterans carried the Maple Leaf into combat in Afghanistan to protect civilians from the Taliban. They fought to keep roads open so that Afghan children could go to school. And now the upgraded version of their vehicle is deployed with a coalition that bombs school buses in Yemen. The disconnect between what Canadian soldiers fought for and what Canadian factories now produce is not lost on the people who served.

The defence industry will argue that the LAV 6.0 is a “different variant” or that it’s “just a platform.” The men who rode into combat in a LAV know better. A weapon system is a weapon system. You don’t sell 928 of them to a country at war and pretend you’re selling tractors.

Irving Shipbuilding and the National Shipbuilding Strategy

The National Shipbuilding Strategy (NSS) demonstrates that Canada can sustain defence industry jobs building equipment for its own military. Irving Shipbuilding in Halifax is constructing the Arctic and Offshore Patrol Ships (AOPS) and will build the Canadian Surface Combatant frigates — contracts worth $60+ billion combined. These projects create thousands of Canadian jobs building ships for the Royal Canadian Navy, not for foreign regimes.^[23]

The ethical framework that is missing from Canadian defence exports is simple: build for Canada and its allies. Do not arm regimes that bomb school buses. Norway and Sweden prove it can be done. The men who built the corvettes that won the Battle of the Atlantic would agree.

08 — WHAT MUST CHANGEReforms That Would Actually Work

The system is broken by design. Export controls exist to create the appearance of oversight while ensuring the deals go through. Fixing it requires structural reform, not more statements of concern. Every reform below has been implemented by at least one Canadian ally. None of them are radical. All of them are overdue.

The Accountability Chain

Both major parties are directly implicated. There is no partisan escape hatch on this issue:

This is not a Liberal problem or a Conservative problem. It is a Canadian problem. The entire political establishment participated in selling 928 armoured vehicles to a regime that uses its military to bomb weddings and starve children. Until both parties acknowledge their role and implement structural reform, the accountability gap remains.

DATACanadian Military Exports by Year

The following table summarizes publicly available data on Canadian military exports (Group 2 goods) from Global Affairs Canada annual reports. Note that reports are chronically delayed and data may be incomplete. The Saudi-specific column tracks the approximate value of military goods exported to Saudi Arabia each year, driven primarily by LAV 6.0 deliveries under the $15B contract.

Two things stand out in this data. First: exports to Saudi Arabia accelerated after the Yemen war began in 2015, peaking at $2.9B in 2019 — the same year Canada ratified the Arms Trade Treaty. Second: even after the Khashoggi murder and the school bus strike in 2018, exports did not decrease. They increased. The data tells the story that official statements try to obscure.

Key Questions for Parliament

Based on the data above, any parliamentarian with the courage to ask should put the following questions on the record in Hansard:

• End-use verification: How many post-shipment inspections of Canadian LAVs in Saudi Arabia has Canada conducted since 2014? If zero, how does GAC justify its finding of “no credible evidence” of IHL violations?
• Contract penalties: What is the actual contractual penalty for cancellation of the Saudi LAV deal? The $10B figure has been cited without documentation. The contract itself has never been made public. What are the specific penalty clauses?
• ATT compliance: How does Canada’s continued export of armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia comply with Articles 6 and 7 of the Arms Trade Treaty, which Canada ratified in 2019?
• CCC conflict of interest: How does Canada reconcile the Canadian Commercial Corporation’s role as both the broker of the Saudi deal (earning revenue from the sale) and the government’s role as export permit regulator? Is the government auditing its own revenue stream?
• Delayed reporting: Why are GAC annual reports on military exports consistently published 18+ months after the reporting period? What specific resources are needed to publish them on the same schedule as the Netherlands (within 6 months)?
• Grandfathered permits: How many pre-Bill C-47 permits remain active for Saudi Arabia? Have any been reassessed under the “substantial risk” test? If not, why not?
• Yemen death toll: Given the UN’s finding of 377,000+ deaths in Yemen and documented coalition strikes on civilian infrastructure, what threshold of civilian casualties would trigger a Canadian suspension of arms exports to Saudi coalition members?

These are not rhetorical questions. They are questions of law, treaty obligation, and basic democratic accountability. Every Canadian has the right to know the answers. Every parliamentarian has the obligation to demand them.

CLOSINGThe Red Ensign Standard

The men who fought under the Red Ensign knew what weapons do. They carried Lee-Enfields through the mud of the Scheldt. They crewed Sherman tanks through the Rhineland. They sailed corvettes through U-boat wolf packs in the North Atlantic. They did not romanticize weapons. They did not euphemize them as “defence products” or “military goods.” They knew that every weapon built has one purpose: to destroy something or kill someone.

When those men came home, they built the industries that would defend Canada. They expected those industries to serve their country — not to sell armoured vehicles to foreign regimes that bomb school buses, starve children, and murder journalists. The industrial base they built was a trust. It has been betrayed.

This is not a partisan issue. Harper signed the deal because it was profitable. Trudeau kept it because cancelling was expensive. Both chose money over principle. Both chose defence industry revenue over the lives of Yemeni children. And neither party has been held accountable by the Canadian public, because the information needed for accountability — export permit data, end-use verification, contract penalty clauses — is deliberately withheld from public scrutiny.

The standard the Red Ensign generation set was simple: Canada defends. Canada does not arm aggressors. That standard has been abandoned. It must be restored. And the people who abandoned it — in both parties, in the bureaucracy, in the defence industry lobby — must answer for it.

377,000+ dead in Yemen. 85,000 children starved. 40 children on a school bus. And Canadian-made armoured vehicles deployed with the coalition that did it. That is the legacy of the Saudi LAV deal. That is what Canada’s arms export system produced. And until it is reformed — structurally, permanently, with real transparency and real oversight — it will produce more of the same.

REFSources & References

Every claim in this article is sourced from government documents, international organizations, investigative journalism, or official registries. Where GAC data is approximate, this is noted. Readers are encouraged to verify independently.

1. [1] SIPRI Arms Transfers Database — Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. “Trends in International Arms Transfers, 2023.” SIPRI Fact Sheet, March 2024. Canada ranked 16th globally by volume of major conventional arms exports, 2019–2023 period. sipri.org/databases/armstransfers
2. [2] Global Affairs Canada — “Report on Exports of Military Goods from Canada.” Annual reports 2014–2022. Group 2 (military) goods export data by destination and category. international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/controls-controles/reports-rapports
3. [3] CADSI — Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries. “State of Canada’s Defence Industry” reports. ~70,000 direct employment figure. Annual CANSEC conference data. defenceandsecurity.ca
4. [4] The Globe and Mail — “The Saudi arms deal: The story so far.” Multiple reports, 2014–2020. $15B contract, 928 LAV 6.0 vehicles, GDLS-C London, Ontario, CCC as broker. theglobeandmail.com
5. [5] UN Development Programme — “Assessing the Impact of War in Yemen: Pathways for Recovery.” November 2021. 150,000+ direct conflict deaths; 377,000+ total deaths from conflict and indirect causes through end of 2021. undp.org
6. [6] CBC News — Multiple reports on the Saudi LAV deal, 2016–2020. Trudeau government position on contract penalties, Khashoggi response, permit reviews. cbc.ca
7. [7] Arms Trade Treaty & Bill C-47 — Arms Trade Treaty text (2013), Articles 6–7. Bill C-47, An Act to amend the Export and Import Permits Act and the Criminal Code (amendments permitting accession to the Arms Trade Treaty), 2019. Legislative summary from Library of Parliament. thearmstradetreaty.org; parl.ca
8. [8] Amnesty International — “Reckless Arms Flows to the Middle East.” Reports on Canadian LAVs documented in Saudi military operations, including Eastern Province. amnesty.org
9. [9] Project Ploughshares — “Looking Back: 2022 Canadian Military Exports” and annual analyses. End-use monitoring gaps, export control critiques. ploughshares.ca
10. [10] UN OCHA / UNDP — 377,000+ total deaths in Yemen (direct and indirect causes) per UNDP November 2021 study. Updated estimates suggest higher figures through 2023. reliefweb.int; undp.org
11. [11] Save the Children — “Dying from hunger in a war zone: Child starvation in Yemen.” November 2018. Estimated 85,000 children under 5 may have died from severe acute malnutrition and disease between April 2015 and October 2018. savethechildren.org
12. [12] UN OCHA — “Yemen Humanitarian Needs Overview.” 2023 edition. 23.4 million people in need; 4.5 million internally displaced. unocha.org
13. [13] CNN — “Bomb that killed 40 children in Yemen was supplied by the US.” August 2018. School bus strike in Dahyan, Saada province. MK-82 guided bomb traced to Lockheed Martin. cnn.com
14. [14] Export and Import Permits Act — R.S.C. 1985, c. E-19. Primary legislation governing Canadian export controls. Group 2 (military) goods, Automatic Firearms Country Control List, Area Control List. laws-lois.justice.gc.ca
15. [15] Office of the Auditor General of Canada — Reports on arms export controls, export permit processes, and GAC capacity. Findings on incomplete risk assessments, delayed reporting, and inadequate monitoring. oag-bvg.gc.ca
16. [16] Commissioner of Lobbying of Canada — Searchable lobbying registry. Registrations for CADSI, General Dynamics, CCC, L3Harris, CAE, Lockheed Martin Canada, Boeing Canada. Communications with DND, GAC, PMO, ISED. lobbycanada.gc.ca
17. [17] Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner — Annual reports. Post-employment concerns for senior DND officials. Revolving door between government and defence industry. ciec-ccie.parl.gc.ca
18. [18] Elections Canada — Individual political contributions database. Defence sector executive donations. Corporate donations prohibited since 2006; individual contributions tracked. elections.ca
19. [19] Globe and Mail / CBC — “Canada suspends drone technology exports to Turkey.” October 2020. L3Harris WESCAM sensor turrets on Bayraktar TB2 drones. Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Partial resumption 2021. theglobeandmail.com; cbc.ca
20. [20] TENET5 — The Arms Pipeline — “Canada to Israel: $229M+ despite a public ‘pause.’” Export data from GAC, Commissioner of Lobbying, CJPME. arms-pipeline.html
21. [21] General Dynamics Corporation — 2023 Annual Report. $42.4 billion global revenue. GDLS-C London, Ontario, employment and production data. gd.com
22. [22] SIPRI / Project Ploughshares — Comparative analysis of arms export controls: Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, Norway vs. Canada. Post-shipment verification models. sipri.org; ploughshares.ca
23. [23] Government of Canada — National Shipbuilding Strategy. Irving Shipbuilding (Halifax): AOPS and Canadian Surface Combatant programs. $60B+ combined value. tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/app-acq/amd-dp/mer-sea

RELATEDContinue the Investigation