F-35 Cost: Auditor General's Report Means Defence Department Will Have To Re-Cost Other Purchases, Says Peter MacKay

Posted: 04/10/2012 3:35 pm Updated: 04/11/2012 9:17 am

F35 Cost Canada Mackay
Prime Minister Stephen Harper addresses the crowd at the Halifax Shipyard in Halifax on Thursday, Jan. 12, 2012. The federal government and Irving Shipbuilding Inc. have reached an agreement in principle to build the navy's next fleet of warships. (THE CANADIAN PRESS/Andrew Vaughan)

OTTAWA - Defence Minister Peter MacKay says last week's auditor general report will force the military to recalculate the costs of tens of billions of dollars worth of planned equipment purchases.

MacKay says routine, lifetime operating costs — everything from salaries and fuel to shoe laces and boot leather — will have to be factored into the projections for new programs.

In his criticism of the F-35 stealth fighter program, auditor general Michael Ferguson took the Defence Department to task for not including $10 billion in continuing operating expenses.

Those operating costs, separate from the maintenance bills on military hardware, include such things as the salaries of pilots and the fuel that goes into the planes.

MacKay has said including those expenses is something the Defence Department has never done, but it will comply with the instructions.

"If this is the way the auditor general wishes us to present program costs in the future, to include those salaries and fuels and fixed costs, we'll do so," he said in Halifax on Tuesday.

"And that's part of the, I guess, lesson learned."

That means coming programs, such warship construction under the $33-billion National Shipbuilding Strategy, will have to be re-costed to include the salaries of sailors and other routine items.

"We did not calculate it with a view to including the salaries of military personnel, or fuel, or oil," he said, referring to shipbuilding program announced with fanfare last fall.

MacKay seemed exasperated at the thought of such an accounting exercise.

"If you went out ... and bought yourself a new minivan and you wanted to drive it off the lot ... you wouldn't calculate the gas, the washer fluid the oil and give yourself a salary to drive it for the next 15 or 20 years."

The Conservatives have a shopping list of ships, planes and armoured vehicles either on order or in the planning stages as part of their often-hyped Canada First Defence Strategy.

When it was announced in 2008, officials estimated the strategy would cost as much as $490 billion, most of it on new hardware and sustainment, over several decades.

Ferguson's report accused the air force of keeping decision-makers in the dark about the short-comings of the F-35 project and essentially rigging the process in order to get the stealth fighter.

The defence industry levelled a similar accusation a few years ago when the Defence Department was shopping for a new search-and-rescue planes. In that instance, MacKay called for an outside assessment in the form of National Research Council report.

He ducked a question Tuesday about whether such practices indicate a systemic problem with air force procurement.

A series of briefing notes for MacKay show senior defence officials have paid a lot of attention over the last few years to the turmoil and lessons Australia has learned in the way it buys military equipment.

The Australian Defence Organization, a procurement agency separate from that country's defence ministry, was trashed a few years ago by their auditor general for the way warship construction was handled.

The appointment of Julian Fantino as associate defence minister last year was seen by some in military circles as a step toward setting up a completely separate procurement branch.

But MacKay said Tuesday that such a decision belonged on the prime minister's desk.

Asked why he seemed more willing to defend the F-35 purchase than some of his cabinet colleagues, MacKay replied: "I'm just an optimistic guy."

The opposition parties have called on him to resign or be fired.

Related on HuffPost:

Loading Slideshow...
  • F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

    FIIn this file photo taken on July 14, 2011 and released by U.S. Air Force, a USAF F-35 Lightning II joint strike fighter (JSF) aircraft soars over Destin, Fla., before landing at its new home at Eglin Air Force Base. Japan selected the Lockheed Martin F-35 stealth fighter Tuesday, Dec. 20, 2011, to replace aging jets in its air force and bolster its defense capability amid regional uncertainty. (AP Photo/U.S. Air Force, Staff Sgt. Joely Santiago)

  • F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

    A F-35 Lightning II sits on stage during the United Kingdom F-35 Lightning II delivery ceremony on July 19, 2012 at Lockheed Martin Corporation in Fort Worth, Texas. The ceremony marked the first international delivery of an F-35 Joint Strike Fighter to a partner nation. (Photo by Tom Pennington/Getty Images)

  • F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

    (Photo by Brendan Smialowski/Getty Images)

  • F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

    Plane models stand outside the Lockheed Martin Corporation during the United Kingdom F-35 Lightning II Delivery Ceremony on July 19, 2012 in Fort Worth, Texas. The ceremony marked the first international delivery of an F-35 Joint Strike Fighter to a partner nation. (Photo by Tom Pennington/Getty Images)

  • F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

    The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jet sits in front the entrance of the Asian Aerospace 2004 show in Singapore 24 February 2004. The Asia Pacific offers one of the world's strongest prospects for defence-related spending, US aerospace giant Lockheed Martin said Tuesday as it expressed confidence in remaining a major supplier to the region's governments (AFP PHOTO/ROSLAN RAHMAN)

  • F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

    (AFP PHOTO/CARL DE SOUZA)

  • F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

    A Lockheed Martin's F-35 Lighning II fighter jet sits on the tarmac for static display at the Singapore Airshow in Singapore on February 12, 2012. Boeing's much-delayed 787 Dreamliner is set to star at the Singapore Airshow this week where companies touting private jets and defence hardware to the Asian market will also be out in force. (ROSLAN RAHMAN/AFP/Getty Images)

  • F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

    (ROSLAN RAHMAN/AFP/Getty Images)

  • F35 JSF Take Off

  • F-35A Flight with External Stores

    On Feb. 16, 2012, the first external weapons test mission was flown by an F-35A conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) aircraft at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif. The F-35A is designed to carry up to 18000 pounds on 10 weapon stations featuring four weapon stations inside two weapon bays, for maximum stealth capability, and an additional three weapon stations on each wing.

  • F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

    IN AIR, NAVAL AIR STATION PATUXENT RIVER, MD - FEBRUARY 11: (EDITORS NOTE: Image has been received by U.S. Military prior to transmission) In this image released by the U.S. Navy courtesy of Lockheed Martin, the U.S. Navy variant of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the F-35C, conducts a test flight February 11, 2011 over the Chesapeake Bay. Lt. Cmdr. Eric 'Magic' Buus flew the F-35C for two hours, checking instruments that will measure structural loads on the airframe during flight maneuvers. The F-35C is distinct from the F-35A and F-35B variants with larger wing surfaces and reinforced landing gear for greater control when operating in the demanding carrier take-off and landing environment. (Photo by U.S. Navy photo courtesy Lockheed Martin via Getty Images)

  • F-35 First Ship Landing

    Courtesy: NAVAIR/JSF Program/Lockheed Martin

  • F35 Hovering

  • F-35 Flight Test Highlights

    Highlights of F-35 flight testing at NAS Patuxent River, Md., NAS Fort Worth Joint Reserve Base, and Edwards AFB, Calif.

  • F-35 Performs First Night Flight

    The first night flight in the history of the Lockheed Martin F-35 program was completed on Jan. 19, 2012 in the skies above Edwards Air Force Base, Calif. Piloted by Lockheed Martin Test Pilot Mark Ward, AF-6, an F-35A conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) variant, launched at 5:05 pm PST and landed after sunset at 6:22 pm

  • F-35 Airstart Testing

    An F-35 test pilot talks about airstart testing at Edwards AFB, Calif., in early 2012.

  • F35 Air Show

FOLLOW CANADA POLITICS

OTTAWA - Defence Minister Peter MacKay says last week's auditor general report will force the military to recalculate the costs of tens of billions of dollars worth of planned equipment purchases.MacK...
OTTAWA - Defence Minister Peter MacKay says last week's auditor general report will force the military to recalculate the costs of tens of billions of dollars worth of planned equipment purchases.MacK...
Filed by Michael Bolen  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 26
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
09:03 AM on 04/11/2012
Is Peter MacKay vitamin deficient? Eating just a diet of potatoes? From Mars?
I'm just askin' as he never makes any sense.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Saucy Tom
11:06 PM on 04/10/2012
I hope all Canadian's are happy with our " President Bush" and his moron ministers that were re-elected in "again" .......oh wait I forgot, Mr. Harper re-elected himself, sorry my mistake.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Taylor Jay
I don't align myself with any political party.
10:28 PM on 04/10/2012
the frames of these jets are supposed to fail before the life schedule of these planes, whatever final cost is its indefinately going up.

Smarten up harper, Canadians dont need pandas, we need J-20 Stealth fighters from china, Because honestly they will tear f-35s to bitss
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SeanMartin
Everything in moderation.
08:04 PM on 04/10/2012
Billions on defence we dont need, but 250 million cut from the CBC.

What m0_r0ns are running this country, anyway?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
sonoffestus
Got smart & got out!
09:53 AM on 04/11/2012
Basically the northern branch of GOP.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tnanimation
08:01 PM on 04/10/2012
It's beginning to look like the Alberta boys are just not capable of governing.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Warren Yuill
Jesus Built My Hot-Rod
07:13 PM on 04/10/2012
To date the CF-18 has cost taxpayers 20 billion in 2011 dollars.
All in since 1982.
photo
Add In Canadia
Egotism is a weakness
07:16 PM on 04/10/2012
20 billion dollars well spent?
I'm going to say no.

Do we want to spend billions of dollars more on new jets? I certainly hope not.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Warren Yuill
Jesus Built My Hot-Rod
07:24 PM on 04/10/2012
Its that or stop fullfilling our NATO obligations.
07:10 PM on 04/10/2012
Now that the details are coming out, it doesn't look quite so unreasonable. Total cost of ownership (TCO) has always been the most important factor in evaluating a purchase. As for whether such items as military personnel wages should be included (when they can be expected to be the same for any similar purchase) is debatable.

Which leads us to the real problem that underlies this kerfuffle about the Harper government's handling of this issue. The secrecy. The compulsive need to keep the Canadian people in the dark. The stonewalling refusal to let any detail of government decisions escape into the general knowledge. The arrogant "Father knows best" attitude that this fear of an informed public shows - is it arrogance, or perhaps fear that if the abilities of the current leadership were to become known - if the reasoning and rationale behind decisions were to become known - then no sane Canadian would want to vote for them ever again?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Warren Yuill
Jesus Built My Hot-Rod
07:21 PM on 04/10/2012
No canadian government could go to the public with the statement
"We are gonna buy whatever the Americans decide to buy"
That could never happen without Canadians at large throwing fits.
But....
thats' exactly what has been happening and will continue to happen untill its a done deal and we are 30 years into the future talking about the next stupid plane.
07:35 PM on 04/10/2012
We may never know - at least we won't know from this issue. It is quite possible that the benefits to the Canadian economy of jobs outsourced from the American manufacturers will prove to be sufficient to offset any disadvantage the F-35's may have in open bidding. And we certainly won't know that our current government took this into consideration, rather than any number of other things we could suspect them of thinking more important than an open and fair bidding process.
This comment has been removed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Warren Yuill
Jesus Built My Hot-Rod
06:40 PM on 04/10/2012
The auditor general seems to be missing the point that the decision to go with the f-35 was made in 2002 when we made a 160 million dollar commitment to be part of the development team.In fact we were part of the "team" that selected the company(Lochheed Martin) to manufature the JSF.
At the15 billion initial purchase price 144 contacts awarded to Canadian companys would yeild a net economic gain of 7 billion dollars to Canada and resurrect the Canadian aerospace industry.
What would the net gain be, spread over the additional 30 years of service life compared to the additional 10 billion projected service costs?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
x46
11:49 AM on 04/13/2012
Nope. The decision was made by Harper. Chretien signed Canada up to participate in the development cycle and to get industrial benefits for Canada's aviation industry. And, btw, Harper, in the contract he did/did not sign, waived Canada's rights to get x% of the work of manufacturing the planes, preferring to make Canadian companies bid for work against the rest of the world. We may see nothing in the way of benefit from this purchase. Harper is bleeding incompetent. This is another of his famous 'deals', very much like the softwood lumber dispute which saw Canada win - and pay money to the Americans.
photo
Liz Wilson 2
“a small group can change the world
06:29 PM on 04/10/2012
Is anyone buying into the idea that the difference in the "campaign price" and the real price is an accounting issue?
photo
Add In Canadia
Egotism is a weakness
06:22 PM on 04/10/2012
What a ridiculous analogy to make. Yes people DO take in the account the future cost of a vehicle purchase, especially now more than ever.

Do you buy a Humvee that will guzzle hundreds of dollars of gas per tank, or do you buy a smaller fuel efficient car that needs a fraction of the gas over the life-time of the vehicle?

Both of them get you from point A to point B in the end.

What the hell are stealth jets supposed to do for Canada? If we need anything that flies, we need helicopters. Something that can transport supplies and people! Buying jets is stupid, plain and simple.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Warren Yuill
Jesus Built My Hot-Rod
06:47 PM on 04/10/2012
People don't often keep their cars for 30 years.
So its a poor analogy.
But a house.....
Factoring in new carpet, toilet paper, spagetti sauce, hot water heaters new shingles ect over 30 years of home ownership.
Compared to covering insurance costs, utilities and mortgages at time of purchase.
Its almost impossible to project anything 30 years forward.
photo
Add In Canadia
Egotism is a weakness
07:01 PM on 04/10/2012
Yes, comparing a house to a jet is soooooooo much a better analogy. My family kept a minivan around for almost two decades, not everyone has the luxury of replacing something every year.

Not to mention if something is going to be lasting three decades, you damn well make sure you're getting your money's worth; not buying into something blindly.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
x46
11:52 AM on 04/13/2012
So does the PMO cut you a cheque for defending them by posting misleading information? It has been standard practice for a very long time - and written in the 'how to purchase things' rules - that the entire cost of acquisition which includes operating, upgrading and maintenance costs. To pretend otherwise is just bald faced lying.