F-35 Purchase: Bureaucrats Defend How They Determined Cost Of Jets

CP  |  By Posted: 05/ 1/2012 9:42 am Updated: 05/ 2/2012 10:27 am

OTTAWA - The bureaucracy fired back Tuesday at Canada's budget watchdog over his suggestion the government kept two sets of books on the multibillion-dollar purchase of new stealth-fighter jets.

Parliamentary budget officer Kevin Page said in a weekend radio interview that it seemed as if one set of books inside the Department of National Defence contained a higher cost estimate for the F-35 fighters while another, lower number was presented to the public.

"You do get the sense there were different books being kept," Page told CBC Radio's The House on Saturday.

But a senior Defence official told a parliamentary committee his department kept only one set of books, and provided the full cost of the F-35 purchase to cabinet.

"There was one book," said deputy minister Robert Fonberg.

"There was a column on the left-hand side that went to cabinet for decision-making purposes. And the government decided to communicate exactly the same way they'd communicated since 2004 on the acquisition."

The Conservative government froze spending on the defence program last month after the auditor general produced a withering report accusing National Defence of keeping Parliament in the dark about the program's spiralling problems.

Michael Ferguson's report said the public estimate of $14.7 billion does not include the expected $10 billion operational costs, such as the salaries, fuel and other commodities used to keep the aircraft flying.

A parliamentary committee is now studying that report.

In July 2010, the Conservative government signalled its intention to buy the F-35 Lightning II, insisting it was the only fighter aircraft that meets the needs of the air force.

Officials from the departments of Defence, Industry, Public Works and the Treasury Board appeared at the House of Commons public accounts committee Tuesday morning to defend the costing of the F-35 purchase.

"I think it's been very clear that this is not a standard procurement. There is uncertainty in terms of total value. We've done our best to try to provide projections to the government of what the maximum value of the opportunities might be," said Simon Kennedy, senior associate deputy minister at Industry Canada.

"Could we have perhaps given a better breakdown and provided more detailed information? We'll certainly take that to heart."

The choice has been a political lightning rod ever since with opposition parties, the parliamentary budget officer and now the auditor general questioning the price tag and the method for selection.

But another senior official said Page's initial estimate was off the mark.

"If you have got the acquisition cost wrong, you're going to wind up with an estimate that is far, far off the mark," said Kevin Lindsey, an assistant deputy minister at National Defence.

"If you get the initial acquisition cost way wrong, your total estimated cost is going to be far off the mark."

The committee is expected to hear again from Page on how he arrived at his estimate.

Also on HuffPost:

Loading Slideshow...
  • The following is a <a href="http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/04/f35-videos/?pid=1183&pageid=78707&viewall=true" target="_hplink">compilation of the worst and most hilarious propaganda videos</a> on the F-35 fighter jet.

FOLLOW CANADA POLITICS

OTTAWA - The bureaucracy fired back Tuesday at Canada's budget watchdog over his suggestion the government kept two sets of books on the multibillion-dollar purchase of new stealth-fighter jets.Parlia...
OTTAWA - The bureaucracy fired back Tuesday at Canada's budget watchdog over his suggestion the government kept two sets of books on the multibillion-dollar purchase of new stealth-fighter jets.Parlia...
Filed by Ron Nurwisah  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 30
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
yer
Stop the Alberta Taliban
01:36 AM on 05/03/2012
It probably went like: na nanana na na na...tequila!
07:46 AM on 05/02/2012
So funny. The CONS can't seem to come up with a good lie to get out of their previous ones.

We're open to all types of fighter jets....as long as they are F35'S. LOL

That would make a good robocall in the next election. Hang on to it Steve.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
opprobrious
More speech. Less Flagging.
12:22 AM on 05/02/2012
Why are the worst ideas governments embrace so damned expensive?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Thalin Lea
10:36 PM on 05/01/2012
These Bureaucrats will always Defend the Cost Of these worthless Jets to assure the dirty commissions they are going to get paid if the transaction is completed ,thing i fiercely doubt. So please dear Bureaucrats stop giving expired Honey .
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
greysells2
grey cells matter
07:40 PM on 05/01/2012
Tell me again why we need VTOL capacity for our needs?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sdgreen
07:51 PM on 05/01/2012
We are not. The F-35 is designed for aircraft carriers of the US Navy. Canada has no such type of ship.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jason Bullock
08:16 AM on 05/02/2012
Look up "Joint Support Ship Project" and "Amphibious Assault Ship Project".
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
greysells2
grey cells matter
07:34 PM on 05/01/2012
Wadduya expect? DND wanted those planes real bad and so did the Government and the Harper Government threw the bureaucrats under the bus when their story didn't hold up to scrutiny. So now the bureaucrats are looking out for themselves. The finger pointing begins. Hello. It is our money! Why don't we look at the Super F-18's? They are cheaper, we have pilots trained on the earlier version and they are two engined. Got an answer to that? Convince me we should not consider them.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sdgreen
08:05 PM on 05/01/2012
The F-18 Super Hornet is a good a/c, albeit based on old technology. The whole idea of the JSF program was to provide interoperability among a number of allied nations who would use the same technology, communications systems and armament. Further, to provide updated airframes employing state of the art radar evasion and weapon inventory.

Whether the final F-35 fighter will meet those objectives has yet to be determined as the A/C is still under development.

The question of single versus dual engines is interesting. What is known is that the new jet engine technology is apparently a quantum leap better than that employed by the older generation fighters. Although, given the size of Canada and potential patrol zones, two engines do make a lot of sense.

The concept of the F-35's and variants, is of interest, but certainly at this point unproven, however they do employ a massively increased state of technology. Will they work, likely.

My favorite though would be the F-22; unfortunately the Americans do not want that a/c placed into non-American forces. My third choice is the F-18 Super Hornet.
paintitblacker
shit happens life goes on
06:55 PM on 05/01/2012
They don't have long range capabilities ,so they will need to be refuelled in mid air , so we also need a flying gas station as well , how many million?

there primary function is as an attack weapon, so who we picking a fight with???
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sdgreen
08:06 PM on 05/01/2012
Actually, I think we already have some flying gas stations in the inventory.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jason Bullock
08:20 AM on 05/02/2012
They were retired in '97.
photo
Felix99
Born to be mild!!!!
06:06 PM on 05/01/2012
Has anyone even done a detailed study whether or not we need this monstrosity? It seems to be full of all sorts of gadgets, like vertical take-off that we will not really ever need.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Greg YanickThompson
05:33 PM on 05/01/2012
just as in the states ,a government completly out of control and any moral obligation to its citizen,s .. Its all about business and money now!! and so not what Canada was just a few short years ago ..
04:34 PM on 05/01/2012
The contempt of the Harper regime and its myrmidons for the public is breathtaking.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
efell
Careful with that axe, Eugene
04:29 PM on 05/01/2012
Why weren't these feeble explanations given by the Conservatives before the election? Oh........right. A leopard can't change it's spots.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Johnny LaRue
political correctness is just incorrect
04:21 PM on 05/01/2012
One of our bozos paid $16.00 for a glass of OJ. How can we trust any of them to negotiate a good deal on anything? Who is playing the part of Frank Moores as the Tory bagman this contract?
03:40 PM on 05/01/2012
Is it true that we had to buy the F35's because Britan didn't have anymore used Subs for sale?
photo
Felix99
Born to be mild!!!!
06:07 PM on 05/01/2012
thanks, Gyice. Great comment! Fanned.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
William Muller
03:39 PM on 05/01/2012
Same old Conservative BS gets spewed each and every time they get caught fudging the numbers and facts. Yes sir, our Auditor General, Kevin Page, US analysts, other countries involved in the acquisition -- they all got it wrong while our DND got it right? Pigs will fly before we believe that WHOPPER!
Rantibus
Cogito, Ergo Rant
03:33 PM on 05/01/2012
This is a plane without a strategic mission. We need tactical interceptors that are capable of interdiction over the ocean and flying patrol in the Arctic regions. I would not wish to do that with a single engine. In point of fact, it was the previous requirement for a double engine for just those exigencies that led us to choose the F-18. Why is this no longer an issue?
photo
Felix99
Born to be mild!!!!
06:14 PM on 05/01/2012
From what I understand, it's because some bright light in the government said that single-engined aircraft are now so reliable that we don't need a 2nd engine. I have flown up north enough times to know that you can lose an engine, and believe me there are no nice forced-landing areas or ejection spots into which you want to go there. And the airfields are far enough apart that no helicopter will reach you for quite a few hours -- assuming we have helicopters stationed up there. It's like the CF-5, a cute toy for the kids to play with, but not much good for anything else, especially for a country this size.
Rantibus
Cogito, Ergo Rant
09:22 PM on 05/01/2012
I'm a pilot who has flown in the northern regions and am also a senior reserve officer. I can't disagree with you. We need a defense minister who has the smallest clue in operations and engineering.