backtop


Print 53 comment(s) - last by just4U.. on Apr 6 at 6:14 PM


F-35 taking off  (Source: Defense News)
Canada promises more due diligence on F-35 purchase

As the costs for the F-35 Lightning II program continue to grow, partner nations seem to be increasingly reconsidering their purchase of the aircraft. More than a few countries have said they would consider cutting back on the number of aircraft they purchase if the price continues to grow. Recently the lifetime cost of the F-35 program in the US was pegged at $1.45 trillion.
 
Some maintain that the costs of the fighter aren't growing as quickly as the numbers would lead people to believe because the U.S. government continues to change how they determine costs. Canada's auditor general accused the Canadian Defense Department of misleading lawmakers on the F-35 program costs this week.
 
Canadian auditor general Michael Ferguson asserts that military officials are so deeply committed to purchasing the F-35 that they did not "exercise due diligence" on the most expensive military procurement program in Canadian history.
 
“The department did not provide parliamentarians with complete cost information or fully inform decision makers about risks created by problems encountered in the (F-35) program,” he said.
 
“Only the most optimistic (cost) scenario was put forward,” and “key approvals (were) obtained after decisions were made.”
 
Canada still maintains that it intends to buy the 65 F-35 fighters, even though reports surfaced last month the Canada might cut back on orders. Canada intends to replace its fleet of CF-18 Hornets with the F-35. 
 
Canadian officials originally pegged the cost of the F-35 at $9 billion plus $7 billion for maintenance. Ferguson claims the true cost estimate is more in closer to $25 billion.
 
Ferguson also claims, “The department did not acknowledge that the decision to purchase the F-35 was well underway four years before it was officially announced.”
 
Ferguson isn't alone in his harsh criticism of the F-35 program in Canada; Democrat MP Christine Moore also criticizes the program. She said, "The government knew the F-35s were going to cost more than anticipated, but they intentionally hid it from parliament and the public." 
 
“This was an outrageous attempt to try and pull the wool over the eyes of Canadians.”
 
The Canadian government has pledged to freeze allocation for the fighter jet at the original $9 billion and turn the procurement process over to the Public Works ministry.

Source: Defense News





Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

what?
By Flunk on 4/4/2012 12:11:30 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Democrat MP Christine Moore


Canada doesn't have a Democratic party. Christine Moore is a member of the New Democratic Party (NDP) which is Canada's socialist party and not really equivalent to any party in the US political system.




RE: what?
By JohnThacker on 4/4/2012 12:18:08 PM , Rating: 2
Eh, the NDP really isn't that socialist, especially after electing Mulcair as its leader The only big difference between the US Democratic party and the NDP (or other technically socialist center-left parties like Labour in the UK or the Socialist Party in France) is that the US Democratic Party runs away from the socialist label whereas other parties embrace it (despite not favoring nationalization, and in many cases proposing privatization.)

Both groups of parties are more properly considered social democratic. The "socialist" parties in Canada and Europe are not as socialist as they claim.


RE: what?
By jabber on 4/4/2012 12:22:33 PM , Rating: 2
Quite right. Very few centre left parties left anywhere in the West, mostly centre right. The powers that be have made all of them pretty much of a muchness. So whoever you vote for the Government always gets in and the status quo agenda carries on.

Take the current US President, take away the healthcare reforms (the token policy to give the illusion of change) and you'd still think Bush was in charge.

Same old same old.


RE: what?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/4/12, Rating: -1
RE: what?
By cruisin3style on 4/5/2012 2:40:56 PM , Rating: 2
I could swear I've seen you post something to the effect of

"Obama is not the hope and change he promised, and instead has continued almost all of Bush's policies"

several times on this site. I could be forgetting the context of those comments or maybe that wasn't you, but just thought i'd throw that out there


RE: what?
By just4U on 4/6/2012 2:25:35 PM , Rating: 2
From a Canadian perspective, It doesn't matter. Democrat or Republican their both to the right of anything we have in Canada. Your country is a right wing society after all. Whereas ours sits mostly in the middle and flirts with both sides of the political spectrum.

Our Conservative government here In Canada would be considered to far to the left to even be electable in the United States.. and yet our peers on the left sometimes say their extreme right which is laughable.

It's amazing how our views on Right/Left political thought vary so much when we all live so close to each other.


RE: what?
By Uncle on 4/4/2012 1:10:29 PM , Rating: 3
Right, thats like saying the Dems are socialists vs the reps because of health care. I suppose if your Canadian you voluntarily ask if you can pay for your doctors visit or emergency care at a hospital and if they say no its free, you refuse their service.


RE: what?
By Captain Orgazmo on 4/4/2012 7:20:04 PM , Rating: 2
Healthcare in Canada isn't free, fool. Last time I checked the government took a third off my pay cheque to fund their monopolistic, union/bureaucracy-choked, worst-in-the-developed-world "free" healthcare system.


RE: what?
By Uncle on 4/4/2012 9:17:07 PM , Rating: 2
I apologize its free if your in a union or as my wife pays 50%, then pays tax in box 40, for a tax benefit, for family coverage or 135$ for a family without coverage. Now if your talking yearly income taxes thats a whole different ball game.


RE: what?
By Captain Orgazmo on 4/4/2012 10:41:54 PM , Rating: 2
Of course I'm talking income tax, and GST, and resource royalties, and sales taxes. To pretend that healthcare is even remotely free is the definition of foolishness. We pay out the nose for our healthcare, and the unions and politicians have successfully brainwashed the masses into thinking that a government run monopoly is a good thing.

The government can break up a company when it gets too big and powerful; who breaks up the government when it gets too big?


RE: what?
By rcc on 4/5/2012 2:58:51 PM , Rating: 2
No one understands TANSTAAFL anymore : (

There ain't no such thing as a free lunch, someone pays for everything. How does society in general keep loosing sight of this obvious fact.


RE: what?
By random2 on 4/5/2012 3:52:28 AM , Rating: 2
I think they may still have a few plots of land for you to choose from south of the 49th, if you care to check. :-)


"A politician stumbles over himself... Then they pick it out. They edit it. He runs the clip, and then he makes a funny face, and the whole audience has a Pavlovian response." -- Joe Scarborough on John Stewart over Jim Cramer













botimage
Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki