- Reaction score
- 1,407
- Points
- 1,160
http://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/guest-column-jets-and-vets
MACKAY: Jets and vets - Toronto Sun - 31 Dec 17
Over two years ago in the general election, the Trudeau Liberals promised a great deal for Canada’s military and for veterans.
A new era of open, transparent procurement was promised to replace the aging CF-18 fighter jet fleet. That included a solemn vow to not buy the Lockheed Martin F-35 stealth fighter, committed to by the previous Conservative government, because said breathlessly by the PM at the time” the plane doesn’t work and won’t work.” Yet, currently six countries have taken delivery of over 300 F-35s and another six have committed to do so.
The previous $9-billion deal for 65 F-35s announced by the Harper Government in 2012 was savaged by opposition, media and ultimately cratered by the auditor general, who used an entirely new metric of life cycle costing over a much extended period of 45 years to inflate the number and spook the public.
Canada would be taking delivery of those aircraft next year had it proceeded.
Recently, in a do-over announcement of a process that will add years and involve the outlay of $19-billion (not using life cycle costing) to purchase the permanent replacement for the CF-18 fleet, a new caveat was added.
The new, open and transparent process for selecting the winning replacement jet may not….wait for it… include Boeing this time. Here we go again.
The proposed 88 new jets delivered sometime post-2025, will not be purchased from a company causing “economic harm” to Canada (read: Bombardier) or which can’t be viewed as a “trusted partner.”
Curiously, just a few months ago, Canada had pretty well sealed a deal to purchase 18 “interim” Super Hornet fighter jets from Boeing. That was before the Trudeau government hit the brakes on the purchase because of a trade dispute between Boeing and Bombardier, saying that it wouldn’t go through, as Boeing could no longer be considered a “trusted partner.”
Bombardier has, in the meantime, inked an agreement with Airbus to build at least part of the C-Series at the Alabama Airbus plant, while the dumping case against Bombardier is proceeding. Not sure, given how much taxpayer money has flowed to Bombardier recently, that we have emerged on the winning side of this transaction, but I digress.
The Federal government will now reverse its announcement of just a few months ago to buy 18 new Super Hornets from Boeing and, instead, buy used Boeing F-18 Hornets from Australia, relying on a made up capability gap, which no one in the Royal Canadian Air Force really believes to be true.
Lt.-Gen. Mike Hood, commander of the RCAF, testified to the fact there was none before a parliamentary committee a year ago. The former Chief of the Defence Staff General Tom Lawson, said he would prefer to get on with the process for a permanent replacement now and forego the interim process.
Photo Caption - I left in as the dates are interesting. Peter MacKay, Minister of National Defence speaks to the military and media as he announces Canada will be acquiring the Lockheed Martin Joint Strike Fighter F-35 Lighting II Friday July 16, 2010 in Ottawa. Next to Minister MacKay is Minster Tony Clement. The government of Canada will buy 65 of these Joint Strike fighters and they are expected to be delivered in 2016.
The defence minister, contradicting the general on the gap and himself said recently, that “we don’t need to buy used equipment, we need new aircraft.”
All this clatter provides a convenient out and a solution to a problem created by Liberal double-speak in the last campaign. After two years trying to square the circle of two contradictory promises — an “open” competition and one which excludes the best aircraft, the F-35 stealth fighter, Australia provided an opportune solution to the self-inflicted wound and unnecessary answer to the non-existent capability gap — surplus F-18 fighters that Australia is replacing with the F-35 stealth fighters, the same ones that our PM claims don’t work. All very confusing.
And all very troubling to RCAF pilots, technicians and their families. Which is why so many are leaving the service.
These politically motivated decisions and delays will indeed lead to a capability gap, a real one with souring costs. The Liberal credibility gap between what they say and do leaves the Forces without vital equipment.
This is all to familiar as it is eerily similar to the political mangling of the EH101 contract by the Chretien Liberals after the 1993 election. No “Cadillac helicopters,” he proclaimed for our brave pilots and crew performing courageous lifesaving acts of rescue over the frigid oceans on our coasts.
That clanger cost taxpayers over half a billion dollars in cancellation fees with the fleet still not fully replaced and ongoing wrangling with the ensuing winner (Sikorski) of the new re-styled contract. And then, there were the used submarines bought in that same era and the saga that followed. There is a troubling pattern of behaviour with Liberals and defence.
A similar sad story line applies to promises made to veterans in relation to abandoning litigation involving disability payments and the reintroduction of lifelong pensions for disabled members of the Canadian Armed Forces. The original change was engineered by the previous Liberal Government in 2005. The return to the old system of lifelong pensions has been delayed again, leaving many veterans skeptical of what is coming — perhaps just adding a few dollars to the lump sum disability payment and then spreading that money out over the rest of the veteran’s life, based on actuarial tables.
A simple cost-effective and timely solution to helping disabled veterans with livable pensions, would be to forego the $500 million plus upgrades about to be forked out to Australia for 18 aging F-18 fighters, and just take the pool of money saved and fund disabled veterans.
Add the fact that, with an immediate fighter replacement competition, the RCAF would have its permanent replacement much sooner than 2025. This would surely receive the support of Canadian taxpayers and be viewed as a far more principled path forward. This entirely unprincipled and politically motivated gong show should be a non-starter.
Hopefully, in the New Year, the House of Commons Defence Committee can examine this mess and explore sensible solutions (i.e. an immediate competition which will very likely be won by the F-35, just as it has won every other competition.)
Then, get on with the actual implementation and fulfil our commitments to our citizens and our allies.
Peter MacKay is a former Conservative national defence minister.
MACKAY: Jets and vets - Toronto Sun - 31 Dec 17
Over two years ago in the general election, the Trudeau Liberals promised a great deal for Canada’s military and for veterans.
A new era of open, transparent procurement was promised to replace the aging CF-18 fighter jet fleet. That included a solemn vow to not buy the Lockheed Martin F-35 stealth fighter, committed to by the previous Conservative government, because said breathlessly by the PM at the time” the plane doesn’t work and won’t work.” Yet, currently six countries have taken delivery of over 300 F-35s and another six have committed to do so.
The previous $9-billion deal for 65 F-35s announced by the Harper Government in 2012 was savaged by opposition, media and ultimately cratered by the auditor general, who used an entirely new metric of life cycle costing over a much extended period of 45 years to inflate the number and spook the public.
Canada would be taking delivery of those aircraft next year had it proceeded.
Recently, in a do-over announcement of a process that will add years and involve the outlay of $19-billion (not using life cycle costing) to purchase the permanent replacement for the CF-18 fleet, a new caveat was added.
The new, open and transparent process for selecting the winning replacement jet may not….wait for it… include Boeing this time. Here we go again.
The proposed 88 new jets delivered sometime post-2025, will not be purchased from a company causing “economic harm” to Canada (read: Bombardier) or which can’t be viewed as a “trusted partner.”
Curiously, just a few months ago, Canada had pretty well sealed a deal to purchase 18 “interim” Super Hornet fighter jets from Boeing. That was before the Trudeau government hit the brakes on the purchase because of a trade dispute between Boeing and Bombardier, saying that it wouldn’t go through, as Boeing could no longer be considered a “trusted partner.”
Bombardier has, in the meantime, inked an agreement with Airbus to build at least part of the C-Series at the Alabama Airbus plant, while the dumping case against Bombardier is proceeding. Not sure, given how much taxpayer money has flowed to Bombardier recently, that we have emerged on the winning side of this transaction, but I digress.
The Federal government will now reverse its announcement of just a few months ago to buy 18 new Super Hornets from Boeing and, instead, buy used Boeing F-18 Hornets from Australia, relying on a made up capability gap, which no one in the Royal Canadian Air Force really believes to be true.
Lt.-Gen. Mike Hood, commander of the RCAF, testified to the fact there was none before a parliamentary committee a year ago. The former Chief of the Defence Staff General Tom Lawson, said he would prefer to get on with the process for a permanent replacement now and forego the interim process.
Photo Caption - I left in as the dates are interesting. Peter MacKay, Minister of National Defence speaks to the military and media as he announces Canada will be acquiring the Lockheed Martin Joint Strike Fighter F-35 Lighting II Friday July 16, 2010 in Ottawa. Next to Minister MacKay is Minster Tony Clement. The government of Canada will buy 65 of these Joint Strike fighters and they are expected to be delivered in 2016.
The defence minister, contradicting the general on the gap and himself said recently, that “we don’t need to buy used equipment, we need new aircraft.”
All this clatter provides a convenient out and a solution to a problem created by Liberal double-speak in the last campaign. After two years trying to square the circle of two contradictory promises — an “open” competition and one which excludes the best aircraft, the F-35 stealth fighter, Australia provided an opportune solution to the self-inflicted wound and unnecessary answer to the non-existent capability gap — surplus F-18 fighters that Australia is replacing with the F-35 stealth fighters, the same ones that our PM claims don’t work. All very confusing.
And all very troubling to RCAF pilots, technicians and their families. Which is why so many are leaving the service.
These politically motivated decisions and delays will indeed lead to a capability gap, a real one with souring costs. The Liberal credibility gap between what they say and do leaves the Forces without vital equipment.
This is all to familiar as it is eerily similar to the political mangling of the EH101 contract by the Chretien Liberals after the 1993 election. No “Cadillac helicopters,” he proclaimed for our brave pilots and crew performing courageous lifesaving acts of rescue over the frigid oceans on our coasts.
That clanger cost taxpayers over half a billion dollars in cancellation fees with the fleet still not fully replaced and ongoing wrangling with the ensuing winner (Sikorski) of the new re-styled contract. And then, there were the used submarines bought in that same era and the saga that followed. There is a troubling pattern of behaviour with Liberals and defence.
A similar sad story line applies to promises made to veterans in relation to abandoning litigation involving disability payments and the reintroduction of lifelong pensions for disabled members of the Canadian Armed Forces. The original change was engineered by the previous Liberal Government in 2005. The return to the old system of lifelong pensions has been delayed again, leaving many veterans skeptical of what is coming — perhaps just adding a few dollars to the lump sum disability payment and then spreading that money out over the rest of the veteran’s life, based on actuarial tables.
A simple cost-effective and timely solution to helping disabled veterans with livable pensions, would be to forego the $500 million plus upgrades about to be forked out to Australia for 18 aging F-18 fighters, and just take the pool of money saved and fund disabled veterans.
Add the fact that, with an immediate fighter replacement competition, the RCAF would have its permanent replacement much sooner than 2025. This would surely receive the support of Canadian taxpayers and be viewed as a far more principled path forward. This entirely unprincipled and politically motivated gong show should be a non-starter.
Hopefully, in the New Year, the House of Commons Defence Committee can examine this mess and explore sensible solutions (i.e. an immediate competition which will very likely be won by the F-35, just as it has won every other competition.)
Then, get on with the actual implementation and fulfil our commitments to our citizens and our allies.
Peter MacKay is a former Conservative national defence minister.
