Ottawa is moving on a sole-sourced purchase of high-tech U.S. fighter jets to replace its CF-18s despite furious last-minute lobbying by rival manufacturers.
Industry and government sources said the cabinet is expected in coming days to approve the launch of negotiations on price and delivery schedules with Lockheed-Martin, the U.S.-based manufacturer of the Joint Strike Fighter F-35.
The government is moving early on buying 65 new aircraft in a bid to “lock up the price” long before the jets start entering into service in 2017, sources said.
The contract worth up to $9-billion would be awarded without competition, with the Harper government set to argue the only other aircraft that could eventually meet the needs of the Canadian Forces would be built in China or Russia, and that such a purchase “wouldn’t fly” in Canada.
But that hasn’t stopped the manufacturers of jets such as Boeing’s Super Hornet from trying to whip up a storm in Parliament and the defence community.
Lobbyists have been contacting journalists and parliamentarians in an attempt to put out the story that Canada could get new aircraft at a cheaper price, and with more Canadian content, by opening up tenders.
“An open competition to select Canada's next-generation fighter would enable Canada's government and military to obtain access to detailed Super Hornet performance data, enabling a thorough and accurate evaluation of its advanced, proven capabilities,” said Boeing spokeswoman Mary Brett in a statement.
Officially, Defence Minister Peter MacKay responded to the speculation in the House on Monday by promising that his government is set to “invest in the next generation of fighters.”
“Stay tuned,” Mr. MacKay said in response to NDP attacks against a sole-sourced contract.
Privately, government officials are saying Ottawa already made a decision in the 2008 “Canada First” defence policy to buy a next-generation fighter plane, and that Boeing lost the competition in the United States to build that aircraft in 2001.
“Boeing has been driving the town crazy,” said a senior government official directly involved in the project. “This is a classic firestorm in Ottawa, with lobbyists stirring up the town trying to stall the acquisition of equipment for the Canadian Forces.”
The Joint Strike Fighter is being developed by Lockheed-Martin, which won a competition to produce the next generation of stealth single-seat aircraft. Canada has invested $160-million so far in the development project, which will cost hundreds of billions of dollars. The U.S. Forces will buy about 2,400 of the F-35s.
The 65 new fighters that the Canadian government plans to buy will replace its current fleet of 80 CF-18s starting in 2017.
Competing aircraft manufacturers say that despite the federal investment, the Joint Strike Fighter might not be the way to go. The overarching theme among manufacturers is that they want to be able to participate in a competition, and that the government will get a better deal – and more regional industrial benefits spread out across Canada – if it opens up a tendering process.
“Competition guarantees the best value for Canada,” Boeing stated in a presentation to Conservative ministers last fall.
Boeing is insisting in its material that it will continue to produce its Super Hornet into the next decade, and that the U.S. Forces will continue to have more than twice as many of these planes than the Lockheed F-35s.
But Mr. MacKay signaled in the House of Commons on May 27 that his mind is made up. He initially spoke of the Joint Strike Fighter as the designated replacement for the CF-18s, before stating that a decision has yet to be made.
(Courtesy of The Globe and Mail)
quote:
The federal government has outlined a new shipbuilding strategy that will cost at least $35 billion and take 30 years to complete.
Defence Minister Peter MacKay says he expects to sign agreements with two shipyards within two years to build 28 large vessels and 100 smaller ships for the navy and coast guard.
"This is, indeed, an historic moment for Canada," MacKay told a defence industry trade show on Thursday. "The national shipbuilding procurement strategy is a major step forward."
The program will produce equipment that is essential to the Canadian Forces, he said.
Two shipyards will be chosen "through a fair, transparent, competitive process to build the large vessels required by the coast guard and navy."
"We expect to have signed agreements with these shipyards within two years, which should clear the way toward contracts for large-vessel projects that the navy desperately needs," he said.
"However, what's even more important is that the strategy will be making available equipment that is essential to the Canadian Armed Forces. Canada's navy will continue to do the remarkable work that it is doing for Canada and has done in the past 100 years."
Several high-profile ship-replacement programs for both the navy and coast guard have been sidelined because cost estimates have come in far above what the Conservative government was willing to pay.
Federal officials have tried over the last year to get the country's notoriously competitive shipyards to agree on sharing the construction.
MacKay has often been quoted as saying there was more than enough work to go around.
The country's top military commander told the defence industry on Wednesday that new ships for the navy is his No. 1 procurement need and noted that it has been 14 years since the last major warship was launched in Canada.
"We need to cut steel on new ships," said Gen. Walter Natynczyk, chief of the defence staff.
Buying aircraft and tanks, sometimes off-the-shelf, is much easier than building warships which, because of their size, complex designs and high-tech machinery, often take a decade of planning before actual construction begins.
To emphasize the need to modernize the Canadian navy, the defence chief pointed to the 5,100-tonne destroyer HMCS Iroquois, which is 38 years old.
The navy's two supply ships, HMCS Preserver and Protecteur, turned 40 last year.
The federal government began searching for a different approach to the time-consuming construction process after the failure of two high-profile projects in the summer of 2008.
Both National Defence and Fisheries and Oceans were sent back to the drawing board on a project for the construction of three naval joint supply ships and coast guard mid-shore patrol boats when bids from industry came in far over the budget the Conservatives had set aside.
Senior defence officials pledged at the time to restart the project within a year, but they were hobbled by the lack of full-fledged shipbuilding strategy.
(Courtesy of CTV)
jester
Plus were slowly taking delivery of the CH-148 Cyclone.
Ordered 28 of these beauties. Bye bye Sea Kings.
(Courtesy of Wikimedia)
One thing I do hope the deep-sea port and military base does happen in Nunavut. I haven't heard any news of if since 2007.
Abercrombie
We need more subs and ships to protect our arctic
VDub
This announcement makes me feel funny in the pants.........
OH YAHHHHHHH!!!!
exraver
What a bunch of BS.
First fake lake for G20, at a cost of 2 mil., courtesy of taxpayers.
Now this.
Affordability was supposed to be a hallmark of the F-35, which began in 2001.
The production cost of each aircraft rose from $50 million in fiscal 2002 dollars to $92.4 million, Raptor's cost was 140 mil per plane.
If raptor was made from gold by weight, it would cost as much.
Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N) said a fourth batch of F-35 fighter planes will beat Pentagon cost estimates by more than 20 percent, even as new U.S. data pegged the overall program tab at $382 billion.
Australia and Netherlands already dropped it like hot potato, now canadians to the rescue!
Poor taxpayers, you're about to get a LOT poorer.
When hits the fan, no dinky subs or UAV, or соме other gadgetry will help you. You need actual people living there.
hardcore trancer
ing waste of money, this money can really be used towards something that can help the Canadians. God I hate having a redneck running/ruining my country.:whip:
rabbitjoker
quote:
Originally posted by VDub
This announcement makes me feel funny in the pants.........
I should have joined the Air Force. ;)
Yohan
quote:
Originally posted by hardcore trancer
ing waste of money, this money can really be used towards something that can help the Canadians. God I hate having a redneck running/ruining my country.:whip:
you do realize that involvement in JSF project was started under Cretin/Martin regime? I don't think those two comes remotely close to a redneck.
DeleteFromUsers
quote:
Originally posted by hardcore trancer
ing waste of money, this money can really be used towards something that can help the Canadians. God I hate having a redneck running/ruining my country.:whip:
Not sure that being defenceless, nor the skyrocketing costs of maintaining older (obsolete) machinery are really great situations for Canada.
Remember that we are currently fighting a war, and not everyone on earth is our friend.
Ask your grandparents. They remember.
VDub
It's interesting to see the country of origin of the people who oppose our national defense...
exraver
It's hard to oppose something non-existent.
You know that and I know that.
2009 budgets for NATO countries in billions of US dollars:
US 663
UK 69
France 67
Germany 48
Canada 15
Non-NATO:
Russia 61
Japan 46
China 98
Compare these numbers to size of territory and size of armies needed to defend it in case of major conventional war. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ry_expenditures
