?Impact

Great, then when Mr. Hood testifies before the Parliamentary committee next week he can say that. Just don't rush a decision that has already been postponed 7 years or more. We need to have ample time to complete a proper evaluation and decision on a permanent replacement to our fighter fleet.

According to the Minister of Defence, we will be unable to meet our commitments to NATO and NORAD with the current fleet. While we currently have 77 aircraft, only about half of them are able to fly at any one time. The bigger problem is the large number of flight hours on them. If an open procurement procedure was started 7 years ago then we wouldn't be in this pickle. Yes, the Liberals have also been slow, they are responsible for 1 of those 7 years.

Not majority, but largest single identifiable group. The 2011 national household survey (remember that optional thingy after Harper got rid of the long form census) had 38.7% of the population identifying as Roman Catholic. Specifically the question asked was: What is this person's religion? Indicate a specific denomination or religion even if this person is not currently a practising member of that group. A lot of us were sent to Church as children (in my case Anglican), and became part of that church (e.g. through a baptism). So according to that question I am an Anglican, even though I haven't had anything to do with the church since childhood Religion was not asked on the census this past May. Historically it has only been asked every 10 years, so we will have to wait and see if they have a similar question in 2021.

Nice that you put that at the top of your post, making the rest entirely meaningless. In 2008 George W. Bush signed the status of forces agreement between the United States of America and the Republic of Iraq that stated U.S. combat forces would withdraw from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009, and all U.S. combat forces will be completely out of Iraq by December 31, 2011.

Yes, there does appear to be an agenda here. The problem with agenda driven topic however is they could backfire.

Good point. Aircraft carriers do not operate independently, they have a fleet surrounding them. In the World War II era there would be several carriers in these carrier battle groups, with dozens or more of escort ships. The cold war era carriers were much larger, and generally had a single carrier with many support ships. The US today calls these carrier strike groups, composed of the aircraft carrier itself and a guided missile cruiser, 2 or more light airborne multi-purpose system (LAMP) warships, and several destroyers and/or frigates. I believe the submarines operate independently, but obviously they will on occasion meet up with these carrier strike groups to coordinate actions.

...by the superintendent of the independent agency that was appointed by Joe Oliver who was the finance minister for the Conservatives, and his appointment goes well beyond the current government mandate. This is 100% on Rona Ambrose.

There are huge lifecycle cost differences between the various options. Other countries have purchased these aircraft for non carrier based operation as well. One of the major differences is the landing gear, and our rough far northern airstrips would make that a benefit.

Yes, but even then it would be politicized. There is an independent agency that approves bank charters, and the last superintendent to that agency has absolutely nothing to do with the present government (appointed by the previous government, and that appointment lasts past the mandate of the current government). That didn't stop the leader of the former government (Roan Ambrose) from making a jackass of herself and blaming the actions of that independent agency on the present government. You can't get away from partisan low life scum like Rona Ambrose no matter how hard you try. How would it be any different here? It certainly feels that way for any public service job, we have the right wing continually calling them a liability and not contributing.

The most interesting thing is this is not Justin Trudeau's foundation, nor is it in his name. He has nothing to do with it, but lying lowlife like Rona Ambrose are trying to create innuendo for their own partisan advantage. There is nothing Justin Trudeau can do about the foundation, it is not his.

So what is your suggestion on an alternative. This file was left to languish for years, and now something needs to be done. Initiating a proper competition is the right thing to do, although I agree they seem to be moving very slow there although there were prerequisites. It looks like by the time that process is competed, and actual jets are delivered, it will be in the mid to late 20's. Can Canada meet it's obligations in the interim, and if not then what do you suggest?

When you misquote me, you only prove that you are not interested in facts and only in partisan bickering. That approval came from superintendent of the OFSI who was appointed for a 7 year term that spans the Liberal government mandate (June 2014 to June 2021), an independent agency. This is 100% on Rona Ambrose. If she thinks there is a scandal, then she is fully responsible for the scandal and should resign.

i already stated that the final approval to operate was on July 7, 2016. That approval came from superintendent of the OFSI who was appointed for a 7 year term that spans the Liberal government mandate (June 2014 to June 2021), an independent agency. The initial approval and listing as a schedule I bank happened prior to the Liberal government mandate. This bank is 100% on Rona Ambrose's government - period. That fact is undeniable.

Rona Ambrose was part of the government that appointed the superintendent that gave the final approval, the only event to happen after this dinner. It was Rona Ambrose's government that approved the bank, issued the letters of patent, and listed it in the Bank Act as a schedule I bank. Rona Ambrose has far more to do with this than does Justin Trudeau.

I just checked the Bank Act, and Wealth One Bank of Canada appears on Schedule I as of December 31, 2015; long before this dinner party took place. In fact it received it's Letters of Patent on July 22, 2015, a full 3 months before the Liberals were elected to power. They did receive their final clearance to start operating by the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions on July 7, 2016, but the OSFI is an independent agency. The Superintendent, Jeremy Rudin, was appointed in June 2014 for a 7 year term, long before the Liberals were in power. This is nothing but a low life scumbag Rona Ambrose trying to manufacture a scandal where none exists. Maybe Rona should talk to the useless Joe Oilver and ask him why he appointed Mr. Rudin if she thinks there is a scandal.

There was no private dinner, there was a fundraising dinner to which many people paid to attend. The provisional approval was made under the government that Ambrose was part of. There are billion of transactions that happen each and every single day in the government, what involvement did the Prime Minister have with this one? What does a donation to a foundation that the Prime Minister is not in any way involved have to do with anything. Only lying sleezbags like Rona Ambrose are the corrupt ones for wasting taxpayer dollars on creating innuendo. She is a perfect example of why the Conservatives have no place in government, they have to manufacture scandals because they are no longer in power to direct their own ones.

The name on the foundation is not that of the Prime Minister, and the Prime Minister has nothing to do with the foundation. It was created after the death of his father in his fathers name, there is no involvement of the Prime Minister at all. The lying scum who want to create innuendo like this instead of doing their taxpayer funded jobs should be fined $10,000 per hour they waste, Ambrose is nothing but lowlife scum.

Again 100% fabricated lies. Where did the Prime Minister have any involvement in granting approval to a private bank? I suppose what that scuzball Ambrose was in power and her government granted provisional approval to the bank, she is a shining angle? No she is a lowlife lying scuzball. What involvement did the Prime Minister have with this approval? Lying innuendo should not be allowed to stand.

Again the Prime Minister has absolutely nothing to do with the foundation. The slimy scuzballs in the opposition are trying to create something where nothing exists for their own partisan gain, they are nothing but lowlife. Why don't they do the job they are well paid by the taxpayer for, and not waste my tax dollars on their stupid partisan lies. They are the lowest of the low, they should be charged $10,000 per hour they waste on this bullshit. Focus on your job, or quit scuzballs.

So, what does the Trudeau Foundation have to do with anything? No politicians involved, just a bunch of crazy assed partisans with their filthy, stinky, innuendo. The scuzballs who are trying to link this to the Prime Minister are human filth.

What politician received any money?

What makes this influence peddling? The crazy assed stories from the political opponents?

Sounds like all those snowflakes who supported Trump because Clinton successfully defended a rapist.

It's not just Facebook. Obviously Twitter and Youtube are responsible for propagating just as much fake news. I was doing some research on gravity the other day, and the first hits on Youtube are the song by John Mayer, the movie, and then the flat-earth society misinformation. Real scientific information on gravity is way down in the list.

Yes, when the government wants to sell us on something they lowball the cost by hiding as much as they can. While I have no idea if this is the first time lifecycle costs have been used to evaluate a program, but they certainly should be.