ExFlyer

No, he cancelled the project that was going to buy SAR and Maritime helicopters in one combined procurement. And he was right to do so. The single type of helicopter for SAR and Maritime was not workable or doable. For SAR, the EH101 variant was an excellent choice (and turned out to be the one we got) but, the EH 101 for ships was completely wrong. The ships we had could not be easily or economically be modified to carry the EH 101 so it would have been cancelled anyway. No, he did buy the Cormorant (EH 101 variant) and he did buy the Cyclone (S92 variant) for Sea King replacement. No, Justin did not cancel the F35 procurement. It was Harper that did that. "Stephen Harper's Conservative government announced in 2010 the intention to purchase 65 F-35 fighter jets via a sole-source contract. However, due to immense controversy over costs, a lack of competitive bidding, and an Auditor General report, the government backed away from the final purchase in 2012, placing the procurement on hold" Once again, you are wrong...the conservatives had not made any, or very few Military purchases and the Liberals did not cancel any of them with exception of the omnibus EH101 procurement....

I was in the Military for 35 years. I saw and read many many "proposals" and "papers". Most were just as you said, for the domestic audience. In all my years, the Military was not "that flavour" for the Canadian public. The only time the Military got any real sympathy was when we started bringing home soldiers in coffins from Afghanistan.... and that was short lived. :(

Never said buying used British subs was a good idea or even a smart idea...just saying Liberals did it The reason I even mentioned it was that on the same day the defence minister was in England espousing the great deal that was made for old used subs, we (me included) were in Milan taking delivery of the first SAR Cormorant from Augusta with the highly regarded secretary of the Canadian Embassy as a the official Canadian government representative LOL Oh and, there was only a white paper "proposal" in the late 80's to look at buying 10 or so nuclear powered subs but I think the US stepped on that idea LOL

Yes, Chretien was a liberal. He was PM when we purchased the Cormorant SAR helicopter. Also the subs from England and replacement for the old H model Hercs and for some air to air refuelling Hercs. As well as Chinooks for Afghanistan. He also was the one that bought into the F35 development program. Justin began the process for the Sea King replacement and procurement project and got them delivered in his tenure. As well as the Fixed Wing SAR program. And Herc J model procurement. And C-17 procurement. I cannot speak to Army of Navy issues but...they did quite a bit., maybe not enough but far from "decade of darkness".

I disagree, moving the coast guard into the Military is smart and can make the coast guard an effective branch of Canadian sovereignty and defence. I never said they are not "armed" but, since you brought it up, what weaponry does the coast guard have? I have worked with the coast guard many times in my career, while in Comox and in Gander and can say they are not "military" in any way. They are most effective on the East coast with the ice breakers but on the West coast, primarily fisheries and lighthouse support. Their helicopters do not even havehoists so they cannot do rescues at sea. They are not considered military or even a police force. They cannot do drug interdiction as the do not have anything but a few small arms. Until integration, it was considered a civilian fleet. Coast Guards in other maritime countries are all part of the Military. While you may think it is political (whatever that is supposed to mean), it is a smart thing to do.

Nope...not using Harper as a foil...just trying to debunk that he was good for the Military. "the Harper government reduced military spending between 2012 and 2015, cutting approximately $1.1 billion by 2014-15 and lowering defense spending to 1% of GDP, the lowest in Canadian history at the time. While initially pledging to increase funding, the Conservative government enforced cuts, cancelled procurement projects like Close Combat Vehicles, and saw billions in approved budgets go unspent."

I think integrating our coast guard into the military brings the coast guard into line with other coast guards in the world. A step in the right direction. If they are part of the military...it for sure represents military spending. Considering they were not part of the military before it is certainly military spending to support them.

Thank goodness for that too LOL The point was not who is here and who is not, it is who did the most for out Military....and it was not a conservative.

Actually, integrating the Coast Guard into the military will give them more than just fisheries and lighthouse replenishment duties. It can mean the coast guard with their ice breakers can be used for sovereignty duties in the North and drug interdiction tasks off our coasts. It is really not a bad change.

Harper hated the military. The Liberals were the ones that got the military what they need. The Conservative government under Stephen Harper did not meet the NATO commitment of spending 2% of GDP on defence. In 2014, when NATO allies agreed to move towards the 2% target, Canada's defence spending was approximately 1% of its GDP. [1, 2, 3] Key details regarding the Harper government's NATO spending record: Non-Committal Stance: While other leaders pledged to reach the 2% target within 10 years, Harper was non-committal at the 2014 summit, stating he would not engage in a "massive military expansion just for the sake of doing so". "Aspirational Target": Harper's office agreed to treat the 2% target as an "aspirational" goal rather than a binding commitment. Spending Declines: Although the Conservatives often pointed to increases in military expenditures, the defense budget was in some years smaller than in 2007, and major spending for equipment renewal declined, according to the Conference of Defence Associations. Get over it. That slogan went away after the election...it only lives in the minds of the LOSER conservatives LOL

It took him 11 months to realize Trudeau was not in politics anymore LOL

Seems to me it was the Bloq and CAQ that made the noise. Uhhh, the Bloq and CAQ made the noise.

It is a very sad thing when some people make a tragedy such as this to gain political points. I saw what his comments on TV and while he did not speak french, there were subtitles. he is the CEO of one of the largest airlines in the world and the language of aviation, world wide, is English. Maybe it is time for Air Canada headquarters be moved. out of Montreal.

As Canada hits NATO 2% goal, Carney vows more as warfare ‘rapidly’ changes https://globalnews.ca/news/11746906/canada-nato-allies-met-or-went-beyond-2-target/ Thank goodness we are finally over the Harper decline LOL AI Overview The Conservative government under Stephen Harper did not meet the NATO commitment of spending 2% of GDP on defence. In 2014, when NATO allies agreed to move towards the 2% target, Canada's defence spending was approximately 1% of its GDP. [1, 2, 3] Key details regarding the Harper government's NATO spending record: Non-Committal Stance: While other leaders pledged to reach the 2% target within 10 years, Harper was non-committal at the 2014 summit, stating he would not engage in a "massive military expansion just for the sake of doing so". "Aspirational Target": Harper's office agreed to treat the 2% target as an "aspirational" goal rather than a binding commitment. Spending Declines: Although the Conservatives often pointed to increases in military expenditures, the defense budget was in some years smaller than in 2007, and major spending for equipment renewal declined, according to the Conference of Defence Associations.

Yup for 11 plus years in power and 3+ more years to come. Seems you have been stuck in the LOSER category for the same period of time...I think it is you that needs the Vaseline LOL You seem to be a leader in the

No matter what you try to say...Liberals have been in power for over 11 years and 3 more to come. Seems there are more Canadian voters than conservative voters LOL If the cons had more votes then they would be in power but ...they did not and are, once again...in second place, or if you like it better, first place of the LOSERS LOL It is obvious that the pedophile LOSER like you cannot stop whining and crying about being a LOSER LOL

The history of US involvement in Iran goes way back to the early 50's. Th conservatives must have someone awake all night long to read Trumps nighttime tweets. Whenever he wakes at night to have a dump, he sits there and tweets LOL When PP was having a podcast day with Rogan, he tried to come across as some sort of Canadian but really, he came across as a conservative...not saying anything that has not already been said...by Carney LOL No matter how hard they try, the conservatives and heir leader still reflect Trump.

And they continue to lose the elections. Clearly tells you what kind of management the conservative party has...a LOSER management team LOL Seems it is you that is not a fan of history pedophile LOSER LOL

So accomplishing nothing is what the conservatives do best??? Please list their accomplishments over the past 15 years?? Oh, a short list...or no list at all LOL I don't shill for the liberals.... they certainly do not need me... but... I do shit on the conservatives that have done nothing and accomplished noting and are the LOSERS for the past 15 years LOL

Well, it is certainly difficult to shill for the conservatives LOL LOL LOL bedmates??? You mean Harper that bailed on you, then O'Foole? Then Scheer? Now PP HA HA HA

I am pretty sure whatever the liberal accomplishments are,...they are far more than the ones the conservatives had in the past decade LOL Can you list conservative accomplishments??? It should be as easy as counting all the Stanley cups the Maple Leafs have from the past 50 years LOL I know you are having great difficulty accepting defeat and admitting you are LOSER. Records from 2015 to 2025, there area few highlights several key accomplishments aimed at expanding social safety nets, strengthening environmental protections, and investing in infrastructure. Key Accomplishments (2015–2025): Social Policy & Poverty Reduction: The Canada Child Benefit was introduced, which helped lift 435,000 children out of poverty. The government also lowered the retirement age back to 65 from 67. Childcare & Dental Care: The government secured agreements to implement $10-a-day childcare across provinces and introduced the Canadian Dental Care Plan for uninsured residents. Climate Change & Energy: Introduced a national price on pollution (carbon tax). Legalization of Cannabis: Legalized cannabis with strict regulations, which generated tax revenue used for initiatives like funding to combat substance abuse. Infrastructure & Housing: Invested in national infrastructure, including expanding transit and reducing drinking water advisories on reserves. Indigenous Reconciliation: Committed to implementing the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's recommendations and launched an inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls (MMIWG). Taxation & Economy: Lowered income taxes for the middle class and increased taxes on the highest 1% of earners. LGBTQ+ and Gender Equity: Appointed Canada’s first gender-balanced cabinet and enacted the Pay Equity Act. Mixed Results & Critical Context: Economic Impact: While employment reached record highs at times, critics argue that policies contributed to inflation and high cost-of-living issues, specifically in housing. Immigration: The government significantly increased immigration, which critics argue put pressure on existing infrastructure and healthcare systems, leading to a policy shift in 2024–2025 to reduce these targets. Pipeline & Economy: While the Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion was completed under the Liberal government, it was a polarizing project for both environmental and economic reasons.

Awww, ya can't even praise your own party and guy....why is that?? Oh yeah, 4 time losers and they have done nothing in over a decade and will do nothing for another 3+ years LOL Man, it must suck to be on a losing team for that many years LOL You must be a Maple Leaf fan too...so used to LOSING all the time LOL

Nope, but sure did get under your skin LOL You don't have to offer any praise...you just need to understand liberals won 4 in a row, and you lost 4 in a row. with 3 different leaders...must be a reason for that, and it is not becasue Canadians are stupid...they are very aware and realize there is no praise for the conservatives LOL Aww, poor little pedophile LOSER... PP went from 20 points ahead to win the election and then LOST!!! And now he is over 20 points behind...a real LOSER...just like you LOL LOL LOL

Barely a year and PP totally tanked LOL The Liberals had 4 chances and won them all... The conservatives had 4 chances and 3 leaders and lost them all LOL LOL LOL Primarily, it is because the didn't have O'Foole, Scheer and PP LOL So, start singing

Awww. You no like the polls? LOL Meltdown?? Better have a look in the mirror pedophile LOSER...the meltdown is all you LOL Who is "freaking out" except you? I am celebrating at the drop in conservative numbers LOL Check them out....you are on a LOSING team which is right on for a pedophile LOSER like you LOL LOL LOL https://338canada.com/federal.htm National polls Rating Leader Nanos Research 2026-03-20, n=1,024(1/4) A 46 33 12 4 5 LPC +13 Liaison Strategies 2026-03-15, n=1,000(1/2) B+ 46 32 9 3 7 LPC +14 Angus Reid Institute 2026-03-14, n=4,005 A− 44 36 9 2 7 LPC +8 Nanos Research 2026-03-13, n=1,015(1/4) A 48 31 11 4 5 LPC +17 EKOS 2026-03-11, n=1,047 B+ 48 27 15 5 4 LPC +21 Abacus Data 2026-03-08, n=1,931 A− 46 35 7 3 7 LPC +11 Liaison Strategies 2026-03-08, n=1,000(1/2) B+ 45 31 8 3 6 LPC +14 Nanos Research 2026-03-06, n=1,023(1/4) A 46 33 10 5 5 LPC +13 Mainstreet Research 2026-03-02, n=1,087 A− 46 36 7 2 4 LPC +10 Léger 2026-03-01, n=1,627 A+ 49 35 5 3 5 LPC +14 Liaison Strategies 2026-03-01, n=1,000(1/2) B+ 44 30 9 3 6 LPC +14 Nanos Research 2026-02-27, n=1,015(1/4) A 44 33 11 5 5 LPC +11 Ipsos 2026-02-26, n=1,001 A 44 36 8 3 7 LPC +8 Angus Reid Institute 2026-02-22, n=1,650 A− 45 32 10 4 7 LPC +13 Liaison Strategies 2026-02-22, n=1,000(1/2) B+ 43 33 9 3 6 LPC +10 Abacus Data 2026-02-21, n=1,500 A− 44 38 7 3 6 LPC +6 Nanos Research 2026-02-20, n=1,021(1/4) A 41 34 11 5 8 LPC +7 Liaison Strategies 2026-02-15, n=1,000(1/2) B+ 45 33 9 3 6 LPC +12 Nanos Research 2026-02-13, n=1,018(1/4) A 38 37 11 4 8 LPC +1 Innovative Research 2026-02-12, n=1,838 B− 44 37 8 3 6 LPC +7 Abacus Data 2026-02-08, n=1,915 A− 44 37 8 3 6 LPC +7 Liaison Strategies 2026-02-08, n=1,000(1/2) B+ 43 34 10 2 6 LPC +9 Nanos Research 2026-02-06, n=1,049(1/4) A 39 35 13 3 9 LPC +4 R esearch Co. 2026-02-05, n=1,001 A− 45 32 10 3 7 LPC +13 Mainstreet Research 2026-02-01, n=1,276 A− 51 36 4 2 5 LPC +15 Liaison Strategies 2026-02-01, n=1,000(1/2) B+ 42 35 9 3 7 LPC +7 Nanos Research 2026-01-30, n=1,055(1/4) A 39 35 13 3 9 LPC +4 Innovative Research 2026-01-28, n=1,666 B− 40 38 10 3 7 LPC +2 Léger 2026-01-25, n=1,611 A+ 47 38 5 2 6 LPC +9 Abacus Data 2026-01-25, n=2,498 A− 43 39 8 2 6 LPC +4 Angus Reid Institute 2026-01-25, n=1,420 A− 41 38 10 2 7 LPC +3 Liaison Strategies 2026-01-25, n=1,000(1/2) B+ 43 35 8 3 7 LPC +8 Nanos Research 2026-01-23, n=1,053(1/4) A 39 35 12 3 8 LPC +4 EKOS 2026-01-19, n=1,453 B+ 44 30 14 4 5 LPC +14 Liaison Strategies 2026-01-18, n=1,000(1/2) B+ 42 34 10 3 8 LPC +8 Nanos Research 2026-01-16, n=1,084(1/4) A 39 35 12 5 8 LPC +4 A− 41 39 8 3 7 LPC +2