Iggy : I will cancel the F=35

[PIK]

Just annouced, here we go again, we will now buy this plane again at twice the price or is this a code word for we are going to gut the miltary again?

[Argus]

Just annouced, here we go again, we will now buy this plane again at twice the price or is this a code word for we are going to gut the miltary again?

Jean Chretien lives again. Another political weasel willing to spend hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on penalties for breaking contracts, and short-change the military in exchange for a few desperately acquired political points.

[M.Dancer]

I think Iggy's days in politics are numbered ...this is too easy. Just mention the sea king....and the EH-101 fiasco that ended up costing us, not just a modern platform, but bags O' money

[nicky10013]

Uhhh, you guys do realize that the F-35 contract has yet to be signed and therefore there can be no penalties associated with the cancellation of the contract?

[nicky10013]

I think Iggy's days in politics are numbered ...this is too easy. Just mention the sea king....and the EH-101 fiasco that ended up costing us, not just a modern platform, but bags O' money

People who decide their vote based on the military are already voting Conservative anyway.

[Rue]

People who decide their vote based on the military are already voting Conservative anyway.

Please do not stereotype me. I am by no means a Harper conservative but I believe new fighter jets and up-dating the military are a necessity.

Edited October 27, 2010 by Rue

[wyly]

Uhhh, you guys do realize that the F-35 contract has yet to be signed and therefore there can be no penalties associated with the cancellation of the contract?

they do but they like to pretend it's a done deal to scare people...

[nicky10013]

they do but they like to pretend it's a done deal to scare people...

Of course.

They'll also be ignorning Sheila Fraser and her skepticism re: the F-35

http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/10/26/the-auditor-generals-report/

[wyly]

People who decide their vote based on the military are already voting Conservative anyway.

yup, a minority of the population...30% that will not agree with anything unless dear leader approves of it...

[nicky10013]

Please do not stereotype me. I am by no means a Harper conservative but I believe new fighter jets and up-dating the military are a necessity.

As do I. If you noted, Ignatieff never said he wouldn't buy more jets, he'd just implement an open tender process in hopes of getting the price down. It wouldn't be of any cost to the taxpayer because the contract hasn't been signed.

However, most people who will solely vote for a candidate based on their stance on the military will end up voting Conservative.

[Argus]

Uhhh, you guys do realize that the F-35 contract has yet to be signed and therefore there can be no penalties associated with the cancellation of the contract?

Yeah, we pretty much have. Or rather, the Liberals pretty much have.

Normally when countries want to buy aircraft, they approach the contractor, cut a deal and the plane is delivered. But the F-35 was conceived and developed collectively by a number of nations, who paid for the privilege of being part of the deal.

In Ottawa's case, that's amounted to US $160 million, which allows Canadian companies access to bid on contacts associated with the project. Think of it as the federal government paying the cover charge to get into a club.

Between now and 2051, the federal government is committed to spending an additional US $551 million in order to remain part of the club.

Blowing up deal would cause diplomatic/colateral damage

[Shady]

Yeah, we pretty much have. Or rather, the Liberals pretty much have.

Normally when countries want to buy aircraft, they approach the contractor, cut a deal and the plane is delivered. But the F-35 was conceived and developed collectively by a number of nations, who paid for the privilege of being part of the deal.

In Ottawa's case, that's amounted to US $160 million, which allows Canadian companies access to bid on contacts associated with the project. Think of it as the federal government paying the cover charge to get into a club.

Between now and 2051, the federal government is committed to spending an additional US $551 million in order to remain part of the club.

Blowing up deal would cause diplomatic/colateral damage

Great post. Looks like nicky, wyly, and associates are once again proven to be liars.

[The_Squid]

Chretien was a buffoon. The EH101 helicoptors were exactly what Cnada needed at the time. And we would have them by now. Cancelling that contract was sheer stupidity. The Cons approach to buying new choppers ($5bil to $11bil and 5-7 years of delay) is sheer stupidity and poor management. Equal buffoonery to the Chretien Libs.

Cancelling the F35's is actually a good call. It will save us billions of dollars... we don't need the stealth super duper stupendous machines. The two cancellations are not comparable.

I am not, nor ever have been, a Lib supporter. I won't be supporting Ignatieff either.

Edited October 27, 2010 by The_Squid

[Rue]

As do I. If you noted, Ignatieff never said he wouldn't buy more jets, he'd just implement an open tender process in hopes of getting the price down. It wouldn't be of any cost to the taxpayer because the contract hasn't been signed.

However, most people who will solely vote for a candidate based on their stance on the military will end up voting Conservative.

Thanks for that clarification. I thought so. I never heard he would cancel the contract. He is not as dumb as some would have us believe, lol.

There is a contravery over the nature in which the F-35 contract was tendered not just here but also in

Israel, Australia and in Europe.

The process was done behind closed doors and in a rush. Some of the complaining may be coming from

competitors for sure, but in this situation the contravery is not so much over whether we

need a new fighter as much as it is the TYPE of fighter.

I am no military expert but some argue its the best craft available while others say its not the right

fit for Canada which needs a longer range craft and two engines, etc.

I think most Canadians if I may be so bold as to say are like me. We are in the middle. We are not comfortable with either Harper or Iggy and we are certainly not NDP-we are smack in the middle. We

see a lot of broken promises and questionable dealings by Harper's government and the longer he stays in power the more like the very Chretien regime he claimed he would never be down to the arrogance and questionable Ministers and back room deals and fudging of the economy.

With Iggy we have no idea what he stands for. When he does give talks he seems to say very little and both he and Harper are with due respect poor public speakers and not very dynamic.

Neither captures the imagination or presents a clear vision. Harper likes to use the negative and divide and conquer tactics and appeal to the negative in people, and darned if I can figure out what Iggy stands for other than he looks bored and out of touch with me and you the average shmuck on the street.

Who does that leave me to vote for? Russell Peters I guess.

[nicky10013]

Yeah, we pretty much have. Or rather, the Liberals pretty much have.

Normally when countries want to buy aircraft, they approach the contractor, cut a deal and the plane is delivered. But the F-35 was conceived and developed collectively by a number of nations, who paid for the privilege of being part of the deal.

In Ottawa's case, that's amounted to US $160 million, which allows Canadian companies access to bid on contacts associated with the project. Think of it as the federal government paying the cover charge to get into a club.

Between now and 2051, the federal government is committed to spending an additional US $551 million in order to remain part of the club.

Blowing up deal would cause diplomatic/colateral damage

The people who actually signed the deal was to say that this is a normal procedure to allow Canadian firms access to development contracts. It in no way binds us to actually buying the plane.

Firstly, Canada apparently won’t have to place a firm order until the fall of 2012, and won’t have to agree to a contract until 2013. So it seems that if the cost to Canada spins out of control, despite Slack’s assurances, there’s still a chance to back out.

[nicky10013]

Great post. Looks like nicky, wyly, and associates are once again proven to be liars.

Nobody here has lied about anything. The only people coming close are the people who are spinning the facts to support the purchases.

An interesting article from the Globe and Mail

Stealth jets, brought to you by a spin machine on steroids

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/stealth-jets-brought-to-you-by-a-spin-machine-on-steroids/article1729089/

Edited October 27, 2010 by nicky10013

[Argus]

Cancelling the F35's is actually a good call. It will save us billions of dollars... we don't need the stealth super duper stupendous machines. The two cancellations are not comparable.

They are virtually identical. It is a needed system which the Liberals haven't even denied. Have you not noticed how they're parsing their words and calling for open competition instead of saying the deal is bad? They're making suggestions, not statements. But you can bet one thing, like Chretien before him, if Ignatieff cancels this contract it will be years before they announce a tender for a new fighter. The competition will take many years, and DND will be instructed to make sure that any OTHER aircraft wins it.

Chretien didn't particularly care if people died in the meantime, and apparently, neither does Ignatieff.

Or you.

I am not, nor ever have been, a Lib supporter. I won't be supporting Ignatieff either.

I'm guessing Ignatieff is way too conservative for you?

[Argus]

As do I. If you noted, Ignatieff never said he wouldn't buy more jets, he'd just implement an open tender process in hopes of getting the price down.

Preposterous nonsense. First off, a tendering/bidding process would take about three years and hundreds of millions of dollars. Then you would wind up with either the same jet at a higher price (The Liberals would NEVER EVER agree to buying the same jet after making such a fuss) or a less capable aircraft.

Clearly some people here don't care if our pilots have to fly second rate aircraft. It's not their asses on the line, after all.

It's certainly clear Ignatieff and his party don't care. Not that they ever have.

Edited October 27, 2010 by Argus

[Topaz]

What the Libs have said was if Michael was PM, he would cancel the F-35 UNTIL an open bid was done to see what is out there, if there is, to replace the F-35. We should buy a jet to secure Canada, not a stealth so we can go to N. Korea or Iran and get into another war and I really think that`s why the Tories line of thinking is. After all, Harper was for going into Iraq with the US. There`s a difference between, do we NEED it or do we WANT it. Is there another jet that can do the job the F-18 are doing now. How far in debt do you want this country to go into? Is the next generation going to be able to pay for all this spending the Tories are doing?

[Alta4ever]

What the Libs have said was if Michael was PM, he would cancel the F-35 UNTIL an open bid was done to see what is out there, if there is, to replace the F-35. We should buy a jet to secure Canada, not a stealth so we can go to N. Korea or Iran and get into another war and I really think that`s why the Tories line of thinking is. After all, Harper was for going into Iraq with the US. There`s a difference between, do we NEED it or do we WANT it. Is there another jet that can do the job the F-18 are doing now. How far in debt do you want this country to go into? Is the next generation going to be able to pay for all this spending the Tories are doing?

Apparently the liberals have no idea of how Google works. There are three aircraft that fifth generation, the F-22, T-50, and the F-35, of these three only one is available to us for purchase.

[Argus]

What the Libs have said was if Michael was PM, he would cancel the F-35 UNTIL an open bid was done to see what is out there, if there is, to replace the F-35. We should buy a jet to secure Canada, not a stealth so we can go to N. Korea or Iran and get into another war and I really think that`s why the Tories line of thinking is.

The Tories line of thinking is that we tend to use our aircraft until they're on death's doorstep so we'd better get good ones.

Or it could be that since we've already contributed $160 million towards its development, and promised to contribute another $500 million, we ought to buy the goddamn plane.

[wyly]

What the Libs have said was if Michael was PM, he would cancel the F-35 UNTIL an open bid was done to see what is out there, if there is, to replace the F-35. We should buy a jet to secure Canada, not a stealth so we can go to N. Korea or Iran and get into another war and I really think that`s why the Tories line of thinking is. After all, Harper was for going into Iraq with the US. There`s a difference between, do we NEED it or do we WANT it. Is there another jet that can do the job the F-18 are doing now. How far in debt do you want this country to go into? Is the next generation going to be able to pay for all this spending the Tories are doing?

good post...yes there are a number of planes that will do the job and motivated sellers, american, brits, german, french, swedish, russian all willing to make a deal...if I had unlimited funds I could buy a Hummer as my everyday vehicle nut I don't so my toyota does the job just fine...

[The_Squid]

The Tories line of thinking is that we tend to use our aircraft until they're on death's doorstep so we'd better get good ones.

Or it could be that since we've already contributed $160 million towards its development, and promised to contribute another $500 million, we ought to buy the goddamn plane.

There is no need to spend billions on a jet that we don't need. THe contribution for development was so that our aerospace industry can bid on contracts associated with the plane. There is no obligation beyond that and no reason to buy this flying Ferrari.

[Alta4ever]

There is no need to spend billions on a jet that we don't need. THe contribution for development was so that our aerospace industry can bid on contracts associated with the plane. There is no obligation beyond that and no reason to buy this flying Ferrari.

Our F-18's are fast approaching the end of their service life, they need to be replaced.

[guyser]

Preposterous nonsense. First off, a tendering/bidding process would take about three years and hundreds of millions of dollars.

The length it takes I can understand, but how does the hundreds of millions work?

Most bid processes the bidder submits a certified cheque (not saying they would here)