F-35 Purchase

[Smallc]

Wrong.

It's not wrong if they've already shown that they're willing to pay the current costs - costs that aren't appreciably different.

Edited April 14, 2012 by Smallc

[Guest Derek L]

MSVS-2011

Shipbuilding strategy-2010

Chinooks -2009

Leopard 2-2007

JSS-2009

Arctic Patrol Ship Project-2007

All of this projects were approved after 2006.

I was just about to ask the same question………..In particular, where was Oppositions’ outrage over the National Shipbuilding Strategy? This programs alone will likely cost, with life cycle costs factored in, 3, 4, 5 times the amount as the JSF……….Yet the NDP is supportive of this program?

[cybercoma]

How many times does it have to be said that it's not about the jets? Will it help if it's a larger font, maybe a different colour and underlined? Do you need some smilies to go with that to understand the problem?

[Signals.Cpl]

I think the conservatives could solve this problem really easily. Inform Quebec that the contract for maintaining and upgrading the F-35's will come to them and suddenly the NDP will cease to complain.

[Signals.Cpl]

How many times does it have to be said that it's not about the jets? Will it help if it's a larger font, maybe a different colour and underlined? Do you need some smilies to go with that to understand the problem?

What is it about then? What I see is the Conservatives handling this PR issue in the most incompetent way possible and the opposition lying to the Canadian public by not informing that the extra 10 billion is coming out of the DND budget.

[Guest Derek L]

I think the conservatives could solve this problem really easily. Inform Quebec that the contract for maintaining and upgrading the F-35's will come to them and suddenly the NDP will cease to complain.

Well Pratt & Whitney are making engine components Quebec.......

[Guest Derek L]

What is it about then? What I see is the Conservatives handling this PR issue in the most incompetent way possible and the opposition lying to the Canadian public by not informing that the extra 10 billion is coming out of the DND budget.

Indeed, and why isn’t the NDP jumping up and down over the total costs of the National Shipbuilding Program not “being made public”? Is it because some of the shipyards are in NDP ridings?

[Signals.Cpl]

Indeed, and why isn’t the NDP jumping up and down over the total costs of the National Shipbuilding Program not “being made public”? Is it because some of the shipyards are in NDP ridings?

Because they are right, its not about the jets, its about politics and the NDP, the liberals and their hardcore supporters do not seem to care that they will be putting Canadian Lives in danger.

[capricorn]

What I see is the Conservatives handling this PR issue in the most incompetent way possible

Their saving grace is that the voting public is smart enough to see through the opposition's game.

The Conservatives were late in making the case that the costs were accounted for, just not in the way the AG would prefer, but going forward they would follow the AG's recommended model. The Conservatives really didn't have a choice in the matter. Over and above political parties, Canadians trust the Auditor General's word most. In the end, the opposition's rantings have been effectively neutered. On to the next faux scandal. Did you hear the one about Harper spending $45,000.00 of taxpayers' money to attend a baseball game...?

[Signals.Cpl]

Their saving grace is that the voting public is smart enough to see through the opposition's game.

The Conservatives were late in making the case that the costs were accounted for, just not in the way the AG would prefer, but going forward they would follow the AG's recommended model. The Conservatives really didn't have a choice in the matter. Over and above political parties, Canadians trust the Auditor General's word most. In the end, the opposition's rantings have been effectively neutered. On to the next faux scandal. Did you hear the one about Harper spending $45,000.00 of taxpayers' money to attend a baseball game...?

Yeah, its getting pathetic.

[Smallc]

Did you hear the one about Harper spending $45,000.00 of taxpayers' money to attend a baseball game...?

No kidding. Like, seriously?

[capricorn]

No kidding. Like, seriously?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/04/13/harper-baseball-trip.html

Edited April 15, 2012 by capricorn

[Smallc]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/04/13/harper-baseball-trip.html

Oh I saw it....it's Challenger jets all over again...

[Signals.Cpl]

Their saving grace is that the voting public is smart enough to see through the opposition's game.

To be honest, I think that the Canadian public is not informed well enough about the military and part of the blame falls on the military for closing and downsizing bases in or near major cities thus making a disconnect between the people and the military. Most people are not well informed about the military and what it does for Canada and what it needs from Canada because of the false belief about peacekeeping.

[Signals.Cpl]

Oh I saw it....it's Challenger jets all over again...

If the CBC is not putting tax dollars to good use the government should have withdrawn 100% of the funding. I mean this type of recycling does not really help the environment just makes the CBC more and more irrelevant in Canada and to Canadians.

[capricorn]

Most people are not well informed about the military and what it does for Canada and what it needs from Canada because of the false belief about peacekeeping.

IMO, no amount of PR will bring the message home that the military plays an integral part in defending our sovereignty. Sadly, I don't think Canadians will be awakened to the need for a strong military until Canada experiences its own 9/11.

[cybercoma]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/04/13/harper-baseball-trip.html

That's a stupid non-issue that the CBC is blowing out of proportion.

[Signals.Cpl]

IMO, no amount of PR will bring the message home that the military plays an integral part in defending our sovereignty. Sadly, I don't think Canadians will be awakened to the need for a strong military until Canada experiences its own 9/11.

People need to realize that we cannot compete with the US but at the same time we cannot be the polar opposite of the Americans. We need our own military to answer to our own government and be capable of meeting all the needs that are placed on them CF.

[Smallc]

That's a stupid non-issue that the CBC is blowing out of proportion.

See, that's how I feel about the F-35 cost things (though I understand that it isn't about the cost for you). The number of comments I've seen on message boards that are just so uninformed over the $25B figure.......

[Army Guy]

This isn't new. This has been the rules according to our Treasury Board since 2006. Moreover, life-cycle costing (LCC) principles have been in use for decades. Engineers began costing projects this way in the early 1980s. NASA began using LCC in the 1960s.

The problem with using only acquisition costs is that it doesn't account for how much money will be necessary to operate and maintain the equipment/asset's being purchased, nor does it consider potential costly disposal fees at the end of the equipment/asset's life.

We know when the rule came in, I'm asking when a DND procument project was release to the public under these rules, and what project was it. todate 2012 no military project has been released to the public that fully complies with these rules...

LCC costing is a guess at best, it does not give you a true cost of anything, it's all about taking a bunch historic data , normally data collected during peace time with no operations ongoing and times it all by the guessed service life.

What it does not take into account is actual operations, as seen in Afghanistan, it does not take into account Dart type missions, or diasters at home, it also does not take into account how cheap our government really is, and how much past it's orginal est life span we keep equipment..nor does it account for inflation, our strength of our dollar, price of oil, there is thousands of factors not considered...hence why LCC is not an effective accounting tool, which is why DND accounts for it's O&M budget every year,at the end of each year, it's accounted to the cent and presented to the government, it projects all the factors we just talked about and asks the government for the next budget. Want to know how much the F-18 cost us that year it is all listed in the last years budget...

It's not the problem acquisition cost are just that, how much is it going to cost us for this purchase today....want to know exactly how much a piece of equipment has cost us todate, to the cent it is available to the public. want to use LCC then it is a guess at best, wonder how many people would buy a home if we used LCC costing, and if we don't use it in our daily lifes then why are we demanding our government use it for the first time on this project, because they want to scare the shit out of the tax payer...

If LCC is not considered at all, the government will be completely in the dark about how much money it will actually need to sustain the equipment/asset being procured. LCC allows them to better predict how much money will be needed. Governments around the world have been using LCC for decades because it's necessary for budgeting and understanding the government's expenses and what future costs the procurement of an asset will put on them.

The LCC is used , but it is a base figure only, and not used in any accounting, or quoting actual costs. the government already keeps track of all records of how much each major equipment has cost us, and tracks it by CFR, or tail number of ship number, these records are available to the public. they track everything down to the penny, except they don't track wages , how many lunches the pilot had, or how much windex was used to clean the windows. those are tracked else where in the budget...

as far as knowing the future costs of anything another purcurement process will be started and the bidding agencies will tell you straight up what the costs are going to be.

Standard accounting practices over the last several decades say you're wrong. The Treasury Board rules say you're wrong. The government's internal documentation say you're wrong. Life-cycle costing is standard procedure and it's the only way to make an informed decision about asset procurement. The asset is useless if you don't have a plan to sustain it over its life. The Canadian taxpayers have every right to know how much that's going to cost them.

how can you make an informed decision on a best guess...when we are talking bils of dollars...this is not the standard i want it is not the standard that is asked of me when doing my job...and your right an asset is useless if we don't have a plan, DND already has a plan and it is accounted every year in it's O&M budget available for everyone to see. It how most nations work thier O&M budgets yearly.....

LCC is a new process and if you going to use it to account for major purchases then a total re vamp of DND's budget needs to be done, and every peice of equipment will need to be assigned LCC funding, you can see the problem can't you....this is the only project that has these rules appied to it...DND's budget will actually shrink in size because it will no longer need to account for O&M funding it will already been accounted for, well atleast until that best guess runs short, but that will be years down the road, or an operation comes up and eats up 2 or 3 years of funding in one year...who's going to replace that funding , do we go back and ask for more , do we have to start a new purchase agreement, and let the tax payers know someone who guessed f***ked it up we need x more bils....Is that the type of accounting you want...

[Guest Derek L]

To be honest, I think that the Canadian public is not informed well enough about the military and part of the blame falls on the military for closing and downsizing bases in or near major cities thus making a disconnect between the people and the military. Most people are not well informed about the military and what it does for Canada and what it needs from Canada because of the false belief about peacekeeping.

I blame the disconnect not so much on the base closure factor, but in fact on DND itself. If one looks at other western militaries, you’ll find that most contract to outside PR firms for public outreach programs. Aside from those who are currently serving, have served or have a niche interest like smallc or DOP, most Canadian’s perception of our military is garnered through the mainstream media. Now I’m not saying all Canadian media venues purposely cast the military in a negative light or intentionally mislead the public, this is not the case.

The problem, and the same can be said about many other topics, is that generally speaking, the media has to sell their stories and good news doesn’t sell. Also on the more technical points, like any other topic, many in the media simply don’t understand what it is they are conveying to the public, be it simple fact checking errors contributing to a false perception (i.e. Everything is a Tank, Battleship or a “stealth attack bomber”) or the inability to explain a complex subject in only a few paragraphs or 30 second sound bites.

I don’t consider the public “stupid” but unlearned, and this is not their fault, but the fault of the military, for allowing the media to misinterpret them to the public……

[bush_cheney2004]

...I don’t consider the public “stupid” but unlearned, and this is not their fault, but the fault of the military, for allowing the media to misinterpret them to the public……

Yours is a very keen observation...but it gets worse, because right next store is a media giant that amps up all things military to the max, and it spills across the border in spades. Many Canadians know more about the American military than there own Canadian Forces.

[Guest Derek L]

Yours is a very keen observation...but it gets worse, because right next store is a media giant that amps up all things military to the max, and it spills across the border in spades. Many Canadians know more about the American military than there own Canadian Forces.

Indeed, but that could be said about a great many subjects………We’re “Peacekeepers” well you guys are “War Mongers”…….Even though, since Canada has had a military, directly or indirectly, we’ve be involved in every major conflict as you guys……..But we’re a nation of “Peacekeepers”, unless one belligerent side starts hacking up the other sides women and children with machetes, then we’ll blame you “war mongers” for not preventing it.

[waldo]

What is it about then? What I see is the Conservatives handling this PR issue in the most incompetent way possible and the opposition lying to the Canadian public by not informing that the extra 10 billion is coming out of the DND budget.

no - the Canadian public needs to understand how much funding the Canadian military is receiving, whether capital or operational based. As MLW member cybercoma repeatedly states, Treasury Board policy rules dictate delineated costs, capital versus operational, must be reported... this is a most fundamental auditing requirement to help ensure that money earmarked for capital programs is not spent on operations and vice versa.

clearly, overall cost was purposely 'down played' by Harper Conservatives, whether by "hiding" the operational costs, outright, or by skewing them with a ridiculous 20-year life-cycle attachment.

[DogOnPorch]

The NDP's choice for Canada's newest combat aircraft. The best Allied fighter of WW1.

Jokes aside...here's a Sunday morning tale for you...

http://acepilots.com/wwi/can_barker.html