Panel mum on fighter choice
Report doesn’t say which military jet would best meet Canada’s needs
OTTAWA — An independent panel examining the purchase of a new fighter jet has placed the choice of plane firmly in the hands of the Conservative government.
The panel’s report does not recommend which plane would best meet Canada’s needs. Instead, it outlines risks and costs associated with each aircraft, said Keith Coulter, a former fighter pilot and member of a four-person panel overseeing the process.
Coulter was joined Thursday at a news conference, held to outline the results of the review process, by members of the Royal Canadian Air Force, the federal Department of Public Works and other government officials.
Deputy ministers are expected to provide advice on which plane to select, with cabinet then making the final decision. There is no timetable for that decision.
The choice focuses on whether to buy the F-35 stealth fighter, or to conduct a competition between that fighter and three other jets. In addition to the F-35, the review looked at the Boeing Super Hornet, the Eurofighter Typhoon and the Dassault Rafale.
The panel’s examination, which looked at cost, long-term maintenance, the risks of each plane and the need for upgrades over time, will give ministers enough information to make their choice, Coulter said.
At the news conference, panel members declined to provide their personal views on which aircraft best suits Canada’s needs.
But both bureaucrats and the panel defended the selection process amid concerns it is rigged to favour the F-35.
“The purpose of this is not (to) reach conclusions or recommendations, but to satisfy ministers that the necessary rigorous analytic work has been done and that it’s been done fairly and objectively,” said panel member James Mitchell, a former senior government official.
Opposition MPs have suggested the current process is designed to favour the F-35 and are calling for an open competition.
Al Williams, the former head of procurement for the Defence Department who oversaw Canada’s initial involvement in the F-35 program, has dismissed the current process as a government public relations ploy. He argues that a competition, where all candidate jets are properly evaluated, is the only way to proceed.
The RCAF, whose previous analysis selected the F-35, oversaw this latest examination.
The four panel members are Coulter, who served as head of the Communications Security Establishment spy agency; University of Ottawa professor Philippe Lagassé, who was a critic of the way the government initially chose the F-35; former senior government official Mitchell; and former federal comptroller-general Rod Monette, who also served in senior management at DND.
Canada’s air force, and the Defence Department, have long favoured the F-35, having selected it in 2006 as the only fighter they feel can meet Canada’s needs.
In addition, Lockheed Martin has confirmed that Canadian funding and participation in the F-35 program continue unchanged, and that the firm is still planning deliveries to the RCAF.
In 2012, even as the government was saying it was looking at other options, air force leaders confirmed they were preparing to receive the F-35.
The F-35 has become a major political headache for the Conservative government. Although the previous Liberal government originally signed on to a research and development program for the plane, the Conservatives significantly expanded that, and in 2010 committed Canada to purchasing the aircraft, making it a linchpin of their defence policy.
In April 2012, Auditor General Michael Ferguson slammed the plan to buy 65 F-35 jets, accusing both Public Works and Defence of lowballing the cost and not doing their homework.
In response, the government launched a review of the proposed fighter jet purchase.
In December 2012, the government received a report from an independent auditor who put the full cost of the proposed F-35 purchase at $44.8 billion.