Lakeshore Advance, 2013-01-02, Page 5Wednesda , Jan . 2, 2013 • Lakeshore Advance 5
Community
Absolutely no taxpayer money has yet been spent
on acquisition costs for a replacement aircraft
MP Shipley discusses
the F-35 Jet
MP Bev Shipley
•9shore Advance
'There has been a good deal of
discussion over the past year or so
concerning our government's plan
to replace our aging CF -18 aircraft;
which at the time of purchase were
the most technically advanced air-
craft available.
By 2020 our CF - 18's will have
reached the end of their useful life.
They must be replaced. The men
and women of the Canadian
Armed Forces need the tools to do
their jobs. 'These tools are expen-
sive and buying them is often a
complex and challenging process
involving numerous different fed-
eral departments. We must ensure
that public monies are well spent,
that military needs are met, and
that jobs are delivered for Cana-
dian workers.
In 2010, Ministers McKay,
Ambrose and Clement announced
our government's intent to pursue
a replacement aircraft for the
aging CF -18. At that announce-
ment, they said we would spend
$9 billion, including contingency,
to buy 65 aircraft plus spare parts,
and weapons.
Our involvement in this pro-
curementprocess has resulted in
significant industrial benefits for
e»nadian businesses and job -cre-
ators. As I write this, about 70
Bev Shipley, MP
Canadian businesses have
received approximately 84311 mil-
lion in contracts, which in turn
have allowed them to create many
high tech jobs, not only in the aer-
ospace industry, but throughout
the supply chain as Well, Further,
(:anadian husin'sses will have an
opportunity to bid on an addi-
tional $9.3 billion in future
contracts.
Later in the process, they also
advised the public of the esti-
mated cast of aircrati tnuintenmre
over 11 twenty year period. 'These
two investments - buying the
plan's and maintaining them -
would be new expenditures of
money. Of course, we would con-
tinue to spend on things such as
pilot salaries and fuel to operate
these new aircraft, just as we do
with our current fleet. 'these oper-
ating costs are paid today and they
will continue to be paid no matter
what fighter aircraft Canada buys.
Some have questioned why
we costed the replacement fighter
program over 20 years and not
longer. Simply put, past govern-
ments and leading officials have
considered 20 -years to he a period
over which costs could be pre-
dicted with confidence. In 2001,
Alan Williams, the official in
charge of procurement at National
Defence at the time stated, "rather
than find ourselves in a position
where we buy something that
looks like a good deal only to find
out that the incremental long-
term support costs escalate dra-
matically, we are saying, no, not
this time. We want to know the
full cost for 20 years." In 2004,
when the former Liberal govern-
ment announced the Maritime
I Ielieopler Project, they signed off
on a 20 -year in-service support
contract. Earlier this year, the Sec-
retary of the 'Treasury Board
stated, "all of the submissions to
slate have been presented to the
Treasury Board have used a
20 -year cost estimate." So, in esti-
mating the program costs over 20
years, We were following the
accepted practice for major mili-
tary purchases.
To date, we have not yet spent a
single penny to acquire new
fighter plan's.
Earlier this year, the Auditor
General of Canada recommended
that we "provide the actual com-
plete costs incurred throughout
the full life cycle of the F-35 capa-
bility." Our government agreed
and we are following a seven step
plan to implement the recommen-
dation before spending any of
your tax dollars on buying fighter
aircraft. On December 12th, we
presented our results to date, this
time estimating costs over a full
42 -year program lifecycle. Never
before has a government pre-
sented estimates in such a com-
prehensive, transparent and long-
term Way. These estimates are big
numbers. Forty-two years is a long
time.
What is included in full lifecy-
cle cost?
1. lust like buying a new car the
price includes the cost of the
plane itself,
2. In addition full life -cycle cost
includes among other things,
the following:
a. Fuel and maintenance over 42
years
b. The salaries and training of
pilots and officers to fly the
planes over 42 years.
c. The lights, heat, and mainte-
nance cost of the hangar where
the plan's are parked over 42
years
d.' The cost of the runways the
plane takes off from and return
un.
e. The disposal and recycling of
the plan' 42 years after we get
it.
Canadians need to know that
the new estimates for the fighter
plan' replacement program are
just that - estimates. KPMG, a
world-class financial firm, says,
"Life cycle costing is fundamen-
tally a forecasting activity and is
therefore imprecise, uncertain
and highly sensitive to many fac-
tors that may be difficult to quan-
tify at the time when the Life Cycle
Costing is developed." As such,
our estimates will become more
definitive as we move forward,
and we will report those revised
estimates to you every year.
In addition, to ensure we are
getting maximum value for your
tax dollars, our government also
announced our intent to open up
this procurement and look at all
viable alternatives for a replace-
ment aircraft. We can do so now
because absolutely no taxpayer
money has yet been spent on
acquisition costs for a replace-
ment aircraft. The F35 remains
one of the alternatives to replace
our current fleet of aging fighter
jets. And by the way, just for per-
spective at a cost of $46 billion
over 42 years the cost of the F-35 is
less 111811 what we give to the Cana-
dian Broadcasting Company on a
year to year basis.
But let me be clear: Regardless
of what aircraft we end up buying,
the purchase cost will be no more
than $9 billion. That is the maxi-
mum acquisition price Ministers
McKay, Ambrose and Clement
announced in 2010, and that has
not changed.
As always I um available if 1 can
clarify any of these matters
further.
Yours truly,
Bev Shipley, MP
Lambton-Kent-Middlesex
Grand Bend Wi to display Hearts of any media
A Christmas meal catered by Pauline Barratt of Cen-
tralia was enjoyed by Grand Bend Wotnen,s Institute
members at their meeting on December 20, 2012. Spe-
cial guests attending this meeting were Anne Cottel,
President of Huron South District WI and lane Dearing
Secretary of Huron South District WL
President Donna Lovle presided for the brief business
meeting. A monetary donation was given to
the Agriculture and Water Festival on April 10. The next
display for the Grand fiend Library display will be
"Hearts" of any media. The next WI hook dub meeting
will review a favourite childhood book,
During the social time many Christnitls ornaments
were shown by the members. Many of these ornaments
were handmade. Some were hand painted, tatted snow-
flakes and rug hooked stars, A bubbling heated light
was unique, Bach ornament had a family memory. It
was noted the custom of decorating Christmas trees
began in the early6 pith century in Germany. During
the 1800,s hard glass ornaments became popular. The
special "cucumber pickle" tree decoration was
explained.
The next WI meeting is January 17, 2013. Special
activities and games will be enjoyed at this time.
Did you know the Grand Bend WI Is a part of the
world,s largest organization for women who work for
the good of all, regardless of race, creed or political
beliefs.