Tory Public Accounts Committee members studying F-35 purchase avoid criticizing senior officials, opposition MPs deliver own reports

PARLIAMENT HILL—The Conservative majority on the Public Accounts Committee studying F-35 fighter jet mismanagement and breach of procurement policy has avoided criticizing senior officials at the head of the project in a new report, and has given the Department of National Defence until next February to provide the committee with a “workplan” for estimating billions of dollars in future operating cost.

Conservative MPs, who completed the main committee report after NDP and Liberal members chose to submit separate conclusions, emphasized that the government unveiled a series of measures in response to Auditor General Michael Ferguson’s report last April, and claimed it has not yet made a final decision to acquire a fleet of F-35 fighters.

On a key issue in the controversy—Mr. Ferguson’s criticism of National Defence for failing to inform Parliament of $10-billion in operating costs and at least 10 years of lifecycle sustainment costs in a report just before the 2011 federal election—the Conservative report cited conflicting testimony from witnesses and gave a deadline of Feb. 3 for the Treasury Board Secretariat to “clarify” what the term lifecycle means.

“In order for Parliamentarians and Canadians to fully understand the costs and benefits of the F-35, the committee believes that Industry Canada should provide the range of estimated industrial benefits for Canadian companies participating in the [F-35] program, and that National Defence should clarify the elements included in its acquisition cost estimate, and the estimated operating costs of the F-35,” the main committee report from the Conservatives said.

A National Fighter Procurement Secretariat the government established in the Public Works Department has already contracted an outside audit by the accounting firm KPMG to verify National Defence cost forecasts for the F-35 fleet, with a deadline for reporting to Parliament later this month. As well, the request for bids on the outside review had already established cost forecasts would be for the expected lifetime of the aircraft, compared to a 20-year forecast Mr. Ferguson criticized last April as inadequate.

The NDP dissenting report slammed the government for the way it handled the F-35 procurement process, as well as for the way it responded to Mr. Ferguson.

“In the case of the government’s decision to acquire the F-35, the process has been flawed, manipulated and not transparent,” the NDP report said. “Important testimony on these issues emerged that is not adequately captured in the committee’s report.”

It emphasized the failure of National Defence and the Public Works Department to hold an open competition to select a replacement for Canada’s aging Boeing CF-18 Hornet fighters. The opposition’s dissenting report also pointed out the government’s estimate of Canadian industrial benefits through acquisition of the Lockheed Martin F-35 was up to $16-billion prior to the government’s 2010 Cabinet decision to acquire the aircraft, and has since dropped to under $10-billion.

The Liberal dissenting report included similar criticism, and also called on the government to refer the F-35 acquisition to the National Research Council for an independent review of the operational requirements National Defence has established for the stealth attack warplane.

Original Article
Source: hill times
Author: TIM NAUMETZ