Auditor general details how Conservative government lied about cost of F-35 fighter jets

    1 of 1 2 of 1

      Canada's auditor general, Michael Ferguson, has shown how the Department of National Defence lowballed the costs by billions of dollars on a plan to purchase and operate 65 F-35 fighter jets.

      In June 2008, department officials initially estimated a $9-billion price tag to buy the jets from Lockheed Martin. According to Ferguson's report, the government calculated another $16 billion at the time to sustain the program over 20 years, adding up to $25 billion.

      But in July 2008, the government established a budget of just $16 billion to buy the jets and keep them operating for 20 years. Prime Minister Stephen Harper has frequently cited the $16-billion figure, even though the parliamentary budget officer, Kevin Page, put the price at $29 billion in a 2011 report.

      In a response to Page's estimate, the Department of National Defence then claimed that the total 20-year cost would be $14.7 billion, according to a table in Ferguson's report.

      The auditor general declared that costs were not "fully presented in relation to the life of the aircraft".

      "The estimated life expectancy of the F-35 is about 8,000 flying hours, or about 36 years based on predicted usage," Ferguson wrote. "National Defence plans to operate the fleet for at least that long. It is able to estimate costs over 36 years. We recognize that long-term estimates are highly sensitive to assumptions about future costs as well as to currency exchange rates. However, in presenting costs to government decision makers and to Parliament, National Defence estimated life-cycle costs over 20 years. This practice understates operating, personnel, and sustainment costs, as well as some capital costs, because the time period is shorter than the aircraft’s estimated life expectancy."

      In addition, the government did not account for the cost of replacement aircraft, upgrades, and weaponry.

      "Third, many costs are not yet reliably known or cannot yet be estimated," Ferguson stated in the report. "These include the basic unit recurring flyaway cost of the aircraft, the cost of Canadian required modifications, and the cost of sustainment. In addition, National Defence is still developing its planning assumptions for operating the fleet. This involves hundreds of interrelated decisions about such matters as how pilot and technician training will be delivered, what physical infrastructure is required and what portion is directly attributable to the F-35, how maintenance and repair activities will be supported, and what they will cost."

      Follow Charlie Smith on Twitter at




      Apr 3, 2012 at 9:45am

      The Conservative government lying to the Canadian public???!!!

      Say it ain't so!

      Barney Fife

      Apr 3, 2012 at 10:19am

      I wanna see Justin Trudeau in the ring with the Fat man.


      Apr 3, 2012 at 10:36am

      Why doesn't the topic of deploying drones ever enter into this discussion about patrolling the Arctic ?


      Apr 3, 2012 at 12:23pm

      @ Xtina: The "drones" have been talking about patrolling the Arctic for several years. That's why the "drones" have picked a single-engine, high-tech, high-performance stealth jet.

      Strangely, the people who actually FLY in the Arctic on a daily basis do so in old twin-prop aircraft - planes that can stay in the air no matter what, and land anywhere.

      But, hey, the Defense Ministry pinheads (aka "drones") know best.

      S B

      Apr 3, 2012 at 1:47pm

      I've often thought we should build our own patrol fleet. Perhaps update the CP-107 Argus, one of the great successes of our domestic aviation industry. The patrol aircraft don't have to be strike fighters.

      The F-35 has poorer range and speed than the twin engine super hornets, rafales, or typhoons, which are already in service and much less expensive.

      13 9Rating: +4

      Who knows

      Apr 3, 2012 at 1:53pm

      Anything when its lies that are keeping the country going and which end is up when you got a government that was robo call made. We need a democratic election to teach Harper's government Canadians will not stand for criminals who will take any action to govern their country with anything but the truth. Boy are Canadians going to pay for letting these Cons rule. Has the head of elections Canada lost his job yet, he should be first and the mounties get them to put a Dunce hat on and stand in the corner for being so complacent and doing nothing when complaints about election fraud where made. Harper's high flying government needs to be brought down to ground, democratic ground and the truth will set you free from the cons and their lies once and for all or at least a decade or two.


      Apr 5, 2012 at 6:28am

      For that kind of money, Canada should have blown the dust of the Avro Arrow plans and started building it again. Just what Canada's economy
      needs. Oreda's still around and the Iroquois Engine is unsurpassed. We are not producing Canadarms anymore. Fine, they can create the control systems. We should supply this ourselves, and not flush money to south of the border

      11 9Rating: +2