Questions about military airlift procurement

A few hours after the vice-president of Airbus Military said he was disappointed that a federal government procurement process had effectively eliminated the product, A400M, that his company was offering, several MPs stood up in Question Period to ask about the process. The only plane that successfully made it through the first part of the procurement process is the C-130J, offered by Lockheed Martin. Defence Minister Gordon O’Connor took most of the questions but finally, Prime Minister Harper decided to step into the fray. Here’s the blow-by-blow in QP:

M. Michel Gauthier (Roberval—Lac-Saint-Jean, BQ) :
Monsieur le Président, le ministre de la Défense nationale s'apprête à dépenser 4,9 milliards de dollars pour des avions dont le Pentagone ne veut plus, tellement les problèmes qui les affectent sont nombreux.

Le ministre de la Défense nationale peut-il nous dire si c'est parce que les autorités de Lockheed Martin ont déclaré avoir corrigé les principaux défauts de ces avions, que les Américains ont payés à un tarif unitaire variant entre 44 et 67 millions de dollars, que le Canada s'apprête à payer trois fois plus cher, soit 188 millions de dollars l'unité?

Le Canada s'apprête à payer trois fois plus cher pour des avions dont les Américains ne veulent plus.

Hon. Gordon O'Connor (Minister of National Defence, CPC) :
Mr. Speaker, I read the news reports. They are based on information provided by competitors and are basically fallacious. There are no technical problems with the C-130 and we are getting them at the proper price.

M. Michel Gauthier (Roberval—Lac-Saint-Jean, BQ) :
Monsieur le Président, il y a des rapports officiels aux États-Unis qui font état des principaux défauts de ces avions et ils veulent mettre fin à leur contrat.

Est-ce que le ministre de la Défense nationale comprend qu'il n'est plus lobbyiste et que son travail n'est pas de faire faire le plus d'argent possible à une compagnie au détriment des contribuables, mais de donner le plus possible aux contribuables pour l'argent qu'ils investissent?

Il s'agit là de son travail. Il ne faut surtout pas répéter l'erreur qui a déjà été faite en achetant, à coup de millions, de vieux sous-marins qui n'ont jamais fonctionné.

Hon. Gordon O'Connor (Minister of National Defence, CPC) :
Mr. Speaker, the requirements were set by the military. This aircraft meets the requirements. We will not purchase paper aircraft or paper trucks.

Ms. Dawn Black (New Westminster—Coquitlam, NDP) :
Mr. Speaker, today Le Devoir reported on a controversy that has been raging in the U.S. It is over Lockheed Martin's C-130J, the plane that the Minister of National Defence seems to be determined to buy.

The Pentagon's inspector general describes the plane as one that cannot perform search and rescue operations, cannot perform night operations and has difficulties in cold weather. How can it protect our Canadian Arctic?

Will the minister please explain to the House how this plane fits into his national defence capabilities plan, the plan he still has not finished?

Hon. Gordon O'Connor (Minister of National Defence, CPC) :
Mr. Speaker, I can assure the House that this aircraft meets the requirements of the military as a medium lift aircraft and meets all the requirements, including weather.

Ms. Dawn Black (New Westminster—Coquitlam, NDP) :
Mr. Speaker, that is not the opinion of the Pentagon. It is likely that these planes are going to turn out to be lemons, just like the Victoria class submarines.

The minister has been running a closed shop on procurement. The Minister of Industry met with Boeing last spring in Washington, a closed door meeting, about helicopters. There are only two companies left to build support ships and the truck contract was written so that only one supplier could possibly fulfill it.

Inside the department it is unclear who is driving this process. Is it the minister, is it Rick Hillier? Who–

The Speaker :
The hon. Minister of National Defence.

Hon. Gordon O'Connor (Minister of National Defence, CPC) :
Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member should take another acting lesson.
The requirements set for aircraft, for trucks, for ships are set by the military and it goes through a competitive process with the defence department, industry department and public works and we have followed all those processes. Whatever the results are, they are done through a fair, competitive, open process.

Hon. Ujjal Dosanjh (Vancouver South, Lib.) :
Mr. Speaker, the requirements identified by DND for the purchase of tactical aircraft were designed to eliminate all aircraft except the C-130J. This is very much like a contract directed to Lockheed Martin masquerading as a competition at the expense of the taxpayers.

Given that the competition in defence procurement always favours better equipment at a better price, why was this process manipulated to limit the competition to one particular aircraft?

Hon. Gordon O'Connor (Minister of National Defence, CPC)
:
Mr. Speaker, I think I have answered this question four times today, but I will try again. The military set the requirements for the aircraft. After a rigorous process they discovered that the C-130J meets the requirement and it is the only aircraft that meets the requirement.

Hon. Ujjal Dosanjh (Vancouver South, Lib.) :
Mr. Speaker, during the committee of the whole the minister admitted that he was not aware of the price we were about to pay for the C-130J. The government's purchase price of $3.2 billion suggests a price of $188 million per plane. Italy is paying approximately $80 million for the same product.

Can the minister tell us why his government plans to pay $100 million more per plane and that is a scandalous $1.7 billion for 17 planes?

Hon. Gordon O'Connor (Minister of National Defence, CPC) :
Mr. Speaker, I have also answered this question previously. The price per aircraft is $85 million U.S. That is what we are paying. All the other costs involve spare parts, training, project management, et cetera.

L'hon. Denis Coderre (Bourassa, Lib.) :
Monsieur le Président, on va l'essayer en français.
Au moment même où le ministère de la Défense nationale s'apprête à dépenser 4,9 milliards de dollars sans appel d'offres pour un avion dont même le Pentagone ne veut plus, on apprend que l'appareil C-130J de Lockheed Martin n'a ni la certification civile ni les capacités d'amélioration requises pour les besoins de nos forces armées. Selon certains experts, cet avion est même dangereux et inadéquat.

Comment le ministre justifie-t-il des dépenses de 188 millions de dollars par avion quand la Maison-Blanche voulait mettre fin à son propre contrat pour cet appareil qui lui coûtait moins de 80 millions de dollars? Pourquoi veut-il nous passer un citron?

Hon. Gordon O'Connor (Minister of National Defence, CPC) :
Mr. Speaker, it might have been better if some of these members coordinated their questions today. They could have had some other questions in Parliament.

The answer is that the military set the requirement and the only aircraft that met the requirement was the C-130J and the military are quite happy with that choice.

Hon. Denis Coderre (Bourassa, Lib.) :
Mr. Speaker, let us try again to the chief lobbyist, the defence man.
Canada is about to buy expensive flying lemons. The minority Conservative government chose to buy without any real competitive process Lockheed Martin's C-130Js as a favour to their buddies in Washington. Not only are we about to pay more than double the original price, $188 million instead of $80 million per plane, but the technology in the flying jalopy has been ruled obsolete by the U.K. and unsafe by a U.S. military auditor.

How does the minister justify spending nearly $5 billion for 17 underperforming planes? Why such–

The Speaker :
The Right Hon. the Prime Minister.
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
The Speaker: Order, please. The Prime Minister has been recognized to answer the question and everyone will want to hear the answer.

Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC) :
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence just pointed out the errors in the hon. member's question. What we see here once again is the Liberal Party opposing new equipment for our military under all circumstances just as they did for 13 long years in office when they starved the military.

However, it is amazing what extent they are prepared to go to do it, saying that the White House and the Pentagon should pick Canada's planes. We are going to pick our own planes.