Chris Alexander is confused

Let us try to understand Mr. Alexander’s ‘understanding’ of the ‘misunderstanding’ that concerned theF-35

by Aaron Wherry

Adrian Wyld/CP Photo

Participating in a panel on Power & Politics yesterday, Chris Alexander offered the following version of recent history on the F-35.

“There was a misunderstanding, to some extent, in the Canadian public opinion, to some extent perpetrated by the opposition who claimed that a decision had been made, contracts had been signed, obligations had been undertaken and that is not the case.”

This is a rather remarkable assertion.

Mr. Alexander is relatively new here—he was just elected last May—so perhaps he was unaware of what the Prime Minister and the Defence Minister were saying about the F-35 procurement through 2010 and early 2011. And perhaps he was so distracted with the adjustment to public office that he missed what Julian Fantino was saying last November. But here are a bunch of quotes to compare and contrast with Mr. Alexander’s understanding of the “misunderstanding” that concerned the F-35.

News release, July 16, 2010. The Government of Canada today announced it is acquiring the fifth generation Joint Strike Fighter F-35 aircraft to contribute to the modernization of the Canadian Forces, while bringing significant economic benefits and opportunities to regions across Canada.

Peter MacKay, September 15, 2010“This is the right plane. This is the right number. This is the right aircraft for our Canadian forces and for Canada,” he said. ”If we don’t make this purchase there is a real danger we’ll be unable to defend our airspace, unable to exercise our sovereignty or unable to share our responsibility to both NORAD and NATO.”

Stephen Harper, November 3, 2010.  ”We are going to need to replace the aircraft at the end of this decade, and the party opposite knows that. But instead, for the sake of getting the anti-military vote on the left, with the NDP and the Bloc, the Liberals are playing this game. The mistake is theirs. It would be a mistake to rip up this contract for our men and women in uniform as well as the aerospace industry.”

Peter MacKay, December 13, 2010. “Mr. Speaker, let us look at the actual contract. What the Canadian government has committed to is a $9 billion contract for the acquisition of 65 fifth generation aircraft.”

Stephen Harper, January 14, 2011“I do find it disappointing, I find it sad, that some in Parliament are backtracking on the F-35 and some are talking openly about cancelling the contract, should they get the chance,” Harper said at the Heroux-Devtek plant in Dorval.

Stephen Harper, January 14, 2011“I need your help making MPs from this region and elsewhere in Canada listen to reason,” Mr. Harper told workers at Héroux-Devtec, which is manufacturing door and wing parts for the F-35. “Honestly, I can’t understand how a Liberal MP from the Montreal region would want to cancel this contract. It’s unbelievable.”

Stephen Harper, January 14, 2011“Contracts like this are not a political game,” Harper said, speaking from a blue podium with government Action Plan slogans perched in front of him and behind him. ”It is about lives and, as you well know, it is about jobs.”

Peter MacKay, February 25, 2011. ”Many figures have been circulated on the cost,” the minister said in a speech Friday before the Conference of Defence Associations. ”Let me repeat it. $9 billion. I have no idea where these other figures are coming from. They’re simply made up — or they’re guessing. If this procurement is cancelled … so another competition can be held, it will cost taxpayers $1 billion and will create an operational gap for the air force in the future.”

Stephen Harper, March 10, 2011Mr. Harper told reporters on Thursday that he refused to “get into a lengthy debate in numbers.” “This is the option that was selected some time ago, because it is the only option available,” he said. “…This is the only fighter available that serves the purposes that our air force needs.”

Stephen Harper, April 8, 2011.  “You have to understand that in terms of the F-35 costs, we’ve been very detailed with those to the Canadian public,” Harper said after releasing the Conservative platform in Mississauga, Ont. ”A lot of the developmental costs you’re reading in the United States, the contract we’ve signed shelters us from any increase in those kinds of costs. We’re very confident of our cost estimates and we have built in some latitude, some contingency in any case. So we are very confident we are within those measures.”

Julian Fantino, November 9, 2011. “We will purchase the F-35,” Fantino asserted. “We’re on record. We’re part of the crusade. We’re not backing down.”

Julian Fantino, November 18, 2011“There’s a plan A, there’s a plan B, there’s a plan C, there’s a plan Z and they’re all F-35s,” he said.




Browse

Chris Alexander is confused

  1. This was our former ambassador to Afghanistan. Maybe that’s why we messed that up too?

    • That’s the tragedy of partisan politics. In the space of only a few years it can take an intelligent, accomplished, respectable young man and turn him into yet another empty-headed, lying dirtbag.

      According to all reports, Chris Alexander was a prize candidate precisely because of his personal qualities. The same qualities that were very promptly discarded with prejudice so that he could become another incarnation of Dean Del Mastro or Pierre Polievre; another shameless huckster puppet, sitting on a stool in a studio, talking shit without flinching at the smell.

      Bravo Chris, great career move.

      • He did seem a decent sort before the election. If only he had been put against one of the scummier Volpe-style Liberals instead of unseating a solid guy like Dryden I could have been quite supportive.

        • He didn’t unseat Dryden. He unseated a fabulous MP — MY MP! Mark Holland. By bringing in buckets of Con money and busloads of gun lobbyists who put a target on Holland over getting the gun registry.

  2. Ok, to be fair – maybe he means they were forced to make things up because the other parties kept asking them questions?

  3. Canadians give too much credence to the capability of the ministers. These ministers are just Harper’s parrots. They don’t need to think, they just say what the PMO tell them to. What a waste of talent! Chris Alexander is supposed to have the brains …so far, he has shown himself to be as mediocre as Peter Kent, Lisa Raitt and many more.

    • These ministers are just Harper’s parrots. They don’t need to think, they just say what the PMO tell them to.

      I don’t necessarily expect people in the Tory office to defy orders from the PMO, but if there’s was going to be a case of one doing so, one would think that it might happen when the PMO tells them to go out there and say the opposite of what the PM’s been saying explicitly for years, and apparently just ignore the fact that they’ve been ordered to directly contradict the government’s long-standing message.

    • I agree with your assessment of Alexander, talk about overpromising and under delivering. He’s extremely partisan, and for some reason, I didn’t expect that. But I guess the Cons have figured out that a lie told on TV has waaay more credence with the average voter than all the ink the press can give it. Now that the major papers are moving to paywalls, after getting everyone used to reading their news online, there will be fewer and fewer people reading about this stuff.

  4. THANK YOU! I was so angry when I watched PnP yesterday and he made that statement. Completly untrue and contradictory to what the Cons have been saying re: the F-35s for years now!

  5. You are mis representing Mr. Alexander. Press releases and political statements are not signed contracts. The governments intent is clear, but there is nothing formal yet.

    • Sure, press releases and public statements are not signed contracts, but one can be forgiven for being led to believe that there’s a signed contract when one hears both the PM and the Minister of Defence explicitly stating that there’s a signed contract.

      MacKay said, explicitly, “What the Canadian government has committed to is a $9 billion contract for the acquisition of 65 fifth generation aircraft”. The PM also complained to the Speaker that the opposition was “talking openly about cancelling the contract, should they get the chance”, and MacKay said, “Mr. Speaker, let us look at the actual contract” on the floor of the House of Commons. The Prime Minister also stated that “It would be a mistake to rip up this contract for our men and women in uniform”.

      I’m an avid follower of this file, and pointed out numerous times how insane it was that the Prime Minister and the Minister of Defence kept telling open and bald-faced lies about the existence of a contract over and over again. Given that, it’s UNCONSCIONABLE that a member of the Tory caucus is now blaming the OPPOSITION for the misunderstanding among the public.

      Alexander is essentially saying that this misunderstanding is all the opposition’s fault for not doing a better job at calling out the government over their numerous LIES to the Canadian people.

      • I think the point that the oddly-named I-hate-biased-Journalism is making is that he thinks we are all damned idiots if we believe “political statements” made by the CPC contain even an ounce of truth. In his view, the fault does not lie with the pathological liars, it lies with the idiots who believe them.
        In a strange way, it’s an honest approach to dishonesty as a lifestyle choice.

        • It seems to be Alexander’s point too. He’s basically saying that the confusion is not the fault of the government for telling bald-faced lies, it’s the fault of the opposition for not more vociferously calling them liars at the time.

          Alexander is basically saying, “Sure the Prime Minister and the Minister of Defence lied repeatedly to the people of Canada, but if the opposition thought that was a problem, or was causing confusion, then they should have spoken up more loudly at the time that the lies were actually being told!”.

          • What I don’t understand about the journalists is why they don’t ask a simple question, “exactly what contracts did the Canadian and US governments sign with regards to this jet?”

          • The problem is journalists never get a straight answer from the conservatives no matter how pointed and direct the question; only spin and repeatedly rehashed talking points.

          • Well if you NEVER ask a straight question…” EXACTLY WHAT CONTRACTS HAVE BEEN SIGNED?”…..Maybe the problem is that the law departments from the news organizations aren’t there to ferret out and EXPLAIN TO THE JOURNALISTS that there are DIFFERENT KINDS OF CONTRACTS in sales agreements. What it comes down to is that the Prime Minister says “CONTRACTS” and everyone makes assumptions about which contracts he is talking about. Then they all call him a liar.

          • er, no. they were pretty clear about what they wanted people to believe.

          • The talking points ALWAYS reiterate the dollars that this government has put into the programme, even if the programme doesn’t yet exist.Dollars are supposed to silence all criticism!

          • Fair enough, but still, “Why weren’t journalists better at making it clear that the government was lying to the people about the largest defence procurement in the history of the country?” isn’t necessarily as important a question as “Will the government be held to account for lying to the public for YEARS about the largest defence procurement in the history of the country?”

      • I think what the biased journalist person is saying is that the “sales contract” came from the manufacturer guaranting things like the price of jets, the delivering dates of the jets, etc. AND the sales contract was signed by the manufacturer NOT by the Canadian or US governments. Therefore, it was not an agreement to purchase but rather an agreement that a certain plane would be developed and then when suitable, it would be manufactured for the Canadian government at a certain price. There never was a purchase agreement signed by the Canadian government for a certain number of jets because let’s face it that jet doesn’t even exist in a finished prototype. Further, it looks like the price is WAY off. If the Canadian and US government signed anything, it was that they wouldn’t shop around while this plane was being developed for them. However, if this plane doesn’t work out, they didn’t promise to buy it.

        • Ain’t now way the manuf. offered a fixed price on those terms.

          • Or a delivery date – that’s the whole problem – they’re moving targets.

          • Yes and there is NO way that Canada has a binding deal with them either because they didn’t stick to any of the contracted dates or financial deals.

          • So there was a contract but Lockheed Martin broke the terms of it – is that what you are saying- because you are contradicting the governments current position.

          • Ain’t no way the US went into a deal WITHOUT a fixed price and fixed terms on what would be coming in terms of a delivery date and features on the plane…..They are the biggest airforce in the world…and therefore the biggest market in the world….think about it…..all they promised was to sit tight until the manufacture had a chance to deliver and buy if the product lived up to its promise….and bring Canada along for the ride.

          • It is obvious by that comment you haven’t been following this at all. Maybe you could do a little googling and get up to speed.

          • to put it simply: no. Your interpretation (not supported by any evidence whatsoever and not backed by Mr. alexander) does not bear with commercial reality/

          • I gather you’re unfamiliar with a little tradition in the US military called “cost-plus contracting”. Hardware procurement for the US military is typically done for a price of “Whatever it costs the contractor to build it, plus a profit percentage”. Thus, the more it “costs”, the more money the contractor makes in profit, and the more they can pay the military guys who signed the deal when they hire them after they retire from the military. Conservatives seem to be bringing the American system to Canada.

    • ummm… what does it mean than when Stephen Harper (ptui) stands up in front of the Nation and tells us he has a signed contract that guarantees the planes at a certain cost?

      • There are such things as “sales contracts” that provide an offer a item at a “guaranteed price”……without the buyer actually signing the purchase agreement. The planes were not even fully developed. There was no way there could have been any final “binding” purchase agreements signed on planes that the bugs weren’t worked out of. How could they ask anyone to contract to buy a plane that might never be “good enough”

        • it is possible and more than possible to agree to such a contract. Did Harper do so? Who can tell now? Did he try to make Canadians believe he had? yup.

          • I think what the government did was sign a contract not to shop around for other planes while this plane was being developed AND having done that, they have no choice but to hang in there until the end.

          • Then why was it an unthinkable horror to tear it up at the expense of jobs, when there was certainly no price guarantee on these undeveloped planes.

          • Well the plane is not completely undeveloped but you think they should tear up the contract and start all over with NO plane and you want me to explain why they don’t do that? You also want to know why they do not pick a Canadian manufacturer….Bombardier, I am guessing…..is that what you are asking?

          • Now that Alexander has replied and didn’t back up your unsupported guesswork, it’s pretty obvious your generous interpretation was off the mark.

          • That would certainly put them at odds with what was said later then, wouldn’t it?

          • How so? Are you saying that manufacturers never provide a price guarantee and then come back and say they can’t do it for that price? Are you saying they never say that need time extensions on guaranteed deliveries? Are you saying these occurances are rare in manufacturing?

          • You think wrong. The MOU did not stop us from having an open bid.

          • I never said anything about a memo of understanding. I was refering to the current government when I said that I believed that they and the US government agreed to not pursue other jet purchases while the F-35 was being developed for them. Frankly, I don’t think Canada’s jet purchase power could inspire any company to develop anything. Lockhead Martin was seeing US Airforce dollar signs and few incidental drippings. If the US drops out of the purchase, this plane development will get shelved.

        • The planes were not even fully developed.

          Just to be clear, they’re STILL not fully developed. They’re only through the first stage of flight tests.

          • Yes you are right. The plane is not even necessarily the last prototype. It won’t be required until 2017…..five years from now.

  6. Mr Wherry is too generous. My reaction when I saw that live was that Chris Alexander was lying.

    • Agreed we are not MPs and we are not in Parliament, call it what it is.
      The only alternative was he didn’t know about the many previous comments; that would make him a stupid really individual and raise the question, “why was he spouting forth on this topic?”

  7. @GFMD Mark Holland was their target.

    • quite right, i was mistaken about his opponent.

  8. To be (actually) fair: Much like the “cabinet shuffle” the media took information they thought to be concrete and ran away with it (all just to find out that the only change was Bev Oda’s resignation). The main difference here is that opposition parties took the information and also got really excited. When it may’ve just been a troll by the CPC to make everyone feel silly for the conclusions they drew, from the beginning. A political game that the liberal media and left leaning pundits failed miserably at. If anybody thinks that politics in ANY capacity, is not a game, then you are foolishly out of touch with Canadian politics as a whole.

    End result? nobody’s pissed off that the jets are not going forward but somehow leftist pundits are pissed that they’ve been hoodwinked once again.

    • Sorry i’m confused? Are you suggesting that Canada is not getting the F-35 now?

      If that is the case, should probably tell the guys from Lockheed Martin because of as of a few days ago they are still planning on delivering 65 planes to Canada.

    • Oh, I see. So when Cons lie like rugs to the people of Canada, that’s a GOOD thing because it wrongfoots the eeevil opposition. Who are eeevil because they dare object to government lying like rugs to the people of Canada. Whew! Glad you cleared that up! For a moment I thought it was possible for a Con to do something wrong. Now I realize that when they start jailing dissidents and ban elections that too will be for very good reasons for which we should be grateful.

  9. He’s was not confused, he was lying. Pretty simple.

    Yet Evan Solomon allows him get away with lying to the public, lost a lot of respect for Evan over the last couple years. Terrible host for a political show.

    Also, why can’t media just come out and tell the truth, Alexander was lying. Why is that so hard to write down for journalist? Why can they not call a spade a spade.

    • I think the lying accusation has lost it’s impact through constant repition. Better to show the contradiction, as Wheery has done, and let the reader draw his/her own conclusions.

      • Honestly, I can’t ever remember a journalist saying a politician was lying. And I think it would have a huge impact if one had the guts to say it.

        • The journo should at least have the facts on hand to rebut the egregious lies of the guest. Read the quotations and ask for an explanation, in light of his revision of facts.

      • Sorry – didn’t this until after I posted…

    • I agree completely with you regarding Evan Solomon’s capacity as the host of a political show.

      I like the work he did with Shift and in terms of literary, media, and technology criticism. I have also seen him be a good interviewer on those subjects as well but when it comes to Power & Politics he is just terrible. I tried to give him the benefit of the doubt when he first started but after all this time there is no doubt.

      He so goes out of his way to be even-handed that he would allow Stalin a right to reply after a Kulak spoke about being starved to death.

      • Agreed. It’s as if he’s terrified of being accused of having an anti-Con bias. I miss Don Newman.

      • I think that’s a symptom of the general atmosphere of fear at the CBC these days. The government has really got to them….

  10. Aaron doesn’t seem to understand the difference between being engaged and being married.

    The Government of Canada has a memorandum of understanding that it intends to sign a contract. Canada is “engaged” to the F-35, not “married” to it.

    • For your sake, I hope you are never involved in negotiations to buy an expensive item.

    • I agree with your distinction, and it is important one, but it is still irritating to listen to lawyers saying we didn’t sign any contracts, we signed a mou!

      • In which there is no obligation to purchase.

        • Indeed.

    • It’s the PM and the Minister of Defence that are confused (actually, they were LYING, but I guess “confused” is more polite).

      The word “contract” appears SEVEN times in their speeches above. The Defence Minister said, “What the Canadian government has committed to is a $9 billion contract for the acquisition of 65 fifth generation aircraft”. The PM also complained to the Speaker that the opposition was “talking openly about cancelling the contract, should they get the chance”, and the Defence Minister said in the House, “Mr. Speaker, let us look at the actual contract“. The Prime Minister also stated that “It would be a mistake to rip up this contract for our men and women in uniform”. They’re CLEARLY referring to a (non-existent) contract in all of these instances, not the MOU.

    • Try to keep up, will ya?
      *this is directed at WhyshouldIseeyourwheat

    • The Government of Canada has a memorandum of understanding that it
      intends to sign a contract. Canada is “engaged” to the F-35, not
      “married” to it.

      It might be more accurate to say the Liberal government got engaged, the Cons got married, and are now slightly pregnant.

      • Technically, the Tories never got married.

        They TOLD everyone they were married, kept introducing their girlfriend as their wife to anyone who’d listen, and insisted that the ceremony was lovely, and the opposition should stop suggesting that the pictures didn’t turn out well, but there was never actually a marriage license, and no ceremony ever took place despite their constant claims to the contrary.

        And now, the Tories simply can’t understand how the dastardly opposition allowed the public to become so confused as to think that the Tories were married.

        • Thank you for this!! I started off fuming with a major cloud of ‘I told you so’ hovering over me (Alexander is my MP. I worked for Holland, grrrr). I tell you, if it wasn’t for laughter I couldn’t handle living under this joke of a government. We can’t stay angry all the time. You’ve gotta laugh or you go mad…

  11. Orwell ~ Politics and English Language:
    Political language — and with variations this is true of all political parties, from Conservatives to Anarchists — is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.

  12. I agree with most of the comments here regarding Chris Alexander. I too thought the man had potential and intelligence. So sad to see him adopt ‘double speak’ and partisan governship.

  13. Everyone seems to forget that it was the Liberal government that involved Canada in the F 35 project (JSF development contract was signed on 16 November 1996). The Conservatives have decided to keep it going, even if the costs have exceeded the original predictions. The Libs would have done the same thing. Let’s be honest here.

    • Nobody forgot that. We’re angry at people who lie, blatantly and for no reason.

    • The Liberals signed a Memo of Understanding which is not an obligation to purchase. The Cons have subsequently claimed to have signed a contract to
      purchase. Now of course they deny it. If there’s an honestly deficit it’s coming from the government. And the Liberals have demanded an open bid, which the government said it would have, until Mackay nixed it.

      • Now are you sure it wasn’t a “development contract” that the Liberals signed and not a “memo of understanding” because there are all sorts of contracts and not every contract is a purchase contract.

        • I think we’re parsing a bit too pedantically now, but members of the Tory cabinet explicitly referred to a “$9 billion contract” and it’s quite clear to me that however one refers to the MOU, even if one wants to call it a “contract”, NO ONE has ever signed a “$9 billion contract” on this, or any other file.

    • that’s a talking point proven wrong a long time ago.

    • What?!?!?

      The Liberals said time and time again that the MOU did NOT commit the country to actually purchasing F-35s and that they’d hold an open bidding process to replace the F18s when the time came.

      The Tories promised an open bidding process, then reversed themselves and started telling anyone who’d listen that they were getting the F35 and nothing else, and that they’d already signed a contract that didn’t exist.

      That’s a pretty stark difference.

  14. Chris Alexander lies with a portion of his brain for a living. He did so when he was our ambassador to Afghanistan and said that everything was dandy and that we should deepen our involvement in that war.

    Many dead Canadian soldiers and much wasted money later, it is clear that he was foolish, dishonest and pernicious. Who could trust him on the F-35? Not me.

  15. OK Mr. Smarty Pants & Clueless about aviation . . . please produce the contracts Canada has signed to buy the F-35 . . .

    Waiting . . . still waiting . . . c’mon Aaron . . . we are waiting!

    You can’t do it because as Chris Alexander said, we haven’t signed a contract to buy the plane.

    You should apologize to Mr. Alexander but then you are a journalist so we won’t hold our breath waiting.

    Just another clueless journalist with an agenda.

    • Do you have anything to say about the repeated use of the word “contract” by the government?

    • Read the thread, if YOU don’t want to be seen as the clueless one.

    • The argument is about the fact that the government initially said there was a contract and are now insisting that there never was one and moreover, that they never said there was a contract. They are either being dishonest (lying) now or they were lying to us before!

    • Please get your facts right. The MOU was signed by the Liberal government only to allow Canadian companies to bid on contracts to develop the plane (Alan Williams has said that many times). In 2010, the government started saying that they were purchasing the F35s and that they had a contract (this is the first time someone talked of a contract); when the opposition questioned the costs of the F35s, all the government parrots on political shows kept repeating that the previous liberal government had made the decision to purchase the planes, which was a lie. The Auditor general said that the process was fine until 2010 when the Conservatives announced the purchase without well-defined requirements and sound costing. Any attempt by you or the Conservatives to re-write history is also a lie.

    • Try to catch up here. No one, including AW, has suggested any contract was signed and could/should be produced. What’s under review here are the numerous occasions on the record when the government’s utterances on the matter led everyone to believe such contracts had been signed, statements which Alexander now conveniently denies were ever spoken.

      The record clearly shows that he’s lying now when he denies they were lying then.

      Got that?

    • That’s a HILARIOUS “rebuttal”.

      Wherry essentially suggests that the government lied for two solid years about having signed a contract that didn’t actually exist, and now you’re claiming he’s wrong because the contract didn’t exist???

    • Wow. That’s brazen.

      1) Diss the columnists ‘aviation’ creds (where none are required), 2) Demand proof of a contract (one previously asserted only by the gov’t), 3) embrace Alexander’s POV (i.e., Lie), 4) DEMAND AN APOLOGY…(we’re still waiting…etc.), 5) Condemn columnist as clueless.
      Nice work. The CPC playbook in full effect. All to save ‘face’ for this once-promising, now hideously partisan gasbag.
      You oughta get back to the real work of selling Alberta to the national industries of China.

  16. The fundamental problem is the history that made War King evolved to make Fraud King. Our society is controlled by the people who are the “best” at being dishonest and backing that up with violence. Chris Alexander is just another fresh face serving as a professional liar and immaculate hypocrite, to advance interests. Since society is controlled by huge lies, backed up by lots of violence, our democracy is already almost dead, and therefore, I expect Alexander will get promoted. The more blatantly he lies, the better his career will advance under the Conservatives. Given that we already live in a runaway fascist plutocracy, and more than 99% of all the most important public powers have already been privatized, we are terminally screwed! We will keep on going deeper into debt slavery, backed by wars based on deceits. We will keep on buying expensive weapons, to fight wars based on LIES. As long as enough of the Canadian people can be fooled enough of the time, then everything will continue to automatically get worse!

  17. Mr. Wherry, is there any credibility in your report!???!

    All your references to quotes and news releases are OUTDATED, ranging from:
    - July 16, 2010 … to … November 18, 2011

    Stale NEWS!!! People get paid to work … your credibility is at stake … get off your butt!

      • Well, not quite. The MOLDING of history begins with this guy. Hopefully, we’ll all forget those quotes from TIME IMMEMORIAL as mere sketches of the outline of an idea of a thing. They’re like a cave painting. A many billion $ cave painting. The truth of the past is entirely stale. The light of the future is…well, ask Dominic Fernandez! He knows!

    • Silly Wherry. We’ve never been at war with Eurasia!!!

      • Eastasia Damnit.

        • No, we’re at war with Eastasia right now. We’re in an ALLIANCE with Eurasia.

          And anyone who tells you that we were at war with Eurasia just last week is a liberal stooge.

          • A soldier will fight long and hard for a bit of colored ribbon.

            Napoleon Bonaparte

            Eurasia? Eastasia? They’re both against freedom and truth

          • Ok…who are we again?

    • Nice try but no cigar.

    • “Mr. Wherry, is there any credibility in your report!???!

      All your references to quotes and news releases are OUTDATED, ranging from:
      - July 16, 2010 … to … November 18, 2011…”

      Er…cuz that’s when Harper and company said what they now essentially deny ever saying or meaning. Wow! I’ll try and find a dumber quote on here today, but mind it’ll be tough.

      lol…what’s he supposed to do, make stuff up? Or is there an expiry date on politicians statements?

  18. This ‘Hot Shot’ Conservative knows very well what was said & by whom. Harper reffered to contracts being torn up while the election was on only to squim later & refer to MOU’s or Memorandums of Understanding.

    It is not the Opposition that duped the Public & this a-hole should be held to account for his remarks that border on lying.

  19. ahh yes another incorrect statement from my pathetic MP. If only Ajax-Pickering were smart enough to keep bulldog Holland in office to at the very least stand up to the Cons. if nothing else.

  20. Too bad we did ^NOT have a signed contract for $9 Billion.. then lockheed would be on the hook for any cost over runs!!! Either way you look at it, the Conservatives have failed miserably..

    • A fixed price contract would have been awesome. We could have sold them off for a huge profit, bought cheaper jets and pocketed the difference.

  21. Earth to Aaron…the contract HAS NOT BEEN SIGNED. Your bias is in full view, and probably accounts for Macleans’s offering 20 issues for $20 and a bonus gift! Thanks, but no thanks.

    • Earth to inarguably…did you bother to read any of the quotes – or don’t you believe our PM when he asserts the contract was signed?

      • It has not been signed off on. The contract is ungoing, and with Barry Obama in control the whole program could still collapse as has the US economy. If the costs of the F-35 soar out of control, we can still back out. In contrast, the cormorant chopper contract was signed off on by Mulroney, until the lil’ guy from Shawinigan ripped it up, costing us billions in penalties with nothing to show for it. To this day, we still don’t have all of the replacements for the Sea Kings…over and out to KCM2. ps. I’m not sold on the F-35.

        • Leave aside it wasn’t cormorants, you seem confused. The issue is did the PM and others explictly SAY the contract was signed? Clearly they did. If it isn’t, that’s good, but it doesn’t change the fact the CPC has been lying for 2 years on this now


    • Earth to Aaron…the contract HAS NOT BEEN SIGNED.

      Earth to Inarguably… THAT’S THE WHOLE POINT!!!

      The PM and Defence Minister both said there was a contract. REPEATEDLY. It was referred to as a SIGNED contract. It was referred to as a “$9 billion” contract, clearly distinguishing it from the MOU. The Tories attacked the opposition for the folly of supposedly wanting to “RIP UP THE CONTRACT”. Now, not only are the Tories acknowledging that there’s no contract, they’re using that as an argument in favour of how smart they are, and wondering aloud why everyone thought that there was a contract.

      Indeed. Where on Earth did Canadians get the idea that the contract that the Prime Minister and the Defence Minister kept talking about, over and over again, for TWO YEARS was a thing that actually existed???

  22. Alexander’s a tool but all three parties have their share of those. I’d trust Haper & the the CPC anyday over the Lie-berals and the NDP when it comes to national defence.

    • QED

  23. The Canadian system of government is a mess and it is ruining what is left of our country

  24. The statement is true if they are already thinking of themselves as a future opposition …. :-p

  25. Nothing new here. Harper lied about the costs, his Cabinet lied about the costs even when they were called out on it. Harper and Co, lied about the price tag right through the election, including calling the Lib’s liars’ for their (correct) costing figures, and, Harper and co, are Still lying. So, business as usual in Harperland.

  26. Robotic answers written by the PMO… after a while the brain can’t function properly. Constantly being programmed to say what someone else tells/wants you to say, removes all rational thinking and thought processes, And this is a fine example!

  27. Chris seems to think as a diplomat he can foolishly spin his words to be blameless. Similar to his comments after the election about the Pickering airport controversy and his reclairification of what he really meant.

  28. In all seriousness, who the hell cares what Chris Alexander has to say, at all? In the great wisdom of the almighty, who once said, “these guys are nothing burgers”, LOL.

    STILL, though, it never ceases to AMAZE me how politicians, like our current crop of Conservatives, can just say things or totally make stuff up, without fully realizing that, yes, 90%+ of us can actually read, most of us do have Internet. And, yes, it’s just so ridiculously easily to actually check up on facts of what people said long ago. Amazing how they quite haven’t figured that out yet, just amazing!

    I guess it must be true that looking like idiots in public really doesn’t really bother them, at all.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *