Kevin Page on the F-35 -

Kevin Page on the F-35


The Parliamentary Budget Officer considers the F-35 experience.

Tom Clark: Let’s stick with the process for a second, from everything that you’ve seen; the process the numbers, do you believe that Canadians were deliberately misled about the costs of this program? 

Kevin Page: Well very clearly, back in 2010 when we released our report, and a year later when the AG released his report, it was clear from the AG’s report that there were numbers that existed at DND that were much higher than what was presented to Parliament. And the Canadians saw the lower set of numbers. And things were taken out of those numbers to make the number as small as possible. So in that sense they were misled, clearly they were misled. And I think that’s a failure again in leadership, both at the public service level and I think because … and a failure politically but I’m more comfortable talking about the failure at the public service level.

Mr. Page also discusses the future of his office and says he’s not been contacted about who will succeed him in March.


Kevin Page on the F-35

  1. we need more people like Kevin Page in politic.

  2. Kevin Page is Huffington Post story of the year 2012. Great article in today’s edition.

    • Regarding Kevin Page his budget analysis was done based on the weight of the aircraft using legecy aircraft maintenance data from the 1970’s which totally neglected 30 years of technical advancements in aviation. If I submited a report like that to my boss he would fire me.

  3. 65 Saab Gripen E models, 6 Barracuda Class SSNs, 12 PV85 Offshore patrol vessels each with an AS565 Panther Helicopter and limited anti-ship, anti-aircraft, and anti-sub missiles is all Canada requires to meet defense and international obligations. SSNs need no support and operate independently so easy to deploy with NATO. SSNs are the only platform that can patrol Canadian coasts 365 days a year and give us way more credibility than a dozen frigates ever will. Saab offered to sell us 65 Gripens in 2010 for under 6 billion including 40 years of maintenance. Much better deal for Canada’s needs. If we decide we really need stealth in the future, stealth drones can be purchased as the technology matures. Another few years of development and they will probably make the F-35 obsolete anyway.

    • Two engine better than one, especially for long distance Arctic patrol?? What’s your view on that?

      • Do you have any technical data that two engines are better then one? It seems to me that even with two engines that the Saab Gripen crashes way to often. So far 5 of the 235 Gripens built have crashed.

        • Actually you are both wrong. The US Navy agrees that one modern jet engine is safe for carrier use – about as trying an environment as you can get so I think at altitude in the Arctic with plenty of time for restart a single engine is fine. BTW flameouts are extremely rare to unheard of in modern jets.

          The Saab Gripen has only one engine.

          • One more thing. The Gripens could be 100% built in Canada. I doubt very much we will get such an offer from General Dynamics….

          • Lockheed Martin, or any other US manufacturer.

          • Actually the F-16 is and built under Licence in quite a few countries under Licence. However it’s better for Canada just to build parts that feed Lockheed Martin’s production line which is super efficient then to spool up a complete factory.

          • The development of the F-16 was a joint NATO project. We have aviation factories here already that would greatly benefit from full production as would the tier 2 and 3 companies supplying parts.

          • Hate to say it but 65 aircraft doesn’t justify tooling up a whole aircraft factory.

  4. What people don’t know is that stealth technology has or will be outclassed soon. Why would any nation not be interested in defending its airspace. Research is ongoing to find a way to detect stealth aircraft. The advantages of having a stealth plane will be useless in the near future. We do not need stealthy planes. We want to replace our 30 something year old fighters with a plane that is slower, has less range, and has a single engine. The only advantage that the F35 has is stealth. Once stealth technology is defeated we will have a plane that is inferior to our current cf-18s. The Typhoon , Rafale , Grippen and F18 Super Hornet are great planes, but realistically we will never buy planes made in Europe. The Super Hornet is only marginally better than what we currently have. Why does our government not consider the F 15. We don’t need the Silent Eagle version, the strike Eagle version is our best bet. Two engines, 750 km/h faster speed, agile as a hawk , awesome range, all on a proven platform . Just asks Israel , Saudi Arabia , the US, Singapore and S Korea how they like theirs. That plane is the upgrade we need.