I’m not against investing in the Canadian Forces in principle - but I also believe we shouldn’t spend a penny more than we absolutely need given that defence dollars could be spent on other pressing domestic priorities.  It isn’t a pure zero sum game - a dollar spent on the military is a direct trade-off for other domestic issues - but it can sometimes feel that way. So at the very least Canadians must be assured that we’re spending defence dollars on things that best support Canadian values and priorities. 

So I’ve been following the government’s announcement that it will purchase sixty-five F-35 Joint Strike Fighters to replace the aging fleet of CF-18s with great interest.  On a theoretical level I can buy the argument that we need fighter jets to defend the massive expanse of our country, and to live up to our NATO commitments abroad.  I say theoretical because I’m no defence expert. What I am is a citizen and taxpayer, so I feel expert enough to be concerned about puchasing very expensive fighters using a single source contract, and designing Canada’s requirements such that no other source could even bid on the contract if it had been put to tender.

I’ve also read enough commentary this week questioning if the F-35 is the right choice for Canada to believe that there must be a robust public debate in Parliament regarding the issue.  Maybe after debate the F-35 is the right choice (I’d note that the Liberal government started us down this path, so they have a responsibility to keep an open mind) - but I’d like to know exactly why the Super Hornet, Typhoon, or the Gripen are the wrong choices?

Between procurement and maintenance the F-35 purchase is about a $16 billion hit to the Canadian taxpayer.  To put that in perspective, we could build a high-speed rail corridor from Windsor to Quebec City for between $18-30 billion. Admittedly, this isn’t a debate about the F-35 versus High-Speed rail - I simply raise it to demonstrate how massive a public expenditure this is, and why I believe a robust debate in Parliament is so necessary. Such a debate would help every informed Canadian answer the following questions: Do we even need new fighters in the first place?  If yes, what do we need them to do?  Finally, what fighter gets us the best value for money?

I’d personally throw in a final question: What other pressing priorities could be satisfied with these dollars, and are those priorities more important than purchasing the F-35s?  Snow ball chance in hell that’ll get debated seriously, but it is the question that weighs most heavily on my mind.