Ms. Normandin is asking for clarification on the accelerated timeline. My concern on this is that things have changed within the RCAF based upon statements made by Mr. Crosby and Mr. Page on Tuesday.
Then, on top of that, when I reiterated the concern to Mr. Martel, I asked, “Would Bombardier be able to meet that expedited timeline to replace the Auroras?”
To quote him completely, he said, “I have to admit that the timeline remains a bit unclear.” That's because there's a lack of transparency. He said:
We heard things two weeks ago at a different committee, and again today. Based on the timeline that is still posted on the PSPC website, we can meet those timelines. That requires the first airplane to be delivered in 2032 and the remaining by 2035. We could do that. Actually, there's plenty of time in front of us. We're in 2023. There's apparently a process that could take place with a selection in 2027. Hopefully, we can expedite that and do even better.
Bombardier is saying they can meet it. We know that one of the arguments behind doing the sole source of Boeing's P-8 is that they can deliver on an expedited timeline as well.
If both manufacturers, who are the only ones, most likely, who are going to bid through an open competition, say they can do it on an expedited timeline, then accelerating the competition, selection and delivery should not be an issue.
I'm not putting any dates on that, but based upon the fact that the dates that are currently on the PSPC website are stipulated and aren't being followed anyway, based upon testimony from Mr. Page and Mr. Crosby and, along with the testimony we heard, then we might as well just say, okay, let's have some transparency here. Let them figure out what the timeline is, as long as it's faster than what's currently posted.