Evidence of meeting #8 for Public Accounts in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was aircraft.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

Members speaking

Before the committee

Hogan  Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General
Beck  Deputy Minister, Department of National Defence
Folkes  Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Department of Public Works and Government Services
Jamie Speiser-Blanchet  Commander, Royal Canadian Air Force, Department of National Defence
Sheehy  Assistant Deputy Minister, Materiel, Department of National Defence
Hammerschmidt  Assistant Deputy Minister, Infrastructure and Environment, Department of National Defence

3:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative John Williamson

Good afternoon, everyone.

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number eight of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Accounts.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the Standing Orders. Members are attending in person in the room and remotely using the Zoom application.

I would like to remind participants of the following points. Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. All comments should be addressed through the chair. Members, please raise your hand if you wish to speak, whether participating in person or on Zoom. The clerk and I will manage any speaking order as best we can, should we be required to do so.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(g), the committee is commencing consideration of report 2 of the Auditor General of Canada, entitled “Delivering Canada's Future Fighter Jet Capability”, of the 2025 reports 1 to 4 of the Auditor General, referred to the committee on Tuesday, June 10, 2025.

I would now like to welcome our witnesses.

From the Department of National Defence, we have Stefanie Beck, deputy minister. It's nice to see you at committee today.

We have Lieutenant-General Jamie Speiser-Blanchet, commander, Royal Canadian Air Force. It's nice to see you as well today.

We have Heather Sheehy, assistant deputy minister for materiel, along with Peter Hammerschmidt, assistant deputy minister for infrastructure and environment.

From the Department of Public Works and Government Services, we have Paula Folkes, associate assistant deputy minister.

From the Office of the Auditor General, we have Karen Hogan, Auditor General of Canada. I see you, along with Nicholas Swales. I see you as well, sir.

Each of you will have five minutes for an opening statement. We haven't discussed who might go first.

Ms. Hogan, the last time, you went last. Why don't you go first? You have up to five minutes. Thank you.

Karen Hogan Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for this opportunity to discuss our report, “Delivering Canada's Future Fighter Jet Capability”, which was tabled in the House of Commons on June 10.

I would like to acknowledge that this hearing is taking place on the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people.

Joining me today is Nicholas Swales, who is the principal responsible for the audit.

In December 2022, the federal government finalized an arrangement to buy 88 CF‑35A fighter jets and associated equipment, weapons and services, from the United States to replace Canada's aging CF-18s. The prime objective of the future fighter capability project is to maintain a strong and modern fighter jet capability to defend our country and meet Canada's international defence commitments. This initiative is in its early stages. Based on the current plan, Canada's first CF-35s will be sent to Luke Air Force Base in Arizona in 2026 to support pilot training, while the first aircraft will arrive in Canada in 2028.

For this audit, we wanted to know whether the Department of National Defence had achieved progress on its plans to introduce the CF-35s into service so that fighter capability would be delivered on time and on budget. We found that the estimated costs of the future fighter capability project had significantly increased and that the project faced several risks that could jeopardize the timely introduction of the new fleet. National Defence originally estimated that the project would cost $19 billion. The audit found that this figure was based on outdated information and that, by 2024, the projected costs had increased to $27.7 billion, almost 50% more than the original estimate. Some of the cost increase was caused by factors beyond the department's control, such as inflation and foreign exchange fluctuations.

We found that construction of two fighter squadron facilities to accommodate the CF‑35s was more than three years behind schedule. As a result, an interim plan was needed, which will further increase infrastructure expenses.

We also found that cost estimates for the project did not include other essential elements needed for full operational capability, such as essential infrastructure upgrades and advanced weapons. These would add at least $5.5 billion to the total cost.

In addition, National Defence still had to address other risks that could jeopardize the timely introduction of the CF‑35 jets. For example, in 2018, when we last audited Canada’s fighter force, we found that one of National Defence's biggest obstacles was a shortage of qualified pilots. Six years later, that is still the case. Because the planned pilot training program would not produce enough pilots by 2032‑33, a new approach was needed.

Finally, National Defence also had to complete the transition plans, such as the integrated master schedule and aircraft maintenance plans.

Maintaining a strong fighter-jet capability contributes to the safety and security of Canadians. This is a large, multi-year project that requires active and ongoing management of risks and costs to ensure that the CF‑35 fleet can be brought into service on time. In the current context of increased defence spending, effective oversight and timely decision-making will be essential to optimize resources and ensure operational readiness.

Mr. Chair, this concludes my opening remarks. We will be pleased to answer any questions the committee may have. Thank you.

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative John Williamson

Thank you, Ms. Hogan.

Ms. Beck, would you like to lead us off?

Thank you.

Stefanie Beck Deputy Minister, Department of National Defence

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. We very much appreciate the opportunity to appear in front of you today. I have with me subject matter experts. I would add it's a real pleasure to be here with our colleagues from PSPC and, of course, the Auditor General. We speak regularly, as you can imagine. There's lots to discuss.

We are honoured to be here today to represent the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces.

As you may know, we employ about 120,000 people and we are represented from one end of Canada to the other. Our numbers recently rose with the arrival of the Canadian Coast Guard.

We're very pleased to have new colleagues in the form of the Coast Guard, and of course, the Communications Security Establishment is also part of our department.

I'm sure you're all well aware of the increases in our budget recently after the commitment of the government to spend 2% of Canada's GDP this fiscal year on defence.

I wanted to point out that this money does not go solely to our department; it goes to various departments. We are responsible for a large portion of that budget, but not all of it.

We also think of the amount of money we spend as all of it going on major capital projects. Just for general reference, about 80% of our budget goes on regular operations, salaries and that kind of thing. Only about 20% is spent on capital projects, of which this F-35 project is one.

Given the gravity of our mandate, we must ensure that we are getting the best value for Canadians' money. I know this is something we're all worried about. This future fighter capability project is no exception. It is a massive undertaking for the Royal Canadian Air Force. There's the acquisition of the 88 aircraft themselves but also, as the auditor has outlined, there's the training that's required, the weapons, the spare parts, the facilities and much more. Through this project, we're making sure the RCAF has the capacity it needs to carry out the mandate that's been given to it by the Government of Canada. We very much appreciate the work of the OAG and parliamentarians in supporting us in this mission.

I think you know that the global threat environment has changed in the last few years. The work has taken on a new urgency since this project first began. The numbers that the OAG was reporting were established before the pandemic and before the Russian invasion of Ukraine. We can see that the defence and security environment is much more volatile and unpredictable than it has been at any other point in recent memory. Our adversaries work independently but also increasingly in co-operation with one another to sow chaos, discord and uncertainty.

This, combined with rapid technological advances in traditional and non-traditional military domains means that we’ve had to redouble our efforts to equip our military with future-ready technologies.

That includes ensuring we can meet our obligations to both the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the North American Aerospace Defense Command, concurrently. Quite simply, our current fighter, the CF‑18 Hornet, no longer meets our needs.

While the aircraft has served Canada well for the better part of four decades, the CF-18 Hornet is now nearing the end of its lifespan and cannot keep pace with the challenges facing it, with either our allies or our adversaries. Some of them are being retired as early as this year. The fleet, as you know, must be fully replaced by 2032.

In early 2023, following a fair, transparent and open process, the government announced that it had finalized an agreement with the U.S. government and Lockheed Martin for the acquisition of the aircraft to help fulfill this requirement.

This aircraft will enable us to remain closely interoperable with our allies—most NATO allies have procured the F-35—and it will also deliver significant economic benefits for Canada. This was part of the original agreement and remains our top consideration. Canadian firms have already benefited greatly from this acquisition.

We have made firm financial commitments for the first eight aircraft, as well as to guarantee the delivery of long-lead items in support of the production of the first 12 of our initial tranche of 16 aircraft.

These Canadian-owned aircraft will be delivered to Luke Air Force Base in Arizona, as the Auditor General said, beginning in 2026, and used to train our pilots on site and our technicians. This training phase is essential to ensure our aircrews are ready before the first jets, which should be delivered in 2028, arrive in Canada.

To receive those aircraft, we are building new fighter squadron facilities at Cold Lake and Bagotville. Design work and site preparation are progressing well. Indeed, construction is already under way. Key elements such as underground infrastructure, site access and security fencing have been completed.

The future fighter infrastructure will provide the space and security standards needed for maintenance, operations, administration, mission planning and simulator training. Although permanent facilities will not be completed before the first aircraft arrive, the Royal Canadian Air Force has developed an interim operations plan that will use existing facilities and temporary secure structures.

Beyond the two main operating bases—those are the ones in Cold Lake and Bagotville—we are also modernizing power, runways and our quick-reaction alert facilities across the country through the defence of Canada fighter infrastructure initiative. These upgrades—for instance, to power—will also benefit the local communities.

As we continue to advance the future fighter capability project, we remain deeply committed to stewardship, rigour, transparency and accountability.

Since the initial estimate of $19 billion, project costs have increased to reflect global economic conditions. We had the pandemic supply chain conditions, of course, and as I mentioned, the invasion of Russia in Ukraine also distorted the defence industry supply chain around the world. Of course, inflation has also been high over the last few years.

However, there has been no change in scope. The changes to the budget have nothing to do with a change in scope. We have stuck to our original plans.

We are still on track to acquire 88 aircraft, along with the associated infrastructure, training and maintenance services. We are always working to incorporate expert recommendations and apply lessons from past procurements to ensure more discipline in our project and risk management.

Canadians deserve assurance that this generational investment is delivering the best capability and value for money.

Mr. Chair and committee members, it's pivotal to bolstering our continental defence and essential to safeguarding our sovereignty and upholding our obligations to our allies and partners around the world.

We look forward to your questions.

Thank you.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative John Williamson

Thank you very much.

Members will note that I allowed a little extra time there. We wanted to get everything Ms. Beck had to say on the record so that members could consider it before their questions.

Now, Ms. Folkes, you have an opening statement. The floor is yours, please.

Paula Folkes Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Department of Public Works and Government Services

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to acknowledge that we are meeting on the unceded territory of the Anishinabe Algonquin nation.

I'm pleased to be here to address the Auditor General's second report, “Delivering Canada's Future Fighter Jet Capability”, as it pertains to Public Services and Procurement Canada, or PSPC as it is commonly known.

Although there are no specific recommendations for Public Services and Procurement Canada in the report, I will take this opportunity to highlight our role within the Future Fighter Capability Project.

As noted in the report, PSPC is the contracting authority for fighter aircraft acquisition, and we led the procurement process in support of the Department of National Defence, which is leading on the overall project.

We are also responsible for weapons acquisitions, through the foreign military sales program agreements with the United States government or directly from industry.

In undertaking our central purchasing agent role, we worked closely with our colleagues at National Defence and Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, as well as at central agencies including the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, to conduct an open, transparent and fair competitive process while ensuring the best value for Canada.

In January 2023, as Deputy Minister Beck mentioned, Canada finalized an agreement with the United States government and Lockheed Martin, with Pratt & Whitney, for the acquisition of 88 F-35 fighter jets for the Royal Canadian Air Force.

As you know, in response to an evolving geopolitical situation, the government launched a review of the current F-35 agreement originally put in place by the Department of National Defence to ensure that it remains in the best interests of Canadians and the Canadian Armed Forces. The Department of National Defence is now leading on this front, and PSPC stands ready to support any decisions that may result from their review.

In conclusion, Public Services and Procurement Canada remains committed to supporting the Department of National Defence in pursuing the Future Fighter Capability Project and in implementing the recommendations of the Auditor General of Canada.

I would be happy to answer any questions the committee may have about the procurement process. Thank you.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative John Williamson

Thank you as well.

I will begin things with our first round. It will consist of three members for six minutes each.

Ms. Kusie, I believe you'll start things off for us. It's over to you, please.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Stephanie Kusie Conservative Calgary Midnapore, AB

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you very much to all of our witnesses for being here today.

I'm going to use some of my time to walk Canadians through the timeline of the fighter jet program in an effort to evaluate whether mismanagement of this program has cost Canada and Canadians our sovereignty.

We know that in the beginning, in 1997, Canada participated, in varying degrees, under the U.S.-led F-35 joint strike fighter program. This was a move that Conservatives and many Canadians supported. We agreed that Canada should participate and stand with allies in NATO and the Five Eyes alliance.

It was during the former Conservative government in 2010 that then defence minister Peter MacKay announced that Canada would purchase 66 F-35s and participate alongside our allies in this program. Ultimately, after an inflated report from the PBO in 2010, the government at the time opted to pause the contract and open competition on the F-35 program, leading us to 2015, when mismanagement delays and politicization truly began.

Upon entering office, the government cancelled the F-35 contract and took us back to square one. However, this time, this was behind schedule with our allies and at the cost of our security.

The new solution was to spend hundreds of millions of dollars examining different fighter jets and upgrading existing CF-18s, which have been described as aging and increasingly unreliable, so much so today that nearly 40% sit out of service. The government even bought used fighter jets from Australia to keep our existing fleet in the air.

In 2018, the Auditor General released a report entitled “Canada's Fighter Force”. The biggest take-away was that the Liberal government must invest in and create a robust strategic plan to recruit and train service personnel and pilots to operate not only the future jets but those that were currently in our possession.

Then, in early 2023, seven years after emphatically stating that the Liberals would not buy the F-35 fighter jet, Minister Anand announced that this government would do exactly that—this time, however, at a higher cost and on a delayed timeline.

Still, members on this side—recognizing the importance of the F-35s, as we did during the Harper government—supported the move and urged the Liberals to move quickly with their acquisition of the jets and to ensure that the critical security infrastructure upgrades needed to host the F-35s on Canadian soil were taking place.

This brings us to 2025. As one of his first acts, the Prime Minister picked up on Trudeau's mismanagement and announced a re-examination of the F-35 purchase. He told Canadians that by the end of the summer a decision would be made on the program's future.

Well, it's now October 7, and both our air force and our allies are waiting to know where the program stands. That leads to us today, 15 years after Conservatives announced the original F-35 purchase, beginning our study on the Auditor General's June report, a report that shows that the cost of this program, which was projected to cost $19 billion in 2022, has now skyrocketed to a minimum of $33.2 billion, a 57% increase, before a single jet has been delivered. It is my conclusion that the mismanagement of this program has come not only at a massive cost to taxpayers but with a cost to our country's security and sovereignty.

With that, Lieutenant-General, as commander of the Royal Canadian Air Force, do you believe that the management of this program and the consistent backtracking to date have left your service members in the best position possible to defend our country and its sovereignty?

Lieutenant-General Jamie Speiser-Blanchet Commander, Royal Canadian Air Force, Department of National Defence

Thank you for the opportunity to be here with you today.

As commander of the air force, I am committed to ensuring that the members of the Royal Canadian Air Force are trained, organized and equipped to meet the demands that the Government of Canada makes of them. In so doing, I have to focus on things that are within our control and the elements of what we're dealing with as we implement this very important and significant shift for the RCAF in terms of the advancement in technology and the advancement in our ability to safeguard Canadians and Canadian sovereignty, which is extremely important.

We are very focused on ensuring that we have all of the elements in place in as timely a fashion as possible, and we're working very closely with all of our partners within the Department of National Defence and the other government departments to ensure success.

3:55 p.m.

Conservative

Stephanie Kusie Conservative Calgary Midnapore, AB

Ms. Hogan, I have a similar question for you. In your opinion, has the management of this program given you the confidence that our country is equipped to handle such a large increase in NATO commitments without more cost overruns, delays and mismanagement?

3:55 p.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General

Karen Hogan

Our audit found that there were some cost increases that were well within DND's control and others that were outside of their control, such as foreign exchange fluctuation, global demand for munitions, and inflation. Those are all outside of DND's control. It would have happened no matter what jet was chosen.

I do think that National Defence has some difficulties in moving forward on projects. All parties should agree on what the Canadian Armed Forces need, and then we should allow the public service and the Canadian Armed Forces to deliver. It isn't about a party decision; this is about the sovereignty and security of Canada. I think that we should support the department in moving forward with that.

Could they do things better? Absolutely. There were delays in construction; there was uncertainty; they used outdated information. That's why we issued recommendations about a constant need for better budgeting and more accurate tracking of costs, but also for more proactive risk management.

3:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative John Williamson

Thank you very much. That is the time.

Ms. Tesser Derksen, you will have the floor for six minutes. We go over to you.

Kristina Tesser Derksen Liberal Milton East—Halton Hills South, ON

Thank you very much, and thanks so much to our witnesses.

This is obviously a focus right now among the public in general, because of the global climate we find ourselves in and announcements by the Prime Minister to be investing more in our national defence.

The elephant in the room is the cost. It's been brought up numerous times. The Auditor General's report notes that in 2022 we had a projected cost of $19 billion.

At that time, was that a reasonable estimate? I want to approach that question from the perspective of some things you've already mentioned, things that were outside the control of the department. When you're answering, keep in mind that there were extenuating factors that were not necessarily within our control. Should we have contemplated those types of risks when coming up with an estimate of this nature, and should we have baked in contingency...? Obviously the pandemic is once in a lifetime, but other stuff like global conflict, Russia.... Anybody probably could have foreseen that coming down the road.

Could you answer that question, contemplating that there may be risks that we should be estimating for?

3:55 p.m.

Deputy Minister, Department of National Defence

Stefanie Beck

It's true that every time we do costing, especially for a major project like this, it is a complex undertaking that in fact takes us months to do because of all the different aspects that were flagged during the review that the Auditor General did. We tried to include in every single costing a significant amount of contingency, but it's not just a flat percentage of the total project; it is related directly to, for instance, labour costs or the cost of inflation or the cost of an exchange rate.

At the time, in 2019, the numbers we had were the numbers that were available also through the joint project office for the existing management and understanding of the costs of the operation of the aircraft and indeed at the time the infrastructure that was required for the F-35s. Between 2019 and the second round, the requirements for the infrastructure also changed. In fact, in the original estimate, we had about two billion dollars' worth of contingency baked into that, and the increase to $27.7 included another four billion dollars' worth of contingencies. In fact, the bulk of the increase is actually in contingency funding, just in case. Experience has shown that we normally use all of that contingency.

At the time of the costing in 2019, we informed the authorities that we were about 50% confident in the numbers we had, whereas, for the numbers in the $27.7 billion, we were 80% confident from an accounting perspective.

Kristina Tesser Derksen Liberal Milton East—Halton Hills South, ON

When you say you're 50% confident in your numbers, how is that managed? Are there additional steps that you take to make sure that.... It's not a very high number to be confident in when you're dealing with dollars of that magnitude.

4 p.m.

Deputy Minister, Department of National Defence

Stefanie Beck

I think that goes to the Auditor General's point about making sure we're doing regular reviews of our numbers and being clear in our conversations with PSPC and Treasury Board about what that means, and I would say not just on an annual basis—I thought the Auditor General was very generous in suggesting we do it annually—but definitely more often than that, making sure that everyone is aware every time we see a significant bump.

I might ask Heather to add to that, but we had some interesting percentages. If there's just a slight change in the foreign exchange rate, the change in our overall budget is likely to be enormous.

Heather Sheehy Assistant Deputy Minister, Materiel, Department of National Defence

Thank you, Deputy Minister.

Just to touch on that, you're absolutely right. When we have a 50% confidence level, to me—and I come from the Treasury Board Secretariat—that indicates we are in the early stage of a project. Then, as we get towards having more information, we get to that 80% confidence level.

In this instance, the only way we could get to an 80% confidence level was to put in place a very significant contingency. The deputy already spoke about that. We went from $2 billion up to $6.2 billion. That's a very significant contingency; you could very well ask why we need that kind of contingency, and it is for exactly the types of things that the deputy referred to.

Let's take foreign exchange. I asked my team to run the numbers. I'm going to use my notes here. For every cent increase in foreign exchange, there is about a $250-million impact on the costs for this particular project. You can imagine there's no way I can actually mitigate the risks of foreign exchange outside of contingency, because it's not something I can influence.

Those are the types of things you see within the contingency, and about 40% of our contingency has been notionally allocated towards foreign exchange rates, but arguably the entire contingency there is a buffer for these kinds of impacts.

4 p.m.

Liberal

Kristina Tesser Derksen Liberal Milton East—Halton Hills South, ON

Thank you for that very thorough answer.

In keeping with the theme of identifying and mitigating outside risks, I'll turn to the draft action plan. One of the recommendations was focused on identification and mitigation of risk. In that draft action plan, you responded to one of the AG's recommendations by agreeing and committing to, amongst some other things, updating the risk management process, and the action plan notes that the updated risk management plan was approved in January of this year.

The senior review board was going to be briefed on that, I believe, last month. How did that go? Do we have an update on that?

4 p.m.

Deputy Minister, Department of National Defence

Stefanie Beck

In fact, there are so many different ways of managing the risk with this particular project internal to the Royal Canadian Air Force management of risk, at the broader departmental level and, in fact, beyond that at the Government of Canada level of the various departments that are involved in the major capital projects.

These conversations happen, of course, not just as a one-off in January or indeed at specific times of the year. Every time we meet, we look at what we are concerned about in terms of not just this project but other major ones we have in front of us.

Then, the other thing I think is important is that this project is unusual in that it's run by a joint project office. The eight partners who are members of this memorandum of understanding to procure the F-35s from Lockheed Martin and Pratt & Whitney, who make the engines, meet frequently as well.

Part of their job as an executive committee of that joint project office is to manage the risks and to mitigate and ensure as best we can the affordability, on an ongoing basis, to consider every new challenge that might arise in, for instance, a manufacturing line or a production line and to figure out the best way to address that. I would include supply chain challenges in that.

It's not just one small group, for instance, that looks after risk, and it's not just one risk management plan. It's a much more holistic approach.

4 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative John Williamson

Thank you. That is your time.

Mr. Lemire, you have the floor for about six minutes.

Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank the witnesses for their presentations.

Ms. Beck, as you said, the CF‑35 contact is moving forward. However, the government said it was still analyzing the contract. Do you see this as government intervention? Does this mean that other options besides the F‑35 aircraft are being considered at this time? What can we make of this? How are the government and your department currently lining up?

4:05 p.m.

Deputy Minister, Department of National Defence

Stefanie Beck

I know there is a lot of discussion, not just within the government but also outside it. Our role during the review is to provide facts. For example, we share information about the progress of the project, where we are in respect of long lead purchases and materials, the costs we anticipate, or the impacts of global change and how to mitigate them.

It is not really up to us to ascertain whether there are other options that might work. Our role is really to communicate what we know, and the government will base its decisions on that.

Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

This is obviously a political era when Canada is wanting to demonstrate some form of independence from the United States, but there seems to be total dependence in the case of the F‑35s. We know that some spare parts will be owned by the Pentagon until they are installed and the Pentagon will oversee software updates.

Is this not Canada being even more dependent on the United States, when it comes to the F‑35s and Canada's capability for defending itself?

4:05 p.m.

Deputy Minister, Department of National Defence

Stefanie Beck

I appreciate the opportunity to answer that question.

As I said, this is actually a joint project, meaning that the parts that go into each aircraft come from all over the world. The project could not be halted by a single country. Regarding software, all of the various governments contribute to developing it. So if there were a problem and someone wanted to shut the aircraft down—people are always talking about a kill switch, for example—it would not be impossible, I admit, but it would be difficult. That would mean that no one in the aircraft could communicate with the others, which is impossible, of course. There is no such kill switch at the Pentagon.

Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

That's good to know, because I was actually wondering about that.

On October 2, Stephen Fuhr, Secretary of State for Defence, announced that he wanted to reduce Canada's dependence on the United States, and yet the next day, Canada signed a $1.75 billion agreement with the United States for rockets.

What are you actually doing to reduce our dependence on the United States?