Public Accounts committee  Thank you. We haven't done an audit on the process that the government has announced it's intending to follow, so I can't comment on any specifics of that.

Public Accounts committee  I guess that has various parts. Again, we haven't done an audit on the process the government has announced. We haven't done an audit on the ship procurement either. In my previous career, I had been part of projects for purchases of assets. It is very critical in those projects to make sure that due process and due diligence and rigour are applied to make sure that the right decisions come out of those types of projects.

Public Accounts committee  Again, because we haven't done an audit of the new process, I can't comment on the specifics of the process.

Public Accounts committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. Certainly we have indicated in the chapter that everything that happened throughout this time period was leading more and more toward the eventual purchase of the F-35. However, again, we stated a few times that it's important that before that purchase is made, the government revisit what could happen and make sure they're going to make the right decision in replacing the CF-18.

Public Accounts committee  No.

Public Accounts committee  The audit was more an audit of the process that occurred after the decision to enter into the joint program with the United States, and then the decision, further on, towards the choice of jets to replace. It was not an audit looking at, in first instances, should the government or should not replace the jets.

Public Accounts committee  As I understood it, the question was about the process up to 2011. Through that process, we found that options were considered, but they were considered earlier on than the 2011 point that the question referred to. There were points in time when different aircraft were identified as potential options, but that would have been before 2011.

Public Accounts committee  Certainly in 2010, the government announced its intention to purchase the F-35. Now again, it still had not put in any order to actually acquire a jet at that point in time. But certainly, from the point in time that the decision was announced, everything was moving towards the eventual purchase of the F-35.

Public Accounts committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. First of all, I think the honourable member is buying cars the same way I am, trying to keep them going for 25 years. Having said that, the important thing in life cycle costing is to get a full picture of what those costs are going to be to operate something like this.

Public Accounts committee  Thank you. Certainly, to the best of my knowledge, we have not received any correspondence from any minister on this chapter.

Public Accounts committee  We haven't gone through the plan in detail. We haven't done an audit on the plan. I think the critical starting point in anything moving forward—and I think it is very important to get this right from here on in—is that the organizations charged with managing this process are given a very clear statement of purpose, a very clear direction about what is expected of them, and I think if that is provided, then the organizations involved will be able to carry out their task.

Public Accounts committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, we received everything we asked for, and in fact if we hadn't, we have a responsibility to specifically state that in our work. We received any information that we asked for.

Public Accounts committee  Thank you. What we are using in that statement is National Defence's numbers, so this is, at least, a $25 billion purchase. We've identified that there are issues and questions around how that number was calculated, but regardless of whether the number is higher or not, it's at least a $25 billion purchase, and therefore we would expect a certain level of due diligence applied to that transaction.

Public Accounts committee  That number includes what National Defence estimated to be the operating, maintenance, and sustaining cost for a 20-year period. We would have expected that the number would have included the additional years, so, no, it was not a full life cycle cost. It was a 20-year cycle cost.

Public Accounts committee  We didn't make a decision or conclusion on the basis of whether policy was violated or not. We identified that there were items missing from the life cycle costing. While the department was presenting something that was a life cycle cost, we felt it had elements missing and wasn't for enough years, so therefore, it was not a satisfactory estimate of life cycle cost.