this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2025
492 points (99.8% liked)

Canada

8928 readers
1911 users here now

What's going on Canada?

Related Communities

🍁 Meta

🗺️ Provinces / Territories

🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.

🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer

💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.

💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales

🗣️ Politics

🍁 Social / Culture

Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
otter@lemmy.ca
mp3@lemmy.ca
492
Carney orders review of F-35 fighter jet purchase from U.S.’s Lockheed Martin (www.ctvnews.ca)
submitted 1 day ago by HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works to c/canada@lemmy.ca
82 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Prime Minister Mark Carney has asked for a review of Canada’s plan to purchase a fleet of F-35 fighter jets.

The deal with Lockheed Martin and the U.S. government is for 88 planes at a cost of about US$85 million each.

A spokesperson for Defence Minister Bill Blair said Carney has asked Blair to look into whether the F-35 contract is the best investment for Canada, or if there are better options.

“We need to do our homework given the changing environment, and make sure that the contract in its current form is in the best interests of Canadians and the Canadian Armed Forces,” Blair’s press secretary Laurent de Casanove said.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kbal@fedia.io 5 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

You're underestimating the size of $70 billion. It's more like high-speed rail to every major city in the country.

[–] Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

Nah, $70 billion is about right, and that's a conservative estimate. If it turns out anything like california high speed rail then it could definitely go into $100 billion territory.

Common law countries like the u.s., Canada and u.k. are really inefficient at building hsr due to property rights issues. California is still struggling to build its hsr even though it's scope has been reduced, its budget keeps ballooning. Similarly, the hs2 project in England to connect London to Manchester has also been cut back to just Birmingham, and it's also over budget ringing in £ 50 billion for just that section.

If this were china then yeah you could probably get a Vancouver to Quebec line for $70 billion, but the Canadian central government isnt that strong and would have to deal with a lot more regulations.

[–] kbal@fedia.io 1 points 11 hours ago

California is the textbook case of paying way to much for that sort of thing, isn't it? It's always the one they go to when they want to make a crazy inflated budget look reasonable by comparison. But yeah, I was seriously underestimating the cost anyway. Maybe we should just go with medium-speed rail.