(The following article is from the July 1-31,  2010 issue of People's Voice, Canada's leading communist newspaper. Articles can be reprinted free if the source is credited. Subscription rates in Canada: $30/year, or $15 low income rate; for U.S. readers - $45 US per year; other overseas readers - $45 US or $50 CDN per year. Send to: People's Voice, c/o PV Business Manager, 706 Clark Drive, Vancouver, BC, V5L 3J1.)

By Kimball Cariou

Rejecting the view of Canadians that the military budget should be reduced to tackle urgent domestic needs, the Harper Tory government now plans to spend $9 billion on 65 new fighter-jets, plus another $7 billion on "ancillary costs" such as future parts and maintenance. The total price tag has more than quadrupled since 2008, when the government first announced that it would purchase 80 "F-35 Joint Strike Fighters" from U.S. munitions giant Lockheed Martin for a total of $3.8 billion.

     This deal gives new meaning to the term "sticker shock." Just two years ago, the jets were priced at $47.4 million each. Now the price has jumped to $245 million at a time when the Harper Tories are slashing social program spending.

     And the waste doesn't end there. The original plan by the Conservatives was to replace the Canadian Forces' current fleet of CF-18 fighter jets. Since then, $2.6 billion has been spent to upgrade the CF-18s.

     A Commons committee will investigate the purchase of a new fighter aircraft fleet, including the price tag and whether Canada actually needs these weapons. But the hearings into the largest military procurement in Canadian history won't take place for months, and the Harper government plans to move quickly.

     Eyebrows have already been raised over the news that there will be no other bids for the contract. In another apparent controversy, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is a single-engine aircraft, which may be a problem for a jet which will be used to patrol the Canadian Arctic. The CF-18s have two engines, which many pilots consider an important safety feature.

     A survey conducted in early March by Leger Marketing asked "With Canada's military role ending in Afghanistan next year, what should the focus be on the government's military spending?"

     Almost 60% agreed with this answer: "Canada should take a peace dividend and cut back on military spending to focus on other more pressing social issues at home." Almost three-quarters of Quebec respondents backed this peace dividend option, compared to 44% of Albertans and 55% of those in Ontario.

     Across the country, 28% of people wanted to "sustain or increase spending on the military because security in a post-9/11 world is of the highest priority." Another 15% of respondents did not give an opinion.

     "The government has not done what most of Canada wants them to do, which is transfer that [military] funding to programs within our own borders," said Leger vice president Dave Scholz.

     According to the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, the Canada First Defence Strategy, unveiled by the Harper government in 2008, promises that military spending will grow by an average of 0.6% in real terms (adjusted for inflation) and an average of 2.7% in nominal terms (not adjusted for inflation) per year from FY 2007-08 to 2027-28. Canadian military spending would increase to about $21.3 billion in 2009 dollars, or about $31.3 billion in 2027 dollars, by FY 2027-28.

     As the CCPA notes, the incremental costs of operations such as the Afghanistan war, currently more than $1.5 billion per year, add to this baseline budget, meaning that final spending could be significantly higher.

     The total spending over the 20-year life of this plan would likely be in the $415-440 billion range (2009 dollars), or about $13,000 per Canadian, warns the CCPA, which published a study of the issue last December. The stunning increase in the F-35 deal alone will boost that figure even higher.

     If Canadian military budgets instead remained at the post-Cold War minimum level, the total spending over this period would be $271 billion in 2009 dollars, a difference of $145-170 billion.

     Imagine what could be done with such an amount over 20 years! To give just a few examples, the public transportation systems of Canadian cities could be provided with thousands of fuel-efficient new buses for just $5 billion. The cancelled national child-care program could receive $5 billion annually, totalling $100 billion. This would leave at least another $50 billion to build about 250,000 new low-income, social and co-operative housing units. These initiatives would cut create jobs, lower greenhouse gas emissions, and reduce provincial government spending on health and policing linked to the costs of massive street homelessness.

     But Canada is governed today by a party which opposes these urgent priorities. The Harper Tories deny the environmental crisis, reject the concept of public child care, and refuse to fund social housing.

     In effect, Canada is ruled by a minority regime which places top priority on war-making, at the expense of the people. Canadians should send the message to all parties in Parliament that the shocking fighter-jet purchase plan is a scandal which must be scrapped immediately.