this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2025
33 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

10675 readers
577 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 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Industry Minister Mélanie Joly pitted two giant defence companies against one another on Tuesday for the future of Canada's fighter fleet, saying the $27-billion contract to buy 88 U.S.-made F-35 jets doesn’t deliver enough jobs for workers in this country and that the public expects a better deal.

In perhaps her most pointed comments to date, Joly acknowledged publicly that the federal government was talking with Swedish defence contractor Saab, which has promised to bring thousands of aerospace manufacturing jobs to the country in the assembly of its Gripen E fighter jet.

"We think that we can use military procurement to get more,” Joly told reporters. “That is why we're looking, indeed, at the Gripen."

She said Saab is offering 10,000 jobs.

all 3 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 6 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I don't think there's going to be any movement on this until the two tariff related cases clear the US supreme court.

The F-35 deal is a major bargaining chip in our negotiations with the US, and those negotiations aren't going to go anywhere until we know what we're negotiating against. If the supreme court strikes down Trump's ability to tariff under the IEEPA, that absolutely destroys his leverage. We know that his own party have already voted against his tariff agenda multiple times, so the only way he can do this is by going around Congress. If he loses that option, he's suddenly playing with a completely empty hand, while we still hold all the same cards we did from the start.

I suspect that's why this "Review" is taking so long. The government is going to want to have it say whatever backs up their position with the US, and right now they don't yet know what that position will ultimately be. What we do know is that Saab's eagerness to make a deal gives us more leverage because we can very credibly threaten Lockheed (who basically own the US government) with walking away. After all, 10,000 jobs and total ownership of the production pipeline is pretty tempting.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 hours ago

If the supreme court strikes down Trump's ability to tariff under the IEEPA,

In that instance, Trump is likely to either find another loophole (whether valid or not) to exploit for the next 10 months until the court can try and stop him again, or ignore the ruling completely.