| 0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic. |
 Author
|
Topic: NeoCons plan for the military....08 (Read 1327 times)
|
Mike Blais
SSM (NATO Bar), CPSM, UN-Cyp, CD
Ultimate 2000+ Member
 Offline
Gender: 
Posts: 3473
A ROYAL CANADIAN "NEVER PASSES A FAULT"
|
Ah, reminds me of the old days when we all got so excited when Mulroney pulled our chain with the infamous White Paper. Harper's Reeeeformers won't have to worry about that, however, cause they know better then commit their smoke and mirror policies to paper! That way they can, like all good knee jerk governments, change their tune in midstep. Of course, we all know how good their word is, eh? Just ask any veteran who, regardless of the promises made when they were in opposition, is now getting boned realll gooooddd by em.
Conservatives won't commit defence strategy to paper
20-year plan for military to be based on 'vision' outlined in Harper, MacKay speeches
David Pugliese
The Ottawa Citizen
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Prime Minister Stephen Harper, speaking at the Armouries in Halifax yesterday, stressed Canada's need for a strong military. 'If you want to be taken seriously in the world, you need the capacity to act -- it's that simple,' he said.
Canada's defence strategy for the next 20 years will be based on speeches by Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Defence Minister Peter Mac-Kay given yesterday in Halifax.
In a highly unusual move, the Conservative government will base its entire future rebuilding of the Canadian military on Mr. Harper's 10-minute speech and Mr. MacKay's 700-word address. No actual strategy document has been produced, or will be produced, according to government and defence officials. Neither speech went into any specific details about equipment purchases, costs or timelines or how the future strategy will unfold. Both speeches presented more broad-brush approaches to defence.
Asked about when the actual Canada First Defence Strategy was going to be released, Jay Paxton, Mr. MacKay's press secretary, replied: "It is a strategy that you heard enunciated by the prime minister and Minister MacKay."
"It is not a 'document' like a white paper -- it is the vision delivered today for long-term planning for the CF," he added. "As such, the speeches are the strategy."
Mr. Harper's speech repeated some phrases from previous addresses, including the need to have a strong military. "If you want to be taken seriously in the world, you need the capacity to act -- it's that simple," Mr. Harper said. "The Canada First Defence Strategy will strengthen our sovereignty and security at home and bolster our ability to defend our values and interests abroad."
Mr. MacKay's speech talked about the purchase of fixed-wing search-and-rescue aircraft, new fighter planes, replacements for destroyers and frigates, combat vehicles for the army and a replacement for Aurora maritime patrol aircraft. He did not provide any details about how much such procurements would cost or the timelines for them.
Mr. MacKay also talked about improving key infrastructure used by the Canadian Forces and increasing military readiness, but did not go into details about either.
The Conservatives did retreat on an election promise that called for a boost to the size of the regular military to 75,000 and the reserves to around 35,000. Now the size of the regular force will be 70,000 and 30,000 for the reserves, an expansion that will take place "over the course of the plan," according to Mr. MacKay.
The Canada First plan covers the next 20 years.
The announcement did not cover other promises made in the past by the Conservatives. There were no details about the replacement of the air force's aging Twin Otters, used in the Arctic. Also absent were details about the creation of the territorial battalions promised by the Conservatives during the last election.
The new airborne regiment that Mr. Harper previously said would be based in Trenton, Ont., and which one Conservative MP insists is still on the books, also wasn't mentioned.
Last year, the Canadian Forces produced a 39-page Canada First Strategy for the government, but that was rejected because it was too specific and also included details about equipment that needed to be eliminated, either because it was too old or too costly to operate.
Defence Department officials believe the government wants to keep its strategy vague so critics cannot point to specific pieces of the plan they may fail to deliver.
The plan also reiterates previous equipment purchases totalling $30 billion and made in 2006 and 2007. Of those, the military has received C-17 transport aircraft and used Leopard tanks. It has also signed a contract for the delivery of C-130J transport planes.
Other previously announced programs, such as the purchase of new Chinook helicopters, Arctic patrol ships, trucks for the army, and upgrades for the navy's frigates are in various stages of acquisition.
Mr. Paxton said the Canada First Defence Strategy is "unprecedented" in that it commits stable funding for the military over a 20-year period and an automatic increase in defence spending each year.
But defence industry officials say such promises are almost meaningless since any government in the future can overturn such initiatives. They note that neither the Conservatives in the 1980s nor the Liberals in the 1990s followed through with all their military spending promises outlined in various white papers.
NDP defence critic Dawn Black said even the previous Liberal government produced a strategy document when it last announced its defence policy for the future. "It's appalling that defence is the biggest expenditure of government and yet there's no strategic documents to go with this supposed plan," Ms. Black said. "We waited two years for this, if you can believe it."
The announcement by Mr. Harper, made against a backdrop of military personnel and with defence chief Gen. Rick Hillier and high-ranking politicians in the audience, generated a burst of positive publicity for the government throughout the day.
But some of the projects announced yesterday have already been announced. In December, Mr. MacKay confirmed that work had commenced on an Aurora aircraft replacement, but he did not have any details on how long it would take.
In regard to the purchase of search-and-rescue aircraft, the Liberals fast-tracked a program in 2004 to procure new planes, but that project stalled over the years. The Canadian Forces just announced it will spend more money to keep the Buffalos flying until 2015-2017 when a new search-and-rescue plane is expected.
For more military news, go to David Pugliese's Defence Watch blog at ottawacitizen.com.
© The Ottawa Citizen 2008
|
1RCR 1977-79 Depot (Italy PL), B Coy, Mortars, Pioneers, D Coy (CFB London)
3RCR 1979-82 M Coy, Pipes & Drums, Sigs, Mortars. (CFB Baden-Soellingen)
1RCR 1982-88 Mortars. Dukes, Cyprus-Welfare NCO 84-85, Injured, WO&Sgts Mess, (CFB London)
1988-92 Med-remuster to HELL/ 35 DU, CFB Baden
1992 Medical release. God Bless you all!
Pro Patria
|
|
|
Mike Blais
SSM (NATO Bar), CPSM, UN-Cyp, CD
Ultimate 2000+ Member
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3473
A ROYAL CANADIAN "NEVER PASSES A FAULT"
|
Harper unveils broad outline of defence strategy; critics pounce on lack of detail
HALIFAX — Prime Minister Stephen Harper unveiled his government's plan to spend $30 billion on the military, in a long-term vision statement that was swiftly criticized Monday for being behind schedule and scant on detail.
Harper confirmed there was little new in the announcement, delivered to about 100 military personnel at a drill hall inside the Halifax Armoury. But he insisted that the 20-year plan heralded a new way of doing things for the Armed Forces.
"The newest thing about this announcement is that it is a long-term plan," Harper said, suggesting that previous planning for the military suffered form a last-minute, piecemeal approach.
"We are establishing a 20-year plan with an escalating budget framework."
The plan calls for boosting the number of regular and reserve troops and moving ahead with replacement of the military's fighter jets, surface combat ships, maritime patrol vessels, transport helicopters, armoured vehicles, helicopters and fixed-wing search-and-rescue aircraft - among other things.
One of the reservists recruited to listen to Harper's speech said she believes the prime minister's promises, but wishes the new equipment would come more quickly.
Sgt. Joanne Henneberry noted that a nearby truck used to transport troops was over two decades old.
"It doesn't change anything. Twenty years? Who's to say if I'll be around in 10 years from now," she said.
"We're hearing about aircraft and ships. What about the equipment we use when we do our training?"
Most of the plans have been announced before and there were few new details offered Monday on the timing or costs. There was also no mention that some of the replacement equipment has already been delayed.
The replacement of the Buffalo fixed-wing search-and-rescue aircraft, for example, has already been put off until 2014 - at the earliest. The 40-year-old planes were supposed to be replaced five years ago.
Meanwhile, the lack of detail in the Canada First plan generated skepticism among critics who claimed the Tories have been scaling back commitments they made during the most recent election campaign.
In 2006, the Conservatives called for expanding the Canadian Forces by adding 70,000 regular members and 30,000 reservists over a five-year period.
Harper repeated the pledge Monday - but he did not mention a deadline.
A Defence Department performance report, released last November, concluded the government had not allotted enough money to meet the target set in 2006.
Given the commitments being made in Afghanistan and the rapid attrition rate in the military, the expansion was "re-profiled" to 68,000 regulars and 26,000 reservists by 2011-2012, the report said.
Senator Colin Kenny, Liberal chairman of the Senate's defence committee, said it remains unclear whether the Tories can meet their recruitment goals.
"What's confusing or disheartening about it is these guys seem to be shooting all over the place," said Kenny.
"There's three sets of numbers the government has gone through in a two-year period of time and this is for a strategy that was promised to us two years ago."
The Conservatives have said they are the party that rebuilt Canada's defences, but the Opposition Liberals argue the Tories must spend a lot more than $30 billion over 20 years to get the military back in shape.
The Senate defence committee, for example, has said the country's annual defence budget should be increased to $35 billion from about $18 billion by 2011-2012.
During Monday's news conference, Harper said his government has committed annual spending to $30 billion by 2028.
"What I don't see anywhere in this announcement is the government making a commitment to invest real money," Kenny said in an interview.
Bryon Wilfert, the Liberal party's defence critic, said he suspects Harper's announcements are an attempt to deflect attacks in the House of Commons over several scandals, including Foreign Affairs Minister Maxime Bernier's relationship with Montrealer Julie Couillard.
Couillard has never been convicted of any offence, but the minister's ex-girlfriend has been linked romantically over a decade ago with a former member of the Hells Angels.
After a "bad week" in parliament, the Tories like to trot out military announcements, argued Wilfert.
"They always like to play two cards: the military card and the law-and-order card to deflect away from the reality they face."
However, the prime minister said the Canada First strategy is aimed at ensuring the Canadian Forces have the people, equipment and support needed to defend the country and ensure security around the globe.
"If a country wants to be taken seriously in the world, it must have the capacity to act - it's just that simple," he said, a massive Canadian flag hanging behind him.
"Otherwise you forfeit your right to be a player. You're the one chattering on the sidelines, that everybody smiles at but nobody listens to."
Flanked by members of the Princess Louise Fusiliers, a reserve infantry regiment, Harper said the strategy will provide a boost for the economy, creating jobs for thousands of Canadians through a long-term procurement strategy.
The new equipment and personnel will improve surveillance of Canada's borders, provide more support to civilian authorities during natural disasters and help provide security to major international events, such as the Vancouver Olympics in 2010, he said.
The prime minister was also scheduled to attend Monday's hockey game in Halifax between Canada and Finland at the world hockey championship.
|
1RCR 1977-79 Depot (Italy PL), B Coy, Mortars, Pioneers, D Coy (CFB London)
3RCR 1979-82 M Coy, Pipes & Drums, Sigs, Mortars. (CFB Baden-Soellingen)
1RCR 1982-88 Mortars. Dukes, Cyprus-Welfare NCO 84-85, Injured, WO&Sgts Mess, (CFB London)
1988-92 Med-remuster to HELL/ 35 DU, CFB Baden
1992 Medical release. God Bless you all!
Pro Patria
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Blais
SSM (NATO Bar), CPSM, UN-Cyp, CD
Ultimate 2000+ Member
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3473
A ROYAL CANADIAN "NEVER PASSES A FAULT"
|
Harper's defence plan: win election
Nothing in this but dollar figures
Don Martin, National Post Published: Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Paul Darrow/Reuters
With lines of soldiers standing tall in potted-plant formation as a camera-friendly backdrop, the Prime Minister announced yesterday a 20-year glimpse into the Canadian military's future.
Only one thing was missing: the strategy itself.
There are 45 paragraphs of background rhetoric, all of it announcement regurgitation from earlier budgets, but the complete plan is apparently locked inside Prime Minister Stephen Harper's brain, albeit requiring the odd whispered correction from Defence Minister Peter MacKay.
"The strategy was enunciated today by the Prime Minister and the Minister," said a Defence spokesman responding to my request to read the actual plan. "So the strategy is what they unveiled.
Huh? Keep in mind this defence vision has been years in the crafting and has gone through multiple drafts to make sure every comma was correctly placed.
So now, it seems, what was listed by Chief of Defence Staff Rick Hillier as a top task for his replacement doesn't actually exist in written form beyond speaking notes. Very odd.
Perhaps the best explanation came from one retired military officer, who confided to me a few months ago that the real purpose of the strategy was to arm the Prime Minister with military plans for election campaign battle.
The body language of the Prime Minister supports the notion this was a rushed rollout, conveniently located in Halifax to keep Mr. Harper away from the Commons lest his Foreign Affairs Minister's dating history become a hot topic of Liberal attack.
Appearing uncharacteristically disengaged, Mr. Harper fumbled answers to basic questions on equipment and needed his budgetary math corrected by a modest $10-billion at one point. That's perfectly understandable, but as anyone who has watched Mr. Harper would know, he's usually better briefed and prepared than his ministers.
In any event, it took mere minutes before local reporters, picking up signals they were being used as stenographers for a government propaganda release, demanded to know what, if anything, was new about the strategy.
"The newest thing about this announcement is that it is a long-term plan," Mr. Harper insisted. So the plan is the news and it doesn't exist except in verbal form. Gosh.
Even if it were written down, there would be problems with a 20-year military buildup blueprint.
Mr. Harper promises regular increases in military budgets, which may or, more likely, may not be shared or allowed by future finance ministers.
The newest thing about this announcement
is that it is a long-term plan
And it's clearly presumptuous to envision Canada's place in the world two decades hence without providing any clear emphasis or directional preference for domestic, continental or international challenges.
Given that nobody could have foreseen Canada's greatest military effort of the last 50 years would be in Kandahar, a dusty dot on an Afghan map few could have found at the millennium turn, prophetic accuracy is difficult, if not impossible, and that complicates equipment requirements.
Just five years ago, for example, Canada's military leaders elevated search and rescue aircraft to the top of their priority list and would have laughed out loud at the notion of hauling refurbished Leopard tanks out of retirement for Afghanistan duty.
Yet this let's-pretend document salivates for tanks and barely mentions fixed-wing aircraft, surrendering the job of patrolling 71,261 kilometres of coastline and our vast interior to the duct-taped-together Buffalo and Aurora fleet for another decade.
OK, let's give the Conservatives some credit. At least they have confirmed a constant direction forward by pledging annual money boosts, a major manpower increase and orderly equipment upgrades. If future governments continue to provide advanced military firepower, Canada will be ready for flexible deployments upon demand anywhere in the world.
Still, the priorities for Mr. Harper could be shelved as the first act of post-election business by another prime minister. Lest we forget, the Mulroney era pledged new helicopters, which were quickly scrapped in the Chretien era.
If Mr. Harper wants to push Canada's military in a particular direction, he might consider appointing a new Chief of Defence Staff soon to learn the secrets to military manoeuvring from Gen. Hillier. That decision is overdue.
But when it comes to spotting long-range military targets, vision deteriorates rapidly with age and, because it's limited to the gap between elections or changes in prime ministers, is chronically shortsighted.
---------
'CANADA FIRST'
Primary goals for the 'Canada First' defence budget, which calls for $30- billion in funding over 20 years:
-Expand regular forces to 70,000 and 30,000 reserves
-Improve key infrastructure
-Increase overall readiness
-Continue with replacements of surface combat ships, maritime patrol craft, fixed-wing search and rescue aircraft, fighter aircraft, and land combat vehicles and systems.
-Previously announced elements include: Major procurement plans for aircraft, helicopters, trucks, tanks; modernization of Halifax Class frigates; establishment of a deep water docking and refueling facility in Nanisivik
Source: Ministry of Defence
|
1RCR 1977-79 Depot (Italy PL), B Coy, Mortars, Pioneers, D Coy (CFB London)
3RCR 1979-82 M Coy, Pipes & Drums, Sigs, Mortars. (CFB Baden-Soellingen)
1RCR 1982-88 Mortars. Dukes, Cyprus-Welfare NCO 84-85, Injured, WO&Sgts Mess, (CFB London)
1988-92 Med-remuster to HELL/ 35 DU, CFB Baden
1992 Medical release. God Bless you all!
Pro Patria
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Blais
SSM (NATO Bar), CPSM, UN-Cyp, CD
Ultimate 2000+ Member
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3473
A ROYAL CANADIAN "NEVER PASSES A FAULT"
|
I think they are pulling numbers out of harper's buttcheeks as the situation develops.
The troops deserve better then lip service from tokens.
Military blueprint sparks confusion
ANDREW VAUGHAN/THE CANADIAN PRESS
Briefing offers more details on 20-year, $50B plan by Conservatives to beef up Canadian Forces
May 15, 2008 04:30 AM
Allan Woods
Ottawa Bureau
OTTAWA–The Canadian Forces are slated to spend between $45 billion and $50 billion on equipment between now and 2028, says Lt.-Gen. Walter Natynczyk, the vice-chief of defence staff.
On Monday, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Defence Minister Peter MacKay presented the "total investments we're making in the military in the next generation" as a $30 billion undertaking during a news conference on the Canada First Defence Strategy in Halifax.
But the $30 billion figure represents just the budget for the Department of National Defence in 2028 as a result of a 2 per cent annual increase that starts in 2011.
"What we're going to invest between now and (2028), and further on beyond that, is that $45 billion to $50 billion," a senior military official explained yesterday. "These are two different numbers. They mean two different things."
Dan Dugas, a spokesperson for MacKay, denied that the Prime Minister or defence minister misspoke, and said any confusion was the fault of reporters who "seized" on the $30 billion figure "rather than look at what we were rolling out as priorities."
But it was the government and the military scrambling yesterday to salvage a blueprint for the future of the military that has been trashed all week as a rehash of old announcements designed to get the Conservative party re-elected. The briefing served up a few more details on the plan, such as a rough schedule for the purchase of new fighter jets (2017), search-and-rescue planes (2015), destroyers (2017) and frigates (2024). The ships will eat up more than half of the equipment budget.
There were also a few surprises, including the latest forecast on efforts to build up the size of the Canadian Forces.
In the 2006 election campaign, the Tories committed to building up to a military of 75,000 regular forces and 35,000 reserves within five years of taking office. Last year, the department said it needed six years to meet that goal due to the rate of retirements. The target has now been downgraded to 70,000 full-time soldiers and 30,000 part-timers, but there is no longer a timeline for achieving that force size, a senior military official admitted.
"That's what happens when you don't come up with a real plan," said NDP defence critic Dawn Black (New Westminster-Coquitlam), who said she was mystified by the defence strategy's new price tag and concerned at cuts to coastal patrols and search-and-rescue capabilities.
Pundits and even military enthusiasts decried the lack of detail and vision in the 20-year military plan this week, as well as the absence of a public document, a so-called white paper, to formalize the government's ambitions.
Dugas said the government does plan on "providing paper of some kind," but he couldn't say when.
Richard Cohen, a senior policy adviser to MacKay, said yesterday that the two years of work that went into the Canada First Defence Strategy are articulated in a secret but "very detailed" cabinet document.
But asked about the information void on the major file, Cohen seemed to acknowledge there had been problems.
"Things could always be better," he said.
|
1RCR 1977-79 Depot (Italy PL), B Coy, Mortars, Pioneers, D Coy (CFB London)
3RCR 1979-82 M Coy, Pipes & Drums, Sigs, Mortars. (CFB Baden-Soellingen)
1RCR 1982-88 Mortars. Dukes, Cyprus-Welfare NCO 84-85, Injured, WO&Sgts Mess, (CFB London)
1988-92 Med-remuster to HELL/ 35 DU, CFB Baden
1992 Medical release. God Bless you all!
Pro Patria
|
|
|
Mike Blais
SSM (NATO Bar), CPSM, UN-Cyp, CD
Ultimate 2000+ Member
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3473
A ROYAL CANADIAN "NEVER PASSES A FAULT"
|
pposition questions true cost of defence plan
Prime Minister Stephen Harper Responds to a question concerning the governments military direction during question period in the House of Commons on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on Thursday, May 15, 2008. (Tom Hanson / THE CANADIAN PRESS)
Prime Minister Stephen Harper Responds to a question concerning the governments military direction during question period in the House of Commons on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on Thursday, May 15, 2008. (Tom Hanson / THE CANADIAN PRESS)
Federal Liberal leader Stephane Dion speaks during a news conference in Toronto, Thursday May 15, 2008. (Adrian Wyld / THE CANADIAN PRESS)
CTV.ca News Staff
Updated: Thu. May. 15 2008 8:02 PM ET
The Conservative government's much-touted 20-year defence plan is raising questions about its actual cost.
When Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced the plan earlier this week to equip the military with new ships and planes, he admitted it would have a substantial cost, estimated to be about $20 billion.
But that figure was quickly corrected by Harper's defence minister -- even before the prime minister had a chance to finish his announcement in front of Canadian soldiers.
"Minister (Peter) MacKay just corrected me," Harper said during what appeared to be a carefully staged photo-op for the media.
"He said the total investments we're making in the next generation are closer to $30 billion."
But it turns out that even that figure may not be correct.
Defence officials now say that $30 billion will only cover the annual operating budget for the Department of Defence in 2028 -- after annual increases over the next 20 years. Right now, the annual budget is $18 billion.
On top of the budget increase, military officials say there will be additional money to cover the cost of new equipment. That could mean an extra $45 to $50 billion for combat equipment such as planes, vehicles, and ships.
Critics say such estimates may be too conservative and the real costs could be much higher.
"(The government) can't say whether the cost of the plan is $30 billion or $50 billion or $96 billion," said Liberal House Leader Ralph Goodale in question period Thursday.
"No one in this government has a clue what their defence policy actually is, or how much it will cost.''
The prime minister insists the numbers are quite straightforward. Harper says the bottom line is that the military officials appreciate the monetary commitment.
"They're on the record -- receiving it well and very glad that the decade of darkness under the previous government is over," Harper said in the House of Commons on Thursday.
But critics say the Tories have not provided any details about how additional funds will be spent. And they claim the confusion of actual costs may be a deliberate attempt to hide true costs of the Tory defence strategy.
"When we talk about the size of the investment that they're talking about, which they don't seem to actually have quantified themselves ... I think Canadians would be quite shocked," NDP Leader Jack Layton said.
With a report by CTV's Roger Smith
|
1RCR 1977-79 Depot (Italy PL), B Coy, Mortars, Pioneers, D Coy (CFB London)
3RCR 1979-82 M Coy, Pipes & Drums, Sigs, Mortars. (CFB Baden-Soellingen)
1RCR 1982-88 Mortars. Dukes, Cyprus-Welfare NCO 84-85, Injured, WO&Sgts Mess, (CFB London)
1988-92 Med-remuster to HELL/ 35 DU, CFB Baden
1992 Medical release. God Bless you all!
Pro Patria
|
|
|
Mike Blais
SSM (NATO Bar), CPSM, UN-Cyp, CD
Ultimate 2000+ Member
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3473
A ROYAL CANADIAN "NEVER PASSES A FAULT"
|
Despite Harper's promises, Canadian Forces still lacking
Canada will require a defence budget of $35 billion by 2011 but funding is falling short
May 16, 2008
Colin Kenny
John Wayne was the epitome of the Hollywood tough guy – steely eyed, quick fisted, a man of action rather than words. He played the toughest cowboy and the most courageous war hero in movie after movie.
The thing most people don't remember is that Wayne was careful not to interrupt his film career with anything as messy as military duty. Unlike Clark Gable, Henry Fonda and other stars, the toughest-talking patriot in America never enlisted for World War II.
Wayne didn't like to talk about that. On the other hand, Stephen Harper and his defence ministers have very much enjoyed talking about how muscular they have made the Canadian Forces, compared to those 98-pound Liberal weaklings under Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin.
I have no problem with the current government depicting those Liberal governments as pikers when it came to funding the kind of military Canadians need. They were pikers.
I do have a problem with Stephen Harper playing the swaggering movie version of John Wayne. He portrays a government that has turned the 98-pound weakling into a helpful, big-shouldered bruiser, capable of defending Canadians' physical safety at home and advancing our interests abroad.
This is a façade. At first I giddily bought into the Conservative hype about resuscitating the Canadian military. I was suckered.
Consider:
NATO's target for member countries' defence spending is 2 per cent of GDP. Even Pierre Trudeau spent 2 per cent. Canada's current defence spending totals just 1.2 per cent of GDP, and will drop to 0.87 per cent under the current 20-year government strategy.
Canada, the Netherlands and Australia have similar world interests. Canada spends $558 per capita on defence; the Netherlands $669; Australia $808.
In mid-April the Senate Committee on National Security and Defence received the Canadian army's 2008-09 strategic needs report. In it, Lt.-Gen. Andrew Leslie revealed that the army's size has actually declined by 30 soldiers since 2005. "The army is now stretched almost to the breaking point."
The navy's report was just as gloomy. It said the strength of the navy's fleet will be soon halved and that Canada will not be able to play a meaningful role with our allies on the high seas for five years between 2013 and 2018.
The air force report warned that, without significant new funding, up to 15 CF-18s will have to be grounded, plus four Hercules transports, four Aurora patrol aircraft and six Sea King helicopters.
The government announced in 2006 that it would increase the Regular Forces by 13,000 to 75,000 by 2010-11, and that the Reserves would be increased by 10,000 to 35,000. Then in 2007 it quietly delayed its plan for a full year and "reprofiled" it, halving the increase in regulars to 6,500 and chopping the increase in reserves from 10,000 to 1,000. The Senate Committee on National Security and Defence, based on the operational tempo of the Canadian Forces over the past 10 years, estimates that 90,000 regulars are needed at a minimum.
Under its "Canada First" policy, the government promised that the Canadian Forces would increase its focus on defending Canadian territory, and that the Forces would be quick to respond to domestic man-made or natural disasters. Territorial battalions would be created at 12 centres across the country. That hasn't happened.
When Gen. Rick Hillier became Chief of the Defence Staff in 2005 he made it his mission to transform and grow the Canadian Forces at home at the same time Canadian troops were serving in Kandahar. After two decades of shabby treatment and overuse, the Forces were short on personnel, equipment, training capacity and so hollowed out that in 2006 an embarrassing 18-month pause in overseas operations had to be ordered up. Underfunded, the general's reorganization plan is foundering. A senior military source recently told me that the Forces are now in worse shape than they were back when the pause was implemented.
Despite all of the above, Harper keeps on flexing for the electorate. From the 2008 throne speech:
"Our government will modernize Canada's military to provide effective surveillance and protection for all of our country, co-operate in the defence of North America, and meet our responsibilities abroad to the United Nations and our allies ... Our government believes that focus and action, rather than rhetoric and posturing, are restoring our influence in global affairs ..."
Harper speaking to the Conference of Defence Associations in February: "Countries that cannot or will not make real contributions to global security are not regarded as serious players."
Well, bad news. Canada is skimping, and the chickens will soon come home to roost. Our committee's most frugal estimate is that Canada will require a defence budget of $35 billion by 2011 to give our armed forces personnel a reasonable chance of performing the roles assigned to them. It looks like the government intends to fall short by about $14 billion.
The Prime Minister and his minister of defence gave some sleight-of-hand speeches earlier this week suggesting that they have some master plan, involving many billions of dollars over 20 years, to ensure that the Canadian military is well-funded. Their words and numbers add up to a sham. Finance Minister Jim Flaherty's most recent budget boosts military spending by only 2 per cent annually and that is unlikely to even match inflation. The numbers announced by the Prime Minister may look impressive, but defence spending will actually go down as a percentage of GDP, which is the only valid statistic to compare military spending from year to year. The government's announcement and subsequent "clarification" by unnamed senior military officers in media briefings are intended for electoral purposes and not to enhance the Department of Defence's long-term capabilities.
The government's commitment is to a budget of $30 billion by 2031. The committee has costed out the funding necessary to maintain (not expand) existing capabilities; the figures work out to between $25 billion and $35 billion by 2011-2012 (not 2031). Senior military sources have told us that their real needs actually exceed the high end of our estimate.
Canadians are going to pay a price in terms of loss of security and influence, and our troops are already paying a price. In Afghanistan, we don't have our own helicopters for them, which would make them less vulnerable to roadside bombs. They have had to make do with antiquated drones to provide intelligence about who is planting those bombs over the hill and around the corner.
Harper is right – focus and action, rather than rhetoric and posturing – are what is needed when it comes to Canada's military. John Wayne couldn't have said it any better.
|
1RCR 1977-79 Depot (Italy PL), B Coy, Mortars, Pioneers, D Coy (CFB London)
3RCR 1979-82 M Coy, Pipes & Drums, Sigs, Mortars. (CFB Baden-Soellingen)
1RCR 1982-88 Mortars. Dukes, Cyprus-Welfare NCO 84-85, Injured, WO&Sgts Mess, (CFB London)
1988-92 Med-remuster to HELL/ 35 DU, CFB Baden
1992 Medical release. God Bless you all!
Pro Patria
|
|
|
Mike Blais
SSM (NATO Bar), CPSM, UN-Cyp, CD
Ultimate 2000+ Member
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3473
A ROYAL CANADIAN "NEVER PASSES A FAULT"
|
Think tank's funding tied to getting good press
STEVEN CHASE
From Friday's Globe and Mail
May 16, 2008 at 4:15 AM EDT
OTTAWA — The Department of National Defence sets quotas for how many times a year a military think tank it subsidizes must appear in the news media, a contract made public at the request of the NDP shows.
Critics say the five-year, $500,000 deal with the Conference of Defence Associations crosses the line from promoting debate to paying for supportive commentary - especially troubling when the Harper government is trying to sustain public backing for the Afghan mission.
They say it also raises questions about the millions spent by National Defence each year on grants to other think tanks and universities and called on the department to disclose the terms of those deals as well.
A contract the Conservatives tabled in Parliament this week says the department considers the CDA's key goals to include the need "to consider the problems of National Defence" and "to support government efforts in placing these problems before the public."
The March, 2007, contract says the grant is part of a program to ensure an "independent voice for discussion and debate on security and defence issues outside of the academic sphere." It sets out 13 "expected results" for the CDA, including the requirements to:
"Attain a minimum of 29 media references to the CDA by national or regional journalists and reporters;"
"Attain the publication of a minimum of 15 opinion pieces (including op-eds and letters to the editor in national or regional publications)."
NDP defence critic Dawn Black said the contract's terms make her uncomfortable because she believes it helps the Harper government build public support for Canada's military mission in Afghanistan.
"This is part of that effort to try and sell the war. These are people who support the government position on the war in Afghanistan, and all of the requirements of this contract indicate they need to be in the news and the op-eds and on television across the country."
Alain Pellerin, executive director of the CDA, says his organization has received money from National Defence for decades and the media quotas have been part of the agreement with the military since 2002, when a consulting firm told the department it should draw up more performance-based grant contracts.
He rejected the notion that the CDA is a mouthpiece for Ottawa. He said it has previously disagreed with the party in office, including during the 1990s when former Liberal prime minister Jean Chrétien's government slashed military spending, as well as when former Liberal prime minister Paul Martin decided against joining the U.S. missile shield plan.
Mr. Pellerin said the CDA has backed the current Afghan mission since the Liberals announced it in 2005 because it believes it's the right course.
He said that media commentary quotas are not something the CDA wanted as a term of its contract, and conceded that the NDP may be right in saying they don't make sense.
"That might be a valid point. ... It's not something we went out and sought," he said.
Stephen Staples, head of the left-leaning Rideau Institute, a critic of Canada's role in Afghanistan, said the CDA has to return the cash to National Defence to maintain credibility.
Mr. Pellerin said those attacking the CDA's contract are critics of the Afghan war who lost the public debate over whether to extend Canada's mission there. The operation was extended to 2011 in March
National Defence declined to answer questions on the contract. A spokeswoman said a five-hour window given to respond was insufficient, adding the department would need until today or next week.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper's office has in recent months exerted greater control over Department of National Defence communications, particularly after the treatment of detainees captured by Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan fuelled controversy. So today media requests to National Defence are often forwarded to the Privy Council Office, the bureaucratic arm of the Prime Minister's Office, for scrutiny and vetting before a response is given. This process regularly delays answers from National Defence for days.
|
1RCR 1977-79 Depot (Italy PL), B Coy, Mortars, Pioneers, D Coy (CFB London)
3RCR 1979-82 M Coy, Pipes & Drums, Sigs, Mortars. (CFB Baden-Soellingen)
1RCR 1982-88 Mortars. Dukes, Cyprus-Welfare NCO 84-85, Injured, WO&Sgts Mess, (CFB London)
1988-92 Med-remuster to HELL/ 35 DU, CFB Baden
1992 Medical release. God Bless you all!
Pro Patria
|
|
|
ranrad
Ron [Andy] Andrews
Ultimate 2000+ Member
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 2319
|
Well Mike, youre likely right on here , and as time may show , i hope not, but it may show that we are even worse off from a military standpoint than ever..i am not sure what the thinking is...they hope for a miracle when they need it??? I truly believe that is where we are headed...and if so, then God help us all, we not only will not keep up with current and projected missions, but will not be able to respond to national emergencies at home..which are sure to happen....talk is cheap , and there does not appear to be any capability to fund all these upgrades..so , one must assume it is all political propaganda....ranrad
|
RCAF,CAF, converted RCR?,1RCR 74-77 CD: SSM (Nato);CPSM,;UN-Cyp.; UN- Golan
|
|
|
Mike Blais
SSM (NATO Bar), CPSM, UN-Cyp, CD
Ultimate 2000+ Member
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3473
A ROYAL CANADIAN "NEVER PASSES A FAULT"
|
Digging Themselves into Deeper Trenches
By Scott Taylor
In reviewing the media defence clippings from last week, I'm reminded of that old Rovers hit song "Wasn't that a party", wherein the singer tries to recall just how much he had to drink, who cut down his neighbour's tree and why he ended up in the back of a police car.
No doubt the spin doctors in Prime Minister Stephen Harper's office and the public affairs branch at National Defence Headquarters felt much the same way when they tried to recall the sequence of debacles and blunders they set in motion last Monday.
It was supposed to be a stage-managed media love-in designed to highlight the Conservative Party's commitment to rebuilding the Canadian military.
The backdrop was a George Bushesque flag-draped drill hall, filled with Canadian service personnel, and the location was Canada's most military-friendly city—Halifax.
So far, so good.
In addition to the prime minister's speech, Defence Minister Peter MacKay gave a brief statement and lining the podium as a show of solidarity was a plethora of senior brass—including General Rick "The Big Cod" Hillier himself. The rationale for staging this extravaganza was that the Conservative government was unveiling its long-anticipated, much-ballyhooed Canada First Defence Strategy.
Both Harper and MacKay certainly made a lot of announcements during their speeches. Acquisitions would include tactical and strategic airlift, the army would get new Leopard tanks, the navy would get new Arctic patrol vessels and destroyers, the frigate fleet would be upgraded, a year-round facility would be constructed in the North, new armoured trucks would be purchased, medium- or heavy-lift helicopters would be procured, out through 2020 the air force will be getting new fighter jets and the current ranks of the armed forces will swell to 70,000 regular and 30,000 reservists.
The price tag for all this additional hardware and troops was $30 billion, according to Harper and Co., and this little nugget was what the media fixed upon as the cornerstone of their stories.
To be fair to those reporters, this dollar figure was about the only thing new in the entire series of announcements. Virtually all of the other projects have already been announced in the past—and some, such as the C-17 strategic airlift and Leopard tanks, are already in service. Sharp-eyed journalists also caught on to the fact that the "new" goals for troop levels were actually 10,000 lower than the goal announced in the 2006 budget.
As the press corps began to work their way through the smoke and mirrors in search of substance, one reporter had the novel idea to ask for a copy of the new strategy paper. It was at this juncture that the wheels really began falling off the PR circus wagon.
Unable to produce a copy of the paper, a press secretary for MacKay explained that "it is not a document like a White Paper—it is a vision delivered [by Harper and MacKay] for long term planning for the CF. As such, the speeches are the strategy."
With no real news hook to justify the elaborate non-announcement spectacle in Halifax, the media soon seized upon this ridiculous notion that Canada's defence strategy for the next two decades—at a cost of $30 billion—was based on nothing more than two short, rhetoric-filled speeches.
Seeing how dumb this looked when it was reflected back to them in national news stories, the Harper Conservatives quickly changed their tune. Contrary to what MacKay's press secretary claimed, the Canada First Defence Strategy was, in fact, a very detailed document and it does really exist. However, as it has been labelled a "Cabinet document" and thus not even subject to the Access to Information Act, Canadians will have no way of ever proving or disproving that claim.
The ever cynical press gallery wasn't buying into that story. So at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, National Defence cobbled together a hasty press conference. This technical briefing was chaired by Vice Chief of Defence Staff Walter Natynczyk—notably absent was the Big Cod and other senior brass who had been paraded for the cameras in Halifax.
In his opening commentary, Natynczyk pointed out that the dollar figure of rebuilding the forces was in fact closer to $45 or $50 billion—not the measly $30 billion as previously reported. A number of other officers were present to answer journalists' questions. However, in a further bizarre twist, it was revealed that these officers were under orders not to let themselves be identified by name when they answered questions.
One has to hope that the team that drafted the secret and unseen Canada First Defence Strategy was drawn from a deeper end of the talent pool than the bozos that plotted these announcement events.
|
1RCR 1977-79 Depot (Italy PL), B Coy, Mortars, Pioneers, D Coy (CFB London)
3RCR 1979-82 M Coy, Pipes & Drums, Sigs, Mortars. (CFB Baden-Soellingen)
1RCR 1982-88 Mortars. Dukes, Cyprus-Welfare NCO 84-85, Injured | | | |
Logged
There were some dandies that almost went to fruition at times.. Does anyone recall any? It began by some clever soldier deciding that if there was no rumors going around by morning coffee it was ones duty to come up with a good one....i am trying to reactivate my brain to remember some of these...whooooeee there were some goodies....gentlemen , reactivate your brains...heheheh..ranrad