Derek 2.0

I'm not the one stating the vessels will be procured within this mandate......you've suggested they could start producing the combatants near the end of this decade/mandate.

They do if they want to build the vessels the navy requires through Irving. My assumption is based on your cite that clearly states the Government has a "off ramp" from said purchases, and that the Government is to review said programs.

Perhaps, but I'm forced to wonder if the definition of prefatory and operative were taught.

Had there been a SCOTUS challenge in the previous 200 years on Americans right to keep and bear arms?

Their fiscal plan only covered this mandate......do they have published spending plans past this mandate?

Ahh so the money isn't "just there"........money that is planned for......hmmm......would a Government include such planned funds in their own fiscal plan?

Based on a report funded by the builder..........so you're suggesting the Liberals are going to base their funding levels, potentially cuts to the Forces, on a report issued and funded for by the ship builder that states it will need double the money? That's insane. How does that address funding? You're assuming the OOSV or JSS gets built........reread your cite.

Actually it does, right down to costs measured in the millions of dollars of the next four years, such the cost to waive camping fees at National parks........it is detailed enough to outline spending to the benefit of campers measured in the millions, but not spending measured in the tens of billions for the Navy and Coast Guard. As to "blame", the Liberals made specific promises to the level of vessels to be produced and their capabilities (a Blue Water navy), if the price has since "doubled", based on a report conducted and funded by the shipbuilder, that is not the fault of the Tories, but it sure will be the Liberals problem.

Of course not, what he's suggesting would be akin to the House appropriations committee giving the DoD the funding for the fifth Ford class CVN decades in advance to "hold onto"......

This isn't a problem for the Conservative, as they won't be tabling next years budget. We? The media and opposition have been claiming that for years.........even I, in this very thread, numerous times, for years, have said there won't be enough money........... How does the hiring of an "expert" address tens of billions of dollars that the Liberals haven't budgeted.

You brought up the notion of regulating a right.

Such interpretation has been enshrined by the United States Supreme Court.

Ownership of firearms is a guarantee under the United States Constitution, ownership of motor vehicles isn't (outside of property rights).

I never said there wasn't.......hence the Government needs to add money. Huh? The last budget ends with this fiscal year, its not Harper's what the current Government decides to fund or not......as the contract for the OOSV (like the JSS) has yet to be signed. I understand that perfectly, what you don't understand, at the end of this fiscal year, budgets going forward will be Liberal budgets, as such, if there isn't money to sign the contracts for the OOSV (or JSS) that is the Trudeau Liberals decision........what a Harper Government would or would not have done in 2016/2017, 2017/2018 etc fiscal years is moot. Based on the Liberal's fiscal plan, that accounts for the next four fiscal years of spending, they do not have money put aside for new ships.......that has nothing to do with former Prime Minister Harper.

No it isn't.......do you not read your own links: I understand perfectly how budget cycles work......the key requirement being money.......which the Liberals don't have.

So on average, 50-60 people are killed in "mass shootings" (precluding domestic and gang violence) in a nation with ~9000 gun homicides a year.......the coverage of the other ~8950 killings a year is not proportional to the ~50-60 that die in "mass shootings" (that preclude domestic and gang violence)........thanks for proving my point, with a report that defines "mass shootings" outside domestic/gang related violence...

Perhaps I missed it, in what year, in the Liberals fiscal plan, includes funding for the JSS and OOSV.......likewise, the tens of billions for the new frigates?

Expect the Liberals have no planned funding, in the next four years, for billions of dollars of new naval vessels.

I did countless times already.

Let me know when CNN has dedicated 24/7 coverage to gangland shootings in Chicago or other urban centers among young black men.

Exactly, likewise a portion of our air force relies upon contractor services, today, for regular operation.

No, the budget framework currently includes operating expenses associated with a navy, be that operating our current frigates past their best before date or a replacement type. No, an allotment for shipbuilding will be necessary to build anything period, that it will cost more than expected is neither here nor there, outside what this Government (or a future Government) is willing to spend. Trudeau said he was committed to funding a blue water surface force of 15 vessels (in addition to the remainder of the shipbuilding program), as such, he will either pay for what he promised or he will break his promise. Yes, and you suggested a review would result in said "logical" conclusion...........my response, your line of thought would only be logical if we were building a navy in the 1950s, to serve into the 1970s, based on doctrine from the 1940s.........to serve past the 2050s.......

Not at all, as most can delineate between innocent people being killed at random versus the greater amount of targeted killings by organized crime among themselves.........

Trudeau has budgets for the next 30 years for a ship yet designed? Who knew? So CBC's reporting is much ado about nothing, as such, the Trudeau Government should have no problem delivering 15 vessels, with capabilities needed by the navy, to serve through to the middle of the century in a modern blue water capacity.........if you say so Then why all the talk of rebuilding the navy of the 1970s? You'd better tell the head of the navy not to sweat it.......

No it wasn't, as the current Government has no money set aside for a series of vessels yet to be designed......that will now cost twice as much as thought prior.