Derek 2.0

No need to offer a wiki version of the Leslie report, I've read it and have discussed it in various topics here.......with that said, procurement (what the Liberals stated they wanted to fix) issues aren't going to be resolved by taking an axe to personal involved in the various procurement files. As to Headquarters staffing levels, its rich coming from Leslie, whom had massive staffs when he was with ISAF and then as head of the Army. Furthermore, his proposed transformations, though portions would be very viable for the Army, would have crippled the operational abilities of both the navy and air force, as both services (in any nations force) are more teeth than tail by their very nature.. With that said, not selecting Leslie is smart politics. Outside his two-block $72000 move, he has made many, many enemies within the Forces, which would ensure throughout his tenure as MND constant, embarrassing leaks would be the new norm.........

Leslie's transformation study indicated that it would gut upwards of 1/4 of DND employees in the Ottawa region.......I'm to assume some live in Leslie's riding. PSAC and DND also feared his recommendation to disband the RCN's FMFs on both coasts, opting to go to contractors.......which would have knee-capped the RCN's ability to conduct routine maintenance on the fleet.

Now you're making things up......Canadair, now owned by Bombardier, use to have the CF-18 maintenance contract via L-3, which Bombardier divested itself from over a decade ago (in 2003). L-3 MAS, now a standalone company, provides services to the RCAF, including the Hornet upgrade, and is involved in the F-35 program. Boeing contracted out the Hornet upgrades to L-3 MAS, which completed the work in Mirabel Que and Cold Lake. Boeing Canada, in Winnipeg, provides support to the civilian airline industry, both through fleet support and limited production (of parts) for its commercial airliners. Boeing won't close its current St Louis plant to reopen it in Canada. (Don't BS a former Boeing employee) Dassault aviation has next to no footprint in Canada, outside contracted support for business jets. 65 Canadian built Rafales will cost a fortune, as we have no current industry base for Canadian production..........but you're right, we will own it, and will get to pay more in development and support than an F-35 over the life of the aircraft. But we will lose-lose, as we'll get to pay more for a limited Canadian produced aircraft, then support it through its life (after the French have retired it) and get to pay to integrate it into NORAD and use our current stores of munitions.......then we get to "invest" in those 30 additional companies that will be on the outside of the F-35 production for the next several decades and go the way of Bombardier ........brilliant idea

Trudeau will devastate the 30 plus profitable companies involved in the F-35, creating 30 more Bombardiers of varying sizes.......all the while, investing billions into failed Bombardier........A savvy investor would see the folly in investing in losers as opposed to the winners.

We have a Canadian aerospace industry, Bombardier is but a failed part.......Bell Textron Canada, AVCORP, P&W etc don't need handouts after poor investment and business practices.

I just said as much above........but thanks for supporting my point by confirming the past Lockheed/Raytheon/Bombardier partnership

In what areas? Lockheed, Raytheon and Bombardier have/had working business interests, but Lockheed and Bombardier don't directly compete, your suggestion that they do is as founded as stating John Deere and Kennworth are competitors because they build things with wheels........

Bombardier isn't a "strategic company", as business jets have yet to decide a war........the 30+ Canadian Aerospace companies contributing to the F-35 are..... If you feel Bombardier is a good investment, dig through your sofa for change and you could probably buy controlling shares.

Lockheed doesn't make airliners, and left the market decades ago because it couldn't compete against Boeing, McDonnell Douglas(now Boeing) and Airbus.

Airbus and Boeing are profitable, Bombardier isn't........The Russians and Chinese have tried to compete in the international market, with far larger investments, and failed.....sinking money into Bombardier is a bad investment and is why their share prices are tanking further, putting them into the realm of penny stocks.

Funding a competitor trying to eat the lunch of Boeing and Airbus (which owns shares in Dassault, and also make biz-jets, in addition to its role in the Eurofighter consortium) should make for an interesting reboot to the Hornet replacement program........in one fell swoop, the Government is competing against the makers of the Super Hornet, Rafale and Eurofighter........

Leslie would have had a rough go handing out pink slips to people that voted for him.

Actually, Leslie was a nightmare for many in the military, including in the army. Harjit Sajjan is far more respected, for his service as both an armored officer and a Vancouver city cop.

Actually, Bombardier is tanking because of its entry into the airline market with the C-Series....."investing" 100s of millions into the company so it can compete with Boeing and Airbus is a futile exercise......

Not at all, you said: In addition to this: In response to my post here: I'm not rephrasing any of your posts........Joe Clark wouldn't have been defeated so early if the right wasn't divided..simple concept.

I disagree, I think her age is to her benefit, as is her intelligence, energy and oratory/debating skills.......and of course her sex and "image", as she will be the furthest thing from Harper during the next election. As it stands, I'd have no real issue, if she won the leadership, putting her up against an older Trudeau running on his then "record", in addition to an older Mulcair? and May. With that, Rempel (like the others) will face many hurdles winning the CPC leadership race........as an example, I think the only presumptive runners that speak french are Ambrose, O'Toole and Jason Kenney.........but with Rempel, if she is precluded, it won't be for her age or experience.

How many years was Harper an MP prior to being elected party leader? In 2019, Rempel will have been an MP for as long as and longer than both Harper and Trudeau (when they won their party's leadership), in addition being member of the previous Government and in cabinet (unlike both Harper and Trudeau). As such, going into a 2019 election, Rempel will have a more experience based resume than both Harper and Trudeau.

No, he lost by the Socreds abstaining from a confidence vote........hence a divided right.

Was Harper or Trudeau in Government prior to winning their party's leadership? Did either hold cabinet portfolios?

And the Socreds in the House would have given him a majority......

And a divided right.....

Unlike Harper and Trudeau, Rempel would be going into a leadership contest as a former member of Government and a cabinet minister.

Why? Joe Clark didn't get defeated because of his age, but by a divided right.

That's not true. First, there is no law precluding an interim leader for running for the party leadership, as such "rule" is only apart of the CPC's constitution. The Party constitution could be changed by the membership or she could resign as interim leader to run for the big chair. As to gaming potential leaders, its far too early to speculate on who would or wouldn't have support of the party.

I agree, hence Rob Nicholson (or Diane Finely?).