Derek 2.0 Posted August 16, 2015 Report Share Posted August 16, 2015 And then you have Jack Harris blasting and cuts to any part of the military. They aren't all doves. You understand what Jack Harris title is right? NDP defense critic. That said, I'd be willing to listen to any suggestions or planned policies Jack Harris and the NDP have........oddly enough, the NDP's previous defense policies are no longer readily available on their website...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted August 16, 2015 Report Share Posted August 16, 2015 Their last plan in 2011 was very encouraging. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted August 16, 2015 Report Share Posted August 16, 2015 Yes, but he has a point that the NDP would blast anything the Tories do. I don't see the NDP caring about the military. They've always been reflexively anti-military, in fact, even moreso than the Liberals. You'll find some Liberals and plenty of NDP types who will question why we need a military at all. Bingo......and the NDP would see a big juicy target for funding their social programs in DND. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted August 16, 2015 Report Share Posted August 16, 2015 Their last plan in 2011 was very encouraging. What plan? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted August 16, 2015 Report Share Posted August 16, 2015 What plan? Sorry, their policy statement. It was much more centrist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted August 16, 2015 Report Share Posted August 16, 2015 Sorry, their policy statement. It was much more centrist. Layton's proposal to turn the Forces into a lightly armed Red Cross and focus the force domestically to address floods and forest fires? The same policy statement would have halted all procurement programs well the NDP released a "White Orange Paper" rewriting the intent of the Canadian Forces, a professional force designed to kill people and break stuff, into one of social justice at the behest of the United Nations? Or the one that would halt off-shore procurement in favor of Made-in Canada solutions? That NDP policy statement? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted August 16, 2015 Report Share Posted August 16, 2015 I'm trying to understand what we're going to be dealing with after the election. I think partisan grandstanding won't do any good considering we're looking at a minority at best, and something far worse is somewhat likely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted August 16, 2015 Report Share Posted August 16, 2015 I'm trying to understand what we're going to be dealing with after the election. I think partisan grandstanding won't do any good considering we're looking at a minority at best, and something far worse is somewhat likely. Simple, continual investment in defense with the Tories, stagnation (at best) under the Liberals and a neutering by the NDP......... As to the eventual NDP win, look no further than former Prime Minister Ed Broadbent's reign after winning the 1988 election, a win which saw the NDP leading in opinion polls going all the way back to 1987........... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted August 16, 2015 Report Share Posted August 16, 2015 I couldn't tell you who will win. At this point, it's even money. I know how I'll be voting, and I know how my riding will go, but I can't tell you what's going to happen elsewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted August 16, 2015 Report Share Posted August 16, 2015 I'm trying to understand what we're going to be dealing with after the election. I think partisan grandstanding won't do any good considering we're looking at a minority at best, and something far worse is somewhat likely. You can't really assess that until you know what the numbers are. An NDP/Liberal coalition would be bad news for the military since neither is much in favour of military spending, and both have very grandiose and expensive plans they will need money for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted August 17, 2015 Report Share Posted August 17, 2015 It's to bad there is not a larger 4 th party something in the center, or slightly right, shit i'd even take far right...., I'm afraid that it really does not matter what party is elected, the military is in for another hit, everyday all parties are promising more and more, that money has to come from some where. unless there is some growth in revenue.... I've never been a fan of this whole Canadian ship building program, I do on one hand i think that Canada could benefit from building navy ships, we used to be good at it.....but reality is telling me it is a waste of valuable military funding, which will be wasted on companies that will not keep those capabilities up after the government money dries up..... There has been several have decent studies been done on Canada's navy and rebuilding it from the ground up.....and while i will admit i know nothing when it comes to navy and it's workings , i do know when the navy is being fleeced to prop up a dead ship building capability....the AOR's are a prime example of that the British just had several AOR's built for a 1/3 of the cost and are receiving twice as much capability...and as inflation erodes the entire projects worth, capabilities will be cut how many frigs where we originally to get and what are we getting now....and what will we end up with.... And then there is the coast guard ships, here is a service that has been screwed over since the beginning of time, and we think the navy is in bad shape...this should have been a separate program altogether and in my opinion this is where we could start with rebuilding the ship building capabilities..... All i'm saying is i don't have faith in any of the political parties right now...at least when it comes to properly funding the military. And like Smc am not sure where i'm going to place my vote, but like Derek i'm sure it wont be NDP, or liberal.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted August 17, 2015 Report Share Posted August 17, 2015 It's to bad there is not a larger 4 th party something in the center, or slightly right, shit i'd even take far right...., I'm afraid that it really does not matter what party is elected, the military is in for another hit, everyday all parties are promising more and more, that money has to come from some where. unless there is some growth in revenue.... There will be growth in revenue, but the Conservatives have promised nothing expensive. I've never been a fan of this whole Canadian ship building program, I do on one hand i think that Canada could benefit from building navy ships, we used to be good at it.....but reality is telling me it is a waste of valuable military funding, which will be wasted on companies that will not keep those capabilities up after the government money dries up..... That's the point - the money won't dry up this time. Even the NDP police manual specifically lays out support of recapitalizing the navy, and the Liberals and Conservatives will almost certainly go through with this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted August 17, 2015 Report Share Posted August 17, 2015 Just a question, what do you think is the total price tag on each parties promises. and where is it coming from, in todays fiscal climate.... SmallC you know thats bull crap if and when the navy gets these ships next time we talk about ships is 30 to 40 years from now.....at least that has been historical record regardless of who is in power.. and while i'm not a big fan of the current ship building program, i think i could look alot different if either the NDP or liberals get ahold of it.....in my opinion it should all be written to reflect on tomorrow's navy needs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted August 17, 2015 Report Share Posted August 17, 2015 Just a question, what do you think is the total price tag on each parties promises. and where is it coming from, in todays fiscal climate.... The Conservatives? About $2B so far, starting when it's affordable. The NDP and Liberals will cancel income splitting, and the Liberals will cancel the UCCB. That'll pay for a lot of it. I can't say until costed platforms come out. SmallC you know thats bull crap if and when the navy gets these ships next time we talk about ships is 30 to 40 years from now. The idea now, is to build the surface combatants very slowly. After they're done, we need new patrol ships to replace the Kingstons we keep. The idea is to build slowly over time. One ship every year and a half or so. We're only getting the AOPS within 4 years for all 5 - 6 because of the need to get going on the surface combatant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted August 17, 2015 Report Share Posted August 17, 2015 I could really see, for example, the NDP going for something like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F125-class_frigate It's right up their alley. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted August 17, 2015 Report Share Posted August 17, 2015 I've never been a fan of this whole Canadian ship building program, I do on one hand i think that Canada could benefit from building navy ships, we used to be good at it.....but reality is telling me it is a waste of valuable military funding, which will be wasted on companies that will not keep those capabilities up after the government money dries up..... I'm largely opposed to protectionism, but in the case of warship construction, we most certainly could purchase cheaper vessels offshore, but in doing so, will result in the demise of the remaining shipbuilding industry in Canada. With the demise of shipbuilding as a whole, so to goes the ability to repair our own ships.......and that is a strategic mistake......hence we pay a premium for domestically produced ships........like we do we with other Canadian industries or Canadian subsidiaries of Western Defense giants. There has been several have decent studies been done on Canada's navy and rebuilding it from the ground up.....and while i will admit i know nothing when it comes to navy and it's workings , i do know when the navy is being fleeced to prop up a dead ship building capability....the AOR's are a prime example of that the British just had several AOR's built for a 1/3 of the cost and are receiving twice as much capability...and as inflation erodes the entire projects worth, capabilities will be cut how many frigs where we originally to get and what are we getting now....and what will we end up with.... First, comparing media reports of other nation's purchases is a fools errand.......in most cases, said price tags aren't inclusive of subsidies to industry, training or operating costs (like how programs in Canada must include said figures) Second, with the British example, as already noted, their AORs are operated by the civilian staffed Royal Fleet Auxiliary. The ships they are producing will be less capable (built to civilian standards also) then our eventual Queenston class. Likewise, the British shipbuilding industry receives large subsidies from the HM Government and though in a period of decline since the 1970s, has been continually building ships as opposed to a boom-bust cycle like what we have in Canada And then there is the coast guard ships, here is a service that has been screwed over since the beginning of time, and we think the navy is in bad shape...this should have been a separate program altogether and in my opinion this is where we could start with rebuilding the ship building capabilities..... Why a separate program? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted August 17, 2015 Report Share Posted August 17, 2015 There will be growth in revenue, but the Conservatives have promised nothing expensive. Except procurement expenditures, which are precluded from the the annual operating budget? That's the point - the money won't dry up this time. Even the NDP police manual specifically lays out support of recapitalizing the navy, and the Liberals and Conservatives will almost certainly go through with this. BS!!! You've been asked to cite the current NDP's defense policies.......not make stuff up. The last NDP policy platform clearly stated halting all current procurement programs until a review of defense policy is complete........unless you can provide newer, contrary info. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted August 17, 2015 Report Share Posted August 17, 2015 Why a separate program? The more ships we can get on this program, the better. We just started it about 10 years late. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted August 17, 2015 Report Share Posted August 17, 2015 The Conservatives? About $2B so far, starting when it's affordable. The NDP and Liberals will cancel income splitting, and the Liberals will cancel the UCCB. That'll pay for a lot of it. I can't say until costed platforms come out. The idea now, is to build the surface combatants very slowly. After they're done, we need new patrol ships to replace the Kingstons we keep. The idea is to build slowly over time. One ship every year and a half or so. We're only getting the AOPS within 4 years for all 5 - 6 because of the need to get going on the surface combatant. The cons have already made cuts to DND to start to pay for election build up, we all seen that last year.....but your right we'll have to wait and find out what the costing is going to be and then wait to see what promises are going to be kept.... You think waiting is the right thing to do,when we know the current status of the navy..... i get it build one frig every 1 year and half, but really that might be 15 years top, then what are these ship builders going to do.....with no government money they'll drop navy ships as fast as could blink..... which is another reason i don't like this welfare to these companies.....when there are cheaper contracts for better equipment out there like say the British AOR's....which according to some will be twice the ship and twice the capability than ours built in canada.....i'd say let south korea build them.....for a 1/3 of the price.....that is what i find so crazy about this welfare program.....god knows what we could save on the surface combatants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted August 17, 2015 Report Share Posted August 17, 2015 I could really see, for example, the NDP going for something like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F125-class_frigate It's right up their alley. Why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted August 17, 2015 Report Share Posted August 17, 2015 The more ships we can get on this program, the better. We just started it about 10 years late. Why do we need two shipbuilding programs? If more ships are eventually needed, why can't they be included in the already existing program? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted August 17, 2015 Report Share Posted August 17, 2015 Except procurement expenditures, which are precluded from the the annual operating budget? I'm talking about the election promises thus far. BS!!! You've been asked to cite the current NDP's defense policies.......not make stuff up. The NDP policy manual was posted by Socialist in another thread: I can't find the link at the moment but I saved it to my computer. It reads: a Defending Canadian sovereignty militarily, socially and economically. b Ensuring our armed forces are well-equipped with the necessary human and material resources for their operations. c Affirming that the primary purpose of the Canadian Forces is peace-keeping, defence and support during emergencies. d Defending our territorial waters, especially the Arctic. e Standing against nuclear arms build-up and rejecting any ballistic missile defence program. f Prioritizing peace operations for each of our armed forces. There's more. I don't support most of that, but the navy need not worry, it seems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted August 17, 2015 Report Share Posted August 17, 2015 You think waiting is the right thing to do,when we know the current status of the navy..... i get it build one frig every 1 year and half, but really that might be 15 years top, then what are these ship builders going to do.....with no government money they'll drop navy ships as fast as could blink..... which is another reason i don't like this welfare to these companies.....when there are cheaper contracts for better equipment out there like say the British AOR's....which according to some will be twice the ship and twice the capability than ours built in canada.....i'd say let south korea build them.....for a 1/3 of the price.....that is what i find so crazy about this welfare program.....god knows what we could save on the surface combatants. In the event of a major war, what solace would you have in knowing, for example, when you broke your C7 it had to be sent to Korea to be fixed? We could certainly replace the C7/C8s with a far cheaper Chinese rifle......how does that grab you? It would avoid corporate welfare to Colt Canada.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted August 17, 2015 Report Share Posted August 17, 2015 You think waiting is the right thing to do,when we know the current status of the navy..... i get it build one frig every 1 year and half, but really that might be 15 years top, That's 18 - 23 years. Then the patrol ships. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted August 17, 2015 Report Share Posted August 17, 2015 Why do we need two shipbuilding programs? If more ships are eventually needed, why can't they be included in the already existing program? I didn't advocate for two programs, I was agreeing with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.