Liberals party defence review

Smallc · May 9, 2016

It is only strategic when there is a navy contract every 30 years,

The whole point of the program is to end that cycle.

dre · May 9, 2016

It's called trade. Should we buy everything here even if we can buy it from a foreign supplier for half the cost? Would you pay $2000 for your smartphone to have it made in Canada? We buy things from foreign countries which can make them cheaper and more efficiently and then trade what we can produce cheaper and more efficiently. That's how the system works.

I wouldn't say that our government should NOT buy things from other countries. But they should evaluate deals carefully and not just go by the sticker price. If the new business activity and employment that's generated by spending money here at home is going to result in increased revenue or a reduction in costs for the government, then that needs to be factored in.

That's how the system works.

The problem is, that if cost is your only criteria there is simply NOTHING Canadians do, that cant be done cheaper by someone else. We can offshore everything that's offshorable, and bring in guest workers to do everything that isn't.

Be careful... you might get what you want.

Army Guy · May 9, 2016

The whole point of the program is to end that cycle.

That is what the plans say, and yet history has shown us time after time we beat our heads up against the wall expecting different results each time. This is a reprint of the old plan you remember that one, Canadian built warships were built by Irving and the Quebec yards...what happened well Irving closed it's ship yard moved to Halifax to a much smaller yard, and Quebecs yards are almost bankrupt....

The Navy needs ships yesterday....and the new plan does not take into account how our government works, plans, or funds it's military....

This plan is nothing more than corporate welfare worth Bils upon bils to hire a few thousand workers....when we could spend half that get the right amount of ships, with the right amount of capabilities....Do you really think Irving is going to keep it's doors open once these contracts are up.....are they going to keep up the work force, Irvings are going to put all those Bils into off shore accounts and wait for the next hand out.....

Dre mentioned that by not doing this Canadians manufacturing will be harmed in some way.....Name one company that has not move some or all of it's manufacturing off shore.....everyone is chasing the dollar....why is this case any different ....in most cases it is to late many companies are doing this....

Argus · May 9, 2016

The whole point of the program is to end that cycle.

Which relies on successive governments not to delay building a new warship when they CAN delay it. The last half century of Canadian history says the government will wait to order a new ship as long as physically possible, and then longer.

SpankyMcFarland · May 10, 2016

The cost of building ships in Canada will continue to spiral out of control. The govt cannot limit spending in the same way it could with a foreign supplier. Politics enters the equation and that's that.

SpankyMcFarland · May 10, 2016

My entirely uninformed guess is that the cost of building ships in Canada will continue to spiral out of control. The govt cannot limit spending in the same way it could with a foreign supplier. Politics enters the equation and that's that.

Smallc · May 10, 2016

Which relies on successive governments not to delay building a new warship when they CAN delay it. The last half century of Canadian history says the government will wait to order a new ship as long as physically possible, and then longer.

Oh I agree with that. This government of the opposite stripe seems like it's following through though.

Argus · May 10, 2016

Oh I agree with that. This government of the opposite stripe seems like it's following through though.

It does? It's postponed everything it CAN postpone. It can't very well stop what's already signed and agreed to and being built.

Smallc · May 10, 2016

It does? It's postponed everything it CAN postpone.

It postponed nothing that has not already been postponed, and put out contracts for long lead items on the Offshore Oceanographic Science Vessel and the JSS. Money has bern reallocated as programs are far behind their original timetable.

It can't very well stop what's already signed and agreed to and being built.

Nor did they ever try to and in fact have continued to advance the program.

Argus · May 10, 2016

It postponed nothing that has not already been postponed,

Did you realize what a meaningless answer that was when you wrote it?

Smallc · May 10, 2016

Did you realize what a meaningless answer that was when you wrote it?

The program is years behind schedule - the whole thing was postponed before they ever got elected. That's why money had to be moved.

Edited May 10, 2016 by Smallc

overthere · May 10, 2016

Stop saying 'behind schedule' and 'delayed' and 'reallocated' and 'postponed' and 'moved'. These words are not in the 2016 Canadian Lexicion of Approved OttawaTalk..

The defence funds have been 'REPROFILED'. It means 'we haven't borrowed them yet and never intend to unless World War 3 breaks out and somebody beats us to the blankie supply role'.

Smallc · May 10, 2016

The defence funds have been 'REPROFILED'.

A word first used by the Conservatives in 2012...and then in 2014. For the exact same thing, I might add.

Argus · May 10, 2016

A word first used by the Conservatives in 2012...and then in 2014. For the exact same thing, I might add.

And we both criticized them for it. Now that it's the Liberals you're defending it.

Smallc · May 10, 2016

And we both criticized them for it. Now that it's the Liberals you're defending it.

Not quite - I'm not in favour of having to do it. I wish we weren't in this position. It's become clear that the bureaucracy at DND is so paralyzed that they can't buy anything unless it's single source. Just look at FWSAR, where two of the three bidders had to submit their bids via moving truck. This is why I'm very in favour of the defence review. I don't want the Liberals to take money away from DND. At the same time, I want DND to be able to spend it.

overthere · May 10, 2016

I don't want any government of Canada to have the will or ability to cripple a reasonable national military capability. The notion that national security is a very high priority, and must be adequately funded, should be part of our national character, and be supported by all parties. That is what happens in , for example, countries like Australia. They take it seriously there, all parties. Decisions are nmot political there, they are financial. And they find the money.

I never want to be dependent on the goodwill of our allies, which is effectively where we are today, and where we will be in future decades. A national 'review' is just yet another poltical circlejerk to delay what must be done.

Edited May 10, 2016 by overthere

Smallc · May 10, 2016

I don't want any government of Canada to have the will or ability to cripple a reasonable national military capability. The notion that national security is a very high priority, and must be adequately funded, should be part of our national character, and be supported by all parties. That is what happens in , for example, countries like Australia. They take it seriously there, all parties. Decisions are nmot political there, they are financial. And they find the money.

Australia spending more than us is a very recent phenomena. It may not last - but it also offers hope for us.

Big Guy · May 11, 2016

I don't want any government of Canada to have the will or ability to cripple a reasonable national military capability.

I never want to be dependent on the goodwill of our allies, which is effectively where we are today, and where we will be in future decades. A national 'review' is just yet another poltical circlejerk to delay what must be done.

What do you consider to be a "reasonable" national military capacity.

Canada will always be dependent on the good will of our major ally - the USA. Whatever we pour into our military will be directed on which conflicts and confrontations the USA decides on.

That is, except for the recent military excursions where Canada went on its own - like ...

Army Guy · May 11, 2016

Not quite - I'm not in favour of having to do it. I wish we weren't in this position. It's become clear that the bureaucracy at DND is so paralyzed that they can't buy anything unless it's single source. Just look at FWSAR, where two of the three bidders had to submit their bids via moving truck. This is why I'm very in favour of the defence review. I don't want the Liberals to take money away from DND. At the same time, I want DND to be able to spend it.

That's is what the politicians would like you to believe, that DND is reasonable for all the purchasing failures. It is after all them that created the system that has become so complicated that it is almost imposable to make purchases, and when they finally get it right funding is cut or removed.

DND has been returning annual funding because of many reasons, it needs to be spent in that fiscal year, but DND has been shocked into keeping bils to fund other losses, such as reduced ann budgets, surprise deployments, or putting money aside to make future purchases. and when the end of the year comes up, it gets caught with a surplus.....and turns it back into government coffers, and accused of not spending it all....sound familiar....

Until all of that is changed , it will remain as it is....to hard to spend the money.....

What you forget is DND is but one cog in the wheel when it comes to purchases, PWSG is the main player a civilian organization that translates DND specs into what it thinks DND wants, gathers up potential sellers, and has DND test those products.....now many times these products do not fit the specs DND has written or not even close to what they are looking for....Government approves everything at every level including how many DND can buy, or how much it can spend....resulting in DND down grading it's requirement, taking what it can get....

I'll give you an example when we purchased the 7.5 ton HLVW, to replace the 5 ton cargo trucks , Government decided it would cut the numbers based on tonnage each truck could carry, disregarding that each veh was in place for a reason, for example one for hauling ammo, other cargos....regardless of how much it could carry....so when the actual numbers of trucks purchased they were 600 vehs short....DND was told it was to late to change contracts...or funding....to make up the short fall they were forced to use 2.5 ton MLVW's that where rerolled....leaving a shortage in the lighter trucks....

My point is rarely do all the government orgs talk to each other , and for the most part work again'st each other....

PIK · May 12, 2016

This proves he do not hire the best people, we hire on color language and gender, and under trudeau it is only going to worse .

cybercoma · May 12, 2016

This proves he do not hire the best people, we hire on color language and gender, and under trudeau it is only going to worse .

White men. It's such a struggle. Amiright?

PIK · May 12, 2016

Another one suffering from white mans guilt. Them old white men built the best country in the world. The liberals have not hired a new judges in 6 months and it could cause criminals getting away with their crime. And when questioned on it ,the minister said they are now looking at exactly what I just said. We need the best and if the best are white and even male give them the job.

cybercoma · May 12, 2016

I don't feel guilty at all. Maybe you're suffering, but unlike you,I realize how much worse I could have it.

waldo · May 12, 2016

This proves he do not hire the best people, we hire on color language and gender, and under trudeau it is only going to worse .

uhhh... are you in the right thread with this? I don't read anything remotely related leading up to this post - just sayin.

.

Derek 2.0 · July 1, 2016

I see the Trudeau Government is "whipping out" a token force for NATO:

The impending dispatch of forces builds on the former Conservative government's placement of troops in Eastern Europe for training exercises and to reassure governments in the region that western nations were serious about holding Russian expansionism in check.

With Crimea still under Moscow's rule and war raging in eastern Ukraine, Sajjan acknowledged Friday the fielding of the new NATO brigade is a serious step, but one that Canada is prepared to wholeheartedly support.

A serious step? :lol: I'm sure Putin is shaking in his boots.

So I take it, the Trudeau defense review is complete? Does that include a more than doubling of the defense budget to come close to reaching the pledged 2% of GDP spending as recently noted by President Obama?

Why does this remind me of when PM PET, under pressure from NATO and the US, agreed to up our NATO commitment in the form of Norwegian reinforcement........in reality, the Trudeau government's Norwegian defense amounted to a several parking lots worth of rusting Korean war surplus jeeps and trucks deposited in Norway.......and a promise to fly Canadian troops to Norway via commercial charters in the advent of war with the Soviets.