Martin's Defense Policy

[RT_1984]

I was wondering what everyone thought of the new defense minister David Pratt. Pratt has been a vocal critic of past defense policy and was actually a proponent of Canadian participation in the Iraq war. The National Post was quite positive about his appointment. Given Martin's recent funding increasing for the military while all other areas are frozen, what does this say for our new PM. Given recently that Martin is giving tax cuts, while freezing spending and canceling Chretien legacy projects, how will the new Conservative Party distinguish itself from the Liberals. Especially with someone like Bernard Lord.

[dnsfurlan]

Martin was the Finance Minister who made all those cuts to Defence and Health Care in the first place. Martin was the most senior member of Cabinet right next to Chretien.

If Martin doesn't take some responsibility for his own govt., then who can?

Like Harper keeps saying, Martin is now running against the Chretien/Martin govt. of the past decade.

And we'll see how Martin can keep all of his promises together.

Frankly, no liberal in recent memory has done what Martin plans to do - make govt. more efficient and increase stature in the world, while at the same time maintaining a strong social safety net.

Either Martin is a strong leader with a truly new kind of vision for this country, or he's a wild-eyed dreamer who's going to have everything crash in on him like an old house in a rainstorm.

Just keep showing pictures of Chretien and Martin together.

If Martin was the visionary he claims to be, he would have seperated himself from the Chretien government a long time ago - resign honourably and go into private life.

Instead, he used the resources of the government to form a government-in-waiting, sat quietly by implementing all of Chretien's schemes, while slowly pushing the man out the door without so much as one vote being cast for such purposes.

St. Paul is no saint. And an election campaign can certainly expose that.

[sir_springer]

Is there anyone more responsible for the sorry state of our military than Paul Martin???

And now his claim to legitimacy is that he's the one to fix it???

That's pretty much akin to giving your wife a set of wrenches to fix up your car that she just totalled.

It's a no brainer that wrecking the damn thing is a tad easier to do than restoring it.

Martin has been running a demolition derby as Minister of Finance for nine years...

And now he has the balls to ask us to let him undo his own damn disasters???

The only thing more bizarre than that bullsh*t is...

People are buying into it.

Lordy, gimme strength.

[Lost in Manitoba]

What power does the finance minister have? Doesn't he have restraints put on him by his boss? People talk of Martin being responsible for destroying the Millitary, but if he didn't make those cuts, wouldn't he have been replaced by someone who would've? I think ultimately this is another thing to lay at the feet of Chretien.

As for Pratt, I think it is a good sign he was rebelious against Chretien (or outspoken at least), when it came to the castration of our millitary. Saying there isn't a freeze on the millitary just because we're getting some choppers, to replace the SeaKings, by the end of the decade, doesn't mean that the budget itself will be increased. That apperently will come after a 'review of foriegn policy'.

CBC made a good point today though. In the ten years of Chretien, he didn't visit the Defense bldg once. In Martin's first week, he was there discussing the future.

[Craig Read]

Martin balanced the books partly on the back of the military. This is indefensible. Billions are wasted on other programs, hundreds of millions spent for the pleasure of the PMOs office [helicopters, trips, increased pay and pensions and so on], are you telling me that 'frugal' Paul could not find a few billion to cut out of the dripping fat that lards the cupboards in Ottawa? Nonsense. Martin lived off of Alta and Ontario's rejuvenating economies. The rest of the country are a lot of pathetic have-nots that have their tin cups out looking for spare change.

Under Martin spending increased [except for the military] during the 1990s - far outpacing inflation and population growth and economic growth. [4 % in 97, 3 % in 98, 0 in '99, 8 % in '01, 5 % in '02, 12 % in 03]. Per year average is therefore, over 5 % increase in real spending in total, 4 % under Martin until he was kicked out of his job. This is bad management under both Martin and Manley.

The Federal budget is at its high point in history as a % of GDP and in absolute terms. Health Funding is increasing by over 10 % per year - an unsustainable increase [but no reforms please].

Martin succumbed to political pressures - appease business via subsidy, same for Quebec and the East, no internal free trade reforms, hand over money to the Natives, spend hundreds of millions on Kyoto based projects, and so on. If you look at the Fed budget it is a litany of pay offs and vote buying schemes.

Martin is no more conservative than Chretien was, and his talk of the future of the military is hot air - designed to make the US look away and worry about something else.

6 reports in the past 18 months have been published - and it is clear what needs to be done. Increase spending by 2-3x as a % of GDP, refocus the force to have projection power, ramp up the number to 100.000 or more, order more capital equipment, refit the fleet and so on.....

But what will Paul do ? Consult. Ask the people. Commission another study. Talk some more. Hold many press conferences with tears in his eyes as he ruminates on the great men and women in the forces. 2, 3, 4 years will pass and nary a red cent more will be spent on the military. Not a dime.

He has already said that Health Care will get funding and not the military under his finance leadership he increased non military spend by $20-28 billion per annum.

That is the real Paul Martin. 'Porker's are Us.'

Postmodern mumbo jumbo - Martin should write a book on Orwellian double speak - how to say nothing but make people believe what they want to believe and then smile all the way to the bank.

[RB]

if you can name one more person in the PM office that actually has some military experience = "peace-keeping", then Pratt is your man of glory at this moment.

now Pratt, try appealing to the folks who can never relate to what are talking about, for example those complex equipment you need for defence .. want to give a speech about those

advise now... Pratt buddy you have to toil for what you believe nevermind the tears in the eye .. did you say “Martin's recent funding increasing for the military” … a tat-for-that