- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 60
Thanks 
Minister of Defence
- Thread starter highlandranger
- Start date
Michael Dorosh
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Policy is set by civilians, not soldiers. Ex-soldiers have not done well as MD&M/MND - Col. Sam Hughes, Col. Ralston, Gen. McNaughton. The best ones have been civilians.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
I used to believe that a military member with lots of TI would be the way to go until recently. Now I realize that if they aren't careful a lot of their old thinking could be brought back propping up the dwindling dino's.
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 7,485
- Points
- 1,040
The ground changes too quickly in defence matters. Unless the candidate is recently retired fresh out of a hot operator's seat in NDHQ or a recent graduate of something like the NSSC, long-term service, particularly if it wasn't in a particularly joint milieu, may be more of a liability than an asset.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 210
that was the statement a co-worker had stated to me today... he said that one of the reasons the new MND has been so quiet lately is because he has realized how different the CF is now compared to when he was in. my co-worker also stated that the MND probabbly feels as if he is in over his head. Im not totally sure about that, but it does seem prudent that with the changing scope of war these days, appointing MND's who were generals in the Cold War, would probabbly not be the most progressive idea.
cheers
cheers
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
your co workers credentials are...?
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
So I hear he was in Shilo today. Probably why the sent me to the range. Anyone know what he did here 'cause they didn't even announce his visit.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 210
CFL said:
Weapons Tech MCpl, with some Decent TI
Spent quite a few years working in NDHQ....
I wouldnt say he was the all knowing expert, but rather it was an interesting perspective to consider.
I was really just wondering if there was any Merit to it. since everyone has opinions.. some just have a little more weight behind em.
Cheers
"Policy is set by civilians, not soldiers. Ex-soldiers have not done well as MD&M/MND - Col. Sam Hughes, Col. Ralston, Gen. McNaughton. The best ones have been civilians."
What was wrong with Barney Danson (QOR Normandy - wounded)?
Eric Neilson (RCAF pilot, WW2)?
Col Ralston?
Tom
What was wrong with Barney Danson (QOR Normandy - wounded)?
Eric Neilson (RCAF pilot, WW2)?
Col Ralston?
Tom
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
I am unclear as to the reason for all the criticism directed at the MND at this point. He is a politician. And he was a soldier. For some reason people confuse the two.
He works the political side. period. The fact that he has first hand knowledge of the military AND knows how soldiers feel is a major advantage.
I keep reading about the fact that he is a dinosaur, a throw back from the cold war era. That he is not up to speed on the equipment being issued. Should he be aware, for example, if the troops in "theatre" are using "silva" compasses or another brand? Not his job...... I do not believe these barbs mean anything. MND is accountable to govt. The CDS calls the shots for the military. Has Gordon O'Connor closed any bases? reduced the size of the forces? cancelled projects? Or worst of all, issue everyone new deu uniforms (because the change of colour will raise moral)
Let's give the guy a chance
(Just my opinion)
Could be worse, apparently the Hellyer years were not what we thought, take a look..............
http://www.ufobc.ca/Beyond/paulhellyer.htm
Maybe smoking something?????
He works the political side. period. The fact that he has first hand knowledge of the military AND knows how soldiers feel is a major advantage.
I keep reading about the fact that he is a dinosaur, a throw back from the cold war era. That he is not up to speed on the equipment being issued. Should he be aware, for example, if the troops in "theatre" are using "silva" compasses or another brand? Not his job...... I do not believe these barbs mean anything. MND is accountable to govt. The CDS calls the shots for the military. Has Gordon O'Connor closed any bases? reduced the size of the forces? cancelled projects? Or worst of all, issue everyone new deu uniforms (because the change of colour will raise moral)
Let's give the guy a chance
(Just my opinion)
Could be worse, apparently the Hellyer years were not what we thought, take a look..............
http://www.ufobc.ca/Beyond/paulhellyer.htm
Maybe smoking something?????
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Actually the troops choose the green over the tan.
Yes I believe its his job to know if the kit sucks or not and what the "basic" load of a member on patrol would be.
He has just enough out dated knowledge to be dangerous.
Yes I believe its his job to know if the kit sucks or not and what the "basic" load of a member on patrol would be.
He has just enough out dated knowledge to be dangerous.
Insert Quote
"Actually the troops choose the green over the tan.
Yes I believe its his job to know if the kit sucks or not and what the "basic" load of a member on patrol would be.
He has just enough out dated knowledge to be dangerous"
- Bullsh_t. Pure and Simple Bullsh_t. That is the view of the Civilian Snivel Servants who want to roll over the minister Bob Fowler style and snow him and the CDS into ineffectiveness. They FEAR and LOATHE Ministers who speak from experience! As do a lot of DMs.
Do you think a lawyer is too much of a dinosaur to be Minister of Justice?
Do you think a doctor is too much of a dinosaur to be Minister of Health?
Do you think a businessman is too much of a dinosaur to be Minister of Finance?
Do you think a farmer is too much of a dinosaur to be Minister of Agriculture?
Well?
I would not judge Mr. Hellyer's time as MND by the UFO thing.:
reorganizing Canada's defence with vision coupled with respect for traditional values, has won the admiration and respect of foes and the permanent confidence of friends--our Minister of National Defence, The Honourable Paul Hellyer.
MR. HELLYER:
I am indeed honoured that The Empire Club should invite me to this distinguished platform again. I should like to take advantage of the opportunity thus provided to follow a suggestion made by several members of The Empire Club that I repeat for the benefit of a wider, audience, some of the basic arguments in favour of integration of our armed forces and also to give a brief summary of our progress to date in that direction. To put the question in context, some background information may be helpful. When Mr. Cardin and I accepted responsibility for the Department of National Defence we sat down to consider what course we should follow. We soon came to the conclusion that there were three steps we should take. First, to _. bring the past up to the present. More specifically, I mean to arrange for the stockpiling of warheads for the weapons systems already acquired for our armed forces. Second, to review the major procurement programmes outstanding and, in particular, what effect those programmes might have on future defence policy. Third, to work out a long-range defence policy for Canada.
In order to obtain the warheads for our weapons systems it was necessary to sign an inter-governmental agreement between Canada and the U.S. to permit the stockpiling of warheads for use by Canadian forces in case of emergency. It was also necessary to sign technical agreements between forces relating to the storage, safety and other technical arrangements. Finally, it was necessary to complete the administrative arrangements, including the construction of special storage for the warheads and training of our forces.
As you know, three of the four weapons systems are now operational. The Bomarc missile squadrons--part of the continental anti-bomber defences--have been operational for a year. The CF-104 Starfighters in the nuclear strike role have been operational for some months. More recently, the Honest John surface-to-surface missile battery with our brigade in Germany passed its final test and the fourth system, the Genie air-to-air rocket for our air defence interceptors, will be available shortly. Canada then will be discharging, in full, those obligations undertaken for us in the name of Canada.
In our review of procurement policy, we considered all factors including technical, budgetary, and industrial but our main concern was the effect on future policy which would result from proceeding with existing plans. In some cases we decided to proceed. We placed an order for three "O" class submarines which are desperately needed for training and which also have some operational capability. The first of these will be commissioned this fall. We ordered a limited number of dual place Starfighters needed for safety in checking out our aircrews. These too have an operational capability.
On the other hand, we decided not to procure more single-seater CF-104's for the strike role because of the limitation this would place on future policy. We cancelled the general purpose frigate construction programme for the same reason, in addition to technical and budgetary considerations. The development of the Bobcat armoured personnel carrier was cancelled because, after ten years, we had not produced a perfected vehicle and because a successful carrier, the American M113 which was already in service in many parts of the world and for which there exists first-class world-wide logistic support, was available to us at least a year sooner and at about one-half the price per vehicle. As our brigade in Europe had for too long been exposed unprotected to possible mechanized attack, the decision taken was the only one which common sense could dictate. On the other hand, we decided to proceed with the development of an experimental hydrofoil vessel for the Navy since in this field our development is still ahead of others who are interested and the advantages of developing an ocean-going hydrofoil are sufficient to justify the risk involved.
Concurrently with the consideration of these first two action areas, we were laying the groundwork for number three. Studies were conducted in the Defence Department on a wide variety of subjects as background for the preparation of a long-range defence policy for Canada. The studies included a review of Canada's defence policy, a review of technological changes in the past decade, an assessment of the world strategic situation, an estimate of likely weapons development in the next decade, an educated guess as to likely changes in world politics and the balance of power, and other factors bearing on future policy and plans. By the fall of 1963 these were completed and the task of writing a policy began. The several government departments interested in defence were involved in the preparation of the White Paper and, in particular, the Department of External Affairs was consulted throughout in order that the two arms of government, defence and external policy, would be working in complete harmony, as indeed they must."
Edit: From: http://www.empireclubfoundation.com/details.asp?SpeechID=1205&FT=yes
Canada's Defence Reorganization
Speaker Hellyer, The Honourable Paul T. Minister of National Defence
Date 18 Feb 1965
Introduced by: Hilborn, Lt. Col. Robert H. President, The Empire Club of Canada
Published in: The Empire Club of Canada Speeches 1964-1965 (Toronto, Canada: The Empire Club Foundation, 1965) pp. 217-231
Index Term(s): Canada - Armed forces Canada - Defences
Full Text
FEBRUARY 18,1965
Canada's Defence Reorganization
AN ADDRESS BY The Honourable Paul T. Hellyer P.C., M.P., MINISTER OF NATIONAL DEFENCE
CHAIRMAN, The President, Lt. Col. Robert H. Hilborn
"Actually the troops choose the green over the tan.
Yes I believe its his job to know if the kit sucks or not and what the "basic" load of a member on patrol would be.
He has just enough out dated knowledge to be dangerous"
- Bullsh_t. Pure and Simple Bullsh_t. That is the view of the Civilian Snivel Servants who want to roll over the minister Bob Fowler style and snow him and the CDS into ineffectiveness. They FEAR and LOATHE Ministers who speak from experience! As do a lot of DMs.
Do you think a lawyer is too much of a dinosaur to be Minister of Justice?
Do you think a doctor is too much of a dinosaur to be Minister of Health?
Do you think a businessman is too much of a dinosaur to be Minister of Finance?
Do you think a farmer is too much of a dinosaur to be Minister of Agriculture?
Well?
I would not judge Mr. Hellyer's time as MND by the UFO thing.:
reorganizing Canada's defence with vision coupled with respect for traditional values, has won the admiration and respect of foes and the permanent confidence of friends--our Minister of National Defence, The Honourable Paul Hellyer.
MR. HELLYER:
I am indeed honoured that The Empire Club should invite me to this distinguished platform again. I should like to take advantage of the opportunity thus provided to follow a suggestion made by several members of The Empire Club that I repeat for the benefit of a wider, audience, some of the basic arguments in favour of integration of our armed forces and also to give a brief summary of our progress to date in that direction. To put the question in context, some background information may be helpful. When Mr. Cardin and I accepted responsibility for the Department of National Defence we sat down to consider what course we should follow. We soon came to the conclusion that there were three steps we should take. First, to _. bring the past up to the present. More specifically, I mean to arrange for the stockpiling of warheads for the weapons systems already acquired for our armed forces. Second, to review the major procurement programmes outstanding and, in particular, what effect those programmes might have on future defence policy. Third, to work out a long-range defence policy for Canada.
In order to obtain the warheads for our weapons systems it was necessary to sign an inter-governmental agreement between Canada and the U.S. to permit the stockpiling of warheads for use by Canadian forces in case of emergency. It was also necessary to sign technical agreements between forces relating to the storage, safety and other technical arrangements. Finally, it was necessary to complete the administrative arrangements, including the construction of special storage for the warheads and training of our forces.
As you know, three of the four weapons systems are now operational. The Bomarc missile squadrons--part of the continental anti-bomber defences--have been operational for a year. The CF-104 Starfighters in the nuclear strike role have been operational for some months. More recently, the Honest John surface-to-surface missile battery with our brigade in Germany passed its final test and the fourth system, the Genie air-to-air rocket for our air defence interceptors, will be available shortly. Canada then will be discharging, in full, those obligations undertaken for us in the name of Canada.
In our review of procurement policy, we considered all factors including technical, budgetary, and industrial but our main concern was the effect on future policy which would result from proceeding with existing plans. In some cases we decided to proceed. We placed an order for three "O" class submarines which are desperately needed for training and which also have some operational capability. The first of these will be commissioned this fall. We ordered a limited number of dual place Starfighters needed for safety in checking out our aircrews. These too have an operational capability.
On the other hand, we decided not to procure more single-seater CF-104's for the strike role because of the limitation this would place on future policy. We cancelled the general purpose frigate construction programme for the same reason, in addition to technical and budgetary considerations. The development of the Bobcat armoured personnel carrier was cancelled because, after ten years, we had not produced a perfected vehicle and because a successful carrier, the American M113 which was already in service in many parts of the world and for which there exists first-class world-wide logistic support, was available to us at least a year sooner and at about one-half the price per vehicle. As our brigade in Europe had for too long been exposed unprotected to possible mechanized attack, the decision taken was the only one which common sense could dictate. On the other hand, we decided to proceed with the development of an experimental hydrofoil vessel for the Navy since in this field our development is still ahead of others who are interested and the advantages of developing an ocean-going hydrofoil are sufficient to justify the risk involved.
Concurrently with the consideration of these first two action areas, we were laying the groundwork for number three. Studies were conducted in the Defence Department on a wide variety of subjects as background for the preparation of a long-range defence policy for Canada. The studies included a review of Canada's defence policy, a review of technological changes in the past decade, an assessment of the world strategic situation, an estimate of likely weapons development in the next decade, an educated guess as to likely changes in world politics and the balance of power, and other factors bearing on future policy and plans. By the fall of 1963 these were completed and the task of writing a policy began. The several government departments interested in defence were involved in the preparation of the White Paper and, in particular, the Department of External Affairs was consulted throughout in order that the two arms of government, defence and external policy, would be working in complete harmony, as indeed they must."
Edit: From: http://www.empireclubfoundation.com/details.asp?SpeechID=1205&FT=yes
Canada's Defence Reorganization
Speaker Hellyer, The Honourable Paul T. Minister of National Defence
Date 18 Feb 1965
Introduced by: Hilborn, Lt. Col. Robert H. President, The Empire Club of Canada
Published in: The Empire Club of Canada Speeches 1964-1965 (Toronto, Canada: The Empire Club Foundation, 1965) pp. 217-231
Index Term(s): Canada - Armed forces Canada - Defences
Full Text
FEBRUARY 18,1965
Canada's Defence Reorganization
AN ADDRESS BY The Honourable Paul T. Hellyer P.C., M.P., MINISTER OF NATIONAL DEFENCE
CHAIRMAN, The President, Lt. Col. Robert H. Hilborn
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
CFL said:
What? You expect the MND to continually receive updated: unit bugout kit lists, locker layout, Veh standard/combat load list etc. etc. He would have to have a substantial Jr General binder. Tour binder, Dom Ops binder and that's just the army. Ships checklists, boarding party kit..........you get the point surely?
And then you expect him to man the DND complaint hotline?????? c'mon man think about it. I will argue that the if home unit Bde Comd visits the troops overseas he won't have that much info.
Please justify why:
He has just enough out dated Knowledge to be dangerous????
Tom,
That was more of a tongue in cheek look at the former MND. I blame it on his age. (even I find myself standing in my underwear wondering if I am getting up or going to bed lately) ;D
"That was more of a tongue in cheek look at the former MND. I blame it on his age. (even I find myself standing in my underwear wondering if I am getting up or going to bed lately) "
- Right. Understood on all counts (Me Too! ;D), but - not a lot of balanced views coming out on how he did on his shift as MND. There was more to those years than just Unifcation.
Tom
- Right. Understood on all counts (Me Too! ;D), but - not a lot of balanced views coming out on how he did on his shift as MND. There was more to those years than just Unifcation.
Tom
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
WRT your examples no I don't think they couldn't be good in minister jobs/judges because they have remaind current. He has not just left his position in the military to become the MND he has been out of the loop for sometime now.
I would hope that he would ask the CDS or someone in the military what we currently use so as to not make himself sound foolish when he makes statements about what our current load is.
He is dangerous because from all indications he is operating on thinking when he was in the military and has not yet realized that the situation as it were in the world and in defence has radically changed from what he knew.
I would hope that he would ask the CDS or someone in the military what we currently use so as to not make himself sound foolish when he makes statements about what our current load is.
He is dangerous because from all indications he is operating on thinking when he was in the military and has not yet realized that the situation as it were in the world and in defence has radically changed from what he knew.
- Reaction score
- 5
- Points
- 430
Just out of curiosity, in order of priority in relation to such things as state of ships, Seakings, aircraft, manning issues, infrastructure, capital equipment programs, etc., etc., etc., (not to mention the day-to-day business that will cross his desk) exactly where would you put the briefing ensuring that he was up to date on small arms basic loads?
Similar threads
