Defending Canada

[EvanL]

Re: Expansion Of Army Reserves Put On Hold, May 22.

The fifth column residing in National Defence headquarters has once again succeeded in convincing the Minister of Defence that they, and only they are capable of determining the manner in which the Armed Forces of Canada must be structured. It is past time when this cancer be removed, and the first task of the present, or new minister should be to excise it.

The military does not need 11,000 bureaucrats, devouring millions of dollars from the Forces' budget for what has been aptly described as a bureaucratic, process-driven culture characterized by a significant degree of self-generating work.

Paul Martin and his Defence Minister should forego the photo-ops at the D-Day observances and go instead to visit the War Graves cemeteries, to see where so many young Canadians lie buried because of the same official neglect facing those who presently serve.

D. Stallard, Trenton, N.S.




Re: Voters Rush To Defence Of Canadian Military, May 26.

In the story on the Angus Reid poll that found increased public support for the Armed Forces, I appreciate that you included the comments by professor Kim Nossal, who noted that support weakens when put against other priorities such as health care.

Another poll, by Ipsos-Reid, also looked at Canadian attitudes to the role of the military, given limited dollars.

Ipsos-Reid found that seven in 10 Canadians disagreed with Canada joining the U.S. missile defence system, and three-quarters of Canadians felt that military spending should be used to enhance peacekeeping rather than trying to maintain forces intended for heavy combat alongside U.S. forces. Quite surprisingly, support for this was highest (80%) in Atlantic Canada, a region that contributes the lion's share of men and women in uniform.

Steven Staples, director,

Project on the Corporate-Security State, Polaris

Institute, Ottawa.

[scm77]

Paul Martin and his Defence Minister should forego the photo-ops at the D-Day observances and go instead to visit the War Graves cemeteries, to see where so many young Canadians lie buried because of the same official neglect facing those who presently serve.

Paul Martin got served!

11,000 people in DND HQ is a joke. :bash:

[Yard Ape]

We need fewer lawyers. You cannot train realisticly any more because CF lawyers (who have never been at the pointy end to judge the dangers) advise the CDS that there might be liability issues.

Authority to do things seems to be held at increasingly higher levels. A CO is no longer able to judge one of his Cpls capable of instructing. If that Cpl has no PLQ (or JLC or CLC) then the Bde Comd must approve of the Cpl teaching on a MG or driver course. Do we not trust our leaders any more? Or maybe it is because our leaders have been replaced by managers & administrators. That type of mentality has even fallen into the titles of our senior jobs.

We have too many Chiefs of Staff and not enough commanders. I want a Land Forces Commander & not just a Chief of the Land Staff. Just words? Maybe, but there is a lot of meaning behind those words

[FRO]

11,000 people in DND HQ is a joke. :bash:

It's empire building, pure and simple. I used to work for Dept Foreign Affairs. 1 manager, 1 assistant manager and 21 staff. Now I'm at DND (not NDHQ) and we've got 1 manager, 3 assistants and 12 staff. It's freaking pathetic. The assistants just seem to be mouth-pieces for the manager rather than doing anything useful. I mean, if you want a gate-keeper, get an admin assistant!

Please note, I can only speak to the office I worked at and a few other locations I visited when working for DFAIT, but I never saw the standard stereotypical bureaucrat over at DFAIT. People worked their butts off. We had some slow periods where people slacked off, but they were well-earned. DND is filled with dead wood. There are a couple of people in this office who are regularly off sick at least once a week. There are another couple of people who barely work. I swear to PANTS there's one person here who naps--that's right, naps!--during the work day. Management can't be bothered to discipline them and so the rest of us have to pick up the slack. Morale is abyssmal.

Also, at DFAIT, when a directive was issued, it was issued on paper with a signature. Here, everything is verbal. Because of that, everything gets confused. It's all about CYA (cover your . . .). If nothing is on paper, the manager can deny ever saying anything. Also, the manager can change process on a whim. Of course, these changes aren't properly promulgated, so a quarter of the office is doing things one way, another quarter is doing it another way and the final half couldn't give a flying f###, if they are working at all.

Yes, I am bitter. I like efficiency. I like the satisfaction of getting a job done right. I'm looking to get back into DFAIT.

Sorry for the rant. Take care all.

[scott]

FRO, what do you do at dnd?
and where did you go to school?

[FRO]

FRO, what do you do at dnd?
and where did you go to school?

Hi Scott

I'm in Procurement

As I've been rather freer than I l ikely should have been with my opinion, until I'm back with DFAIT, I don't want to offer up too much personal information. Sorry if that seems paranoid, but I've noticed the upper echelons of DND are petty.

I went to university in SW Ontario, but I'd rather not say exactly which Uni.

Take care.

[BOB1]

Hey FRO as a Logistics Officer/Supply Tech can you not bring this up through your chain of command?

[Yard Ape]

FRO,
Are the problems you describe more prominent in either the military or civilain personel?

[FRO]

Hey FRO as a Logistics Officer/Supply Tech can you not bring this up through your chain of command?

Hi BOB1. How's it going.

Now, I know what happens when one assumes something, but I'm going to do a little of that here and assume that the mention of Logistics Officer/Supply Tech and chain of command indicates that you may believe I'm in the military. I'm not, just a civvie that works in DND. Usually--at least in the section I work in--people refer to DND when talking about civil servants and CF when talking about military.

If I assumed wrong, I apologize and will be an excellent example of why people should not assume things! ;)

In any case, my chain of command pretty much is the problem. My boss is supposed to answer to a military CO, unfortunately, the CO and the XO both seem scared $h!tless of my boss, which amuses me to no end. The CO seems to care more about not making waves (pun, he's Navy) rather than getting anything done and the XO is a great guy and bright, but he's gone by August and I think he just wants to see this assignment through and get the heck out.

As an example of what happens when you go through channels, there were two supervisors that were leaving just as I was getting there. Both had gone head-to-head with the boss about irregularities in the office (not big things like contracting irregularities, just stuff like ignoring work descriptions, undermining their authority, poor HR management) and had actually attempted to get some of the problems corrected. Both ended up taking lower paying positions--one in a different problem--because of the stress cause by the heat the boss put on them. No support from the CO. They could have filed a greivance, but that pretty much $h!tcans your career.

[FRO]

FRO,
Are the problems you describe more prominent in either the military or civilain personel?

Hi Yard Ape, good to hear from you again.

Also, please everyone reading this remember that I can only talk about the section in which I am working. I tend to generalize and I shouldn't. It's the bitterness of moving from a fast-paced and demanding but efficient workplace to a workplace that wouldn't be as hectic if it were efficient.

In any case, it's pretty much even. We only have a few CF in our office, but we are nestled in a larger section and the building is mostly military. We recently lost a Cpl who was a good guy but lazy as H***. We have a PO2 who seems pretty much certifiably insane. We have gained another Cpl who is pretty cool and seems pretty bright. Around us, in the military, we have a couple of very intelligent, hard-working young officers, a couple of equally young and very conscientious NCOs and then a CO who may be very intelligent (has BA and MA, working on PhD) but is a complete tool and three CPO1s who, together, might be able to figure out how to make a good cup of coffee but seem pretty useless beyond that.

It is also possible (and likely) that logistics doesn't attract the brightest lights in the military. Further, one of the civvies who is the hardest worker is ex-CF (he's been out a little over a decade).

[Yard Ape]

I had always thought of NDHQs inefficiencies stemming from the structure of the HQ more than from any quality issues in personnel.

How do you find the bureaucracy? What could be done to fix things?

[anonymous individual]

Hopefully, Canada will structure a better military this way because it is in need of improvement.

[SFontaine]

The answer (http://www.conservative.ca/)

[FRO]

I had always thought of NDHQs inefficiencies stemming from the structure of the HQ more than from any quality issues in personnel.

How do you find the bureaucracy? What could be done to fix things?

For DND? Grow some metaphorical balls and actually give a $h!t about stuff. Clean out the dead wood. When some manager says that they need an assistant manager to handle a staff of five, obviously this person sucks as a manager, so turf the loser. Everyone is so worried about building an empire and promoting their own agenda they tend to forget what we are there for. My manager is more worried about who attends certain meetings than what goes on at those meetings.

Unfortunately, from what I've seen--and it is really only a snapshot--the rot is deep and it would take a sea change in attitude at the highest levels along with the actual will to change things. It can happen. I've worked in a few offices that actually did what they were supposed to with a minimum of politics and ego.

[FRO]

The answer (http://www.conservative.ca/)

The Conservative Party is the answer? Politicians are the problem. They only see to the next election. And Harper actually had the cojones to talk about reviewing the Sea King replacement project. First he's complaining about how long it took the Liberals to get the project rolling, then he's talking about intervening. To what purpose?

I'm not singling out the Conservatives. We would have had the EH-101s long ago if it hadn't been for Chretien's entirely partisan trashing of the PC deal to replace the Sea Kings. Those same helicopters (EH-101s) are in the finals for replacing the Sea Kings along with a Sikorsky offering (the newest design, undeployed yet in any military to my knowledge). All the political parties will tell you whatever you want to hear. Too few politicians give a crap about the CF because too few of the voting public do.

Maybe that's the answer. The CF needs its own political party. The Bloc CF. ;)

[scott]

thats funny that you should mention politics being the problem
because it really is. and sadly any major reform to dnd would be blasted by the canadian public as a misallocation of priorities.
for the record, there have been 17 ministers of national defence since the first sea king *replacement program*
and how am i still voting liberal? because in canada, its just not wise to put a government together on defence issues, its not in our culture

FRO im kickin around grad school for about the next decade but id love to bump into you sometime in ottawa, without realizing who you are ;)

[FRO]

thats funny that you should mention politics being the problem
because it really is. and sadly any major reform to dnd would be blasted by the canadian public as a misallocation of priorities.

Too true. The saddest part is, at least in DND rather than CF, the reform wouldn't need a red cent. Hey, how about we actual follow the policy, do our jobs and support the troops rather than trying to advance our own careers above all other priorities. Career advancement is great, but it should be because one is doing the job one was hired to do, not because one engineered one's ascent.



for the record, there have been 17 ministers of national defence since the first sea king *replacement program*
and how am i still voting liberal? because in canada, its just not wise to put a government together on defence issues, its not in our culture

I'm not even going to begin to discuss electoral politics because on a board like this, that's a no-win situation. I really don't think it could remain civil. However, I agree that voting based on defence policy is a bad idea.



FRO im kickin around grad school for about the next decade but id love to bump into you sometime in ottawa, without realizing who you are ;)

I envy you. I had hopes of grad school, but I got into the workforce to pay off my student loans and when I was ready to get back in, realized that all that partying I did really didn't help. My marks for my last year and half were good but everything before that was spotty at best. Still, I have a fair career mapped out (if I can get out of DND or get into a section that is something other than a manager's promotion project), so I can't complain.

At the risk of getting off topic, what are you studying?

For the record, I'm not in Ottawa, but likely someday I will be.

[scott]

political science
obviously an emphasis on strategic studies

[scott]

wow, that sounded bitchy
not *obviously* strategic studies but im certainly not big on canadian politics or electoral systems

[mocking_loudly_died]

Has Alpha Flight been cancelled yet?

[[AFSOC]]

fghsdghfghg

[FRO]

Has Alpha Flight been cancelled yet?

We're still trying to get Wolverine back, but Vindicator--in her Captain Canuck jammies--kicks a satisfactory level of @$$.

I haven't read Alpha Flight since the early 90s. Is it still going on?

[FRO]

wow, that sounded bitchy
not *obviously* strategic studies but im certainly not big on canadian politics or electoral systems

Didn't sound particularly bitchy, just the usual condensed version of conversation one sees in boards, so no worries.

Hope you're having fun. Going through for a PhD?

And could this get any farther off-topic? p-)

[mocking_loudly_died]

wow, that sounded bitchy
not *obviously* strategic studies but im certainly not big on canadian politics or electoral systems

Didn't sound particularly bitchy, just the usual condensed version of conversation one sees in boards, so no worries.

Hope you're having fun. Going through for a PhD?

And could this get any farther off-topic? p-)

Yes - ****s.

[FRO]

And could this get any farther off-topic? p-)

Yes - ****s.

****s are always on topic. Always!

[Yard Ape]

We're still trying to get Wolverine back,
You should know better than to talk of Weapon X in a public forum. Go give your self 10 lashings. :P

Here is a thought: politicians cater to constituents. If all soldiers/sailors/airmen were to change their voting constituency to that of one of our large bases, then it would guarantee at least a few MPs that will keep defence at the from of their minds.

Unfortunately, it is not kosher to promote this idea within the military.

[scott]

but name one mp that holds a cabinet or shadow cabinet position whose riding is a base...

so yes, a few mps would have defence on their mind, but their voice in whichever party would be minimal

FRO, working on masters now, phd later... hell maybe a decade at this rate
cheers (*now* im off to the red mile)

[LordHalbert]

Why does Canada even need a defense?

It has no enemies.
Nobody wants to attack Canada.
Nobody wants to occupy Canada.

It too damn cold !!

rofl

[Yard Ape]

Why does Canada even need a defense?
How else would it look after its interests in places like Afghanistan? How else would it respond to acts of terrorism, or provide security for major international gatherings (like the G8 summit in Kananaskis)? What other type of force is capable of stabilisation missions in countries around the world? What other group will show our presence in the north?

scott,
Do you assume that MPs that currently hold cadinet or shadow positions will always hold those positions (or the next person in the riding will take it over)?

[FRO]

We're still trying to get Wolverine back,
You should know better than to talk of Weapon X in a public forum. Go give your self 10 lashings. :P

/10 lashingings later

Man, that's the last time I mention Wolverine on a . . . damn.

/back to the lashings


Here is a thought: politicians cater to constituents. If all soldiers/sailors/airmen were to change their voting constituency to that of one of our large bases, then it would guarantee at least a few MPs that will keep defence at the from of their minds.

That's kind of the same as getting everyone in a union to vote NDP. Even when it's in their best interests, people tend to be blinded by the rhetoric and empty promises. And I honestly don't know how one would go about this. Isn't there some kind of residency requirement? I have to plead ignorance--damn, I hate when that happens--about the practicality of this plan.

Anyone?


Unfortunately, it is not kosher to promote this idea within the military.

And there is that too! ;)

[FRO]

Why does Canada even need a defense?

It has no enemies.
Nobody wants to attack Canada.
Nobody wants to occupy Canada.


Which was pretty much the arguement after WWI . . and WWII. Canada needs the CF--and a well-trained and well-equipped CF--if Canada wishes to remain an international player. Like it or not, the world has not yet entered the Starfleet era of universal peace on Earth. In order to project political power, one still must be able to project military power.



It too damn cold !!

rofl

Yes, our parliament buildings are a huge igloo. :P

[RealUltimatePower]

Hi, just wanted to add my two cents to this discussion.

I'm a lowly Cpl and in the reserves so I won't comment on how NDHQ works since I have no experience there as of yet.

But on the topic of Canadian voters not caring enough about defence issues. I think the problem is that in our culture we prefer to be peaceful and not use force to exact change. That's why a lot of the younger voters I talk to believe that a military with a stronger budget is a vote for conflict.
Although in reality I don't believe this to be the case. It's true that the largest role of the military is warfighting. But what people need to be brought to understand is that there is sooo much we can do that helps world stability and peace. That the military can be a tool of change and not just a weapon.

FOr example in Haiti right now our troops are assisting with the floods. However, if we had the resources to deploy more troops and griffons we could obviously be in a better position.

Or also in the Sudan and neighbouring Chad. The conflict there has caused a nearing refugee crisis in Chad. And with the wet season coming it will be near impossible for aid agencies to move supplies to the remote towns where the refugees are. Now if the CF still had the Chinook we could be over there flying the supplies in. I think that would be a worthwhile mission and a good policy move for Canada.

Maybe if Canadians understood the needs of the military better and the potential it has that they would care more about voting in leaders who will fund and use it properly.

[Yard Ape]

FRO,
When someone joins the military they continue to vote in the riding they lived in on enrollment. There is the option to change that riding to the location you are currently living at any time there after.

I'm not suggesting everyone in the CF should be asked to vote for a given party. However, if every member changed his/her electoral riding to that of one of the "mega-bases" when posted to such a base, then the local constituency would be very military. When compared to local population, there are several places where "the military vote" could push one candidate above the others:
Halifax, Oromocto, Baggotville, Petawawa, Kingston, Shilo, Wainwright, Cold Lake, Namao, Esquimalt, etc

[scott]

gravedigger! :)
but wouldnt you say the military communities of petawawa, cold lake etc are already "very military"?
im thinking of the restauranteurs, shopkeepers and businessfolk that depend on the bases to earn their living
they would probably be just as sympathetic to defence issues as soldiers are.

from an electoral standpoint...

[FRO]

Yard Ape: Ah-hah! Then what you suggest makes huge sense. I'm actually surprised that a party pushing it's defence platform as one of its election planks. I think, though, that none of the parties are pursuing this as they are worried it could fry them at some point in the future.

Certainly has merits from the CF's point of view.

Scott: Dead on. Halifax is very much a "defence" town. Of course, it is also a town with huge suspicions of the federal government, which is why Alexa McDonogh's seat has been so secure. I wonder about this election though.

[ctcboy]

I could be wrong about this but I think that at one time the Cf voted for a couple of seats in the parlaiment directly. I believe it was Defenbaker(sp)
that ended that.
I would bet that if Al Qaeda does eventualy launch a succesful attack on Canadian soil, as they have threatened to do, that our public opinion will swing rather stronglt towards being pro military. At least for a time.

[Yard Ape]

Those communities may be pro-military, but they do not necisarily make an informed military vote. The NDP has focused its military platform on quality of life, accomodations, and pay. This sounds nice, but soldiers are not doing too bad now. We want money for training & operations. We want money to keep our tools relevant (a tank designed in the middle of last century is rapidly becoming irrelevant). The feel good stuff can come after all of that.

There is also a fact that teachers, doctors, buisness people, and property owners will have thier own intrests first, even if they are miitary friendly.

[FRO]

True, the NDP has spoken of pay and benefits issues, but in an interview in Halifax Jack Layton also affirmed his support for moving the helicopter replacement project forward without delay (which is nice to hear) and that funds need to be earmarked for equipment (though no specifics and the reporter didn't seem to consider it important enough to follow up on). Layton also stated his opposition to a "hybrid carrier" project (no surprise there). A little worrisome was his statement that he would like to consult the military before moving forward with the JSS project. If this is a sincere concern with the military getting what they need, excellent. However, it does sound a little like political double-speak for "we're going to kill the JSS project and be ready to place the blame elsewhere."

Still, the chances of an NDP prime minister are snowball-in-Hades to FRO-getting-randy-with-Jennifer-Connelly so it's really just academic. However, a minority government is going to need allies and it would be nice to think that the NDP has come to realize that the military is an integral part of this nation.

Also, I think if a party were smart, they would be able to both meet the needs of the middle class and the military while also not alienating to an excessive degree the exceptionally wealthy (who will always be alienated by surrendering any of their loot) or treading on the exceptionally poor (who usually don't drive political decisions save their influence on the sympathy and guilt of the middle class).