# The Next Minister of Defense



## tomahawk6 (24 Jan 2006)

http://server09.densan.ca/archivenews/060124/cit/060124ct.htm

Retired BG Gordon O'Connor to be the next MND ? Would be great to have a man with military experience in that important job. He would make a great compliment to Hillier.


----------



## The_Falcon (24 Jan 2006)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> http://server09.densan.ca/archivenews/060124/cit/060124ct.htm
> 
> Retired BG Gordon O'Connor to be the next MND ? Would be great to have a man with military experience in that important job. He would make a great compliment to Hillier.



Do a search on O'Connor (on this site) and you will see that, any thoughts of O'Connor as MND would NOT be well received.


----------



## Good2Golf (24 Jan 2006)

Tomohawk. O'Connor does not get along with many folks, including it is rumoured, Gen Hillier.  Some think of O'Connor as an old school dinosaur who represents the throngs of little "managerial generals" in plastic green suits of the early/mid-eighties...not at all inspiring!

I personally hope the LCol (Ret'd) Laurie Hawn is made defence minister...perhaps only reaching unit command will serve him well, not having being drawn into the politically charged General ranks and away from the troops!  I've had dinner with Laurie and he's a super guy!  He'd have gotten my voite if I lived in Edmonton!

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## nd.07 (24 Jan 2006)

I have read that alot of people on this site don't like him to much. I've seen what he says in the papers, and based on that it isnt a too good impression. He's the MP for my riding of Carleton-Mississipi Mills (kanata, suburb of Ottawa) The grit  candidate was much more impressive.
But I cant vote anyways...  :-X


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (24 Jan 2006)

tomahawk
you would think so but this cat is out to lunch.  He has been out of the loop for far too long and has no clue what's going on.  On a high note Harper was very complimentary of us in his speech last night.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (24 Jan 2006)

To add to that, there is a thread somewhere around here were he is suggesting housing the JTF on a base (ie Pet) away from the public because they are trained killers and out of Ottawa.  Kinda the opposite of what Harper wants.


----------



## Hunter (24 Jan 2006)

nd.07 said:
			
		

> He's the MP for my riding of Carleton-Mississipi Mills (kanata, suburb of Ottawa) The grit  candidate was much more impressive.



You're kidding, right?  Isabel Metcalf is a dud, and she doesn't even live in the riding.


----------



## George Wallace (24 Jan 2006)

I think it only fair to bring this to everyone's attention once again (no matter what our feelings):

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/37742/post-312823.html#msg312823



			
				dorionhawk said:
			
		

> Letter from Gordon O'Connor to the Citizen Editorial board
> 
> Letter to Editor
> Ottawa Citizen
> ...


----------



## MdB (24 Jan 2006)

Hmm, THERE'S an argument. 

I hope he does his homeworks better to deliver better anylisis if he ever becomes MND.

As we say in French, that doesn't fly high! ;D

Cheers,


----------



## Devlin (24 Jan 2006)

If Mr. Oconnor was across the pond I believe the response to that little note of his would be.....



Get Stuffed! 

Really who cares where they are located. Leave them alone let them do their job, they seem to be pretty good at it.


----------



## The_Falcon (24 Jan 2006)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I think it only fair to bring this to everyone's attention once again (no matter what our feelings):
> 
> http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/37742/post-312823.html#msg312823





			
				CFL said:
			
		

> To add to that, there is a thread somewhere around here were he is suggesting housing the JTF on a base (ie Pet) away from the public because they are trained killers and out of Ottawa.  Kinda the opposite of what Harper wants.



I am still waiting for him to reply to my letter about that issue.


----------



## Lance Wiebe (24 Jan 2006)

I would prefer Laurie Hawn as well.....


----------



## a_majoor (25 Jan 2006)

General Hillier is a very smart man, so I think he has already laid out a campaign plan to see him through no matter who had won last nights election (except maybe the NDP or Green parties).

Even if Mr O'Conner becomes MND, Hillier can use manoeuvre warfare principles to outflank or simply collapse the bureaucratic OODA loop, and by now I would guess Canada Command, Expeditionary Command, SOF Command and a host of other institutions have enough loyalists to advance transformation even if General Hillier himself is no longer in command. It would be far better, however, for the CDS and MND to have a close working relationship; and I fervently hope both parties see that as well.


----------



## Kirkhill (25 Jan 2006)

I'd be very disappointed if they couldn't.  But nobody's askin' me  ;D.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (25 Jan 2006)

from another thread

"Laurie Hawn, the newly elected Tory MP for Edmonton Centre and a former air force fighter pilot, joined the military dignitaries on the tarmac for the soldiers’ arrival. 

"I have not met Gen. Hillier yet but I think it was good to get involved," he said shortly before trotting 200 metres to where the Airbus was parked"

hopefully this forshadows a cabinet postion, say Min of Def


----------



## KevinB (25 Jan 2006)

CFL said:
			
		

> from another thread
> 
> "Laurie Hawn, the newly elected Tory MP for Edmonton Centre and a former air force fighter pilot, joined the military dignitaries on the tarmac for the soldiers’ arrival.
> 
> ...



+1

Funny eh? the Army (and ex-Army) guys wanting a AF MND, over a ARMY one...


----------



## bubba (25 Jan 2006)

Im hopen for Hawn as well. Gordon lost his bearings i also hope they leave Hillier right were he's at.


----------



## Good2Golf (26 Jan 2006)

KevinB said:
			
		

> +1
> 
> Funny eh? the Army (and ex-Army) guys wanting a AF MND, over a ARMY one...




Worse yet, Kev...is a tactical aviator endorsing a fighter pilot....EEGAD!    It goes against almost everything in my CADPAT blood!  ;D

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## GO!!! (26 Jan 2006)

Gordon O'Connor is against the use of the Mk 19 because it may leave a dud that could contravene the Ottawa accord banning anti-pers land mines.

That type of attempt to garner attention at our expense is not what I would want as our MND. He is using his imagination and position to screw us (or try to) when he was part of the opposition. 

Give the job to the pilot, rather than the stuffed shirt bleating for attention, we need an MND who is on our side, both as citizens and soldiers, and O'Connor is obviously only in it for himself.


----------



## Jarnhamar (26 Jan 2006)

> Gordon O'Connor is against the use of the Mk 19 because it may leave a dud that could contravene the Ottawa accord banning anti-pers land mines.



Umm, what?

Does this mean no more 40mm's from the M203 or even bombs from cf18s?

That's funny in a sad way.


----------



## George Wallace (26 Jan 2006)

Ghost778 said:
			
		

> Umm, what?
> 
> Does this mean no more 40mm's from the M203 or even bombs from cf18s?
> 
> That's funny in a sad way.


Would that mean that the Triple 7's would be coming home?

Think of the nightmare of a dud 155 round lying out there in the Afghan hills.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (26 Jan 2006)

Lets hope it doesn't come to having him change policy.


----------



## Edward Campbell (28 Jan 2006)

*Rumours* (picked up over a couple too many pints yesterday afternoon and evening):

•	Friends of Rick Hillier have already made it known (to Harper’s _political_ team) that his ‘old friend’ Gordon O’Connor’s former career as a defence lobbyist might make it difficult for him to be a visibly effective defence minister.  The national media is already picking up on O’Connor’s lobbying; and

•	Despite their absolute joy at the demise of Pierre Pettigrew (I heard it said that he was both venal and incredibly lazy as well as being shallow, rude and nearly impossible to brief), the foreign affairs mandarins (including some old friends of Derek Burney) are expressing reservations about Stockwell Day.  The _gold standard_ in foreign ministers, they point out, is Condoleezza Rice and Day’s lack of formal qualifications etc will be spread about by a generally hostile media and that will reduce his effectiveness.  Surely, they ask, there are good, solid choices within the upper levels of the Conservative caucus who will enhance Canada’s standing in the world, etc, etc, etc.

The _thinking_ here abouts is:

•	Defence: Day

•	Foreign Affairs: Stolberg, or Peter MacKay if he asks for it

•	Veterans’ Affairs: O’Connor 

For what it’s worth and, I emphasize, all *rumours*.

Edit: Changed to "Friends of Rick Hillier have ..." which is, I think, what I really heard


----------



## Armymedic (28 Jan 2006)

Ed, those rumours do sound plausible.

The toughest job that Mr. Harper's staff will have this entire term will be to choose the right mix for cabinet. If they do not get it right this time, they may not have another chance to sort it out for several yrs.


----------



## George Wallace (28 Jan 2006)

Just listening to recent comments in the news, it appears "some of Harper's caucus may be surprised as to who will and who will not be getting Cabinet Posts."


----------



## Edward Campbell (28 Jan 2006)

A little off topic, but ...

Another interesting *rumour*: Harper will take a leaf from Mulroney's 1984 book.  Remember how Mulroney surprised (and pleased) many folks by appointing NDP star Stephen Lewis to be our ambassador to the UN?  Mulroney did that to allay fears about how _conservative_ he was.  Harper will invite NDP super-star Ed Broadbent to come back as a part time but paid _”servant of Parliament”_ (of some sort) to deal with/advise on ethics or accountability.  Broadbent cannot take on a full time task because his wife is very, very ill but he is rumoured to be interested in doing something in Ottawa – on or around the Hill.

Addendum

Ah, a nice brisk walk clears the cobwebs.  Here is another *rumour*, also a bit off topic: the next Secretary General of the United Nations will be …
<drum roll>
John Manley!  


Here is how is will play out:

•	He is the favoured candidate of the influential Council on Foreign Relations but the US will not put him forward;

•	None of the candidates put forward by either the African Union or the Arab League will be acceptable to the US;

•	The Europeans will be unable to find a consensus candidate – a loose coalition of the UK, Norway and some eastern Europeans will oppose any candidate offered by the Franco-German _centre_ and, conversely, no one favoured by the UK will escape  French veto.  None of the Europeans will like the Russian proposal;

•	The Asia-Pacific group will have three candidates: one favoured by China, another by India and a third by Japan – none will get enough support to go forward; and

•	The OAS will propose Manley as a compromise candidate – most likely proposed by Mexico.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (28 Jan 2006)

May I ask where one hears theses type of rumours?


----------



## big bad john (28 Jan 2006)

You just have to live and work in Ottawa.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (28 Jan 2006)

Sounds worse then living on base with the wifey hotline.


----------



## big bad john (28 Jan 2006)

Trust me it is.


----------



## tomahawk6 (28 Jan 2006)

I doubt Manley will be offered the job. I have heard  Shashi Tharoor, the under secretary for public information. As an Indian it would be a good move. Another possibility is Vaclav Havel a man with a great reputation.


----------



## Hawker (28 Jan 2006)

Pick Laurie Hawn for goodness sakes...I've had the pleasure of talking with him a few times, and he seemed to me an intellegent, level headed man, which I don't think describes O'Conner.


----------



## KevinB (28 Jan 2006)

Picking the Indian will irk the Pakistanis - our "ally" in GWOT...


----------



## tomahawk6 (6 Feb 2006)

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_PrintFriendly&c=Article&cid=1139179810364

MacKay may get the nod. Any thoughts ?


----------



## Troopasaurus (6 Feb 2006)

Gordon O'Connor got in.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/02/06/harper-ottawa060206.html


----------



## kahone (6 Feb 2006)

Looks like it's:
Gordon O'Connor

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/02/06/harper-ottawa060206.html

partial list only for now.
oops! sorry for the duplicate, I was slow in logging in!


----------



## muffin (6 Feb 2006)

kahone said:
			
		

> Looks like it's:
> Gordon O'Connor
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/02/06/harper-ottawa060206.html
> ...



another Ref:
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1139227386481&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154


----------



## tomahawk6 (6 Feb 2006)

After keeping news of his cabinet a closely guarded secret, key cabinet posts will go to:

Peter MacKay - Foreign affairs minister 
Jim Flaherty - Finance minister 
Lawrence Cannon - Transport, Infrastructure and Communities minister 
Stockwell Day -- Public Safety minister 
Vic Toews - Justice minister 
Gordon O'Connor - Defence minister 
Tony Clement - Health minister 
Michael Fortier - Public Works minister 
Rona Ambrose - Environment minister 
Maxime Bernier - Industry minister 
Jim Prentice - Indian Affairs minister


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (6 Feb 2006)

F**K!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Sig_Des (6 Feb 2006)

It just had to be Gord....If his tenure as MND is anything like his previous issues....God D*mnit


----------



## Kat Stevens (6 Feb 2006)

I guess the Dwyer Hill Mob can start packing for Pet, and get fitted for those tracking collars..... :


----------



## kincanucks (6 Feb 2006)

_CDS_ ?

Anyway it is not a good thing based on his past performance and here is to hoping that his reins are being held tight.


----------



## tomahawk6 (6 Feb 2006)

I don't think it will be all that bad. Sometimes politicians say one thing out of power and do another in power. I think Hillier is too popular to be dismissed.


----------



## regulator12 (6 Feb 2006)

complete list here

http://pm.gc.ca/eng/cabinet.asp


----------



## Fabius (6 Feb 2006)

I hope to god this doesn't turn back the clock, I like the way things are going currently


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (6 Feb 2006)

tomahawk6 can you please tell my why you have so much faith in this guy considering his recent past comments.


----------



## Edward Campbell (6 Feb 2006)

I think he will be held in close check by Elcock (if he stays), Hillier and whoever becomes Clerk.  There are troops in action, overseas – the Minister’s room to manoeuvre is limited.  He will have to avoid favouring, being seen to favour, or even being thought to favour his old cronies in the defence lobbying business.  The _fast track_ aircraft procurements should stay on that track.  I also expect that Peter McKay will have lots to tell him about what the CF will be required to do.

He may find himself running Hillier’s errands – taking the _demands_ to the cabinet table and bringing back the budget allocations.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (6 Feb 2006)

What defence groups were they btw.

Mr. Campbell I REALLY hope your right.


----------



## GK .Dundas (6 Feb 2006)

O'Conner as MND.......I'm sorry I have to say it....EEEEEEEEWWWWWWWW!  Just what is the drug of choice in ottawa these days? :


----------



## Big Foot (6 Feb 2006)

I too was hoping for someone else but, failing that, why not hope for the best? Honestly, I think there is the possibility of something good coming out of this. Gen. Hillier seems to be an extremely level headed man and I think he and people like Laurie Hawn, etc can influence Mr. O'Connor in the right direction. At very least, I've got my fingers crossed that that will be the case...


----------



## Edward Campbell (6 Feb 2006)

CFL said:
			
		

> What defence groups were they btw.
> 
> Mr. Campbell I REALLY hope your right.



He lobbied for a long list of companies but Airbus is the one which may tie his hands first.  It will be very, very difficult for O'Connor to even hint at interfering in any aircraft procuremnt decision without being dragged through the mud, on TV, in the house, by all the opposition parties because of his ties to Airbus.


----------



## tomahawk6 (6 Feb 2006)

Just remember that PM Harper will dictate military policy. The MND will carry out his policy.


----------



## Mortar guy (6 Feb 2006)

I, for one, welcome our new insect overlords...

MG


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (6 Feb 2006)

That is true tomahawk.  However the MND chooses how to make that policy happen.  Unless you suggest that the PM will dictact HOW it will happen as well.


----------



## tomahawk6 (6 Feb 2006)

It will be up to the civilian leadership to get a funding increase for the CF. I think that is more important than who the minister is.


----------



## The Gues-|- (6 Feb 2006)

Did ya's all see them attempt to sing the National anthem? what a joke.


----------



## vonGarvin (6 Feb 2006)

Mortar guy said:
			
		

> I, for one, welcome our new insect overlords...
> 
> MG


"Would you say that now is the time to panic?"
"Yes I would, Kent"


----------



## commo_dude (6 Feb 2006)

General Hillier used to report to Defence Minister O'Connor when he was General O'Connor. There is no bad blood between them.


----------



## Journeyman (6 Feb 2006)

commo_dude said:
			
		

> General Hillier used to report to Defence Minister O'Connor when he was General O'Connor. There is no bad blood between them.



I'm curious how you know this.


----------



## muffin (6 Feb 2006)

He has started another thread on this as well - I have replied to him there.

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/39501.0.html
muffin


----------



## aesop081 (6 Feb 2006)

commo_dude said:
			
		

> General Hillier used to report to Defence Minister O'Connor when he was General O'Connor. There is no bad blood between them.



danger will robinson, danger  ;D


----------



## commo_dude (6 Feb 2006)

CBC and CTV stated that today on TV.


----------



## aesop081 (6 Feb 2006)

commo_dude said:
			
		

> CBC and CTV stated that today on TV.



Oh ......then it must be true  :


----------



## Journeyman (6 Feb 2006)

commo_dude said:
			
		

> CBC and CTV stated that today on TV.



OK, so if two independent news services come up with the same line, there's a real good chance it came from some spin doctor's Media Release. If true, that perhaps begs the question of why it was felt necessary to bring it up in the first place.

Anyone wish to second-guess the motives of either a government or DND 'talking head'? Are they maybe attempting to mend some fences? Or should we simply accept what we are told by the government and/or media? 

(If you answer 'yes' PM me for a great deal I have on some swamp land..... er, valuable non-arid real estate)


----------



## Rubes (6 Feb 2006)

At least it's not Bill Graham...


----------



## Chimo (6 Feb 2006)

Now that the Right Honourable Minister of Defence Gordon O'Connor, Carleton-Mississippi Mills, Ont. is in fact the MoD we all owe our loyalty to him. 

General Hillier is well adapt at working with and mentoring people to achieve the desired results. Fear not young Jedi.


----------



## Armymedic (6 Feb 2006)

Darn it all, I was actually hoping for someone else...

Oh well, lets see what he does.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (6 Feb 2006)

"is in fact the MoD we all owe our loyalty to him."

Frankly I don't feel I owe him shit until he's shown he's capable.  As it stands hos most recent body of work leaves a lot to be desired.


----------



## sneak and peek soldier (6 Feb 2006)

Gordon O'Connor - Minister of Defence 

The new minister of defence is a former brigadier general and most recently, the defence critic for the official opposition. 

He has fought for a fair and open tendering process for Canadian military purchases, but his history as a defence industry lobbyist could pose some ethical problems in this area, according to CTV’s Craig Oliver.

However, his base of support within the military ranks will be pleased to see him take the position, particularly at a time where the Armed Forces are set to expand.

“They will be pleased to have someone who can step forward and speak for the department, which is going to need to be defended,” Oliver said. “There’s no governmental department that will be exploding in size the way the defence department will be.”

Oliver said one of O’Connor’s main challenges in the position will be defending Canada’s role in Afghanistan, where spending continues to increase.

O’Connor was first elected to Parliament in 2004 for the new Ontario riding of Carleton-Mississippi Mills. After leaving the military, he worked in the private sector as a consultant and lobbyist for defence contractors


----------



## Kat Stevens (6 Feb 2006)

There are three or four threads already dealing with this... can we streamline this a bit?


----------



## Inch (6 Feb 2006)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> There are three or four threads already dealing with this... can we streamline this a bit?



Merged as requested.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (6 Feb 2006)

"However, his base of support within the military ranks will be pleased to see him take the position, particularly at a time where the Armed Forces are set to expand"

And where are these guys?


----------



## Big Foot (6 Feb 2006)

Chimo said:
			
		

> Now that the Right Honourable Minister of Defence Gordon O'Connor, Carleton-Mississippi Mills, Ont. is in fact the MoD we all owe our loyalty to him.


Chimo, only the Prime Minister is Right Honourable, the MND is the Honourable Gordon O'Connor.


----------



## Chimo (6 Feb 2006)

Bigfoot, thanks for the correction. I sit corrected.


----------



## Ralph (6 Feb 2006)

Because I'm on PATA and have the time for things like this, I did some surfing, and unless the Internet is wrong, O'Connor is the first long-serving army guy to be MND since, like, forever (Lamontagne and Danson were the last and fought in WWII). That seems like it might be a big deal...choosing him was almost American-esque.


----------



## Pikepusher (6 Feb 2006)

A couple of comments on the new MND in this thread.

1.  The man is no fool.  I knew him when he was D force S in the late '80's, and he knows the military and political side of Defence inside out.  I pity the poor SOB who tries to snow him.

2.  He is a "tanker", as is Hillier.  They will know each other from way back, and it is quite possible that Hillier did report to O'Connor at some stage (O'Connor was promoted to BGen in '87 or'88.)

3.  The fact of the matter is that the CDS reports to and is responsible to the MND.  The CDS is considered equal to the DM, and both are responsible to the MND.  And this MND knows the score, despite the fact that he may not be au currant with the latest flavour of the month.

4.  I am bothered by his work as a lobbyist, but then that seems to be the route procurement "experts" and generals seem to go, the military career as a stepping-stone to higher earning potential in selling stuff back to DND.  In the dark old days, the military career used to be the end in itself and old soldiers just "faded away," but then CDS's became DMs in other departments, and even ambassadors.  Anyway, O'Connor knows how lobbyists work, so I don't think he will be suborned.

5.  To those still "in," look forward to rational but not necessarily interesting times.  But do remember that few governments keep all election promises.  The Conservatives in the mid-eighties engendered great expectations in the CF, but delivered only environmental uniforms.


----------



## kierankyllo (7 Feb 2006)

If you would like to know more about Gordon O'Connor I have found a helpful resource that keeps tabs on all of his parliamentary voting activity in his political career.  It is extremely useful in monitoring MP's for accountability on the issues that may matter to you.  The website is http://www.howdtheyvote.ca and the link to the voting activity of Gordon O'Connor is http://www.howdtheyvote.ca/member.php?id=215.  

This is a free website resource, I am not advertising it.  It is just really useful when trying to get a bead on MP's positions.

In regards to Gordon O'Connor some noted votes are his position against MP floor crossing prohibition and against same sex marriage, among others.


----------



## geo (7 Feb 2006)

I hope that Gen O'Connor's placement in the Cabinet's 1st official picture is not indicative of the priority that will be attributed to the CF... 
Past recent history has been that there is a pecking order 

( back row in the nosebleed section )


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (7 Feb 2006)

Thanks for that kierankyllo.


----------



## Edward Campbell (7 Feb 2006)

O’Connor already attracted lobbyist/conflict of interest questions.

In fact, if I heard correctly, the only questions he was asked when he left the cabinet room yesterday were abut his lobbying job (Hill and Knowlton) which he left less than two year ago.  Every defence procurement decision will be parsed by the press to see if O'Connor is, somehow or other, connected to the contractors.


----------



## Kirkhill (7 Feb 2006)

> In fact, if I heard correctly, the only questions he was asked when he left the cabinet room yesterday were abut his lobbying job (Hill and Knowlton) which he left less than two year ago.  Every defence procurement decision will be parsed by the press to see if O'Connor is, somehow or other, connected to the contractors.



The other end of a possible problem is that if Harper wanted to keep O'Connor clear of the actual purchase decisions (undesirable but the way the Liberals ran the show) then the other "Go To Guy" is Michael Fortier - the new Senator-designate from Montreal's power structure in charge of Public Works and Government Services Canada.

I voted for them.  I am glad the Liberals are gone.  I am nervous.  Will it be coal or candy in the stocking?


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (7 Feb 2006)

Do we know who the deputy Minister of Defence is?


----------



## Edward Campbell (7 Feb 2006)

CFL said:
			
		

> Do we know who the deputy Minister of Defence is?



It is Ward Elcock; a long time civil servant.  He came to DND after heading CSIS.  Very, very bright fellow.

Edit: See: http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/18069/post-89254.html#msg89254 for a bit more about Elcock and some of our comments from a while back


----------



## KevinB (7 Feb 2006)

I feel sorry for the CF and Gen Hillier especially -- IMHO O'Connor is a moron, and prove it with several of his comments.


----------



## Cloud Cover (7 Feb 2006)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> I voted for them.  I am glad the Liberals are gone.  I am nervous.  Will it be coal or candy in the stocking?



Candy coated coal and a very large stalking by our media friends. (you know the ones-   ).


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (7 Feb 2006)

damn you media friends :-\


----------



## buzgo (7 Feb 2006)

KevinB said:
			
		

> I feel sorry for the CF and Gen Hillier especially -- IMHO O'Connor is a moron, and prove it with several of his comments.



I agree with KevinB. Sure, he was a General, but he was a general when we were getting ready to plug the Fulda Gap! 

It will be interesting to see how aircraft procurement plays out - he worked for Airbus....


----------



## Good2Golf (7 Feb 2006)

Boeing's Arnprior plant (Chinook an dLab depot-level repair and inspection) is in his riding.....hmmmm?

Duey


----------



## redleafjumper (7 Feb 2006)

Rather than making predictions about whether or not O'Connor will be a good MND or not, why not check fire and see how he does?  He certainly can't be worse than Hellyer...


----------



## Kirkhill (7 Feb 2006)

> He certainly can't be worse than Hellyer...



That makes for an interesting standard, right enough.


----------



## rifleman (7 Feb 2006)

redleafjumper said:
			
		

> Rather than making predictions about whether or not O'Connor will be a good MND or not, why not check fire and see how he does?  He certainly can't be worse than Hellyer...



Thats hilarious. From what I remember Hellyer started this new "unified force with an integrated approach". we are all embracing now.


----------



## KevinB (7 Feb 2006)

redleafjumper said:
			
		

> Rather than making predictions about whether or not O'Connor will be a good MND or not, why not check fire and see how he does?  He certainly can't be worse than Hellyer...



Of course Hellyer was not at the helm during a shooting war...
  Like it or not Afghan/GWOT is a shooting war.


----------



## Pikepusher (7 Feb 2006)

KevinB and Signalsguy: no moron - wait for it!  And the Fulda Gap was an American problem.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (7 Feb 2006)

I don't know about the comparison, or even if we should do it that way. Let's wait and see how he does, and judge him on his own merits. Everyone's human and will make mistakes. The telling will be if the wrong is admitted and rectified. Don't forget how the Ottawa Citizen tried to crucify him by lying about what he said. Expect more of the same. Don't trust the fourth estate to tell you the absolute, unbiased truth. Judge only that which you percieve for yourself. I still like to think that officers (even ex) are gentlemen, and there's honour among gentlemen. I would hope he sets a high standard, befitting a General Officer, for the rest to follow.


----------



## GO!!! (7 Feb 2006)

I judge O'Connor by his past statements;

"Use of Mk 19 AGL possible violation of Ottawa Accord"

"Move JTF 2 to Gander"

"Keep JTF Killers on military base where they can be controlled"

So we have a former tank officer and cold war dinosaur, with a hate on for special forces.

So let's see what he does, but he is off to a bad start....


----------



## TCBF (7 Feb 2006)

"So we have a former tank officer and cold war dinosaur"

- Cold War Dinosaur?  Please explain.

Tom


----------



## Fishbone Jones (7 Feb 2006)

And what's wrong with tank officers?


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (7 Feb 2006)

"Cold War Dinosaur"
I don't wish to put words in his mouth but perhaps he meant archaic ways of thinking when it comes to military deployments of 2006 vice when he was serving.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (7 Feb 2006)

He can speak for himself.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (7 Feb 2006)

yeah I know, just giving my perception on what he meant, I have NO doubt he will elaborate.


----------



## Kirkhill (7 Feb 2006)

Is it appropriate to note that when he (and some of the rest of us dinosaurs) were serving Canada had an airborne regiment; a Special Service Force complete with airborne artillery and engineers, as well as an infantry battalion and an armoured regiment;  Recce, Utility and Transport helicopters and a functioning fleet of transport aircraft?  And how about AMF(L) Allied Mobile Force (Land),  the light infantry battalion tasking in Scandinavia for which the BV206s were bought?

Stop me if I misunderstand, but aren't we looking to recreate something of that sort currently?

4CMBG was the focal point right enough - perhaps too much so - but there were other capabilities available in the days of the dinosaurs.  Canada was not a one-trick pony.


----------



## GO!!! (7 Feb 2006)

By "dinosaur" I am referring to the propensity of many of the previous generation of soldiers to believe in a strictly heavy metal mechanised battlefield, where national armies fought over clearly defined objectives in terms of land, resources and opposing ideologies.
They are characterised by an inability to see beyond this type of conflict, and question the use of any piece of equipment or training that does not fit into this framework. Historically, this meant hostility towards special forces and airborne units, as they were often seen as using a disproportionately large piece of the budgetary pie, for results not as easily ascertained as numbers of tanks, trucks and carriers.

This would appear to be further borne out by the open hostility O'Connor has shown in the media to the only Canadian SF unit, expressing his desire to move them to Gander - a less than ideal posting, questioning their professionalism in his desire to move them to a conventional army base, due to some threat that they each personnally represent, and implying that their use of a Mk 19 constitutes a violation of international treaty and national law.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (7 Feb 2006)

I agree with Go!!!'s assessment,......lets hope we are both brutally wrong.

...and I for one will be glad to offer my public humiliation if that happens. :-X


----------



## TCBF (7 Feb 2006)

"4CMBG was the focal point right enough - perhaps too much so - but there were other capabilities available in the days of the dinosaurs.  Canada was not a one-trick pony."

- Myself, I miss the nukes.  

Tom


----------



## RangerRay (8 Feb 2006)

I hope my uneasy feelings about O'Connor are misplaced...

 :-\


----------



## Edward Campbell (8 Feb 2006)

It is going to get worse for Gordon O’Connor before it gets any better.

Today the _Globe and Mail_ weighed in with a news story* and an editorial.  The latter is reproduced, below, under the fair dealing provisions of the Copyright Act.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20060208.EDEFENCE08/TPStory 


> The defence lobbyist who became the minister
> 
> Prime Minister Stephen Harper seems intent on interrupting the honeymoon usually enjoyed by new governments by contradicting the very positions he took in Opposition. The Conservatives stand for an elected Senate and condemned the sponsorship scandal that compromised the Department of Public Works and party officials; so Mr. Harper appoints a party official to the Senate and makes him Public Works Minister. The Conservatives' first order of business is to restore accountability to government; so Mr. Harper hands a cabinet post to an MP who only two weeks ago ran as a Liberal and told voters to elect him because the Conservatives were a danger.
> 
> ...



We can acknowledge that the _Globe and Mail_ is not a raging blue Tory paper but, despite Jeffrey Simpson’s petulant offerings, it did endorse Harper and the Conservatives and has been, broadly, even handed to favourable in its treatment of the new government.

Like it or not the _Globe and Mail_ is an influential Canadian daily – it is, despite the _National Post’s_ protestations, Canada’s _paper of record_; its editorial positions matter.

Mr. O’Connor is now _on notice_, as it were; if he interferes with – even if he just fails to press forward with enthusiasm on the _fast track_ procurement of new _Hercules_ aircraft he will be accused of favouring his old employers.  Those kinds of charges are:

•	Hard to beat – how do you prove a negative? and

•	Detrimental to the defence programme because Gen. Hillier’s plans (the whole _*Department’s*_ plans) for transformation and rebuilding get caught up in a ministerial _scandal_ – even if none really exists. 

I appreciate that O’Connor is a hard working, loyal team player who has helped Harper’s team to victory – he was also one of the _Ontario pioneers_ in 04, signalling the rebirth of Conservative fortunes in Ontario.  He has been rewarded for his skills, knowledge, hard work and experience; I hope his reward doesn’t penalize DND.

----------
* See: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060208.wxoconnor08/BNStory/National/home


----------



## Edward Campbell (8 Feb 2006)

Here is another editorial from today’s _Ottawa Citizen_, also reproduced under the fair dealing provisions of the Copyright Act:

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/editorials/story.html?id=32901432-6af7-41e1-9ff0-4600dce1f6ec 


> General knowledge
> 
> The Ottawa Citizen
> 
> ...



I agree that no one questions, or should question, Gordon O’Connor’s honesty.  There is no hint, anywhere, that he is anything but a man of integrity.

His judgement is seen (by some – and some may be too many) to be suspect and that also calls Harper’s judgment into question.


----------



## Matt_Fisher (8 Feb 2006)

To me, it seems that Harper has just baked himself a political hot potatoe.  Wouldn't it have been better to have given O'Connor a cabinet post which rewarded his party loyalty and work that didn't place him in such conflict-of-interest scrutiny? ie. Veteran's affairs or Public Safety?


----------



## Kirkhill (8 Feb 2006)

O'Connor is could be  a problem unless procurement decisions are put to a parliamentary committee for final decision and not made by bureaucrats in PWGSC or the PMO.  Maybe it is wishful thinking but I seem to remember something of the sort being proposed about the time that the Submarines and Chicoutimi were being debated.

Don't know if it will happen but it would change the dynamics.


----------



## dorionhawk (8 Feb 2006)

As President of Gordon's board and an integral part of his campaign team for the last two elections I can assure you that he is a man of integrity. Our campaign team refused to accept  funds from any company that does business with DND which consist of almost all the businesses in Kanata.. I find it amusing that the press continues to focus on  Gordon's  past. For the last thirteen years the press ignored all facts and did not even whimper when the Liberal government hacked to death the military's budget but quickly jumped in bed with political hacks who invited them to cocktail parties. 
Now we have a retired general who knows how DND functions , he can work with the CDS to rebuild our forces  which will enable Canada to have a say at the table and  play a larger role across the globe  . Gordon has personally written and presented a clear plan for the future, unlike his many predecessor who had no clue where they were going or what they were doing.
The media and special interest groups will  gnaw and mash their teeth 
as long as the Conservative government remains in power. Many of these journalist now realize that this caucus is very tight lipped and no leaks will occur therefore no stories and no free parties.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (8 Feb 2006)

"Gordon has personally written and presented a clear plan for the future, unlike his many predecessor who had no clue where they were going or what they were doing"

Can you share this with us?


----------



## buzgo (8 Feb 2006)

You say: 





> Our campaign team refused to accept  funds from any company that does business with DND


 and yet, what do I read online today?



> PUBLICATION:  The Ottawa Citizen
> DATE:  2006.02.08
> EDITION:  EARLY
> SECTION:  News
> ...



Hmmm.... Didn't Calian recently get a big DND health care contract?


----------



## muffin (8 Feb 2006)

We hire all of our contractors through Calian...

muffin


----------



## KevinB (8 Feb 2006)

Dorionhawk -- how's that foot taste?


----------



## Sheerin (8 Feb 2006)

I'm sure his reply is going to be that that what happened in the 2004 election is ancient history and that we should only focus on the last one...


----------



## vonGarvin (8 Feb 2006)

Sheerin said:
			
		

> I'm sure his reply is going to be that that what happened in the 2004 election is ancient history and that we should only focus on the last one...


I'm not so sure.  Why don't we let HIM answer.


----------



## GO!!! (8 Feb 2006)

Dorianhawk,

Since you are so well placed in Mr. O'Connor's staff, can you explain the hostile position that he has taken towards the JTF? Will this sentiment be extended to the CSOR? Or is Mr. O'Connor prepared to perform a 180 degree turn and start supporting the non-conventional portions of the military?


----------



## The Gues-|- (8 Feb 2006)

Hey too bad Gen. Lewis Mackenzie wasn't appointed MND!


----------



## a_majoor (8 Feb 2006)

The press and the usual suspects are slathering dirt over Prim Minister Harper's team right from the get go in order to avenge the defeat of their Liberal patrons and protectors.

While it is true Prime Minister Harper's choices of David Emerson and Mr O'Conner have bad "optics"; I think we should all be willing to look at their performance on the job before rushing to judgement. As was noted in a previous post, our former government's ministers (and MPs) were never held to any standard of conduct or accountability, and the public record of their performance should speak for itself.


----------



## Kirkhill (8 Feb 2006)

> The press and the usual suspects are slathering dirt over Prim Minister Harper's team right from the get go in order to avenge the defeat of their Liberal patrons and protectors.



Curiosity time:  During the reporting on the swearing in CTV had two CPC spokesmen supplying "colour commentary".  There were no spokesmen on CBC.  
During the campaign Harper would not commit to "Townhall" on CBC until the very end of the campaign.   I wonder if there are many nervous/angry CBC producers out there?


----------



## TCBF (8 Feb 2006)

Well, hey, they could always go on strike again...

 ;D

Tom


----------



## Kirkhill (9 Feb 2006)

If a tree falls in the forest......


----------



## Edward Campbell (9 Feb 2006)

Rumours, worse than rumours: bar talk filtered through morning after memory:

The Tories have one single idea: winning 160 seats in the next election, which they believe will be in late Spring 2008;

To win 160 seats they need –

•	Some (<10) seats to swing from Liberal to Conservative in BC and Atlantic Canada

•	Quite a few (>10) seats to swing Liberal to Conservative in Ontario, outside of Toronto; and

•	Some (<10) seats to swing BQ to Conservative in Québec, outside of Montréal; and

•	Some (<10) seats to swing Liberal to Conservative in Montreal.

Everything, including Emerson, Fortier and McKay to Foreign Affairs was done with this in mind.

Harper will focus, closely ands clearly, on the five priorities – which *do not* include defence.

Emerson is expected to:

•	Solve the softwood lumber problem sometime this year or first half 2007 – after fall 2007 it will be impossible to address because of the 2008 US elections; and

•	Ensure that BC knows that the 2010 Olympics are being funded by all Canadians, including the hated (envied) Calgarians and Torontonians.

Fortier is expected to deliver contracts to Québec, especially to Montréal

Harper does not expect either to run in the 2008 general election, although Fortier may offer himself as something of a sacrificial lamb in Mont Royal, which may be the safest Liberal seat in Canada.  He does expect their actions to deliver a few more Tory seats in their respective regions in 2008.  It is expected that both _events_ will have blown over in the next 25+ months.

McKay will be highly visible and Atlantic Canadians are expected to enjoy the sight of one of their own traipsing around on the global stage and, consequently, send a few more Tories to Ottawa. 

O’Connor is expected to offer tea and sympathy to DND, along with smallish budget increases – smallish because it will be necessary to deliver a GST cut without cancelling the Liberals income tax cuts.  Under-funding the gun registry, etc will not deliver anything like the money Harper needs.  DND’s funding will grow but not like many here hope.  Giving O’Connor the ministry he wants helps to cement the loyalty of rural Ontario members – old eastern Ontario Tories and Cheryl Gallant style Reforms alike.  O’Connor straddles both camps and is a leader in both.  This is, possibly, his last election, too.

Mulroney has advised Harper that no matter how good the policies suggested by ministers and their bureaucrats it must pass muster by the provincial and regional (Vancouver and Montréal qualify) _barons_ in the cabinet – the _political ministers_.  That’s just the way Canadian politics is: regionalism trumps national interest every time.

Remember, the above is just rumour mongering.  I got them for nothing; that's probably what they're worth.


----------



## RCD (9 Feb 2006)

He comes with suspect bagage for the job.
Not a good choice


----------



## commo_dude (9 Feb 2006)

What is the suspect baggage your referring too?

We all no his background and what positions he held prior to leaving the military, that is a PRO in all this because of his last position. He knows the ins/outs, loopholes on procurement and how to fast track etc. 

I still don't see how his job as lobbiest 2 yrs ago, relates to now? If he isn't getting anything like kickbacks etc from contractors, then its irrelevant.

Technically speaking there is no conflict of interest. It seems too many people are worried that he will favour one contractor over another. Well news for you, He has to pick someone and he is limited with his choices as to which contractor to use? Whatever is best for the military should be the concern, not everyones personal squabbles with Mr O'Connor. Finally there isn't a friggin politician who knows nothing about the military, rather finally someone with a good understanding of both sides.


----------



## Rifleman62 (9 Feb 2006)

Two news items from San Antonio, Texas. The Governor just got back from a tour with 2 other State Governors, of the theatres where soldiers from their States are deployed. The Texas Governor stated his approval of the technological improvements to the C 130 Herc ( their AC of travel!) from the ones he flew 35 years before (should fly with the CF). Also a State Senator, is on his way to Iraq as a Res USMC Colonel. He will miss the election, but his Democrate opponent (also a Vet) will make allowances ( too detailed to account for here). Different countries, different outlook. Possibly as we finally have a Minister with some understanding of the military, we should back off.
Two Sgts from San Antonio, one an Army Engineer, and one a USMC, killed in Iraq this week so far. Total of 179 Texans killed to date. Texas National Guard, who recently had an Infantry Division deployed, is well over its recruiting goals. Also, due to reenlistment's of Iraq/Afghan Vets, the training costs have been reduced. The Minister of the local church, a Reserve Navy Captain, was supposed to go to Iraq, Jan 05, but got bumped by a Reg F Chaplain who wanted the position with the Marines. So the Minister ended up on the staff of the 2 MEF, and has been all over a the Commanders Staff Chaplain- lots of visits to casualties (but thats another story).


----------



## Journeyman (9 Feb 2006)

commo_dude said:
			
		

> What is the suspect baggage your referring too?
> 
> I still don't see how his job as lobbiest 2 yrs ago, relates to now? If he isn't getting anything like kickbacks etc from contractors, then its irrelevant.



While I try to avoid jacking people up for posting on topics well beyond their knowledge base, this is one time I have to call "stay in your lane." 

Politics is ALL about perception. The issue is not kickbacks _per se_, but whether he's deemed too close to his former employers to be _perceived_ as unbiased in any future decisions taken. He lobbied for several different defence industries. In the matter of strategic airlift procurement, for example, his previous association with Airbus will allow for claims of 'politicking' within the competition - - regardless of the reality - - based on his previous, paid, position statements.

While I've enjoyed this lesson in Defence Economics 101, please try and limit your future comments to areas in which you can contribute usefully; while not as pricey as a new C-130J, bandwidth costs money too.


----------



## rifleman (9 Feb 2006)

Being a politican is suspect enough


----------

