# GOFO Musical Chairs... LGen Frances Allen to be first female VCDS / LGen Rouleau shuffled



## ballz (9 Mar 2021)




----------



## MilEME09 (9 Mar 2021)

The fact we go though so many VCDS's is an embarrassment, without more details this sounds political not a military strategic decision.


----------



## McG (9 Mar 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> The fact we go though so many VCDS's is an embarrassment, without more details this sounds political not a military strategic decision.


We may never know.


----------



## MilEME09 (9 Mar 2021)

Full story









						Canada getting first female vice chief of defence staff after military shake-up - National | Globalnews.ca
					

According to an internal military notice of promotions, Lt.-Gen. Mike Rouleau will no longer hold the position and Lt.-Gen. Frances J. Allen will take over the role in his place.




					globalnews.ca


----------



## blacktriangle (9 Mar 2021)

LGen Allen is probably the best thing for the CAF right now. She's an intelligent officer with some unique insights into the future of warfare (Ok, that warfare is here - today) Maybe she's not a pilot, never been a BWK, or had her head sticking out of a hatch in some god forsaken place. And maybe that's exactly why she is the right choice.

A consummate professional. Until I'm proven wrong - glad to see the LGen get the nod.


----------



## daftandbarmy (9 Mar 2021)

ballz said:


> View attachment 64673



Well, nice to finally see some affirmative action, especially on International Women's Day. Way to Virtue Signal!

However, the law of unintended consequences is always tooling around somewhere in the shadows as these two Canadian, female, researchers point out in this HBR article:


Research: Bringing Up Past Injustices Make Majority Groups Defensive​by Ivona Hideg and Anne Wilson

Summary.   

Many organizations and institutions reference past injustices with the intention of making people more sensitive to how historic systems of oppression contribute to present-day inequalities. But can all this attention being paid to shameful historical inequities also have unintended negative consequences? Researchers investigating how to build support for programs that seek to remedy gender discrimination in the labor force discovered that it actually can. After conducting three experiments, they found that invoking past discrimination can threaten men’s social identity and undermine their perceptions of current levels of discrimination, consequently lowering their support for policies meant to ameliorate this situation. However, the researchers also found that focusing on how women’s status has improved over time deflects the threat to men’s social identity and makes them more likely to support present-day employment equity policies.










						Research: Bringing Up Past Injustices Make Majority Groups Defensive
					

Many organizations and institutions reference past injustices with the intention of making people more sensitive to how historic systems of oppression contribute to present-day inequalities. But can all this attention being paid to shameful historical inequities also have unintended negative...




					hbr.org


----------



## hattrick72 (9 Mar 2021)

reveng said:


> LGen Allen is probably the best thing for the CAF right now. She's an intelligent officer with some unique insights into the future of warfare (Ok, that warfare is here - today) Maybe she's not a pilot, never been a BWK, or had her head sticking out of a hatch in some god forsaken place. And maybe that's exactly why she is the right choice.
> 
> A consummate professional. Until I'm proven wrong - glad to see the LGen get the nod.


I wonder why LGen Whitecross left instead of putting her name in the hat for CDS or VCDS.


----------



## Good2Golf (9 Mar 2021)

hattrick72 said:


> I wonder why LGen Whitecross left instead of putting her name in the hat for CDS or VCDS.


That assumes she was eligible/considered/asked.


----------



## OldSolduer (9 Mar 2021)

I don’t know General Rouleau so I will not make comments about him.

It sounds as if he was painted with the same brush as the former and current CDS.
Holier than thou virtue signalling IMO.


----------



## Kilted (9 Mar 2021)

I'm guessing that he wasn't replaced in order to move into the CDS position. I will make another guess that this might have been planned awhile ago, however, I would have thought that they might of held off in till next year because of Macdonald. I'm not sure if the CDS and VCDS have ever been replaced this close together, other then the normal flow of promotions. I wonder if anything has come to light about him. From the sound of things, in the civi world, he could probably make a human rights complaint, because based on the available information, it appears that he lost his job based on his gender.


----------



## Haggis (9 Mar 2021)

hattrick72 said:


> I wonder why LGen Whitecross left instead of putting her name in the hat for CDS or VCDS.


Whitecross turns 58 this year.  Maybe not enough birthdays left for her to do a full term as VCDS then CDS?  Or, maybe the PM is "saving" her for an eventual CDS appointment once the outcome of the MacDonald investigation is dictated (remember the PM's remarks on the on his expectation that the charges against VAdm Norman would lead to a trial?)

Allen is CELE (Air).  My experience working with CELE (Air) officers in the IM Gp was very positive.  Each one I worked with was extremely smart.


----------



## AKa (9 Mar 2021)

Being VCDS seems to be the hardest and most thankless position in the CAF.  The huge span that includes critical corporate and command responsibilities is brutal.  Admiral Zwick apparently looked at the problem and produced an org chart that he felt would address many of the issues, but it hasn't been adopted (yet?).  

I am excited at the prospect of seeing Francis Allen at the helm.  Much as I like Whitecross as a person, I don't think she is up to the role of VCDS.  Her time in ADM(IE) was not a spectacular success.


----------



## Jarnhamar (9 Mar 2021)

AKa said:


> and most thankless position in the CAF.


_Charlie team has entered the chat_


----------



## Navy_Pete (9 Mar 2021)

AKa said:


> Being VCDS seems to be the hardest and most thankless position in the CAF.  The huge span that includes critical corporate and command responsibilities is brutal.  Admiral Zwick apparently looked at the problem and produced an org chart that he felt would address many of the issues, but it hasn't been adopted (yet?).
> 
> I am excited at the prospect of seeing Francis Allen at the helm.  Much as I like Whitecross as a person, I don't think she is up to the role of VCDS.  Her time in ADM(IE) was not a spectacular success.


I think it's great that someone from the engineering side of the world is in place. Never get why the ADM(Mat)/ADM(FIN) stream isn't a natural feeder into VCDS, as all that stuff is their bread and butter. All the operational requirements feed in through their normal chains to that piece, but makes sense that that person in charge of buying/maintaining equipment should have some kind of experience buying/maintaining equipment.


----------



## Journeyman (9 Mar 2021)

Navy_Pete said:


> I think it's great that someone from the engineering side of the world is in place. Never get why the ADM(Mat)/ADM(FIN) stream isn't a natural feeder into VCDS, as all that stuff is their bread and butter. All the operational requirements feed in through their normal chains to that piece, but *makes sense* that that person in charge of buying/maintaining equipment should have some kind of experience buying/maintaining equipment.


Well, you've jinxed that; she won't be there long enough to fix things.


----------



## MilEME09 (9 Mar 2021)

It also possible that LGen Rouleau was shuffled into an adviser to the CDS to put him in a position to be CDS in the future. We don't know how long Admiral Macdonald will be sidelined, these kind of investigations could take years, they can't have an acting CDS forever.


----------



## dapaterson (9 Mar 2021)

Or that the role designated for LGen Rouleau is of sufficient importance that they want his undivided attention on it, and not distracted by the daily (hourly?) tire fires and helmet fires that the VCDS must address.


----------



## ballz (9 Mar 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Or that the role designated for LGen Rouleau is of sufficient importance that they want his undivided attention on it, and not distracted by the daily (hourly?) tire fires and helmet fires that the VCDS must address.



I was wondering if it was a made-up position, that's the way it looks? If it wasn't, was it vacant? Either way, a made-up position or one that would have been unfilled allows Rouleau to move into it and quietly retire in 6 months without any knock-on effects.


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Mar 2021)

It is a new position but Rouleau is huge on the modernization of warfare and CFD, a function that falls within the VCDS' responsibilities. As dapaterson said, this will allow him to concentrate of that (imo, much needed) aspect of the job, without having to run the forces.


----------



## brihard (9 Mar 2021)

Hopefully he's still there in six months.


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Mar 2021)

brihard said:


> Hopefully he's still there in six months.



Unless he is fired, I think this is what he wants.


----------



## Haggis (9 Mar 2021)

brihard said:


> Hopefully he's still there in six months.


The same can be said for the new VCDS.


----------



## Weinie (9 Mar 2021)

brihard said:


> Hopefully he's still there in six months.


I will bet (beers) that he won't be.


----------



## Haggis (9 Mar 2021)

Weinie said:


> I will bet (beers) that he won't be.


But will you bet on where he *will *be?


----------



## Weinie (9 Mar 2021)

Haggis said:


> But will you bet on where he *will *be?


Yup. Not CDS.


----------



## daftandbarmy (9 Mar 2021)

brihard said:


> Hopefully he's still there in six months.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Mar 2021)

reveng said:


> LGen Allen is probably the best thing for the CAF right now. She's an intelligent officer with some unique insights into the future of warfare (Ok, that warfare is here - today) Maybe she's not a pilot, never been a BWK, or had her head sticking out of a hatch in some god forsaken place. And maybe that's exactly why she is the right choice.
> 
> A consummate professional. Until I'm proven wrong - glad to see the LGen get the nod.



So "no operational experience" now = "best choice to lead a nation's Armed Forces.   I'll respectfully say I'm on the complete opposite side of the fence on this one.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Mar 2021)

Kilted said:


> I'm guessing that he wasn't replaced in order to move into the CDS position. I will make another guess that this might have been planned awhile ago, however, I would have thought that they might of held off in till next year because of Macdonald. I'm not sure if the CDS and VCDS have ever been replaced this close together, other then the normal flow of promotions. I wonder if anything has come to light about him. From the sound of things, in the civi world, he could probably make a human rights complaint, because based on the available information, it appears that he lost his job based on his gender.



Flip side;  maybe he was asked and said "ummmm...I'll pass";  didn't want CDS, but not quite ready to retire/step over to the "after the CAF job".


----------



## dapaterson (9 Mar 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> So "no operational experience" now = "best choice to lead a nation's Armed Forces.   I'll respectfully say I'm on the complete opposite side of the fence on this one.


VCDS does not lead the CAF.  VCDS manages.  Knowledge and background in the management of the Force is what the VCDS requires (together with similarly knowledgeable and experienced subordinates).


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Mar 2021)

Great;  then explain the choice of the now-previous VCDS...he strikes me more of the 'operator' side?


----------



## daftandbarmy (9 Mar 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> So "no operational experience" now = "best choice to lead a nation's Armed Forces.   I'll respectfully say I'm on the complete opposite side of the fence on this one.



No operational experience in the classic 'trigger pulling' sense? I doubt that's a big impediment to doing a good job.

Being smart. Now there's a pre-qualification I can get behind!


----------



## dapaterson (9 Mar 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Great;  then explain the choice of the now-previous VCDS...he strikes me more of the 'operator' side?


CANSOF does a significant amount of in-house development and in-house management, generally on more rapid turnaround times than the institutional CAF; they are "special" in many ways. Bringing someone from there to try to accelerate CAF transformation makes sense.  Now dedicating them to that task (and not having to worry about Junior Canadian Rangers, the Departmental Security Program, and the million and one other things the VCDS is responsible for) frees up time to focus on transforming the force.


----------



## brihard (9 Mar 2021)

Sounds like she’s one of our top people in the cyber domain and has done a lot in that realm on her way up. I wouldn’t necessarily read too much into a lack of shiny objects on her shirt if that’s the world she came up in. I get the sense that that’s been an institutional expertise gap, and one that Canada is well served by having represented that close to the top.


----------



## Kilted (9 Mar 2021)

brihard said:


> Sounds like she’s one of our top people in the cyber domain and has done a lot in that realm on her way up. I wouldn’t necessarily read too much into a lack of shiny objects on her shirt if that’s the world she came up in. I get the sense that that’s been an institutional expertise gap, and one that Canada is well served by having represented that close to the top.


I can't find much information on her, but it appears that the only medals she has are the Order of Military Merit (I'm not sure which grade) and the CD.  You would have thought that someone who reached Lt Gen would have at least received a jubilee medal or managed to spend 30 days somewhere.  The Order of Military Merit is an achievement in its self, but how many GO/FO are there who don't have it?


----------



## Navy_Pete (9 Mar 2021)

dapaterson said:


> CANSOF does a significant amount of in-house development and in-house management, generally on more rapid turnaround times than the institutional CAF; they are "special" in many ways. Bringing someone from there to try to accelerate CAF transformation makes sense.  Now dedicating them to that task (and not having to worry about Junior Canadian Rangers, the Departmental Security Program, and the million and one other things the VCDS is responsible for) frees up time to focus on transforming the force.


There are some really interesting support line opportunities over there; high tempo stuff but really interesting stuff where they run it from requirement developments at the way to procurement.

Really hoping General Rouleau is able to do that kind of work; was really impressed by him. Also seems like a good sneaky squirrel tactic to go to ground and get out of the spotlight during the ongoing inquisition.

Getting a good cyber capability in place makes a lot of sense (jinxing it again!) so cautiously optimistic this is a good thing.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Mar 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> No operational experience in the classic 'trigger pulling' sense? I doubt that's a big impediment to doing a good job.
> 
> Being smart. Now there's a pre-qualification I can get behind!



My reply was more of a "generally (ha!) speaking" one, not directed at the VCDS (solely). 

I also understand (vaguely) that the VCDS is the 2 I/C, so to speak...and has to "act as the CDS" in certain times/circumstances.  I think that individual should have relevant operational experience. 

Certainly, being smart / intelligent is crucial...but being smart can't make up for  inability to relate to the 'warfighter'...stuff.  [That's my oar-puller perspective...]


----------



## Eye In The Sky (9 Mar 2021)

Kilted said:


> I can't find much information on her, but it appears that the only medals she has are the Order of Military Merit (I'm not sure which grade) and the CD.  You would have thought that someone who reached Lt Gen would have at least received a jubilee medal or managed to spend 30 days somewhere.  The Order of Military Merit is an achievement in its self, but how many GO/FO are there who don't have it?



I've been going off of this;  I had no knowledge of the VCDS prior to this week/story either.  What mainly jumped out at me was the EA to the VCDS and Dep VCDS positions. 









						Frances J. Allen, Military Representative of Canada to NATO
					






					www.nato.int
				




* I hope someone takes a minute to show the VCDS where the Command Badge properly goes...


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Mar 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> My reply was more of a "generally (ha!) speaking" one, not directed at the VCDS (solely).
> 
> I also understand (vaguely) that the VCDS is the 2 I/C, so to speak...and has to "act as the CDS" in certain times/circumstances.  I think that individual should have relevant operational experience.
> 
> Certainly, being smart / intelligent is crucial...but being smart can't make up for  inability to relate to the 'warfighter'...stuff.  [That's my oar-puller perspective...]



At that level, there are advisors to advise on warfighting stuff.  The more important aspect is being a credible (the definition of credible changes with time - I would argue today credible at least partly means not having big skeletons in the closet) and being able to think strategically and politically. An Air Force CDS probably doesn't know much about Army ops and probably manages (some arguably better than others - that's true with every element) to do the job regardless.


----------



## Weinie (9 Mar 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> Why do yo
> 
> 
> At that level, there are advisors to advise on warfighting stuff.  The more important aspect is being a credible (the definition of credible changes with time - *I would argue today credible at least partly means not having big skeletons in the closet*) and being able to think strategically and politically. An Air Force CDS probably doesn't know much about Army ops and probably manages (some arguably better than others - that's true with every element) to do the job regardless.


Ummmmmmmm...............what?


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Mar 2021)

Weinie said:


> Ummmmmmmm...............what?



I think in today's CAF, having any (not necessarily criminal) past misconduct will hurt your credibility as a military leader, moreso than even 5 years ago.


----------



## Edward Campbell (9 Mar 2021)

I have met LGen Allen, once, I think, many years ago, when I was a director and she was a young officer asking about grad school opportunities if my memory serves. I cannot say I know her at all, but I know a lot of people, including a handful of very senior people, who do know her, well, and all I have heard is that she is very, very bright; hard-working; honest; etc, etc, etc. (BTW, she didn't go to physics/engineering grad school.)


----------



## Weinie (9 Mar 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> I think in today's CAF, having any (not necessarily criminal) past misconduct will hurt your credibility as a military leader, moreso than even 5 years ago.


And would you have said that two months ago? Really?


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Mar 2021)

Weinie said:


> And would you have said that two months ago? Really?


I would have said that what defines being credible changes.  I am just using today’s flavour as an example.


----------



## Weinie (9 Mar 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> I would have said that what defines being credible changes.  I am just using today’s flavour as an example.


#WOKE


----------



## Walt (9 Mar 2021)

Weinie said:


> #WOKE


Why don't we stay on topic??? Personal attacks are unwarranted. We all have opinions and expressions; however, blatant criticism on this forum is not welcomed. Please consider what you are (trying) to convey before you post a reply/message.


----------



## brihard (9 Mar 2021)

Weinie said:


> #WOKE


Is he objectively wrong? Seems that the standards against which senior military leaders are measured have evolved. Certain past misbehaviour or indiscretion is weighted more heavily than it used to be. The times have changed.

You don’t like his opinion; got it. But with CAF senior leadership representing the institution to the GoC and to the public, it doesn’t seem to me that he’s off track.


----------



## Weinie (9 Mar 2021)

brihard said:


> Is he objectively wrong? Seems that the standards against which senior military leaders are measured have evolved. Certain past misbehaviour or indiscretion is weighted more heavily than it used to be. The times have changed.
> 
> You don’t like his opinion; got it. But with CAF senior leadership representing the institution to the GoC and to the public, it doesn’t seem to me *that he’s off track.*


And how long is off track?


----------



## brihard (9 Mar 2021)

Weinie said:


> And how long is off track?


Your question doesn’t make sense, nor does the tone you’re taking with Max.

He opined that not having skeletons in your closet is an aspect of credibility that has increased in importance. Objectively, looking at what has happened to several senior military leaders, and at how many of the troops have responded to this Op Honour debacle, his position seems to be well founded. Simply dismissing him with “#WOKE” is not an argument.


----------



## Weinie (9 Mar 2021)

brihard said:


> Your question doesn’t make sense, nor does the tone you’re taking with Max.
> 
> He opined that not having skeletons in your closet is an aspect of credibility that has increased in importance. Objectively, looking at what has happened to several senior military leaders, and at how many of the troops have responded to this Op Honour debacle, his position seems to be well founded. Simply dismissing him with “#WOKE” is not an argument.



#woke is my comment when someone suddenly postulates that they abhor how senior leadership has failed the military. Max has never ever posted about this before.

And it is really easy to pile on, given the current circumstances. You don't have a fucking clue, other than what you have read in the media, of the veracity of anything that has been said.

You are a cop. Innocent until proven guilty?


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Mar 2021)

Weinie said:


> #woke is my comment when someone suddenly postulates that they abhor how senior leadership has failed the military. Max has never ever posted about this before.



Except I have never said that senior leadership has failed.  All I said is that the conditions defining what credible means change over time.  

If you do not agree that a past free of misconduct is included in today's definition of credible, you can take it up to the highest levels of the institution.


----------



## Weinie (9 Mar 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> Except I have never said that senior leadership has failed.  All I said is that the conditions defining what credible means change over time.
> 
> If you do not agree that a past free of misconduct is included in today's definition of credible, you can take it up to the highest levels of the institution.


Max......seriously.

Do you stand for anything?

OMFG


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Mar 2021)

I think it's time for you to take a break bud. I am sorry I upset so this much.


----------



## MJP (9 Mar 2021)

Weinie said:


> #woke is my comment when someone suddenly postulates that they abhor how senior leadership has failed the military. Max has never ever posted about this before.
> 
> And it is really easy to pile on, given the current circumstances. You don't have a fucking clue, other than what you have read in the media, of the veracity of anything that has been said.
> 
> You are a cop. Innocent until proven guilty.


We can have opinions even dissenting ones and have conversation.  SSM has articulate a position (in fact he has been great in recent topics doing so, where some others have chosen to stray outside of polite conversation), one that is very poignant in highlighting that values and conditions change. This isn't some court of law where we have to reserve rendering an opinion until all the facts are out.  FWIW I am glad that there is more scrutiny as there is a real sense that there is very much a "rules for thee not me" being applied to senior officers for things more junior soldiers would hang for. Real or not the perception that the schism is there exists. 

The next few weeks are going to be very painful for us as an institution but I rather we rip the band aid off and get on with it.  




Weinie said:


> Max......seriously.
> 
> Do you stand for anything?
> 
> OMFG



You are just trolling, go to twitter if you can't hold a conversation.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (9 Mar 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> Except I have never said that senior leadership has failed.  All I said is that the conditions defining what credible means change over time.
> 
> If you do not agree that a past free of misconduct is included in today's definition of credible, you can take it up to the highest levels of the institution.


I would say the problem is NOT the past free of misconduct.....I have been "misconducted" criminally once and "misconducted"several times at my various jobs, but what I see is the real issue is how the machine allowed this to not be corrected via whatever 'misconduct' was required years and years ago.   I always learned and changed from my slaps, its apparent that so many of these folks appear to never have been slapped for things, and now the powerless people are speaking up all at once.  
 Not sure if I articulated that well enough, but in my mind the problem is not so much about those being investigated now, but those who knew yet said and did nothing over the last couple decades.


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Mar 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> I would say the problem is NOT the past free of misconduct.....I have been "misconducted" criminally once and "misconducted"several times at my various jobs, but what I see is the real issue is how the machine allowed this to not be corrected via whatever 'misconduct' was required years and years ago.   I always learned and changed from my slaps, its apparent that so many of these folks appear to never have been slapped for things, and now the powerless people are speaking up all at once.
> Not sure if I articulated that well enough, but in my mind the problem is not so much about those being investigated now, but those who knew yet said and did nothing over the last couple decades.



That is true Bruce. I am wondering, however, how the political crowd and, more importantly, the CAF would react, today, to having a CDS that was charged and found guilty  of misconduct (and rehabilitated) in the past. There is one side that tells me that if someone paid the price, we should move on and another side that tells me that it wouldn't project the right message.


----------



## Weinie (9 Mar 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> I think it's time for you to take a break bud. I am sorry I upset so this much.


Max,

I will break away from this


MJP said:


> We can have opinions even dissenting ones and have conversation.  SSM has articulate a position (in fact he has been great in recent topics doing so, where some others have chosen to stray outside of polite conversation), one that is very poignant in highlighting that values and conditions change. This isn't some court of law where we have to reserve rendering an opinion until all the facts are out.  FWIW I am glad that there is more scrutiny as there is a real sense that there is very much a "rules for thee not me" being applied to senior officers for things more junior soldiers would hang for. Real or not the perception that the schism is there exists.
> 
> The next few weeks are going to be very painful for us as an institution but I rather we rip the band aid off and get on with it.
> 
> ...


Thanks for your post.


----------



## MJP (9 Mar 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> I would say the problem is NOT the past free of misconduct.....I have been "misconducted" criminally once and "misconducted"several times at my various jobs, but what I see is the real issue is how the machine allowed this to not be corrected via whatever 'misconduct' was required years and years ago.   I always learned and changed from my slaps, *its apparent that so many of these folks appear to never have been slapped for things, and now the powerless people are speaking up all at once.
> Not sure if I articulated that well enough, but in my mind the problem is not so much about those being investigated now, but those who knew yet said and did nothing over the last couple decades.*


I think that is the key is people know that they will be heard now, having the courage to speak up is hard even for soldiers as our culture really discourages it. This is not some internal CAF problem, fear of reporting is a well known phenomenon throughout many industries and society writ large. If a victim feels like they won't be listened too or has no power they are reluctant to report. Even the trauma of reporting/testifying is stumbling block. The current environment is probably one of the most open and conducive to reporting likely since we went down the Op H route

I have no doubt that this will be used to grind some imaginary axes....


----------



## brihard (9 Mar 2021)

Weinie said:


> #woke is my comment when someone suddenly postulates that they abhor how senior leadership has failed the military. Max has never ever posted about this before.
> 
> And it is really easy to pile on, given the current circumstances. You don't have a fucking clue, other than what you have read in the media, of the veracity of anything that has been said.
> 
> You are a cop. Innocent until proven guilty?



Indeed, I have no firsthand knowledge, and I do believe in innocent until proven guilty. Though we aren’t even talking criminal here. You’ll note I’ve not opined on the likelihood that any individual or specific set of allegations against any particular officer is true. I am speaking, and I believe Max is speaking, to the broader crisis of confidence that has emerged in CAF senior leadership because of this ugly and unfortunate series of reports and allegations.

I am unable to form my own objective set of beliefs from firsthand or investigative knowledge. With that said, I’m not solely limited to what is said in the media. I also have the informed opinions of those more in the know who I do consider credible, yourself included. In the recent thread alleging issues with COMD MILPERSCOM:


Weinie said:


> Line up. This is one of the allegations that is going to have legs



I know who you are and what you do, so when you say something like that it carries enough weight that, if corroborated by other people that I trust, it’s enough for me to agree there’s maybe smoke and to watch with interest. Nowhere will you see me saying who set the fire, or even if there’s a flame. Of course this is not the first case that has ‘grown legs’ nor is it the second. The number of leaves-on-shoulders implicated in potentially credible allegations of this sort of stuff is enough to cause concern.

As to Max never having had much to say on the subject, the same can be said for many people. I’ve never seen this many key senior officers facing this kind of scrutiny or controversy before in the ‘Op Honour’ bucket. This is a pretty novel set of circumstances and of course raises concern. To have such concerns is fair. To suggest that expectations have changed over time is fair. To suggest that what defines credibility in 2021 differs from in 1995 is fair.

Your reply to me is remarkably hostile for what I though was a civil exchange between a couple of professionals on an ugly but important topic. While I was only ever a Sgt, and a reservist at that, my years in that uniform and as a _very_ minor and utterly inconsequential leader in the profession of arms have instilled in me some pride, and some vested interest in how the institution fares. I have immediate family who are or were senior enough officers too. I care about how they might be seen.

I have no interest in a pointless squabble. So- respectfully, perhaps take a tactical pause here and decide if coming at me like that is warranted. I personally don’t think it was, and I’m a bit surprised and disappointed. But that’s ultimately up to you.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (9 Mar 2021)

I wasn't talking about the victims speaking up...I'm sure many tried and were shut down  It's the ones who knew who need to go even more in my mind.....like the MND must go without question.  The fact he isn't sitting as an independent getting kicked out next election is a pox on every Canadian.


----------



## MJP (9 Mar 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> I wasn't talking about the victims speaking up...I'm sure many tried and were shut down  It's the ones who knew who need to go even more in my mind.....like the MND must go without question.  The fact he isn't sitting as an independent getting kicked out next election is a pox on every Canadian.


Ahh ok I understand now and FWIW the stench on this current situation from that particular area and higher leaves we with less confidence than I had before which I didn't think was possible


----------



## OldSolduer (10 Mar 2021)

Thirty or so years ago - maybe close to 40 a young private in 2 VP did 30 days in the DB in Edmonton. He cleaned his act up, put in the work and in the early 2000s was the RSM of 2VP. 
Would he be considered for any leadership position today? Hard to say.


----------



## FSTO (10 Mar 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> Thirty or so years ago - maybe close to 40 a young private in 2 VP did 30 days in the DB in Edmonton. He cleaned his act up, put in the work and in the early 2000s was the RSM of 2VP.
> Would he be considered for any leadership position today? Hard to say.


Maybe if we used the DB more, there would be the image out there that there are consequences for actions but afterwards there is also a path to redemption. 
Right now there is neither.


----------



## Weinie (10 Mar 2021)

brihard said:


> Indeed, I have no firsthand knowledge, and I do believe in innocent until proven guilty. Though we aren’t even talking criminal here. You’ll note I’ve not opined on the likelihood that any individual or specific set of allegations against any particular officer is true. I am speaking, and I believe Max is speaking, to the broader crisis of confidence that has emerged in CAF senior leadership because of this ugly and unfortunate series of reports and allegations.
> 
> I am unable to form my own objective set of beliefs from firsthand or investigative knowledge. With that said, I’m not solely limited to what is said in the media. I also have the informed opinions of those more in the know who I do consider credible, yourself included. In the recent thread alleging issues with COMD MILPERSCOM:
> 
> ...


Bri, my apologies.


----------



## brihard (10 Mar 2021)

Weinie said:


> Bri, my apologies.


It’s alright, thank you for that. No harm, no foul.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (10 Mar 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> Thirty or so years ago - maybe close to 40 a young private in 2 VP did 30 days in the DB in Edmonton. He cleaned his act up, put in the work and in the early 2000s was the RSM of 2VP.
> Would he be considered for any leadership position today? Hard to say.


I was his assisting officer.  He was a Sgt at the time, came out of DB as a Private, and worked his way back up to being an RSM.  A very impressive man in every sense of the word.


----------



## The Bread Guy (10 Mar 2021)

Speaking of GOFO musical chairs - a bit of ... shuffling ...


> ... the Acting Chief of the Defence Staff announced the 2021 Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) General and Flag Officer (GOFO) senior appointments, promotions, and retirements. General Officers (Canadian Army and the Royal Canadian Air Force) and Flag Officers (Royal Canadian Navy) lead the CAF in defending our country’s values and interests, here at home and abroad. They share the responsibility for the stewardship of the entire institution, and for the profession of arms as a whole.
> 
> Every year permanent and temporary positions are created and removed. This year, the following permanent and temporary GOFO positions have been created to meet CAF operational requirements:
> 
> ...


----------



## OldSolduer (10 Mar 2021)

PPCLI Guy said:


> I was his assisting officer.  He was a Sgt at the time, came out of DB as a Private, and worked his way back up to being an RSM.  A very impressive man in every sense of the word.


He’s not the only one.


----------



## Scott (10 Mar 2021)

Trying to get something off your chest, RSM?


----------



## OldSolduer (10 Mar 2021)

Scott said:


> Trying to get something off your chest, RSM?


Who me? Just saying one can monumentally f3ck up as a junior soldier but reform is always possible


----------



## Haggis (10 Mar 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> Who me? Just saying one can monumentally f3ck up as a junior soldier but reform is always possible


The new Special Advisor to the A/CDS has a conviction on his Conduct Sheet for one of the most common charges laid in the CAF.  He immediately owned up, pled guilty, paid his fine and apologized to his troops.  That's far more than many have done in similar circumstances.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (10 Mar 2021)

_THAT_ is the type of leadership we need in the CAF (at ALL levels).


----------



## SeaKingTacco (10 Mar 2021)

PPCLI Guy said:


> I was his assisting officer.  He was a Sgt at the time, came out of DB as a Private, and worked his way back up to being an RSM.  A very impressive man in every sense of the word.


Over the years, I have had many subordinates who have had “digger time” in the DB in Edmonton. In every single case, they were much better members of the CAF afterwards. Many had addiction issues that were actually addressed in the DB. Others had personal issues that they received counselling for while in the DB.

In my opinion, we are far too quick to release people and should use the DB more, because it actually gets folks attention and fixes their problems- it is not all about yelling, drill and polishing garbage cans. People have, over the years come to misunderstand the role of the DB- it is not about punishment, it is about rehabilitating people. Removing a CO’s ability to sentence folks to detention in the next iteration of the NDA is not going to be a step forward.


----------



## dapaterson (10 Mar 2021)

Individuals who accept responsibility and correct their behaviour are the sort who should be retained (generally).

Those permitted to act with impunity who don't "seek and accept responsibility", less so.


----------



## MJP (10 Mar 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Over the years, I have had many subordinates who have had “digger time” in the DB in Edmonton. In every single case, they were much better members of the CAF afterwards. Many had addiction issues that were actually addressed in the DB. Others had personal issues that they received counselling for while in the DB.
> 
> In my opinion, we are far too quick to release people and should use the DB more, because it actually gets folks attention and fixes their problems- it is not all about yelling, drill and polishing garbage cans. People have, over the years come to misunderstand the role of the DB- it is not about punishment, it is about rehabilitating people. Removing a CO’s ability to sentence folks to detention in the next iteration of the NDA is not going to be a step forward.


DB can be a great tool but we are also not here to solve every soldier's issues especially complex psychosocial issues. Nor should we accept severe conduct issues as one offs and allow people to go on some form of remedial measure and carry one.

There is a line between Johnny going to DB cause he is a bit of a rule breaker that ignored an order for the final time and the folks that are commiting NDA offences because of issues or there are other severe conduct issues at play.  Having dealt with a few recently (including a one that went to DB), we make every effort to help soldiers with resources that most people don't have access to, and some to their credit do better but many don't succeed.  If they don't improve we need to stop thinking that we need to keep everyone, I wish it was actually a bit easier of a process to get rid of folks. Not CO level delegations just a better streamlined DMCA 2 process.


I don't think you are saying that we are trying to keep everyone, rather you are pointing out that one of our historical tools has potential to assist some members in overcoming their issues. For a number of reasons usage of DB has declined to the point that it is essentially empty most of the time and I don't see it changing anytime in the near or distance future.  In terms of context to this particular topic, I think the larger issue is past conduct that we as an institution have allowed over the years is coming home to roost. Some of them may have have breached NDA but the larger issue is that we allowed this conduct to happen (either by virtue of culture, omission, ignorance or  pick your poison) and that conduct has tainted the institution. I don't think more DB would solve this issue considering that many of these people in the news currently matriculated when DB was used a more. Rather our culture has allowed this conduct to flourish and the CAF has not kept up with a changing society and societal norms and we have to deal with our inaction.

I am not blind to the fact that we are being held to a higher standard than many others (including some of our political masters) so there is a bit of hypocrisy at play.


----------



## OldSolduer (11 Mar 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Over the years, I have had many subordinates who have had “digger time” in the DB in Edmonton. In every single case, they were much better members of the CAF afterwards. Many had addiction issues that were actually addressed in the DB. Others had personal issues that they received counselling for while in the DB.
> 
> In my opinion, we are far too quick to release people and should use the DB more, because it actually gets folks attention and fixes their problems- it is not all about yelling, drill and polishing garbage cans. People have, over the years come to misunderstand the role of the DB- it is not about punishment, it is about rehabilitating people. Removing a CO’s ability to sentence folks to detention in the next iteration of the NDA is not going to be a step forward.


The highlighted words are missing in the penal system in Canada. We don't rehab anyone - if we do its by sheer luck. 

"Nothing ever goes as planned and if it does its purely accidental"


----------



## OceanBonfire (14 May 2021)

Additions and changes announced today:






						Acting Chief of the Defence Staff announces additional 2021 Canadian Armed Forces General and Flag Officer senior promotions and appointments - Canada.ca
					

Lieutenant-General Wayne Eyre, Acting Chief of the Defence Staff, has announced additions to the list of Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) General and Flag Officer senior appointments and promotions for 2021. These promotions and appointments support recent decisions on military institutional initiatives.




					www.canada.ca


----------



## Jarnhamar (14 May 2021)

OceanBonfire said:


> Additions and changes announced today:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm not suggesting these senior appointments aren't important information.. but I get the feeling like the entire CAF is waiting for an update on Jon Vance. And Admiral McDonald. And the Major/s from Iraq that were repatriated. And the head of the intelligence school. And what's happening with General Dawe. And so on.


----------



## OldSolduer (14 May 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> I'm not suggesting these senior appointments aren't important information.. but I get the feeling like the entire CAF is waiting for an update on Jon Vance. And Admiral McDonald. And the Major/s from Iraq that were repatriated. And the head of the intelligence school. And what's happening with General Dawe. And so on.


I'd worry less about him and a lot more about the aforementioned GOFOs


----------



## OceanBonfire (29 Jun 2021)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1409613122579668994




__ https://www.facebook.com/CanadianForces/photos/a.1524483394445524/3237226016504578
			









						Lieutenant-General Allen assumes the role of the Vice Chief of the Defence Staff - Canada.ca
					

Today, Lieutenant-General Frances Allen assumed the responsibilities of the Vice Chief of the Defence Staff (VCDS) in an assumption of command ceremony which took place at National Defence Headquarters Carling.




					www.canada.ca


----------

