# MacKay vs O'Connor as MND (merged)



## MarkOttawa (13 Mar 2007)

Firing O'Connor doesn't appear in the script (Shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the Copyright Act.)
_Globe and Mail_, By JOHN IBBITSON, March 13
http://www.rbcinvest.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/PEstory/LAC/20070313/IBBITSON13/Columnists/columnists/columnistsNational/4/4/4/



> Gordon O'Connor is not going to be fired. It doesn't fit the narrative.
> 
> When the House of Commons resumes next week, Canada's Minister of Defence will have to offer an abject apology for misleading it.
> 
> ...



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## GAP (13 Mar 2007)

You are right, he can't NOT support him until he can change him without controversy....who was the member from Edmonton everyone thought should have been the defense minister? Is he up to it? Is he more adept politically, or is he focused like Hillier?


----------



## MarkOttawa (13 Mar 2007)

GAP: Lt.-Col. (ret'd) Laurie Hawn, former fighter pilot (defeated Landslide Annie McLellan).
http://www.lauriehawnmp.ca/
http://www.conservative.ca/?tpid=1979&section_copy_id=7862&section_id=1051&linkTo=true&districtId=1737

Ran his own blog, _Strong and Free_, until the election was called.
http://strongandfree.blogspot.com/

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## GAP (8 May 2007)

O'Connor should stay, poll majority says
Canadians give defence minister benefit of doubt in alleged mistreatment of detainees: pollster
Jack Aubry, The Ottawa Citizen Published: Monday, May 07, 2007
Article Link

The majority of Canadians believe Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor should hang on to his cabinet post despite the furore over the treatment of detainees in Afghanistan, partly because the minister should not be expected to know everything that happens to prisoners after they are handed over to Afghan officials.

A new Ipsos Reid poll, conducted exclusively for CanWest News Service and Global National, found 53 per cent of Canadians believe it is unfair for opposition parties to call for Mr. O'Connor to step down as they have been doing almost every day recently in the House of Commons. On the other hand, 36 per cent of Canadians believe Mr. O'Connor has been negligent and should have been monitoring what was happening to the detainees after they were turned over to Afghan officials.

The Harper government has been under steady siege in the Commons since allegations surfaced in late April that as many as 30 prisoners transferred by Canadians may have been abused.
More on link


----------



## Edward Campbell (11 May 2007)

Rather than start another new thread ....

I don't know if this is just _”a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing”_ or if it is the first stirrings of an organized revolt against Minister O'Connor for his inept handing of questions in Parliament or, quite likely, it is just part of the ongoing journalistic attack on O'Connor.  In any event, here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act is a strange story from today's _Globe and Mail_:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20070511.OCONNOR11/TPStory/TPNational/Politics/


> POLITICS: DEFENCE MINISTER UNDER FIRE
> 
> O'Connor organizer quits over 'corruption from the bottom'
> 
> ...



A few points:

•	I believe Mr. Dorion made a few appearances on Army.ca a couple of years ago to support Mr. O'Connor when some members – me included – attacked him for his duties as opposition defence critic and, later, as a candidate.

•	This is not, necessarily, a tempest in a teapot.  Mr. Dorion is correct to note than that even 97¢ packs of gum can bring discredit upon politicians.

•	On the other hand, the last paragraph may say it all.  Some (many? most?) journalists detest Mr. O'Connor and they will rake up any muck, however incidental, to try to damage his reputation.


----------



## observor 69 (3 Aug 2007)

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070803/cabinet_shuffle_070803/20070803?hub=Canada

Earlier, cabinet ministers were told not to leave the country after Aug. 27, but that date has been moved up to Aug. 13, Taber told CTV's Canada AM on Friday from Charlottetown.

Harper didn't confirm he is considering a cabinet shuffle, but didn't rule it out as an option when speaking to reporters on Thursday.

"Obviously, we'll have to make a decision on that before we reach the fall session, one way or the other,'' Harper said in response to a question about cabinet changes.

"And you can anticipate we'll make our decisions on that, one way or another, fairly shortly.''

Taber said that's the clearest hint yet that Harper may be considering some changes.

"I've never heard him be so expansive when he was answering a question about a cabinet shuffle," Taber said.

There have been rumours for months that Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor could be transferred out of the weighty portfolio. 

O'Connor has stirred controversy with his comments about the treatment of suspected Taliban detainees in Afghan prisons and funding for the funerals of military personnel. If he is shifted, others are likely to move as well.


"When you shuffle a senior minister such as himself, this creates a domino effect. We're hearing this cabinet shuffle could be as big as half of Mr. Harper's 31-member cabinet," Taber said. 


"We're hearing Maxime Bernier, industry minister; Vic Toews, treasury board; Stockwell Day, public safety minister -- and he's the one people they are thinking could move into defence." 

The caucus meeting -- the first since Parliament broke in June, was supposed to wrap up Friday morning with a final meeting, but ministers were sent home early for the long weekend


----------



## Remius (6 Aug 2007)

Sunday's Citizen was saying Jim Prentice for MND.


----------



## Exarecr (6 Aug 2007)

Are we the only country that places those with the least amount of information in positions where obvious experience in the field would be logical. We wouldn't put a truck driver in charge of the Medical Assn.,or place a waitress as the Teachers Federation head?. Yet nobody seems perplexed when a lawyer or worse,a political appointee takes over as Minister of National Defence. Conner and the Harper Government have become poll freaks .Makes me think of Mr. Dithers and the Liberal mess they replaced.Sadly, there still is no leadership in Ottawa,just a strange brew called Liberal Lite.


----------



## Remius (6 Aug 2007)

You need someone with experience yes.  Political experience.  The CDS is the guy with the field experience.  The MND has to be able to represent the military at Cabinet and be able to represent that role in the House of Commons.  If he has a military background great but not necessary.  O'Connor has shown consistently that he isn't up to the task, making one goof up after another.  Replacing him is long over due.


----------



## Bane (6 Aug 2007)

"The state that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools." Thucydides.


----------



## geo (6 Aug 2007)

FWIW, Bill Graham had the makings of a great MND - though he had no military service behind his belt, he had sound jugement and did a good job of communicating the military's need to the Gov't.

Unfortunately, Mr O'Connor suffers from "foot in mouth" disease.


----------



## observor 69 (6 Aug 2007)

geo said:
			
		

> FWIW, Bill Graham had the makings of a great MND - though he had no military service behind his belt, he had sound judgement and did a good job of communicating the military's need to the Gov't.
> 
> Unfortunately, Mr O'Connor suffers from "foot in mouth" disease.



And the disease keeps reoccurring.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (12 Aug 2007)

geo said:
			
		

> FWIW, Bill Graham had the makings of a great MND - though he had no military service behind his belt, he had sound jugement and did a good job of communicating the military's need to the Gov't.
> 
> Unfortunately, Mr O'Connor suffers from "foot in mouth" disease.



He did look out of place surrounded by all those Liberals. had he crossed the floor, I would support it.


----------



## geo (12 Aug 2007)

Ummm - my post was not meant to be political - it was only to point out that a good politician (Oxymoron?) holding the defence portfolio, does not have to have military service in his portfolio.  A sound jugement, paired to a knowledgeable staff (Esp the CDS) is what is required...

Graham & Hillier were an effective combination, O'Connor & Hillier weren't


----------



## newfin (12 Aug 2007)

O'Connor has not been all that bad. He may have stuck his foot in his mouth a few times but look at how often he has had a microphone in his face.  I don't see too many other ministers on TV as often except for a few, Baird, McKay, Flaherty, the PM.  O'Connor has been in charge of spending a huge amount of money and there are certain programs he has helped push through very quickly.  A lot of gear has been either purchased or is about to be on his watch.  We all know the list of items.  He takes his job very seriously and I think that he has been a champion for military in cabinet.  Never in my life time has there been a trio for the military like Harper, O'Connor and Hillier.  These guys are making things happen.  Long, long overdue kit is being purchased and they are committing this country to new equipment, which will allow new capabilities that would have never taken place under the Liberals.  C-17, AOP/V, Leopard II, Arctic Warfare Centre, Naval Station Nanisivik.

And as for him being an embarrassment to the government, I don't buy it.  Why?  Because most of the public just does not care a rats corpse about the Canadian Armed Forces.  They can't tell you the MND's name, they can't tell you what arrived in Abbotsford yesterday, or what a Leopard 2A6M is, or a what a  C-130J is, or where Kandahar is, or what you would use an AOP/V for etc....  The public just could not care less.  We do, that's why we're here.  But they don't.  So, how could O'Connor be bringing down the fortunes of the government?

I think he should stay where he is and somene in Ottawa should pay a spin doctor somewhere to get him some badly needed political grooming.  Keep him away from the tv cameras and the reporters, and let him keep working like a pitt bull on behalf of the military and the public.  I hope Harper does not cave into the press and sack O'Connor.  It's the media that has created this frenzy, the public hasn't really noticed anything at all.

Can you imagine two average people standing around the water cooler talking about the public rift between O'Connor and Hillier and how shocked they are that the PM can let such a disgrace continue for another moment?  Not likely.  They're much more interested in daycare, the price of gas and the new tv fall line-up.


----------



## observor 69 (12 Aug 2007)

Sounds about right newfin.  But O'Connors fate is probably all ready sealed.


----------



## SiG_22_Qc (13 Aug 2007)

We should do a poll about: do you think the poll companies help democracy or hinders it?


----------



## geo (13 Aug 2007)

Hinder!


----------



## retiredgrunt45 (14 Aug 2007)

We'll all find out later today about Mr. O'Conner's fate, once the PM is done rearranging his wardrobe, eh I mean cabinet. 



> PM's cabinet shuffle.
> 
> Will you please all stand up and take one step over to the next chair on your left. Now, whatever it reads on that chair infront of you, is now your new job, congratulations.
> 
> ...


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (14 Aug 2007)

Speculation piece on CTV last night said OConner, Mackay and Flaherty to get shuffled and Prentice likely to get a more high profile portfolio. I wonder why Laurie Hawn wouldn't be considered for MND?


----------



## geo (14 Aug 2007)

IN HOC SIGNO said:
			
		

> Speculation piece on CTV last night said OConner, Mackay and Flaherty to get shuffled and Prentice likely to get a more high profile portfolio. I wonder why Laurie Hawn wouldn't be considered for MND?


Other than the fact that he does have a service (air) background, why would he rate over others?
A good MND to back up the CDS (and vice versa) is what we need.


----------



## Strike (14 Aug 2007)

Although I agree that those taking up ministerial positions should have some experience in the field, at times this can be a hindrance.  In the case of an MND, yes mil experience can be considered and asset.  However, because of the CF's structure wrt the CDS, this can get in the way.  If you get an MND with too much experience you run the risk of he and the CDS butting heads over how things should be run.  Just because they were run a certain way when the MND was in does not necessarily mean that same method would work today or is even appropriate.

I'm not saying this is the case between the current MND and CDS.  I've never worked closely with either, and one would have to see them work on issues together quite often to have the ability to come to that conclusion.  However, it does make one think when talking about who should be MND.

Provided the CDS is a strong person with a strong personality who can get their ideas through to the MND, then the Minister shouldn't need to have a whole bunch of (if any) military experience.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (14 Aug 2007)

I was listening to Lewis McKenzie speak about the C-17, he did a good job, mentioning how we could have used it to fly the DART team straight to Sri-Lanka instead of mucking about as we did. He is an excellent public speaker and the press like him a lot. He also said that putting aside any comments in the media that if you look at O'Connor record in MND, it was very impressive how he has been able to get the contracts that he did and so quickly. How about a shared position? LM doing the speaking and O'Connor doing the heavy lifting?


----------



## geo (14 Aug 2007)

Colin P said:
			
		

> He also said that putting aside any comments in the media that if you look at O'Connor record in MND, it was very impressive how he has been able to get the contracts that he did and so quickly.



The impressive record will have to be marked with an "asterisk"... having bent all the rules to deliver the goods.
I don't dissagree with the delivered goods but, when considering that the current gov't, as the opposition, didn't help the process while it was 1st tabled... the methods aren't quite as satisfactory as 1st seen.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (14 Aug 2007)

The way the government is currently set up, you have to bend the rules for anything to happen. We are currently 6 months through a process to hire someone for a 1 year postion that has 6 months left in it.  :


----------



## Jaydub (14 Aug 2007)

It's just been anncounced...  Peter MacKay to replace Gordon O'Connor.



> O'Connor dropped from Defence
> BRODIE FENLON AND JANE TABER
> 
> Globe and Mail Update
> ...



http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070814.wnewcabinet0814/BNStory/National/home


----------



## stfx_monty (14 Aug 2007)

I like the move. Rightly or wrongly O'Connor was taking too much flak. MacKay has a lot of experience and his own power base so he should be a good fit. 

I would think, however, that this means Hillier is gone if the Liberals regain power. A CDS who can unseat a MND can't be that desirable.


----------



## Jaydub (14 Aug 2007)

I like Peter Mackay.  He was my first choice to replace O'Connor.

I think Gordon O'Connor did a fairly good job.  I wish him good luck as Minister of Revenue.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (14 Aug 2007)

stfx_monty said:
			
		

> I like the move. Rightly or wrongly O'Connor was taking too much flak. MacKay has a lot of experience and his own power base so he should be a good fit.
> 
> I would think, however, that this means Hillier is gone if the Liberals regain power. A CDS who can unseat a MND can't be that desirable.



 It's a big if at this point for the Libs to get back in. Interviewed last night on CTV, about a possible cabinet shuffle, all S. Dion could do was spout anti-American slogans and say that Harper et al are mini-Bushites.....is this really going to appeal to a majority of Canadians? The man looked a fool to me.


----------



## geo (14 Aug 2007)

Ahhhh, the joys of a minority gov't


----------



## 3rd Herd (14 Aug 2007)

I read overall the Quebec vote:

Mr. Bernier's appointment from Industry to Foreign Affairs is seen by insiders as part of a larger emphasis by Mr. Harper on global economic productivity.

Mr. Bernier, 44, was instrumental in outlining the new softwood lumber agreement with the United States, and helped launch new Conservative attack ads against the Liberals.

It's a major step up on to the world stage for the member from Beauce, Que., who entered federal politics less than two years ago.

- Bev Oda has been demoted from Heritage to Minister of International Co-operation-Not bilingul, had issues giving money to Quebec in regard to various Hertiage and Social events, sponsorship anyone.

- Josée Verner moves from International Co-operation to Heritage.-see above

-But with only 14 women in his caucus, Mr. Harper has struggled to offset the gender gap at the cabinet table.- What happened to the "best person"

As for O'Conner that was a done deal.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (14 Aug 2007)

Ruxted thanks Mr. O'Connor.
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/65184.0.html


----------



## Donut (14 Aug 2007)

stfx_monty said:
			
		

> I like the move. Rightly or wrongly O'Connor was taking too much flak. MacKay has a lot of experience and his own power base so he should be a good fit.
> 
> I would think, however, that this means Hillier is gone if the Liberals regain power. A CDS who can unseat a MND can't be that desirable.



In what way did Gen Hillier "unseat" O'Connor?  Media spin and Mister O'Connor's foot in mouth disorder did it...the man did a great job, 22 Billion in needed kit, the largest output since WWII.

Keep in mind Hillier was brought into that position under a Lib government...one of the best decisions I think they in my opinion.

PS  As Ruxted said!


----------



## geo (14 Aug 2007)

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070814/harper_cabinet_070814/20070814?hub=TopStories



> Maxime Bernier, Peter MacKay and Jim Prentice have emerged as big winners in Prime Minister Stephen Harper's cabinet shuffle.
> 
> Bernier, a Quebec MP first elected in 2006, moves from industry to foreign affairs. He replaces MacKay, from Nova Scotia, who becomes defence minister.
> 
> ...




Well, read em and weep.  

Gordon O'Connor is now the Revenue Minister..... ahhh.... one of ours, reaching into my pocket to get a share of my earnings
Peter Mackay as our new boss.... As a maritimer himself, the CDS shouldn't have too much trouble with the accent


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (14 Aug 2007)

I think Peter Mackay will do a good job. It's funny though under the Libs the MND post was always looked on as the kiss of death. I wonder if M. Harper is looking to eliminate the competition?


----------



## FSTO (14 Aug 2007)

IN HOC SIGNO said:
			
		

> I think Peter Mackay will do a good job. It's funny though under the Libs the MND post was always looked on as the kiss of death. I wonder if M. Harper is looking to eliminate the competition?



With no facts to back me up, only a gut feeling, I do not think that Peter McKay is too much of a competition to the PM.


----------



## Jaydub (14 Aug 2007)

IN HOC SIGNO said:
			
		

> I think Peter Mackay will do a good job. It's funny though under the Libs the MND post was always looked on as the kiss of death. I wonder if M. Harper is looking to eliminate the competition?



That's an interesting theory.  I've never thought about it that way.  

I don't think it's the case though.


----------



## tree hugger (14 Aug 2007)

Peter McKay is still a young man, and this is a big shot for him.  He'll have a shot for PM someday.  I have faith he'll do a good job in this spot, he's a good NS boy!

edit - still working on my first language skills...


----------



## GAP (14 Aug 2007)

Peter MacKay was a nimby in Foreign Affairs....I do not look favorably at him in Defense....


----------



## Shadowolf (14 Aug 2007)

I think McKay is smart enough to listen to Hillier, powerful enough to pull in more kit for the troops, and charismatic enough to avoid alot of the 'Foot in Mouth' problems O'Connor suffered from.   I think its a great move, as O'Connor took alot of the flak from various Afghanistan issues and then moved on (bit of a scapegoat move), leaving McKay and Hillier free and clear to do their jobs.


----------



## 3rd Herd (14 Aug 2007)

Shadowolf said:
			
		

> I think McKay is smart enough to listen to Hillier, powerful enough to pull in more kit for the troops, and charismatic enough to avoid alot of the 'Foot in Mouth'  problems O'Connor suffered from.   I think its a great move, as O'Connor took alot of the flak from various Afghanistan issues and then moved on (bit of a scapegoat move), leaving McKay and Hillier free and clear to do their jobs.



No he was not smart enough to have avoided other physically related problems with certain "Belinda"


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (14 Aug 2007)

Yup, it will take a while for me to totally forget [forgive?] the public moping he did "After Belinda"[ hereafter known as AB].


----------



## Shadowolf (14 Aug 2007)

*My opinion is* Belinda is nothing but a spoiled rich girl looking for power, whether through her current boyfriend or by buying her way into the top echelon of whatever she thinks the party of the day is.   And Peter McKay's comment relating her to a certain animal companion.... he squirmed his way out of that without too much trouble.  

Watch and shoot on his performance, I guess.


----------



## observor 69 (14 Aug 2007)

I can't see the appointment of Mackay making any change in the Harper government's policy toward Afghanistan.
Whether MacKay can sell the policy better or more successfully than O'Connor remains to be seen.
As Min. of Foreign Affairs MacKay already was deeply involved in the Afghanistan issue, meeting NATO partners and frequent visits to Afghanistan.
His french is so so according to the media so his affect on Quebec's support of the mission in Afghan is doubtful.
Bottom line ....status quo.


----------



## stegner (14 Aug 2007)

Not wanting to dimish Gordon O'Connor, but did he not have the luxury of coming in at the right time?  Were the acquisitions entirely his doing or were they merely inevitable?  Would even a Liberal government made these purchases?  

By the way,  Peter Mackay used to work for the German arms manufacturer Thyssen Henschel in Germany.  http://www.cbc.ca/canadavotes/riding/013/  I believe his father Elmer Mackay along with Karlheinz Schreiber attempted to get a Thyssen factory built in Canada.


----------



## George Wallace (14 Aug 2007)

stegner said:
			
		

> By the way,  Peter Mackay used to work for the German arms manufacturer Thyssen Henschel in Germany.  http://www.cbc.ca/canadavotes/riding/013/



So?  What company or job have you held?  What will you say about it, should you enter politics later in life?




			
				stegner said:
			
		

> I believe his father Elmer Mackay along with Karlheinz Schreiber attempted to get a Thyssen factory built in Canada.



His father was the MP for that Riding as stated in the article:  





> PC Elmer MacKay, Peter MacKay's father, won the 1971 byelection and then won four general elections. He was appointed minister of regional economic expansion in the Joe Clark government and resigned in 1983 to create a vacancy for new Tory Leader Brian Mulroney.
> 
> Elmer MacKay won again in 1984 and 1988. He served as solicitor general, minister of national revenue, minister of public works, minister responsible for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency and minister responsible for Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp.



What member of Parliament hasn't tried to get jobs created in his Riding?


----------



## stegner (14 Aug 2007)

I am not saying it is a bad thing- in fact it is good it will help him understand the procurement process.  Good on his father too for trying to get a factory also.  Never hurts to have a defence minister that speaks german.


----------



## GUNS (14 Aug 2007)

O'Connor was in the right position at the wrong time.

A nonmilitary MND is a good mix with a CDS such as Hillier.
The MND would have to rely on the CDS to put current military deployments into perspective.

A ex-military MND(General to boot), is not a good mix in my opinion.
As all soldiers know, once a soldier, always a soldier.
O'Connor may have had a hard time separating his military past with his political future.
Give the man credit, the CF is far better off now than years ago.

As much as I respect the man and what he has done for the CF.
Image is everything in politics,
O'Connor was and will always be just a soldier.
IMHO.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (14 Aug 2007)

GUNS said:
			
		

> O'Connor was and will always be just a soldier.
> IMHO.



Which is much more a compliment than it sounds...............


----------



## Cloud Cover (14 Aug 2007)

3rd Herd said:
			
		

> I read overall the Quebec vote:
> 
> Mr. Bernier's appointment from Industry to Foreign Affairs is seen by insiders as part of a larger emphasis by Mr. Harper on global economic productivity.
> 
> ...



Inside scoop on Bernier is that he was tagged on the inside as "problem" minister by CSIS, the RCMP and the CSE. Citing privacy concerns, he has been holding up any progress on the lawful access (internet intercept) legislation in Canada because the industries tasked to implement it fell under his portfolio. Look for new lawful access legislation to come this fall from the government. The bill reintroduced by Marlene Jennings as part of Dion's law enforcement strategy caught Harper and Day by surprise and embarrassed the government by making them look like they were protecting online perversion.


----------



## Bigmac (14 Aug 2007)

I think Mr O'Connor did a good job as MoD. It is probably the most difficult seat to hold today considering Canada's role in Afghanistan and renewed spending on defense. Unfortunately he just didn't have the political savvy to deal with the negative media and the opposition party members. I agree that Mr Mackay has a little more political backbone but I hope he also listens to the advice from the CDS on military matters. My 2 cents.


----------



## GUNS (14 Aug 2007)

Thank you for saying that.
After I re-read what I posted, I was worried that it may be taken the wrong way.
Soldiers are soldiers regardless of rank.





			
				Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Which is much more a compliment than it sounds...............


----------



## retiredgrunt45 (14 Aug 2007)

Mr. O'Connor did a fairly good job, I give him the biggest credit for procurring much needed new kit for the troops. We're he lacks is political savvy or a political tongue so to speak. If you watch him speaking with the press, he's not a smooth speaker like Mr. McKay. He tends to ramble and that's were he made his biggest blunders, "foot in the mouth" so to speak.

Mr. McKay is a pretty smooth character, yet again he's been bred and raised in a political family, so i think it just comes naturally to him. He will make a very good MND and I think he and General Hillier will compliment each other very well.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (14 Aug 2007)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> Inside scoop on Bernier is that he was tagged on the inside as "problem" minister by CSIS, the RCMP and the CSE. Citing privacy concerns, he has been holding up any progress on the lawful access (internet intercept) legislation in Canada because the industries tasked to implement it fell under his portfolio. Look for new lawful access legislation to come this fall from the government. The bill reintroduced by Marlene Jennings as part of Dion's law enforcement strategy caught Harper and Day by surprise and embarrassed the government by making them look like they were protecting online perversion.



um...whose inside scoop?


----------



## Quag (14 Aug 2007)

retiredgrunt45 said:
			
		

> Mr. O'Connor did a fairly good job, I give him the biggest credit for procurring much needed new kit for the troops. We're he lacks is political savvy or a political tongue so to speak. If you watch him speaking with the press, he's not a smooth speaker like Mr. McKay. He tends to ramble and that's were he made his biggest blunders, "foot in the mouth" so to speak.
> 
> Mr. McKay is a pretty smooth character, yet again he's been bred and raised in a political family, so i think it just comes naturally to him. He will make a very good MND and I think he and General Hillier will compliment each other very well.



+1 RetiredGrunt.

As experienced as Mr. O'Connor was, what the public needs is a smooth talking, articulate person.  Mr. McKay offers this.  It will be interesting to see if Mr. McKay can transform the public's image and beliefs of the mission in Afghanistan better than Mr. O'Connor's.

All the best Mr. McKay, I stand behind you!


----------



## GAP (14 Aug 2007)

Boy CBC and CTV are sure dissing O'Connor.....more of their agenda stuff


----------



## Cloud Cover (14 Aug 2007)

IN HOC SIGNO said:
			
		

> um...whose inside scoop?



Lobbyists ...


----------



## DualCore (14 Aug 2007)

O'Connor did nothing wrong, but he did not have the cheerful enthusiastic personality to convince the half-wit pencil-neck info-tainers that they should drop the Paris Hilton story, and the "St Pierre the Divine" version of peacekeeping, and spend some time and money understanding what is a Canadian soldier, and what they doing in Afghanistan.   

MacKay is not a genius in such matters, but whether dealing with the morons at the defense committee asking why a Leopard tank can't be cut into a dozen pieces and delivered to Afghanistan on Bombardier regional jets, or talking to analysts or citizens, etc., he can tell a few jokes and construct his comments into something that they may understand, rather the O'Connor's habit of dismissing the questions and advising that they contact Foreign Affairs or Treasury Board, or ....

MacKay might even have the ability to make speeches that are as media-savvy as Hillier, and not lead to a constitutional crisis every time Hillier hits upon a good sound-bite, because the media half-wits consider a snappy sound-bite and affront to the parliamentary system.   Hillier and MacKay can both speak, and people can debate it, and Harper will make the decisions -- good news all around.


----------



## STONEY (15 Aug 2007)

I eagerly await to see how Mackay does in the job. For those who don't live in NS and know of his stand on the Atlantic Accord he may not be very popular here and would have difficulty getting re-elected as he is seen by many to be a traitor to his home province. He has more loyalty to the Party Line than to the people whom he represents. O'conner didn't suffer fools easily hence his problems with the media. Most journalists seem to have passed with flying colors their stupid questions 101 class.

cheers


----------



## DirtyDog (15 Aug 2007)

GUNS said:
			
		

> O'Connor was in the right position at the wrong time.
> 
> A nonmilitary MND is a good mix with a CDS such as Hillier.
> The MND would have to rely on the CDS to put current military deployments into perspective.
> ...



Yes, but having an ex-CF member in power as MND is relatively good for us (the soldiers) just not particularily for his political career.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (15 Aug 2007)

STONEY said:
			
		

> I eagerly await to see how Mackay does in the job. For those who don't live in NS and know of his stand on the Atlantic Accord he may not be very popular here and would have difficulty getting re-elected as he is seen by many to be a traitor to his home province.
> cheers



Pretty sure he is elected as a *FEDERAL* MP, vice a provincial one.  As to comments about "traitorous" stance on the Atlantic Accords, clearly you have attended the same classes as the journalists that you just derided...or are content to form your opinions on the issue based on the rhetoric of self-serving provincial politicians.

Dave


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (15 Aug 2007)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Pretty sure he is elected as a *FEDERAL* MP, vice a provincial one.  As to comments about "traitorous" stance on the Atlantic Accords, clearly you have attended the same classes as the journalists that you just derided...or are content to form your opinions on the issue based on the rhetoric of self-serving provincial politicians.
> 
> Dave



Exactly. As to getting re-elected I don't think he'll have any trouble there. the Liberals are not running a candidate as they agreed to let Elizabeth MAY run there un opposed by a Lib and the NDP has as much likelihood of winning in a Tory blue riding as does a Marxist Communist. I think you really should do your homework before you make such outlandish statements.


----------



## 3rd Herd (15 Aug 2007)

Interesting historical comparison:

""It's not quite a General MacArthur problem, but it's the Canadian equivalent because you have a popular figure with the public, popular with the troops, who has become the spokesman on defence policy," said Carleton University professor Fen Hampson, director of the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs.

U.S. president Harry Truman famously dismissed the outspoken Gen. Douglas MacArthur during the Korean War after he ignored orders to refrain from political statements and called for an attack on China unless Communist forces laid down their arms.

While nobody is expecting Gen. Hillier to be shown the door, Prime Minister Stephen Harper is probably anxious to avoid a continuation of the conflicting sound bites emanating from his Defence Minister and his Chief of Defence Staff. "Hillier's triumph, MacKay's challenge
ALAN FREEMAN  August 15, 2007 http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20070815.HILLIER15/TPStory/National


----------



## pbi (15 Aug 2007)

I,for one, do not bemoan the departure of Mr O'Connor for one moment. IMHO he was the wrong man for the job under our political system. Unlike the US system in which members of Cabinet do not need to hold elected office, but can be selected from appropriate civilian expertise fields (or election contribution sources, however you want to look at it...), our Ministers must be politicians first. They must be politically savvy and have credibility with the PM. The success of their Depts will rise and fall based largely on that and their ability to work the party power machine in the Battle of the Ministries. Whether or not they actually know anything about Fishery, or Trade, or Defence is really secondary. 

Mr O'Connor was, to put it mildly, an inept politician on the national stage.  He was, IMHO, a perfect example of "be careful what you wish for": for years we all sat around the mess moaning about not having an MND with any military experience. Well-we finally got one.  Too bad his experience was years out of date, and his conceptions (if they were actually his...) for a National Defense Policy were seemingly quite out of step with those of the CDS. He was (again IMHO) utterly lost in the political lion-pit and constantly appeared ill-informed on the issues of the day thus undermining the GoC, and by extension the CF. I usually cringed in anticipation each time he rose to speak in the House, wondering what PR disaster we would stumble into next. Given the PM's extreme concern over tightly controlled imaging and message, I am pretty sure I was not alone...

It is a very debatable point IMHO as to just how much of the recent procurement and reinforcement of the CF had anything to do with Mr O'Connor at all (except as a figurehead); how much was  Tory strategy developed prior to the election as part of Harper's overall vision; and how much was already underway or on the books under Minister Graham and the Liberals, with whom Gen Hillier appears to have enjoyed an equaly good if not superior relationship. In my view Mr Graham was a far better and much more respected Minister.

Mr Mackay cannot do worse, and one hopes that he will do much better.

Cheers


----------



## pbi (15 Aug 2007)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Pretty sure he is elected as a *FEDERAL* MP, vice a provincial one.  As to comments about "traitorous" stance on the Atlantic Accords, clearly you have attended the same classes as the journalists that you just derided...or are content to form your opinions on the issue based on the rhetoric of self-serving provincial politicians.
> 
> Dave



Good point Dave. If our Federal Ministers serve only the parochial interests of their home ridings, who serves the interests of Canada as a whole? Who makes the tough decisions based on the big picture, not just what the folks in Lower Bucket want? Who are the "statesmen" as opposed to the pork barellers and turf protectors? Maybe it's high time we looked at whether or not tying a Federal Minister to a particular riding is really a good thing or a recipe (not to say guarantee...) for parochialism and pork.

Cheers


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (16 Aug 2007)

As do I.  I was under the impression that the Conservative defence platform was _largely_ the product of O'Connor as the resident defence "expert" and I have long felt that platform was riddled with hare-brained schemes, politically motivated "ideas" and out and out pointless concepts.

I believe that the current momentum in defence spending and planning was set in place by the Liberals - for all their faults - under Graham.  It was Martin and Graham, not the the current government, who selected Gen Hillier as the CDS, committed Canada to an expanded role in Kandahar, approved the CDS' transformation concepts and set in motion some (if not most) of the current procurement initiatives.  

I won't miss O'Connor at all.  As PBI said, he was inept.  Worse, he was _obviously_ inept.  Keep your fingers crossed that the next guy is better.


----------



## observor 69 (16 Aug 2007)

This from today's G&M  http://www.theglobeandmail.com//servlet/story/LAC.20070816.CODEFENCE16/TPStory/Comment

Give O'Connor credit where credit is due
J.L. GRANATSTEIN 

Writes on behalf of the Council for Canadian Security in the 21st Century

August 16, 2007

In his brief, anodyne press conference after the swearing-in ceremony, Mr. Harper talked about the months since January of 2006 as a "historic period" for the Canadian Forces. The PM was right, and for all Mr. O'Connor's flaws, the minister who directed the Department of National Defence deserves the lion's share of the credit. After all, someone who was so regularly denounced by the likes of Dawn Black and Denis Coderre, the NDP and Liberal defence critics, can't be all bad. Gordon O'Connor wasn't, and he handled the important matters well.


----------



## SiG_22_Qc (16 Aug 2007)

DAmn!! ,  Rona Ambrose was on top of my MND wishlist :-*

I didnt think O'Connor did a bad job, Afghanistan is very hard to sell, that's all. If McKay can sell ice to Innu's, then he's probably fit for the job. If the objective could be shown as something concretelly achievable rather than a taliban-whack-a-mole, maybe he'd succeed.

O'Connor got the canadian army plenty of new equipment, from ships to tanks, to logistic aircraft. When are the combat helicopters coming? Hind-24 or blackhawks would look good...(guess i'll put them after Rona on the wishlist).


----------



## geo (16 Aug 2007)

Rona.... she has nice hair


----------



## Sheerin (16 Aug 2007)

CSA 105 said:
			
		

> Oh, no worries, I had no beef with anything you said.  It just seems that people seem to forget Mr Pratt and tar him with the same brush as others in that party.
> 
> Agreed completely on your assessment vis a vis the recently departed Mr. O.



It's actually not that surprising that Pratt is often forgotten, given the fact that he held the office for six months.  

I seem to recall back in January of 06, before Harper announced the new cabinet that a lot of people on this board were worried about O'Connor given his track record as defence critic.  I also recall many hoping that Laurie Hawn would be appointed.


----------



## Edward Campbell (16 Aug 2007)

While I was less than thrilled to see Mr. O'Connor appointed in the first place and while I am not unhappy to see him go I do not think Graham or Hillier deserves much credit for the big-ticket procurements.  Even though they almost certainly had the PM's personal support they had to be pushed through the powerful cabinet P&P committee - almost certainly against the well reasoned objections of several powerful ministers including Flaherty (whose officials remain, I believe, highly suspicious of DND's ability to manage its money) and Prentice, who was rumoured to have had some major spending plans of his own with the aim of buying long term aboriginal peace and prosperity, and against the objections of the Clerk (Lynch) who is also rumoured to be suspicious of DND's planning and management abilities.

The cabinet committees matter.  They, not the Liberals, provide the real *opposition* to the PM's plans and they, not the Senate, provide _sober second thought_ on plans and policies.  Elcock and Hillier do not go to cabinet committee meetings; O'Connor had to make the strategic, managerial, financial, operational and political cases and he had to have made them well.

His lousy communication skills were a problem - a big one.  I also think he was hampered by his recent experience.  There were  rumours floating about to the effect that he was trying to micromanage and to deal with matters with which he had been involved 15 years ago - matters which are not any of the minister's business.  He's getting on in years; I heard he was hard to brief - impatient with details, unsure of some of the _strategic_ issues and mired in a _cold war_ mindset.

I think he did a good job on the equipment/budgetting issues - better than most of his colleagues would have done.  I think he used his own close relationalship with Harper and his _status_ as a retired general to good effect in committees.  He failed on TV and in parliament - that's what did him in, as it should have in this day and age.

I wonder how C.D. Howe would fare in the 21st century?  Would Canada's _*best ever*_ minister of almost everything have survived any better than O'Connor?


----------



## Babbling Brooks (16 Aug 2007)

In assessing Gordon O'Connor's performance as MND, I think it makes sense to lay out just what we expect of a Defence Minister.  I've done that, and explored his accomplishments and gaffes in each area in a post over at The Torch:

http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2007/08/on-outgoing-minister-of-defence.html

Bottom line?  O'Connor failed on the most important aspect of his job: building and maintaining political support for the CF and its most visible mission.


----------



## dapaterson (16 Aug 2007)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> [ O'Connor's ] lousy communication skills were a problem - a big one.
> 
> (snip)
> 
> I wonder how C.D. Howe would fare in the 21st century?  Would Canada's _*best ever*_ minister of almost everything have survived any better than O'Connor?



I believe you've answered your own question.  Howe was a good communicator; meaning he listened well as well as putting across his points.  He was also unafraid to bring people from the outside to promote change.  O'Connor, as a consumate insider to both the miltiary and the defence procurement industry, never made significant efforts in that way.


----------



## Old Sweat (16 Aug 2007)

To my simple mind, this paragraph by Edward explains just what is wrong with much of the public service mindset in Ottawa.

While I was less than thrilled to see Mr. O'Connor appointed in the first place and while I am not unhappy to see him go I do not think Graham or Hillier deserves much credit for the big-ticket procurements.  Even though they almost certainly had the PM's personal support they had to be pushed through the powerful cabinet P&P committee - almost certainly against the well reasoned objections of several powerful ministers including Flaherty (whose officials remain, I believe, highly suspicious of DND's ability to manage its money) and Prentice, who was rumoured to have had some major spending plans of his own with the aim of buying long term aboriginal peace and prosperity, and against the objections of the Clerk (Lynch) who is also rumoured to be suspicious of DND's planning and management abilities.

What troubles me is that while our forces are engaged in a shooting war, mandarins in Ottawa are objecting to providing them with the werewithal to do their job because of perceived managerial deficiencies. It may also be that other ministers wanted the money spent on their own priorities, and O'Connor may not have had a lot of support. (I was going to suggest he did not have a lot of friends, but I remembered the comment attributed to President Truman to the effect, that if you want a true friend in Washington, buy a dog.)

No matter what the reason, on his watch O'Connor got a lot of urgently needed kit, and he got it quickly. He may have been a bit of a cold warrior, he may have said some dumb things, he may have had the charisma of a snow shovel, but when all is said and done, he delivered. 

Two other things. Don't forget that he was able to get the allowances for wounded troops and the funeral expense thing sorted out very quickly by Ottawa standards. Last, his vision for the north has largely been adopted.

Bottom line: he got more things right than wrong. Unfortunately the things he got wrong are those for which he was accused by the prosecutors in the court of public opinion - the media.


----------



## GUNS (16 Aug 2007)

There is an old saying that applies to our former MND.

When I do right,
No one remembers.

When I do wrong,
No one forgets.

I agree with Old Sweat, his +'s outnumber his -'s.

He did good.


----------



## Haggis (16 Aug 2007)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> Don't forget that he was able to get the allowances for wounded troops and the funeral expense thing sorted out very quickly by Ottawa standards.
> 
> Bottom line: he got more things right than wrong. Unfortunately the things he got wrong are those for which he was accused by the prosecutors in the court of public opinion - the media.



True, but I would daresy he also had media support in fast tracking the allowance changes.  In both cases, what began as a MND feeding frenzy in a pool of MSM sharks ended up with the MSM actually assistng in his rescue from crimson-ink stained waters.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (16 Aug 2007)

Babbling Brooks said:
			
		

> In assessing Gordon O'Connor's performance as MND, I think it makes sense to lay out just what we expect of a Defence Minister.  I've done that, and explored his accomplishments and gaffes in each area in a post over at The Torch:
> 
> http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2007/08/on-outgoing-minister-of-defence.html
> 
> Bottom line?  O'Connor failed on the most important aspect of his job: building and maintaining political support for the CF and its most visible mission.



Outstanding op-ed....totally worth the read.


Matthew.


----------



## Brad Sallows (16 Aug 2007)

The difficulty with laying too much credit at the feet of the previous government is that one has to disregard the Liberal habit of promising and stalling before one may credibly believe much would necessarily have come to pass in any timely fashion.

What's important is that many of the good ideas have come to pass, and many of the harebrained ones have been (or may yet be) set aside.  Where to lay the political credit for that is problematical.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (16 Aug 2007)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> The difficulty with laying too much credit at the feet of the previous government is that one has to disregard the Liberal habit of promising and stalling before one may credibly believe much would necessarily have come to pass in any timely fashion.
> 
> What's important is that many of the good ideas have come to pass, and many of the harebrained ones have been (or may yet be) set aside.  Where to lay the political credit for that is problematical.



Agreed.....when all was said and done the Libs did a lot more saying than doing. At least this crowd has got us some hardware and sped up the acquisition process. Now if we can get some Naval assets fast tracked it would be awesome....BHS anyone?


----------



## stegner (18 Aug 2007)

Does anyone know in what units O'Connor served in?  Was he ever deployed abroad?


----------



## George Wallace (18 Aug 2007)

stegner said:
			
		

> Does anyone know in what units O'Connor served in?  Was he ever deployed abroad?



Yes, O'Connor and the positions that he has held in the CF have been discussed many times on this site .  Yes, he has been deployed abroad.   Many on this site have actually served under him.  It has also been stated, several times, that he was once General Hillier's Commanding Officer.  Many of us on this site have had both as our Commanding Officers while serving in the Royal Canadian Dragoons.


----------



## stegner (20 Aug 2007)

Mr.  Wallace I apologize your for my  ignorance but could you direct me to the links where it talks more about in what units and where Mr. O'Connor served?   Thank you kindly


----------



## geo (20 Aug 2007)

(go to the top of this web page, press the search button and once the search engine's page comes up, put in the name O'Connor)

You'll be amaazed by how well the search feature runs, now that Mke has his new server.

Enjoy!


----------



## George Wallace (20 Aug 2007)

stegner said:
			
		

> Mr.  Wallace I apologize your for my  ignorance but could you direct me to the links where it talks more about in what units and where Mr. O'Connor served?   Thank you kindly



I used SEARCH and found 15 pages on "O'Connor".  Feel free to parouse them at your leisure.


----------



## The Bread Guy (14 Oct 2008)

Anyone care to guess?  Speculate?  Hope?


----------



## Harley Sailor (14 Oct 2008)

Hard to tell that far into the future.  I believe Peter will still be tomorrow.


----------



## FSTO (14 Oct 2008)

Whats the saying - Hope for the best; prepare for the worst?

Hope for Mckay, prepare for Rae.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (14 Oct 2008)

Olivia Chow


----------



## Danjanou (14 Oct 2008)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Olivia Chow



I think you meant Offenceive Minister there


----------



## Rifleman62 (14 Oct 2008)

I perceive that Olivia Chow's only qualifications/abilities as a MP is too keep Jack's shidt eating grin on his mug.


----------



## Daidalous (14 Oct 2008)

I never thought of Olivia Chow.   That would be ummm. ahhh. hrmmmm  interesting... I guess :rofl:


----------



## Teeps74 (14 Oct 2008)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Olivia Chow



Well, if she was it, we could expect our counselling services to take it up an notch, and perhaps some youth advocacy for the cadets?

Other then that, I think she may have watched a war movie once... That would qualify her as much as many of our past ministers of defence (including McKay).

Ahh well. Whoever gets in, so long as they have an open mind, and will actually listen to their predecessors, NDHQ staff, and the CDS, we will survive, and all will be good. I do not fore-see any truly radical changes for us or the country as a whole regardless of platform being riden on (reality has a nasty way of smashing the hopes and dreams of political platforms).


----------



## gaspasser (15 Oct 2008)

Luckily, there is no change this morning...and it is still Prime Minister Harper..


Not Prime Minister Layton!!!!!


----------



## kratz (15 Oct 2008)

Both the Peter MacKay and Steven Harper's Conservatives were elected, with 16 additional members. The cabinet has not been sworn in yet, so there could still be a change in seats.


----------



## geo (15 Oct 2008)

Possible that we will retain who we have (McKay) ... pending probable cabinet shuffle - to cover off cabinet ministers who did not get in or those who are now in the dog house....


----------



## GAP (15 Oct 2008)

With Emerson gone, I'd be more concerned about who's going to get Foreign Affairs....

Granted the wrong MND could play havoc with the CF and it's programs of catching up, but that's going to happen anyway until the economy straightens up.....but the FM "NEEDS" to be someone competent, not some political lightweight looking for awareness....


----------



## PanaEng (15 Oct 2008)

Absolutely. 
However, I do think that McKay will be looking for something else this time around in order to broaden his experience and influence in the party. He may still feel that he needs to be rewarded for his 'sacrifice' in uniting the party a few years ago.

Actually, was dating Stronach a perk or part of the 'sacrifice' - did he draw the short straw?
  ;D


----------



## GAP (15 Oct 2008)

PanaEng said:
			
		

> Actually, was dating Stronach a perk or part of the 'sacrifice' - did he draw the short straw?
> ;D



Only his dog knows..... ;D


----------



## geo (15 Oct 2008)

Two prominent faces in Conservative Leader Stephen Harper's previous caucus will be missing in Ottawa as a result of Tuesday's election.

Voters rejected former cabinet minister Michael Fortier's bid in Quebec and booted Rahim Jaffer from his Alberta riding.
With the notable exception of Fortier, all of Harper's cabinet ministers were re-elected.  Jaffer, 36, a high profile MP who is engaged to Ontario's Simcoe-Grey representative Helena Guergis, had represented the riding since 1997


----------



## Haggis (15 Oct 2008)

GAP said:
			
		

> With Emerson gone, I'd be more concerned about who's going to get Foreign Affairs....



Maxime Bernier got re-elected.


----------



## geo (15 Oct 2008)

At least everyone knows what skelletons are in his closet.....


----------



## OldSolduer (15 Oct 2008)

Maybe Maxime's girlfriend Julie C could be Defence Minister......? LOL Can you imagine the cabinet meetings? I'm jesting of course! 



			
				geo said:
			
		

> At least everyone knows what skelletons are in his closet.....


And what skeletons are in Julies.......


----------



## PanaEng (15 Oct 2008)

Haggis said:
			
		

> Maxime Bernier got re-elected.


Yikes, maybe he should date Stronach until he learns to protect documents and keep his mouth shut.
Time to switch from biker ladies to NHL ladies - hi'll have to take on Domi


----------



## PPCLI Guy (16 Oct 2008)

OK - I will be serious now.. What about Laurie Hawn?  He was tapped to be Parliamentary Secretarty to MND prior to the writ.


----------



## GAP (16 Oct 2008)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> OK - I will be serious now.. What about Laurie Hawn?  He was tapped to be Parliamentary Secretarty to MND prior to the writ.



Well, there would be a short learning curve.....might just be the right person to steer the government and DND through this economic mess.


----------



## OldSolduer (16 Oct 2008)

Rona Ambrose!!! (Kidding!!) ;D


----------



## geo (16 Oct 2008)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> OK - I will be serious now.. What about Laurie Hawn?  He was tapped to be Parliamentary Secretarty to MND prior to the writ.


Well, having military experience does not always translate into a good MND.... take a look at Gen O'Connor.
Nothing wrong with the man himself BUT..... he had his own views on how the miltary should be.  Best have someone who has ears & an inclination to use em


----------



## retiredgrunt45 (16 Oct 2008)

Why wouldn't they just leave McKay in the posistion? He's already done the job pretty well and knows his way around most if the issues.


----------



## geo (16 Oct 2008)

why.... they might want him back at external affairs

All depends on the talent pool and who was naughty during the campaign


----------



## The Bread Guy (16 Oct 2008)

geo said:
			
		

> All depends on the talent pool and who was naughty during the campaign



...not to mention who's new in the zoo who may be worth rewarding with such a post.


----------

