Author Topic: "MP's or Provost - An Idea on Roles" and "Replace base MP with RCMP"  (Read 201552 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Piece of Cake

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • 2,105
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 83
Re: "MP's or Provost - An Idea on Roles" and "Replace base MP with RCMP"
« Reply #425 on: February 25, 2018, 14:41:20 »
I too have enjoyed this thread.  The debate between a Senior Legal Officer and a MP is of great significance.  What I find even more fascinating is the amount of attention this topic has received.  If a discussion took place replacing any other purple trade with their civilian counterparts, I don't believe it would garner the same attention.
Policy is more than black and white.  We need to not only understand the spirit of why a policy was written, but also how the policy affects people.

Offline Pusser

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 79,685
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,677
Re: "MP's or Provost - An Idea on Roles" and "Replace base MP with RCMP"
« Reply #426 on: February 26, 2018, 11:12:27 »
As far as the topic of MP v RCMP is concerned, I will always be on the side of retaining the MPs because they are more versatile than the RCMP. the RCMP, at this point, simply offer the basic policing function without any of the universality of service elements that enable us to use the MPs in all the military functions that they are designed for from the investigation of offences to traffic control on the battlefield.

[cheers]

The trouble with this (and this was noticed in Afghanistan) is that the MPs have (or perhaps, had) largely shifted their focus in recent decades away from the "military" part of the Military Police.  In many cases, the MPs had lost their military policing skills and this proved very problematic.  I've actually been led to belied that the most effective MPs in Afghanistan (at least initially) were the Reserve MPs because, as they are not considered to be Peace Officers under the Criminal Code, they continue to focus their training and employment on military vice domestic policing.
Sure, apes read Nietzsche.  They just don't understand it.

Offline Pusser

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 79,685
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,677
Re: "MP's or Provost - An Idea on Roles" and "Replace base MP with RCMP"
« Reply #427 on: February 26, 2018, 11:36:47 »
As far as the topic of MP v RCMP is concerned, I will always be on the side of retaining the MPs because they are more versatile than the RCMP. the RCMP, at this point, simply offer the basic policing function without any of the universality of service elements that enable us to use the MPs in all the military functions that they are designed for from the investigation of offences to traffic control on the battlefield.

In the examples that I gave earlier (Carabinieri, Gendarmerie nationale, Guardia Civile, etc) it is worth noting that although these forces have a large domestic role in rural/smaller town policing (they generally don't cover major cities) and national policing (two roles almost identical to those of the RCMP), they also fall under their respective defence departments and have a clear military role. 

Obviously, turning over CAF policing to the RCMP is not as simple as saying, "make it so." Many things would have to be worked out, including access to information by the chain of command and the level of service required by the CAF.  I would never suggest anything that would endanger CAF operations.  I just wonder if we can do this better.  Having said this, I will concede that my opinion on this has softened in the last few minutes in reading this thread.  Well done to everyone for an intelligent debate.
Sure, apes read Nietzsche.  They just don't understand it.

Online Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 69,460
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,519
Re: "MP's or Provost - An Idea on Roles" and "Replace base MP with RCMP"
« Reply #428 on: February 26, 2018, 11:41:16 »
My take is that he RCMP has a man(people)power  issue.  Adding bases and any other jurisdiction to their plate would only cause more issues.
Optio

Offline Pusser

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 79,685
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,677
Re: "MP's or Provost - An Idea on Roles" and "Replace base MP with RCMP"
« Reply #429 on: February 26, 2018, 11:44:37 »
What about the other services MPs do outside of 'normal' partrolman/woman duties;  close protection, TASO, etc.  Who would do those if the RCMP took over all policing in the CAF?  Is it possible?

Why do these roles need to be assumed by the MPs?  Close protection is not really a police function and I would argue that just anyone (who is so inclined) can be trained.  A detailed knowledge of the Criminal Code is not required to be able keep a VIP safe.  Likewise for many of the escort and guarding functions we have.  We are an armed force after all.  There is nothing wrong, or illegal, about having other personnel providing armed escorts for various things or guarding things.
Sure, apes read Nietzsche.  They just don't understand it.

Offline Pusser

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 79,685
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,677
Re: "MP's or Provost - An Idea on Roles" and "Replace base MP with RCMP"
« Reply #430 on: February 26, 2018, 11:50:13 »
My take is that he RCMP has a man(people)power  issue.  Adding bases and any other jurisdiction to their plate would only cause more issues.

Obviously, their establishment would have to be increased (complete with a budget transfer).  Presumably, a large chunk of this increase would effected by transferring MPs (those who wanted to) over to the RCMP.  This is not dissimilar to cases in the past where the RCMP has absorbed police officers from other forces when assuming their jurisdictions.
Sure, apes read Nietzsche.  They just don't understand it.

Offline Haggis

  • "There ain't no hat badge on a helmet!"
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 48,795
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,465
  • "Oh, what a glorious sight, Warm-reekin, rich!"
Re: "MP's or Provost - An Idea on Roles" and "Replace base MP with RCMP"
« Reply #431 on: February 26, 2018, 11:56:53 »
My take is that he RCMP has a man(people)power  issue.  Adding bases and any other jurisdiction to their plate would only cause more issues.

Another concern is where the money paid to the RCMP to provide dedicated garrison policing would really go.  Would it go into general revenues to pay for all policing within a given area (which might include a CAF garrison - or not)?  Would RCMP detachments all over the country now take on the services provided to Reserve units in their detachment areas? (e.g. NDI 20 (permanent) I cards, security surveys, investigations, education and outreach services etc.)

An example is the money the RCMP receives for border patrol.  How much of this actually goes towards border integrity? If you ask the CBSA's union, the answer is "not enough" as they are calling for an expanded role for the CBSA to patrol between ports of entry.  (Yes, I know why unions ask for stuff, particularly unions that have been without a contract for almost four years, but it's still a valid concern.)
Train like your life depends on it.  Some day, it may.

Offline Pusser

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 79,685
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,677
Re: "MP's or Provost - An Idea on Roles" and "Replace base MP with RCMP"
« Reply #432 on: February 26, 2018, 12:11:55 »
Would also like to thank everyone for this post. I’m on my MP QL3 right now and this thread has been discussed quite a bit at the mess hall dining table in recent days. I frequent the threads here to find these kinds of discussions involving senior or more experienced MP members and then further discuss it with the other candidates to see what we all think. It helps in getting a better idea as to the ups and downs of the trade as well. Anyways keep up these kinds of discussions cause they actually do help the new guys see things in a different light other than what is taught in course.

It has also been a great opportunity for us to hear both sides of the story when it comes to how MP deal with other members of the CAF.

A little off topic, but I will give an example of a "situation" I once had that you and your buddies can discuss if you like.

There was a fire in an ammunition depot.  The MP who responded, drove straight through the first gate of the depot and only briefly stopped at the gate to the Explosives Area and ordered the commissionaire to get in with him (to show him where the fire was?) and then proceeded into the Explosives Area without authorization.  I should point out at this stage that when we have fires (thankfully rarely) in Explosives Areas, we tend to evacuate them, not go charging in blindly - just saying.

Luckily by the time we saw the police car scream by the Command Post, I had been able to ascertain what had actually happened (minor fire in a building that had actually been emptied of all explosives, but the MP didn't know that).  When I caught up to the MP and politely asked what he thought he was doing, he told me that he was investigating the fire.  Are MPs trained in fire or explosives occurrence investigations?  I then proceeded to point out to him that he was in an explosives area, which had been evacuated and in which only trained firefighters were supposed to be (even firefighters wouldn't have been in the area he was at the time).  I also pointed out that he was in possession of both firearms and unauthorized radios in an Explosives Area (both prohibited).  He left rather sheepishly and his chain of command was informed (who no doubt, had a one-way conversation with him later on). 

This was a case where an MP was confused about what authority he actually had and as a result, put both himself and others at risk.
Sure, apes read Nietzsche.  They just don't understand it.

Offline Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 129,350
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,596
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: "MP's or Provost - An Idea on Roles" and "Replace base MP with RCMP"
« Reply #433 on: February 26, 2018, 12:18:42 »
This was a case where an MP was confused about what authority he actually had and as a result, put both himself and others at risk.

Yes, but it sounds like a matter of lack of knowledge of rules and policies vice willful ignorance.  Anybody could make this mistake.  This is something to be fixed with training and orientation, not getting different uniforms in to (possibly) make the same mistake for the same reasons.
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline Brihard

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 148,890
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,852
  • Non-Electric Pop-Up Target
Re: "MP's or Provost - An Idea on Roles" and "Replace base MP with RCMP"
« Reply #434 on: February 26, 2018, 12:19:10 »
In the examples that I gave earlier (Carabinieri, Gendarmerie nationale, Guardia Civile, etc) it is worth noting that although these forces have a large domestic role in rural/smaller town policing (they generally don't cover major cities) and national policing (two roles almost identical to those of the RCMP), they also fall under their respective defence departments and have a clear military role. 

Obviously, turning over CAF policing to the RCMP is not as simple as saying, "make it so." Many things would have to be worked out, including access to information by the chain of command and the level of service required by the CAF.  I would never suggest anything that would endanger CAF operations.  I just wonder if we can do this better.  Having said this, I will concede that my opinion on this has softened in the last few minutes in reading this thread.  Well done to everyone for an intelligent debate.

We can take it as a given that RCMP will not shift departments from PS over to DND. The RCMP Regulations, under the RCMP Act, do provide regulatory powers for RCMP officers to theoretically be ordered to serve outside of Canada to assist other Canadian departments, or to protet Her Majesty's property, or to protect certain Canadians. In practice, while RCMP members do serve outside of country, it's always voluntary either in the immediate sense or the specific task, or in the sense that on going to certain units (E.g., PM's protective detail) you're gonna travel. For the RCMP to have a shift where members would be ordered to go to foreign soil to do deployed law enforcement on a base or what have you would be a radical change, however given the pretty significant financial incentives, finding Mounties to step up for overseas gigs has not been too difficult.

RCMP could absorb domestic policing-on-base with little difficulty. They already have municipal policing detachments in such lovely locales as Oromocto, Cold Lake, Wainwright, etc. The actual workload from adding domestic law enforcement within the jurisdiction of bases would be pretty minimal. While there would be some learning curve in understanding certain applicable legislation or regulation, this is really no different from the radical shifts in duties Mounties already undergo- a guy policing Alberta could get posted to the Integrated Border Enforcement Team in Cornwall and have to learn IRPA, Customs Act, and various other things. A member posted to VIP protection has to learn all the laws around that. Likewise anyone going to a child exploitation, or proceeds of crime, or tech crime unit. Mounties learn new parts of the law and assume new duties all the time. That would not be a show stopper if they were to be told "OK, now you're going to enforce the Defense Controlled Access Area Regulations and the Government Property and Traffic Regulations".

So- 'policing' as cops think of it? Absolutely RCMP could do that on bases and in the PMQs.

As identified by others, the problem would be having the deployed capabilities - the 'provost' work. I would also add that there will still be some uniquely military contexts needing military police with investigational experience. You can't knit that experience. It has to come from somewhere. And that's probably going to be routine, mundane investigative files on bases- files that have little real import, but which build up a police officer's ability to conduct an investigation, take statements, deal with crown and the courts, and so forth. Detachment policing on bases is a necessary 'farm team' for the stuff NIS does.

The MPs are like the RCMP in one interesting way- they have a lot of different jobs, some of which are not necessarily related to each other, but which draw from a common baseline skillset that is difficult to acquire other than doing the stupid, routine, annoying day to day police stuff. The foundational skills have to be there, whether investigative or tactical, in order to move on to other things.
Pacificsm is doctrine fostered by a delusional minority and by the media, which holds forth the proposition it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 193,885
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,925
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: "MP's or Provost - An Idea on Roles" and "Replace base MP with RCMP"
« Reply #435 on: February 26, 2018, 12:59:41 »
Why do these roles need to be assumed by the MPs?  Close protection is not really a police function and I would argue that just anyone (who is so inclined) can be trained.  A detailed knowledge of the Criminal Code is not required to be able keep a VIP safe.  Likewise for many of the escort and guarding functions we have.  We are an armed force after all.  There is nothing wrong, or illegal, about having other personnel providing armed escorts for various things or guarding things.

They don't 'need' to be, but as of now they are MPs roles - not sure about present day but back when I wore a black beret, Convoy/VIP escort and TCPs were part of what armoured recce did.  Close Protection and TASO - I don't know enough about it to have an informed opinion as to who could/should do this if not the MPs.  Could it be like TacHel does for door gunners and draw from the cbt arms?  Perhaps...

Any CP or TASO types who could chime in?  Why, historically, have CP and TASO functions been part of the MP toolbelt?
If you're gonna fight, fight like you're the third monkey on the ramp to Noah's Ark.

And brother, it's startin' to rain...

Offline ExRCDcpl

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 4,500
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 305
Re: "MP's or Provost - An Idea on Roles" and "Replace base MP with RCMP"
« Reply #436 on: February 26, 2018, 15:55:28 »
They don't 'need' to be, but as of now they are MPs roles - not sure about present day but back when I wore a black beret, Convoy/VIP escort and TCPs were part of what armoured recce did.  Close Protection and TASO - I don't know enough about it to have an informed opinion as to who could/should do this if not the MPs.  Could it be like TacHel does for door gunners and draw from the cbt arms?  Perhaps...

Any CP or TASO types who could chime in?  Why, historically, have CP and TASO functions been part of the MP toolbelt?

I have a fair bit of experience in the TASO world and while I can’t speak to why it’s been historically an MP taksing, I can say the job itself could certainly be done by the combat arms.  In reality the bread and butter of TASO is essentially 5s and 20s and then watching arcs.  If the infantry got handed the tasking on Monday, by Wednesday I’m sure they’d be more than ready to do it operationally.

The fundamental job of CP itself could certainly be handled by combat arms units once they had enough qualified people.  Having said that, I am unsure the legalities of having non police officers armed while in plainclothes both in and out of country.  That could potentially be why it remains an MP based gig.

Offline PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 893,875
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,572
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
A CP operator is going to need the same MOU to carry firearms in a foreign country as anyone else. Being a MP doesn't make them magically exempt from permission, especially considering that CP was recruiting from all trades up to a few years ago.

Offline BeyondTheNow

  • Directing Staff
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 46,085
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 723
  • Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult
Re: "MP's or Provost - An Idea on Roles" and "Replace base MP with RCMP"
« Reply #438 on: February 26, 2018, 18:28:12 »
...That could potentially be why it remains an MP based gig.

I’m confused by this point as a member of our unit went for CP quite recently. He’s not MP and is not OTing either. (Actually, multiple pers applied but he was the only one selected to attend the training.) Can you offer more insight?
"Stop worrying about getting back to who you were before it all went wrong. To heal is to understand that the person you've since become is the one who's most capable of doing whatever it is you were put here to do."~SR

Online mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 466,260
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,190
    • The job.
Re: "MP's or Provost - An Idea on Roles" and "Replace base MP with RCMP"
« Reply #439 on: February 26, 2018, 18:33:19 »
For reference to the discussion,

Close Protection Training 
https://army.ca/forums/index.php?topic=35757.100
8 pages.
Get on the bus. Take a ride with us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2lSGnPl-ww

Offline Humphrey Bogart

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 97,984
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,735
Re: "MP's or Provost - An Idea on Roles" and "Replace base MP with RCMP"
« Reply #440 on: February 26, 2018, 18:33:43 »
I’m confused by this point as a member of our unit went for CP quite recently. He’s not MP and is not OTing either. (Actually, multiple pers applied but he was the only one selected to attend the training.) Can you offer more insight?

The reason for this is because the MPs don't have enough officers to do all the CP tasks required so they recruit outsiders to fill pers gaps in their ops.  The capability is owned and managed by the MP branch; however, others do get the opportunity to take the training and do the job when manpower isnin short supply.

Offline PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 893,875
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,572
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
The reason for this is because the MPs don't have enough officers to do all the CP tasks required so they recruit outsiders to fill pers gaps in their ops.  The capability is owned and managed by the MP branch; however, others do get the opportunity to take the training and do the job when manpower isnin short supply.
How nice of them. If the trade is that strapped, perhaps they should give up all the high speed stuff and focus on core tasks?

Online mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 466,260
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,190
    • The job.
Re: "MP's or Provost - An Idea on Roles" and "Replace base MP with RCMP"
« Reply #442 on: February 26, 2018, 18:57:24 »
From 2017,

DISCLAIMER

May not be up to date. Just something I read in the Close Protection discussion.

Adding for reference, "for those curious."

CANFORGEN 120/17 CDS 032/17 181849Z JUL 17 - CP Recruiting

For those curious

"Unofficial site, not associated with DND."
« Last Edit: February 26, 2018, 20:24:35 by mariomike »
Get on the bus. Take a ride with us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2lSGnPl-ww

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 193,885
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,925
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
perhaps they should give up all the high speed stuff and focus on core tasks

Maybe this is the best COA;  or, something in the middle.  If a CP 'team' consists of say, 4 - 5 pers (I have no idea, I am pulling that out of my arse), maybe 2 of those could be MP pos'n and the rest cbt arms. Same for TASO.  If the MP branch wants to remain at the pointy end of those tasks, they could be the team leads and draw from cbt arms (or any MOSID, cbt arms preferred).

This would take the pressure off the MPs to 100% man CP and TASO, but not toss it aside completely.  Cbt arms/other MOSIDs could provide the other pers.  I mention the door gunners from TacHel...I know not only Reg Force cbt arms folks are getting those positions too.  You could even open it up to PRes folks.

Lots of options...but the first real question is...are the MPs feeling stretched with the core functions (patrolmen/women), CFNIS, etc on top of the high speed/low drag 'stuff'? 
If you're gonna fight, fight like you're the third monkey on the ramp to Noah's Ark.

And brother, it's startin' to rain...

Online SeaKingTacco

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 121,180
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,774
  • Door Gunnery- The Sport of Kings!
Re: "MP's or Provost - An Idea on Roles" and "Replace base MP with RCMP"
« Reply #444 on: February 26, 2018, 20:53:46 »
The MP branch also has a significant chunk of its PML doing security work at embassies overseas, for GAC.

A legitimate question could be asked: is that the best use of police officers? Are there other alternatives that would free up scarce MPs for duties either on bases or for CF deployments?

Offline Old Sweat

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 208,820
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,544
Re: "MP's or Provost - An Idea on Roles" and "Replace base MP with RCMP"
« Reply #445 on: February 26, 2018, 21:49:07 »
The MP branch also has a significant chunk of its PML doing security work at embassies overseas, for GAC.

A legitimate question could be asked: is that the best use of police officers? Are there other alternatives that would free up scarce MPs for duties either on bases or for CF deployments?
As I recall, in the mid seventies - say circa 74-76 - FMC was offered the opportunity to provide embassy security details, which would have provided an opportunity to reward good guys and gals and broaden their experience. The Commander turned it down for whatever reason, but let's say the view of the utility of the task from the coal face differed from the perspective from the executive suite. 

Offline Poppa

  • Member
  • ****
  • 4,540
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 167
Re: "MP's or Provost - An Idea on Roles" and "Replace base MP with RCMP"
« Reply #446 on: February 27, 2018, 11:01:39 »
IMO what we need to do better as a branch is take a look at what it is we do on a day to day basis. Policing, TASO, CP or whatever and do an honest assessment of our training IOT do that role. Does a TASO need a badge? I'd say no...so we train our PRes to do it, Port security - PRes, MPSS - PRes. Actually anything that does not specifically require a badge let the PRes side of the branch take care of it freeing up the 156 guys to police.
"The Platoon is for all purposes, the unit for whose perfection we strive. Because a perfect platoon means a perfect battalion and brigade or division and the efficiency of any army corps is to be measured by that of it's platoons." Major General Sir John Monash

Offline garb811

  • MP/MPO Question Answerer
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 47,220
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,083
Re: "MP's or Provost - An Idea on Roles" and "Replace base MP with RCMP"
« Reply #447 on: March 03, 2018, 18:58:23 »
Playing catch up...

The trouble with this (and this was noticed in Afghanistan) is that the MPs have (or perhaps, had) largely shifted their focus in recent decades away from the "military" part of the Military Police.  In many cases, the MPs had lost their military policing skills and this proved very problematic.  I've actually been led to belied that the most effective MPs in Afghanistan (at least initially) were the Reserve MPs because, as they are not considered to be Peace Officers under the Criminal Code, they continue to focus their training and employment on military vice domestic policing.
While this is true, to a point, it is simply because the vast majority of MP are not employed in a field environment.  Expecting a MP from Halifax to have the same level of field skills as a MP from 1, 2 or 5 MP Pl would be the same as expecting a trucker from Halifax to have the same level of field skills as a trucker from 2 Svc Bn.  The demand for MP quickly outstripped the ability of the MP Pls to provide the numbers required.  This was also true in Bosnia but the impact of integrating an amalgamation of MP from non-field units and the PRes was not an issue as it was not a war-fighting deployment and the problem then became what we were supposed to do with the 20% mandated PRes MP component who couldn't do police tasks on a mission that was primarily policing the force.

It would also be disingenuous to say their expertise went beyond individual soldier skills as the vast majority of PRes MP do not have experience at operating within the context of anything much bigger than a Coy Gp for limited duration's of time.

Having worked with PRes MP at numerous points in my career, the reality is the quality of pers, training and experience varies as widely across the PRes as it does across the MP Branch as a whole.

They don't 'need' to be, but as of now they are MPs roles - not sure about present day but back when I wore a black beret, Convoy/VIP escort and TCPs were part of what armoured recce did.  Close Protection and TASO - I don't know enough about it to have an informed opinion as to who could/should do this if not the MPs.  Could it be like TacHel does for door gunners and draw from the cbt arms?  Perhaps...

Any CP or TASO types who could chime in?  Why, historically, have CP and TASO functions been part of the MP toolbelt?
The short answer is they are an MP role because we are assigned that task, these are not things we arbitrarily decided to do on our own.  Although it seems like a large part of the MP Branch would like to just ignore security and force protection, the reality is they are core capabilities that we provide to the CAF.

The longer, historical, answer...

CP - Back in the day, we were closely aligned to RMP.  In the late 80s, a Canadian became the Deputy Commander of one of the US Corps in Germany, I think it was VII Corps but might be wrong.  As part of the threat assessment, it was determined he required a CP Team and MP were tasked to provide it.  Training was provided by RMP and once the posting was over, the draw down of 4 CMBG started.  Whether by luck or design, a significant cadre of that CP Team ended up at SIU Section Ottawa and they assumed the role of providing CP on an as required basis.  They ran a couple of courses internal and also provided CP to the CDS on several occasions, most notably during the Gulf War when he had a team for the duration.  At some point, I'm not exactly sure when but it might have been when SIU stood down in 97, JTF2 assumed the role of providing the CAF CP capability.  There are a few pics floating around of them doing this task OUTCAN, including one where the PMO released a picture with identifiable face shots of the CP team, that was later re-released with black rectangles to hide their identities... 

In 2003, when the Embassy in Kabul re-opened, an enhanced MPSS team was sent in with part of their mandate being "VIP Escort", although this quickly evolved into an adhoc-CP role for the Ambassador with them tapping into certain resources on the ground to gain some skill-sets on the fly but it was always emphasized that, at that time, the only thing being provided to the Ambassador was VIP Escort and not CP.

In 2004, when Gen Henault was selected to be Chairman of the NATO Military Committee, the threat assessment identified that he needed a CP team, the responsibility for that resides with the originating country.  By this time JTF2 was fully immersed in the post 9/11 stuff and they were looking to off load the CP task.  The decision was made to re-task MP with this and MP were again trained to provide the CP Team by RMP.  The intent was to stand up a small CP unit based on this team once the task ended to maintain the capability and provide coverage on an "as required" basis.  As Afghanistan evolved, things rapidly spiraled well beyond the initial thoughts on what was going to be required for CP.  The Embassy quickly turned into a joint team of MP, one group doing the traditional MPSS role responsible for the Embassy and pers inside, and the other being a full-fledged CP team for the Ambassador.  At the height of Afghanistan there was 1 x team in KAF plus 3 x teams in Kabul plus the CFPSU which had stood up in Ottawa as planned.  This led to the task being opened up to other trades, initially the call was just for MSE Op as drivers but that proved a less than ideal solution as everyone needed to do everything so the complete CP Op role was opened.  This had mixed success, the primary shortcoming being various levels of member's chains of command refusing to make non-MP available for additional missions, and it was the major reason that the Branch opened a back door in the requirement to have a 2 year diploma waived if the member was a trained CP Op.  The hope was pers who wanted to keep doing CP but who were being blocked by their chain of command would OT/CT into the trade to keep doing the task.

When we left Afghanistan the expectation was that CFPSU would be able to fill the reduced requirements as we entered the much advertised operational pause and if that was the case, all would be well and the Branch would be more than capable of providing the capability without being stressed.  But the reality is CFPSU is almost completely dedicated to CDS' tasks, the overseas missions have continued (Op ADDENDA is the ongoing CP mission in Kabul, plus a team to Op IMPACT MLT plus some other stuff). 

TASO - The first I remember of MP being put on aircraft for direct security duties that were not CODE 1 VIP (aka Air Marshalls on the VIP flights) was during the siege of Sarajevo.  I had several friends who were flying in and out aboard Hercs and their primary duty was security on the aircraft, particularly when non-CF pers were onboard.  Although the MP Branch as a whole had close ties to RMP, the Air Command MP formed close links with the USAF Security Police.  Around about 1998-99, the Air Force MP stood up the "Airfield Security Force", to provide a deployable Force Protection package to provide Airfield defence.  As usual, we did it the Canadian way and instead of instituting a full-time capability, it was an ad-hoc organization with each guardhouse on an air force base being responsible for providing a certain number of pers each, that came together for exercises, with a small HQ element full-time in Trenton.  Part of their mandate was providing pers on aircraft for security.  Around the same time the USAF was implementing their PHOENIX RAVEN program.  Although ASF deployed into Kosovo with the helicopters, the concept died shortly thereafter but the RCAF still wanted the ability to put MP onto aircraft with the PHOENIX RAVEN program being the template. MP being on the first flights into Afghanistan when SOF deployed in late 2001.  Since that time MP have continued to do the TASO mission as tasked by RCAF.  The "official" capability ask is for 1 x TASO mission at a time but right now, there are 2 x teams on Op IMPACT plus 1-3 teams on non-Op IMPACT flights at any given time.  As with us having the task, we don't decide which flights will have TASO, that is up to RCAF with AF MP Gp trying to shape the asks when possible.

How nice of them. If the trade is that strapped, perhaps they should give up all the high speed stuff and focus on core tasks?
Sure thing.  Unfortunately, just like we didn't decide to start doing this stuff on our own, we also can't just decide to not do it on our own either.  Plus, as already mentioned, security and force protection are our core tasks.  In fact, my argument usually is policing is a contributor to security and force protection and we had it right back in the day when we were the Security Branch and had Security Officers and Military Police as opposed to being the Military Police Branch with Military Police Officers and Military Police.

We are strapped for the exact same reason other branches are, but in these particular instances it is because the demand is beyond what we are set up for with permanent, dedicated, positions.

The MP branch also has a significant chunk of its PML doing security work at embassies overseas, for GAC.

A legitimate question could be asked: is that the best use of police officers? Are there other alternatives that would free up scarce MPs for duties either on bases or for CF deployments?
Our pers at MPSS are seconded to GAC, they do not count against our PML as GAC owns and pays for them, lock, stock and barrel.  They are still members of the CAF for admin, discipline etc.

The reason GAC asked for MP to fill the positions is because of the security mandate of the Branch.  My argument is we aren't providing the same quality as we did when we hadn't lost the focus on the security ball due to the policing obsession but GAC is still happy with what we are providing and keep asking for increases in numbers.  These guys do not provide any level of policing to GAC, or the CAF for that matter.  Totally outside their remit.  RCMP is responsible to do any GAC type police support, CFSU(O), CFSU(E) or CFNIS is responsible for CAF stuff.

As I recall, in the mid seventies - say circa 74-76 - FMC was offered the opportunity to provide embassy security details, which would have provided an opportunity to reward good guys and gals and broaden their experience. The Commander turned it down for whatever reason, but let's say the view of the utility of the task from the coal face differed from the perspective from the executive suite.
When a new Embassy was built in Beijing in the late 80s, combat arms pers augmented the MP at the Detachment in order to provide an enhanced presence.  My understanding is they did roving patrols, escorts etc.  The is much more to the job that is being done in MPSS than being a simple security guard.  While that still occurs at a few missions, the reality is the vast majority of pers are providing security management services.  Not rocket science by any stretch and you could train other trades to do it but at the end of the day the customer wants MP and that is what we (CAF) are obligated to provide.

IMO what we need to do better as a branch is take a look at what it is we do on a day to day basis. Policing, TASO, CP or whatever and do an honest assessment of our training IOT do that role. Does a TASO need a badge? I'd say no...so we train our PRes to do it, Port security - PRes, MPSS - PRes. Actually anything that does not specifically require a badge let the PRes side of the branch take care of it freeing up the 156 guys to police.
As you're no doubt aware, there are efforts ongoing to integrate PRes MP into some of these activities.  Reality is none of these will ever be 100% PRes for the simple fact that you always need pers who can go out the door at minimal notice and, sometimes, be ordered out the door.  The first attempt to send a PRes member out the door on a TASO mission didn't work because of passport issues for instance and I also know a reserve MP who refuses to deploy on any more CP missions because he did his "1".  In both instances, Reg Force MP have had to fill the task, at extremely short notice in the case of the TASO mission.  There is certainly scope for augmentation but just like PRes MP can't fill the MP Pl role on their own, none of these capabilities will be anything other than augmentation.

Online SeaKingTacco

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 121,180
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,774
  • Door Gunnery- The Sport of Kings!
Re: "MP's or Provost - An Idea on Roles" and "Replace base MP with RCMP"
« Reply #448 on: March 03, 2018, 19:10:54 »
Awesome history lesson. Thanks Garb!