6 Maritime Coastal Defence Vessels being no longer Mothballed

[Snakedoc]

Its quite amazing the amount of news coverage this has received across Canada over the past 24 hrs, this has certainly brought the naval ships/lack of ships issue to the forefront.

 

[kratz]

from CBC.ca

Order to cut navy's coastal vessels rescinded
Last Updated: Friday, May 14, 2010 | 1:54 PM ET Comments0Recommend5.
CBC News
The order to cut Canada's 12 coastal defence vessels by half has been rescinded — just one day after it was announced, according to the country's chief of defence staff.

"We're going to rescind the order and have a look at the resources that are being provided, not only the money … but also the crewing and what we can do to maximize the available personnel, not only in the navy but the rest of the Canadian Forces to ensure that the navy's next 100 years is as successful as the last," Gen. Walter Natynczyk told a press conference in Ottawa Friday.

On Thursday, a navy spokeswoman told CBC News that a shortage of money and sailors would force Canada's navy to mothball half its fleet of 12 coastal vessels used to patrol the Arctic, Atlantic and Pacific coasts.

More to come

 

[SeanNewman]

I love the shouts of criticism from the opposition parties...

No kidding!  I couldn't believe my ears hearing an NDP guy yell out "When will the Prime Minister answer for how poorly he has funded the military...?".

The budget has been increased by how many billions in the last decade?

Granted the Liberals started us going upward, but you can be rest assured one party was voting against every penny of it.

 

[MarkOttawa]

The CDS has cut the legs from under the Chief of the Maritime Staff who, in my view, has no choice but to resign.  This certainly cannot be good for service relations; and the CDS is sadly taking on a bit of the appearance of a ministerial poodle.

Which did not appear the case previously, see here  and here:
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2010/04/afghan-detainee-docs-cds-sticking-it-to.html
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2009/11/cds-serves-hard-one-to-government.html

Mark
Ottawa

 

[PanaEng]

I guess some peoples phone lines and BB are going nuts. Wish the drama/storm was televised.  op:
The public damage is done, might as well watch the show.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

....and just a heads up, those "some peoples" are watching this thread very closely.
And, for some reason, they seem very thin-skinned.

Bruce
Staff

 

[jollyjacktar]

Good to hear of the screams from the money lenders, but, I won't hold my breath on new stuff until there is new stuff.  How the Lieberals/NDP can shout the odds is beyond me after the 90's but maybe this will be a good thing.

 

[The Bread Guy]

This just out at the CF web page:

Recent media reports about the Navy are over-stated.  In fact, in this Navy’s centennial year, the level of support is strong.  We have not stood down a single ship.

I am very proud of the Navy’s significant role around the world.  The Navy has projected leadership abroad in missions like Haiti and anti-piracy patrols in the Gulf of Aden.  That role will continue.

La protection de la souveraineté du Canada est une priorité.  Les patrouilles maritimes vont se poursuivre.  Le rôle de leadership que joue la marine continuera.

As Chief of Defence Staff, I am very happy with the significant investments made by this government in recent years.  The DND Budget Line continues to rise every year.

The instructions with respect to readiness levels of the fleet, for this fiscal year, which were issues by the Chief of Maritime Staff on April 23, 2010, are rescinded.

We will have to review the resource allocations across the CF and issue new instructions with the Minister’s endorsement.

 

[MarkOttawa]

More here, with video of the CDS:

Top general reverses navy decision to mothball ships
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20100514/naval-cuts-100514/20100514?hub=TopStoriesV2
http://watch.ctv.ca/news/latest/navy-cuts/#clip302191

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

The CDS has cut the legs from under the Chief of the Maritime Staff who, in my view, has no choice but to resign.  This certainly cannot be good for service relations; and the CDS is sadly taking on a bit of the appearance of a ministerial poodle.

Which did not appear the case previously, see here  and here:
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2010/04/afghan-detainee-docs-cds-sticking-it-to.html
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2009/11/cds-serves-hard-one-to-government.html

Mark
Ottawa

Nowheres does the CDS even hints that he has lost confidence in the CMS, nor has the Navy. So as a serving sailor I feel your view is not only wrong but one based upon the obsolete custom of falling on ones sword.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Sorry, all, I think the CDS just screwed the CMS and I agree CMS should resign on principle. But a resignation will do no good; it will be a half day wonder, at best.

The CDS has done a Baril; pity.

 

[Cloud Cover]

I too think the CDS has now done even more damage to the Navy.

Our Navy requires a serious modernization and upgrade in combat power. This is not probably not going to happen if they are forced to maintain ships and systems that are obsolete. And sorry, I dont think the modernization of the HFX class was even close to bringing a sufficient upgrade to the fleet.

How long has it been since Canada has cut steel for a major surface combatant or a support ship of serious capability.

The MNDs 40 billion dollar fleet is just political words, and unfortunately so now are those of the CDS. What was needed was real land practical leadership from the CDS as demonstrated by the CMS, and today that did not happen.  Indeed a pity. 

 

[medicineman]

So I guess I have to change some points I passed on in my O Group the other day?

MM

 

[Cronicbny]

....and just a heads up, those "some peoples" are watching this thread very closely.
And, for some reason, they seem very thin-skinned.

Bruce
Staff

Bruce,

Understood. Perhaps a lesson can be learned about establishing a coherent communications strategy before releasing the news to every sailor in the Formation(s) man (woman) to man (woman). I was actually a bit surprised it took this much time for the news to hit the MSM.

And to be clear to everyone here, and looking from "beyond" - the letter was never Classified or Designated and it certainly wasn't LIMDIS.

Whoever leaked it should get a job in Public Affairs... transparency and establishing a "single message" must still remain the focus within the Navy, CF and DND as a whole.

EDIT to add: The representations in this post are mine, and mine alone and do not necessarily reflect the overall mission statement:

Commemorating the Past, Celebrating the Present and Committing to the Future - Bringing the Navy to Canadians

 

[SeanNewman]

Very unfortunate that a lot of CDS bashing is going on here.  (Comparing him to Baril?    Are you serious?).

Let us not forget that the RH MND Peter MacKay seemed a bit taken aback by the comments yesterday, too.

Nobody on this board can say they know the motives behind anything that has been said in the last two days, but it is not a stretch to imagine the MND's reaction resulted in direction to the CDS.

Stay loyal, people!

 

[NavyShooter]

The chips will lie where they fall, and the sailors and fleet will carry on doing their jobs to the best of their abilities, as we have done for the past 100 years, and will continue to do.

Whatever the fallout, info was distributed, and now decisions appear to have been made that may result in changes that will affect the originally distributed info.

*shrug*

How many of us have seen plans change in mid-stream because the original mission that the plan was based on was updated/changed?  There's a reason that the ship's schedule is called a "FLEX"....mostly 'cause it's flexible.  We always roll with those changes, let's roll with this one.

I vote we continue being sailors, work our butts off as we usually do to earn our beer/rum and leave the finger pointing and name calling out of it.

I'm back to work Monday, but tomorrow, I have an 800 meter rifle match to shoot.  Anyone wanna go play?

NS

 

[Nuggs]

The chips will lie where they fall, and the sailors and fleet will carry on doing their jobs to the best of their abilities, as we have done for the past 100 years, and will continue to do.

Whatever the fallout, info was distributed, and now decisions appear to have been made that may result in changes that will affect the originally distributed info.

*shrug*

How many of us have seen plans change in mid-stream because the original mission that the plan was based on was updated/changed?  There's a reason that the ship's schedule is called a "FLEX"....mostly 'cause it's flexible.  We always roll with those changes, let's roll with this one.

I vote we continue being sailors, work our butts off as we usually do to earn our beer/rum and leave the finger pointing and name calling out of it.

I'm back to work Monday, but tomorrow, I have an 800 meter rifle match to shoot.  Anyone wanna go play?

NS

I'll take ya up on that in 3 weeks

 

[Cronicbny]

The chips will lie where they fall, and the sailors and fleet will carry on doing their jobs to the best of their abilities, as we have done for the past 100 years, and will continue to do.

Whatever the fallout, info was distributed, and now decisions appear to have been made that may result in changes that will affect the originally distributed info.

*shrug*

How many of us have seen plans change in mid-stream because the original mission that the plan was based on was updated/changed?  There's a reason that the ship's schedule is called a "FLEX"....mostly 'cause it's flexible.  We always roll with those changes, let's roll with this one.

I vote we continue being sailors, work our butts off as we usually do to earn our beer/rum and leave the finger pointing and name calling out of it.

I'm back to work Monday, but tomorrow, I have an 800 meter rifle match to shoot.  Anyone wanna go play?

NS

No argument here - In Ardua Nitor

 

[Edward Campbell]

If this story, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the Ottawa Citizen, is substantially correct then Gen. Natynczyk looks a little less like Maurice Baril and, with Deputy Minister Robert Fonberg, a lot like Monty Python:

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Defence+chief+rescinds+navy+fleet+cuts/3029113/story.html

Military rescinds cuts to Canada's navy fleet

BY DAVID AKIN, CANWEST NEWS SERVICE

MAY 14, 2010

OTTAWA — Canada's chief of defence staff took the rare step Friday of overturning a directive made by his top admiral — an order that some analysts said was essentially gutting Canada's navy and, as a result, quickly became a political liability for the Conservative government.

Last month, Vice-Admiral Dean McFadden, the head of Canada's navy, ordered half of the country's maritime coastal defence vessels to be docked indefinitely and also shelved upgrades and maintenance on many other ships, including frigates.

McFadden's order, first reported by the Ottawa Citizen earlier this week, said he was forced to take such drastic action because he simply didn't have enough funding.

"I have had to make difficult choices that will directly impact fleet capability and availability this year and possibly for the medium term," wrote McFadden.

Defence analysts called it a major reduction in the number of ships available for service, prompting howls from opposition MPs in the House of Commons that the Conservatives were essentially starving the navy of the money it needed to keep ships afloat — and to rub it in, was doing this in the navy's centennial year.

But after two days of tough questions, Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Walter Natynczyk reversed McFadden's decision, saying the Canadian Forces will re-allocate some financial resources so that McFadden and the navy won't have to tie up a substantial portion of the fleet.

"Recent media reports about the Navy are over-stated. In fact, in this Navy's centennial year, the level of support is strong. We have not stood down a single ship," Natynczyk said in a statement posted Friday on the Department of National Defence's website.

"The instructions with respect to readiness levels of the fleet, for this fiscal year, which were issued by the Chief of Maritime Staff (McFadden) on April 23, 2010, are rescinded. We will have to review the resource allocations across the (Canadian Forces) and issue new instructions with the minister's endorsement."

That sets up the possibility of a fierce turf war within the Canadian Forces as each service — the navy, the army and the air force — and each command — the reservists and special forces, for example — tries to defend existing budget allocations.

"I think there's a lot of frustrated people in the navy," said a defence-industry lobbyist, speaking on condition of anonymity. "But all the services have had to essentially park their assets. There's no money anywhere."

Natynczyk would not say if he was directed to undo McFadden's order by Defence Minister Peter MacKay, who, earlier this week, appeared caught off guard by McFadden's decision.

"I heard Minister MacKay with regard to his guidance, but at the end of the day, in the military chain of command, it's my direction to rescind the order," Natynczyk told reporters at a Parliament Hill news conference. "It's my job to make sure that my minister's not surprised."

"What McFadden did was, he got his way," said military analyst Mercedes Stephenson.

"So, ultimately, he wins because he got the cuts reversed. What will become of him, I'm not so sure because there will be a huge price to pay for having had the minister look like he doesn't know what he's talking about."

Early Friday, Conservative MP Laurie Hawn, MacKay's parliamentary secretary, angrily denied that McFadden had even issued such an order.

"No ships are going into dry dock. That is simply false," Hawn told the House of Commons. "The navy has been given $200 million more this year than last."

But even with that extra money, the navy — like the other branches in the Canadian Forces — is finding it tough to keep up.

"We could always use more money," Natynczyk said. But he also suggested that part of the reason for mothballing ships in dry dock — what the navy refers to as putting them in "extended readiness" — was due to a shortage of trained sailors.

McFadden had told the naval officers under his command that the Kingston-class vessels would be reduced from 12 to six ships.

The Kingstons are the smallest of the navy's 33 warships, submarines and coastal defence vessels. They were launched between 1995 and 1998 and carry crews of about 35, most of whom are naval reservists. Each ship has an anti-aircraft gun and two machine guns for basic self-defence.

But McFadden had also ordered that three frigates — HMCS Montreal, HMCS St John's and HMCS Vancouver — would now be conducting domestic and continental missions to a "limited degree."

Additionally, combat systems on HMCS Toronto, HMCS Ottawa and on the destroyer HMCS Athabaskan would be "minimally supported to enable safe to navigate sensors and communications only," according to a letter McFadden sent to his senior officers.

A key weapon system on board the Protecteur-class supply ships designed to destroy incoming missiles "will not be supported," it added. Some anti-submarine warfare capabilities for the navy's destroyer fleet would also not be supported.

© Copyright (c) Canwest News Service

First, I agree with David Akin’s source, defence analyst Mercedes Stephenson:  "What McFadden did was, he got his way … So, ultimately, he wins because he got the cuts reversed. What will become of him, I'm not so sure because there will be a huge price to pay for having had the minister look like he doesn't know what he's talking about."

The last phrase is why Fonberg and Natynczyk look like they are running amateur hour, not the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces. The Minister is not supposed to be surprised, as Natynczyk says he was, and he’s not supposed to made to look like a fool, either and the two people responsible to ensure the MND is properly briefed, not caught by surprise, not made to look silly when major policy decisions are announced, are Fonberg and  Natynczyk.

Second, we can be about 99% sure that this route, challenging the government’s wholly inadequate defence spending programme, can only get used once; that door is, now, closed.

The real villains, in my opinion are two very senior civil servants: Assistant Deputy Minister (Policy) Jill Sinclair* and Assistant Deputy Minister (Public Affairs) Josée Touchette. Tying up ships is, as I have already said, a major policy decision; if Sinclair didn't know this was coming down the pipe then she was not doing her job. Maybe Adm McFadden et al blindsided her but I, personally, find that a bit hard to believe; the 13th floor of NDHQ (the Executive floor), at least in my experience (out of date though it may be) is a pretty small place; it’s hard to keep ‘secrets’ there. Ditto Touchette: it was her job, her responsibility, to coordinate announcements of major policy decisions  - beginning with ensuring that the rest of the government’s propaganda PR machine is good to go with whatever DND is saying.

Natynczyk is, publicly, falling on his own, personal, CDS, sword not, in fairness to him, blaming the Navy for this fiasco. McFadden is going to be something of a hero in the Navy, which is a good thing, I suppose, because he is, now, about as popular as a screen-door on a submarine in the rest of NDHQ and the Government of Canada. The this is a fiasco … sad.


----------
* Jill Sinclair

Position: Former assistant secretary to the cabinet for foreign and defence policy. Sinclair is now the assistant deputy minister (policy) at Department of National Defence. Sinclair was copied on some of Colvin's memos.

Response to Colvin's testimony: Sinclair referred all questions to the public affairs office at DND.

Source: http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2009/11/20/f-afghan-detainees-colvin-whoswho.html

 

[Edward Campbell]

More opinion, from Don Martin, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the Ottawa Citizen:

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Natynczyk+makes+miss+Hillier/3031403/story.html

Natynczyk makes us miss Hillier

BY DON MARTIN, THE OTTAWA CITIZEN

MAY 15, 2010 8:16 AM

Quick. Bring back retired Gen. Rick Hillier before Canada's armed forces enter a decade of deference.

In a particularly spineless move by a top general already prone to weak-kneed appearances, Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Walter Natynczyk bowed to political pressure Friday and ripped up his own vice-admiral's order to mothball half the fleet of coastal patrol vessels to stay within budget.

To make matters worse, he rewrote the job description of Canada's supreme military leader as someone who meekly serves and protects Defence Minister Peter MacKay.

"It is my job to make sure my minister is not surprised, that's my job," Natynczyk told startled reporters on Friday. "I have a role to support the minister and if the minister is uncomfortable with this kind of intention, then I have to adjust resources in there to ensure we achieve the minister's intent."

Good grief. A military leader already ridiculed in senior circles for spending too much time flying his Challengers around the globe on questionable trips apparently now sees himself as a political staffer to MacKay.

It's not as if Natynczyk didn't know navy orders were coming down to dock half of Canada's coastal defence ships, reduce service for three frigates and mothball advanced weapon systems. His name is on the circulation list.

And given that even Liberal senators had copies of the orders several days ago, it defies belief that MacKay was "surprised" by the contents of a vice-admiral directive sent out last month.

Sure, MacKay's sensitivity to the move is understandable coming from an MP whose Central Nova riding, about an hour's drive from Halifax, borders a key Atlantic naval base. But sending pit bull MP Laurie Hawn into the Commons on Friday to insist the orders were "false" is a bit rich given they were in effect and being implemented until Thursday afternoon.

Natynczyk's move has got to hurt military morale, particularly having the country's top general tiptoeing along in the footsteps of no-nonsense Hillier.

The last budget dinged the military, eliminating future increases in spending that were already on the books and required for upgrades and replacement equipment in a post-Afghanistan military.

But not a peep of protest was heard from widely nicknamed "Uncle Walt."

Replay that tape under Hillier's vigilant watch and you'd have heard his howitzer of a howl deep underwater in the mid-Atlantic.

Speaking of submarines, let there be no doubt the Canadian navy is far from tip-top shape as it waits for overdue replacement vessels to arrive.

I was standing in St. John's harbour when HMCS Corner Brook pulled in last Friday. It was one of those used subs we bought from Britain in 2003, most of them having spent far more time in repairs than under water.

Well, you've got to see this bucket of bolts to believe it. Corner Brook has deep pockets of rust from bow to stern. Dozens of external panels appear to have fallen off. A foreign-looking steel plate has been screwed onto the hull. I asked one of the seamen if he felt safe submerging in this relic.

He shrugged. "I just follow orders."

I digress.

In RCMP circles, what's being done here is called the Musical Ride Manoeuvre. When the Mounties are ordered to cut costs, they inevitably put the popular equestrian tourist attraction on the chopping block. It's a given the public outcry will immediately force politicians into rescinding the cuts.

Perhaps Vice-Admiral Dean McFadden was engaging this strategy, knowing it would not be politically tolerated by the Halifax-elected MacKay. Perhaps he's willing to endure the public humiliation of having his orders rejected in order to force Natynczyk into pledging a review to find the funds to keep the ships on active duty.

But land and air chiefs must be plenty worried because refloating the fleet will require a lot of money siphoned from other areas of the Canadian Forces. (Ironically, a senior source says Natynczyk returned almost $500 million of unspent military funds last month.)

Canada's chief of defence staff has a duty to defend his military, not subject it to change orders based on political expediency. For his soldiers, sailors and pilots, his job performance must come as a rude surprise.

Don Martin writes on national politics.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

The CDS’s range of options was limited:

• Stand up, with McFadden, and tell Canadians what is, or ought to be self evident – the Canada First Defence Stategy which Minister MacKay says provides predictable defence funding is, as I predicted, wholly inadequate;

• Do a complete Baril – blame McFadden and, maybe even, fire him; or

• Do a partial Baril – fall on his own, CDS, sword, give McFadden more money (the Navy no doubt thanks the Army, Air Force and central support services who will, now, do without) and hope it will all blow over in a day or two.

As taught in Appreciating the Situation 1010, Gen Natynczyk chose the least unacceptable course of action but it is going to cost him some reputation points, as it should.

Martin says, and I believe him, that Natynczyk was made aware of McFadden’s major policy decision. If his staff failed to alert him then he needs to do a wholesale cleaning of the 13th floor; if he knew and failed to brief Fonberg and MacKay then he messed up one of his primary duties – he is the link between the defence staff and the government. He has direct, unrestricted access to the Minister, all the time, and he has relatively unfettered access to the Clerk of the Pricy Council and the Prime Minister on important military matters - and one would have thought tying up part of the fleet just might be an important military matter.

I think that, in the current fiscal climate, going to MacKay and even Harper and saying “we’re going to tie up part of the fleet if you don’t give us more money” would have resulted in tying up part of the fleet - but it would have saved one and all a lot of public embarrassment.

Perhaps Martin and I are wrong, perhaps McFadden blindsided everyone, including Natynczyk and floated this in relative secrecy, until it exploded in the media. But I don’t think that’s the case.