• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Canadian Federal Election 44 - Sep 2021

Oldgateboatdriver said:
So let's see here: The party that said the acquisition of C-17's was a waste of money now makes it part of its platform to "grow strategic airlift" ... after the line for C-17 has been closed and Canada missed its chance at snatching the last three or four? What is he going to acquire? Used C-5 parked in the desert and refurbished to current US Air Force standard?

And what on earth is a short range strategic airlifter? If you are going to go at the strategic airlifter level (as opposed to tactical airlifter) wouldn't you want them to have reasonable legs ... unless what you have in mind is the Airbus A400M or the Super Hercules.
Click to expand...
Voters don't know the difference, nor do the LPC staffers that wrote the platform.

Hell I'm sure you could send in a picture of the Spruce Moose, and there would be a few serious considerations, until a SME steps in with reality.

i-said-hop-in-hostage.gif
 
Oldgateboatdriver said:
So let's see here: The party that said the acquisition of C-17's was a waste of money now makes it part of its platform to "grow strategic airlift" ... after the line for C-17 has been closed and Canada missed its chance at snatching the last three or four? What is he going to acquire? Used C-5 parked in the desert and refurbished to current US Air Force standard?

And what on earth is a short range strategic airlifter? If you are going to go at the strategic airlifter level (as opposed to tactical airlifter) wouldn't you want them to have reasonable legs ... unless what you have in mind is the Airbus A400M or the Super Hercules.
Click to expand...

Strat airlift can include replacing the Polaris (long range) and possibly growing the Herc J fleet.
 
Their cost of their legally owned gun ban from Bill C-21 just went from $200M to as much as $12.8B, all to be spent in 2022, if every province and territory buys into Trudeau's plan. For sure QC and BC will be on board, so his startup costs are already at least $2.8B.
 
Comparing platforms on the veterans' front - Team Blue:
"... Canada’s Conservatives will:
• End the mess of two benefit systems - Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) and Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) - that do not work together and replace them with one streamlined system of benefits from enlistment through service and retirement.
• Ensure financial security & transition support for injured Veterans and their families.
• Streamline benefit adjudication & set performance targets to ensure that the benefits system is focused on helping our veterans rather than on outdated procedures.
• Allow veterans and their families to direct their care and rehabilitation.
• Insist on care, compassion, and respect in every aspect of veteran services.
• Ensure that the benefits system is focused not only on compensation but on helping veterans build meaningful careers through partnerships with universities, colleges, and businesses.

Specific measures that Canada’s Conservatives will take to honour the sacred trust include:
• Empowering military doctors, who know the demands of service and the impact of injuries, to determine a service-related injury for all CAF and VAC purposes.
° No longer will one medical evaluation deny someone the ability to serve, and a separate assessment then deny them benefits.
• Revising the concept of “universality of service” to be job-specific.
° The “everyone is a rifleman” concept is outdated and unsuited to the realities of modern warfare while leading to injured service members being pushed out and cut off.
° Fitness categories will become job-specific, and those who wish to continue to serve after injury will have the opportunity to retrain in an area where they can serve.
• Ensuring a smooth transition for any CAF members who have to be medically released, including retaining them in the CAF until all the benefits and services from the CAF, VAC, and Service Income Security Insurance Plan have been confirmed and put in place.
• Implementing the Lifelong Disability Benefit for moderately to severely injured veterans.
• Making a transfer to the reserves a practical and easy option and adjusting service requirements to balance the need for training with the reality of adapting to the civilian workforce.
° This will ease a regular force member’s transition and strengthen the reserves.
• Ensuring that military families, especially spouses, are provided with sufficient support.
• Implementing a strategy to combat homelessness among veterans and explore the potential for using surplus military housing to provide housing for homeless veterans.
• Covering the cost of PTSD service dogs for veterans and creating training standards for them.
• Empowering frontline VAC employees to adjudicate claims.
• Completing the Afghanistan War Memorial.
• Funding educational initiatives that teach Canadians about veterans’ service and Canada’s place in the world ..."
Click to expand...
Team Red:
"... A re-elected Liberal government will:
• Move forward on our plan to launch a pilot program next year that will provide rent supplements and wrap-around supports to homeless Veterans, so that they can get the housing and services they need.
• Introduce a Veterans stream to the Rapid Housing Initiative which will see new affordable housing become available for Veterans.

(...)

A re-elected Liberal government will:
• Continue our work to reduce wait times and ensure Veterans and their families receive decisions on their applications in a timely manner.
• Invest the necessary resources to accomplish this, such as hiring more case workers and adjudicators, continuing to enhance disability benefit processing, and by enhancing innovative digital solutions.
• Ensure the benefit system and Veterans Affairs services are responsive and meet the needs of underrepresented Veterans including women, LGBTQ2, racializes, and Indigenous Veterans.

(...)

A re-elected Liberal government will:
• Launch Canada’s first National Veteran Employment Strategy, with a goal of ensuring that every Veteran can find meaningful work after releasing from the Canadian Armed Forces. A part of this strategy will include improving qualification recognition so that certifications earned while in service can be used in civilian life.

(...)

To ensure that the legacies of those who have served live on, a re-elected Liberal government will:
• Support Commemorate Canada and ensure this program recognizes modern Veterans as well as women, Indigenous, racialized, and LGBT2Q Veterans from all conflicts.
• Ensure that we recognize the valuable contributions of Canadian Armed Forces Veterans who have served our country in domestic operations such as wildfires, ice storms, and floods ...
Click to expand...
 
dapaterson said:
Liberal platform is out. Commitment to grow the CAF's long and short range strategic airlift.
Click to expand...
Sigh. Would I be a cynic if I said that this was meant to be a spin-doctor attempt to respond to the shit show that was the Canadian evac for Afghanistan?

Just asking for a friend.
 
That would be very un-Liberal, Weinie.

Why would they want to put something in their program at this point that would only serve to re-emphasize one of their recent debacle? They certainly could not use it to say" We didn't have enough strategic airlift to carry out our plan in Afghanistan" when they failed to make that claim at the time, and when they have been in power for six years before that and didn't see the need to say so four years ago (has it been that long?) in SSE or do anything about it during that time.

Besides, this can't be a surprise. I have friends at Air Transport that keep telling me that they have been informing the higher ups for years that in Canada, it is not possible to make a coherent sentence that would include the words "we have enough" and "strategic airlift" in it.

P.S. Here's somethings else "strategic" we haven't enough of , but no one talks about: Sealift.
 
Oldgateboatdriver said:
That would be very un-Liberal, Weinie.

Why would they want to put something in their program at this point that would only serve to re-emphasize one of their recent debacle? They certainly could not use it to say" We didn't have enough strategic airlift to carry out our plan in Afghanistan" when they failed to make that claim at the time, and when they have been in power for six years before that and didn't see the need to say so four years ago (has it been that long?) in SSE or do anything about it during that time.

Besides, this can't be a surprise. I have friends at Air Transport that keep telling me that they have been informing the higher ups for years that in Canada, it is not possible to make a coherent sentence that would include the words "we have enough" and "strategic airlift" in it.

P.S. Here's somethings else "strategic" we haven't enough of , but no one talks about: Sealift.
Click to expand...
And on the obverse, why would they emphasize/point out their failures/shortcomings, as you stated above, unless they have concocted a plan to defeat criticism of this very point?
 
Short answer is nobody has criticized the GoC for a lack of strategic airlifters at this time. And if they had, you don't respond by saying Ok, we'll buy more.

I would think it is because you are opening a can of worms. First, it would make it sound like you are complaining after the fact about something you didn't complain about at the time.

Second, even if you did have more strategic airlift assets available, would it have made any difference? I may be wrong, because I am not in the know, but got a strange feeling from what I read in the various papers that with the planes available, their location and with the time on hand for the evacuation, more flights could have been flown and more people could have been loaded on each, but that the American control of the air bridge limited the number of spots we could get for our flights (like every body else) in the first instance and our abiding by our "seat belt" regulations restricted the second. But I've not heard anyone mention we were short of planes. So why draw attention to the Canadian participation in the air bridge if all of these facts can be thrown in your leader's face during the debates?

At this point in time, we have no idea why this point has suddenly been put in the program, instead of making reference to SSE and connecting to it somehow (another scoring opportunity for the other parties at debate time: "You just put out your white paper and already you are changing your shopping list!!!" We'll have to wait and see their logic, but in my cynical view based on past performance of the Liberals, it's probably there with a view to making some sort of announcement at a staged event in an air industry setting to say "look at what we will do to support your industry".

But that's just cynical me talking here.
 
Oldgateboatdriver said:
So let's see here: The party that said the acquisition of C-17's was a waste of money now makes it part of its platform to "grow strategic airlift" ... after the line for C-17 has been closed and Canada missed its chance at snatching the last three or four? What is he going to acquire? Used C-5 parked in the desert and refurbished to current US Air Force standard?

And what on earth is a short range strategic airlifter? If you are going to go at the strategic airlifter level (as opposed to tactical airlifter) wouldn't you want them to have reasonable legs ... unless what you have in mind is the Airbus A400M or the Super Hercules.
Click to expand...
I assume they’re talking about the tanker replacement, A330 MRTT for strategic airlift. Maybe the short range they’re talking about the Kingfishers that are half delivered?
 
In keeping with the trend one could only assume the following rationale: Harper didn't buy enough at the time... the LPC aim to correct Harper's past mistake so don't vote for O'Toole because... Harper.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Edward Campbell
    • Like
    • Insightful
The Next Canadian Government
18 19 20
Replies
394
Views
26K
Colin Parkinson
Colin Parkinson
The Bread Guy
2024 Rail Strike (or not?)
3 4 5
Replies
84
Views
6K
brihard
B
K
    • Trolling
    • Humorous
Politicized Climate Change as Wealth Redistribution
Replies
3
Views
697
daftandbarmy
daftandbarmy
Kirkhill
    • Like
    • Insightful
The Decline of the Liberal Party- Swerved Into a Confederation Topic
26 27 28
Replies
558
Views
224K
Fishbone Jones
Fishbone Jones
Kirkhill
    • Like
Canadian, Eh?
Replies
0
Views
2K
Kirkhill
Kirkhill
Back
Top