Challenger/"VIP" Jet/CF Chopper Use (CDS, others) [merged]

[Old Sweat]

I wonder if the media have been frustrated in their failed efforts to get people like Bev Oda and whats his name (the MP mixed up with the Chinese journalist) fired, and have switched their sights to the CDS? All the usual suspects seemed to have been lined up for outraged comments, most of which are nasty and forgettable, like a sound bite should be. In my opinion, the reporting has been less than stellar, for example the CTV Ottawa 1800 news last night claimed he was using Challengers for personal reasons. Mind you, I suspect the newsroom was using copy from the network.

 

[Remius]

My tin foil hat seems to have worked this time...we'll see where this goes.  I hate it so much that no matter how much logic you throw at someone they still won't see it or acknowledge it.  Plus I'm not happy with the PM seemingly throwing him under the bus...

 

[2010newbie]

Here's an editorial from the National Post defending Gen Natynczyk:

The big scoop, revealed last week after a TV network “obtained flight logs,” showed that Canada’s top military man took one of the jets to “appreciation nights” for the military at various sports events, and also to join his family on a Caribbean vacation after he missed the regular flight.

It supposedly all added up to $1 million in flight costs. So Big Whoop-de-doo.
First of all, who cares? The chief of the Canadian military is in charge of forces that are currently engaged in two wars, and are based at locations across Canada. His responsibilities are mammoth, and serious in the extreme. No other position in the government puts you in charge of men and women who take such extreme risks on the country’s behalf, and could end any day in a coffin heading for home. If he has to fly a lot, and once in a while the involves using a Challenger, big fricking deal.

Full article here - http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/09/19/give-natynczyk-his-own-challenger/

 

[Edward Campbell]

But the CBC (radio) just reported (1130 Hrs) that Gen Natynczyk has done an about turn and is now offereing to pay back some money. That is, de facto an admission of guilt of wrongdoing, so CTV wins and Natynczyk loses and I guess he is finished.

 

[OldSolduer]

But the CBC (radio) just reported (1130 Hrs) that Gen Natynczyk has done an about turn and is now offereing to pay back some money. That is, de facto an admission of guilt of wrongdoing, so CTV wins and Natynczyk loses and I guess he is finished.

I concur. It won't be long before we see a retirement announcement, and an announcement who the new CDS is. My two cents, Walt was one of the best Chiefs I've had the pleasure of serving under. He was there at the repatriation for the fallen from 3 Sep 2008, and I found him to be very genuine. 

My tin foil hat is on here, so I'll say no more.


Edit: I guess that attending all those repatriations at Trenton over the last three plus years counts for nothing.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Here is the story on CTV news, headlined: "Top soldier open to repaying Caribbean vacation flight."

 

[Edward Campbell]

... The various forms of media are only concerned with cases that can generate outrage, and gain viewership/readers. I've noticed that the media thrives on cases where there's a certain degree of ambiguity ...
...
Just my  :2c: .

I'll add my  :2c: to that, too.

I reiterate my contention that the  Gen Natynczyk 'story' is Gotcha journalism of the very worst sort. I expected no more ... Edit: I decided to delete a rude comment about a specific journalist, not becuase I think it was wrong but rather because it was rude and not especially germane to this discussion.

Oh well, admirals and generals are tough and journalists are [expletive deleted].

In my opinion 49.75% of journalists are flacks, employed by big business, big government, big labour and big special interest groups to write propaganda; another 49.75% are little more than stenographers who regurgitate what the flacks send them; about 0.5% of journalists are out there trying to tell Canadians what's going on.

 

[cupper]

Is it just me or is there a trend happening here, where the CDS is approaching the end of the his term the media seems to need to generate some contrived issue which then results in the general public gaining the false perspective that the CDS is leaving under a cloud of controversy.

On a side note, I noticed a short article on the CBC website that made note of the fact that the new e-Passports will jump the cost from $85.00 to $225.00. This little tidbit was discovered when the costs were released for Harper and his family to get their passports renewed. Interestingly enough, in this great time of fiscal restraint, the taxpayer is picking up the tab for all of them, not just that of the PM's.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Is it just me or is there a trend happening here, where the CDS is approaching the end of the his term the media seems to need to generate some contrived issue which then results in the general public gaining the false perspective that the CDS is leaving under a cloud of controversy.

On a side note, I noticed a short article on the CBC website that made note of the fact that the new e-Passports will jump the cost from $85.00 to $225.00. This little tidbit was discovered when the costs were released for Harper and his family to get their passports renewed. Interestingly enough, in this great time of fiscal restraint, the taxpayer is picking up the tab for all of them, not just that of the PM's.

Why would you even mention that and possibly sidetrack this thread? If you're that interested, start another topic in the appropriate forum.

Milnet.ca Staff

 

[PuckChaser]

Why is the PMO deciding what should and shouldn't be paid back? Is that not a function of the Treasury Board and the rules in place for the specific situation the CDS was in? Someone pointed out earlier that he was entitled just as any of us were to costs associated with his cancelled vacation due to cancelled leave.

 

[The Bread Guy]

But the CBC (radio) just reported (1130 Hrs) that Gen Natynczyk has done an about turn and is now offereing to pay back some money. That is, de facto an admission of guilt of wrongdoing, so CTV wins and Natynczyk loses and I guess he is finished.

Sad, but have to agree so far....

Why is the PMO deciding what should and shouldn't be paid back? Is that not a function of the Treasury Board and the rules in place for the specific situation the CDS was in?

Good point - the reporters asked the PM because he was available, but I don't know if any reporters have asked those who make the rules themselves.

 

[Good2Golf]

CTV News - Top soldier open to
repaying Caribbean vacation flight

...However, he conceded that it may have been wiser for him to
pay for the cost of his trip to St. Maarten up front, then submit the
receipt for reimbursement.

Natynczyk had missed his scheduled vacation charter flight in order to
attend a repatriation ceremony for several fallen soldiers.

He then took a military flight to catch up with his family, at a cost of
almost $93,000 for the return flight.

He said the Treasury Board has a policy in place for occasions when
scheduled leave is disrupted or cancelled, and he was advised he was
within his rights to take the military flight....

So, the only thing that changes from my previous analysis of the
situation is the the CDS had not yet paid for his commercial ticket when
he was recalled from leave to attend the repatriation ceremony in
Trenton with the MND.  I don't see the General being the first one to
ask the MND for permission to fly on the Challenger.  It was likely a
keen staff officer, their knowing the Treasury Board policy to repay the
costs of civilian tickets due to cancelled leave, and their assessing
that last-minute commercial tickets (which the Gov't would be required
by Federal regulation to repay the General) would be rather expensive,
so better to ask permission from the MND to take the Challenger, which
was a sunk cost anyway, rather than having Gen Natynczyk then buy a last
minute airline ticket for thousands of dollars likely, and having
taxpayers pay for it.

Notwithstanding the incorrect use of the $92,000 flight cost figure by
the media (and some in Government), it appears as though taxpayers would
rather have had the General buy that last-minute ticket after the
repartiation ceremony and pay an ADDITIONAL $X,XXX to reimburse the
General, than just be satisfied that that CF resources were actually
used in the most cost-effective (to the taxpayer) manner.

Sadly, only a few folks who actually understand (or were willing to
listen to it explained to them by those who knew) how the use of CF
aircraft is governed will appreciate that the best interests of the
taxpayer were in fact supported by the General's use of the Challenger.

Regards
G2G

 

[Edward Campbell]

Sadly, G2G, we are dealing with journalists - so facts don't matter; impressions, innuendo and agendas, they're what matters. This is, now, a journalistic dog-pile and Gen Natynczyk is trapped at the bottom of the heap while masses of fat slobs pile on, weighing down any hope of truth or factual reporting as they search to get their byline on the front page or their face on the screen.

 

[OldSolduer]

How true. When Russ Williams (sorry to the cats out there) was arrested, some CBC reporter tried to pin it all on the CDS. Her tactic was to use the "how well are they screened" and "who is responsible for the CF members?"
Walt was treated very shabbily by the CBC IMO :2c:

 

[George Wallace]

When this story first broke, and the PM was the talking head in the newscast, the only thing that popped into my head was the question of why the PM was being so "two faced"?  Prime Minister Harper has just returned for a long junket to South America, with his wife in attendance, using a CF Airbus.  Now a CF Airbus is much more expensive to operate than a Challenger, so who spent the more in the way of Taxpayer's Dollars?  Is the PM going to reimburse any of those costs out of his pocket?

The point has been covered that the Aircraft and crews have budgeted hours to fly to maintain qualifications/skills/etc. and whether they fly empty or on a tasking, no matter what, that money and time will be spent.  Why not usefully (other than maintaining crew qualifications - ie. NOT EMPTY)?

Another point, the CDS will not be sitting back reading the Sun page 3 on these trips, but often in Top Secret briefings or working on Top Secret materials.  Scott Brison of the Liberal Party once discussed Confidential Government policies on a CAL and we all know what happened to him.

As most here understand the intracacies of the CDS's job, we know this to be a non-issue, even more so than the PM's junkets to South America.

 

[Remius]

This is what makes this stink.  Whenever a cabinet minister gets into hot water (there have been a few) the PM staunchly defends them or makes no comments about it.  A story breaks about the CDS and now he's "going to look into it".  Stupid tinfoil...

 

[Good2Golf]

Just so folks understand the Regulations and Instructions in effect for all CF personnel, regarding the recall of personnel from authorized leave and reimbursement of the individual at public expense, the pertinent orders are:

Queen's Regulation and Order (QR&O) Chapter 16, Article 01 (QR&O 16.01) - Witholding of and Recall from Leave (http://admfincs.mil.ca/qr_o/vol1/ch016_e.asp#16.01)

(1) Leave may be withheld from an officer or non-commissioned member only when there is a military requirement to do so.

(2) An officer or non-commissioned member on leave may be recalled to duty only:

  (a) because of imperative military requirements; and

  (b) when the member’s commanding officer personally directs the member’s return to duty.

(3) An officer or non-commissioned member recalled to duty under paragraph (2) ceases to be on leave and is on duty during the period of the journey from the place from which he is recalled to his place of duty and during the period of the return journey if he resumes leave immediately after completion of the duty for which he was recalled.

...and the Treasury Board-compliant Canadian Forces Compensation and Benefits Instruction (CBI), Chapter 209, Article 54 (CBI 209.54) - Reimbursement of Expenses When Recalled From or On Cancellation of Leave (http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dgcb-dgras/pub/cbi-dra/209-eng.asp#sec-209-54)

209.54(1) (Application) Subject to paragraph (2), an officer or non-commissioned member who is recalled to duty from leave in accordance with article 16.01 - Withholding of and Recall From Leave of the QR&O or whose approved leave has been cancelled for service reasons may be reimbursed for:

a. transportation and travelling expenses in accordance with CBI 209.83 - Transportation and Travelling Expenses – Move of Officers and Non-commissioned Members on Posting or of Dependants for the member and, where applicable, their dependants to the place of duty from the place from which the member was recalled and for the return journey if the member resumes leave immediately after completion of the duty for which the member was recalled; and

b. additional expenses resulting either from the cost of breaking contractual arrangements or cancellation fees that were made specifically for the purpose of an approved leave period.

209.54(2) (Submission of claims for reimbursement) Claims for reimbursement under paragraph (1) shall be submitted in accordance with orders and instructions issued by the Chief of the Defence Staff.

Gen Natynczyk was recalled from leave (this would be the MND's direction to do so) for him to attend, as the Commander of the CF, the repatriation ceremony, in accordance with QR&O 16.01.

Before the CDS purchased a last-minute ticket (for which he would have been rightfully entitled to claim reimbursement for under CBI 209.54) the Minister gave permission for Gen Natynczyk to be flown to St.Maartens on the Challenger aircraft, the costs for which are a Departmental "sunk cost" (i.e. fuel/YFR allocations already funded and pilots, technicians, etc... are paid their salary no matter when the plane flies, etc..., -- there was limited, if any true incremental cost to the use of the Challenger beyond resources allocated at the commencement of the Department's fiscal year).

HAD The Minister refused Gen Natynzcyk's travel on the Challenger, Gen Natynczyk would have purchased his own commercial ticket to fly to St.Maartens, then he would have been entitled to be fully reimbursed for the cost of that ticket, in accordance with CBI 209.54.

In the end, the taxpayer did not pay anything other than the original resource/YFR allocation for the Challenger fleet.  Reimbursement of the General's ticket, had it happend WOULD have been an additional cost to the Department, and Government to ensure compliancy with Treasury Board directives.

I have no expectation that the media assessment of the situation will give any meaningful consideration of the situation, or in fact to Gen Natynczyk's right to his OWN reimbursement of ticket costs, had he not been flown by Challenger.

Regards
G2G

 

[jollyjacktar]

For what it's worth, when I flew from Que City to Ottawa following my return on Roto 7 the CDS was also on that flight with his good lady following his attendance in an official capacity at Valcartier.  They both sat well behind me in economy seating as any other CF member would, and not as some fat cats.  He is a good man, and I would hope this is not a concerted effort by some at partisan politics to stab him in the back and dump his remains.  The politics of a public presence and what can become of people makes my skin crawl and blood boil many's the time. 

 

[SeaKingTacco]

James Cudmore from the CBC had a great, factually correct report early yesterday morning about the whole situation- so there is good reporting going on.

 

[dapaterson]

On the other hand, this has distracted everyone from a Parliamentary Secretary having an affair with a foreign intelligence agent, so from certain perspectives, it's all good.