DART too expensive for Foreign Affairs budget?

[Kirkhill]

Does anybody know whether DART deployments were previously funded out of the DND budget or the DFAIT budget?

Does this possibly represent a change in the way Ottawa apportions costs?  Because if so it means that DND could end up with a LOT more dollars to spend on manpower, training and capital.  Other candidates for cost transference are pension plans, compliance with legislation, governance, grants, research and development.....all mentioned by Col Marsh (ret'd) and others in various articles.

That allows Liberals to spend more on Defence without greatly increasing the Defence budget.  A Billion or 2 more in annual funds, a Billion or 2 less in costs, a revision to the bureaucracy (major/minor, civil/military according to your taste) and pretty soon you are talking about real money.

Heck, maybe they can start inducting and training all of those interested citizens lining up at the door.

DART aid for Haiti may be too costly: Pettigrew


FROM CANADIAN PRESS

Foreign Affairs Minister Pierre Pettigrew says it may be too expensive to send the Canadian Forces' Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) to Haiti, CBC's The National reported today.

DART provides medical care and clean drinking water in disaster areas, both of which are needed in Haiti in the wake of tropical storm Jeanne.

Pettigrew headed for Port-au-Prince on Tuesday to survey the damage left by Jeanne. Canada has already pledged about $3 million in relief aid to Haiti, but so far the government has not offered to send in the DART team, but neither has Haiti or the UN asked, the CBC said.

"It's not something that you offer or whatever," said Pettigrew. "We look at the needs in the country. DART is a very expensive thing. I mean, it's all very nice to say DART, but it represents several million dollars."

Still, Foreign Affairs officials say use of the team hasn't been ruled out.

Pettigrew promises Canada's involvement in Haiti is long-term. Last year Ottawa pledged $150 million over several years to the country, as part of a reconstruction and development program.

The opposition says the government should not worry about money in a midst of a humanitarian crisis.

Peter Goldring, the Conservative foreign affairs critic for the Caribbean, has just returned from Grenada, which also suffered severe storm damage. He says the DART should be sent to the region immediately. "You know they're needed. Why are they holding back? Send them."

The military hasn't deployed the DART since 1999 when it went to Turkey after a massive earthquake. The five-week mission cost almost $8 million.

The military says a reconnaissance team could be on the ground in 12 hours, with the rest of the 200-member emergency team ready to go anywhere on 48 hours notice. The government just has to give the order.

The estimated death toll from flooding and mudslides stands at 1,500, with 900 missing, most in the city of Gonaives, where aid workers continued to face desperate crowds clamouring for, and sometimes attempting to loot, emergency supplies.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_PrintFriendly&c=Article&cid=1096409411170&call_pageid=968332188774

 

[Cloud Cover]

Does anybody know whether DART deployments were previously funded out of the DND budget or the DFAIT budget?

DART deployments were typically meant to be funded out of special treasury board requisitions not incidental to any particular budget, the money is used to fund an event or occurrence, not necessarily a line ministry item. However, the requested funds could be used to reimburse a ministry for an expenditure, such as special vehicles like Gators etc. As far as staffing the unit, training, supplies and large pieces of equipment, there are more qualified people than me on the site that can speak to that. But, I have worked on several requisitions [inc. 1 DND] that went to the treasury board for fund allocation during all phases of a deployment.

 

[Kirkhill]

Thanks whiskey 601.

So if I take you right I should:

a) as a taxpayer be glad that the government is being careful with my money

b) as a citizen be unhappy that the government is not taking a more proactive international role by deploying underutilised existing assets (Does that make DART an unnecessary expense?)

c) as a supporter of the military be unhappy that the government has not found new and imaginative ways to fund the CF.

Any place close?

I was hoping they might have found  new funding stream.

Oh well,

Cheers, and thanks again.

 

[Cloud Cover]

I am going to clarify a bit: DART has a DND budget, that's for sure. Problem is, [was], how big should the budget be? What if there are no disasters, or more likely, no disasters that the government wishes to attend to. So, it is really just a maintenance budget to keep the unit as a formation, but the situation dictates the scale, and thus the cost, of the response. That's pretty reasonable, IMHO. Set up the formation, and have a friendly banker willing to pay the costs of deployments. No deployment= 0 trips to the bank.

But here is the rub ... why refuse to deploy on the basis of cost if the capability to react is in place? Seems to me politics, and not need, dictate DART deployments, just like every other type of deployment.     Does DART exist just so that we can say we have the capability, much like other formations we have/had/lost/need?

I think we need a supply/log tech to jump in here, because I believe the real costs involved are purchasing and storing the supplies, provisioning and maintaining the deployed forces, and of course bringing them home.

One other thing, there are some legal complexities that have to be overcome with respect to deployments, such as permission for overflights, capacity to enter into local contracts etc. Occasionally, those things might constitute an unexpected cost.

A much more controversial element to the discussion is the problem is security for the team, which means people with guns and all the political b.s. accompanying that consideration.

Bottom line is this, beyond maybe adding another DART team, and possibly a reserve DART, don't look for billion dollar program expenditures for military projects, even ones with humanitarian functions like DART. There is a distinct possibility grounded in military requirements, and probably a good financial argument, to simply contract the DART function to a civilian org. like a contractor. I'm not saying that is in the works,[and I wouldn't know anymore anyway] but if DART went ASD, would the CF be denied an actual military capability or the opportunity to provide a worthwhile service to the government by the military? 

 

[SeaKingTacco]

As purely uninformed, but educated speculation, could the hesitation to deploy DART boil down to a shortage of airlift?   How easy is it to find the 29(or so) Hercules sorties required to deploy the DART right now?  

 

[Marauder]

as a citizen be unhappy that the government is not taking a more proactive international role by deploying underutilised existing assets (Does that make DART an unnecessary expense?)

I think this annoucement could perhaps be the writing on the wall that we always find after the fact. Makes one wonder if DART could be on the chopping block to help funnel more cash to the premiers for "health care" <snort>
Wouldn't suprise me, anyway.

 

[Armymedic]

I have just returned from OP MED conference where deploying the DART was discussed in the back rooms and bars around Edmonton.

BTW from a reliable source, deploying the DART to a loc in the Caribbean will cost 7 million dollars to start. Most will be in renting the aircraft to get it to Haiti, as we have NO strategic air lift capacity.

Second is the man management issue. Petawawa is currently to provide the majority of manning. There lays the question of avail pers who did not recently deploy in the last 12 months...Also, Roto 3 is to be staffed by Pet. Current TO&E reflects alot of pers who didn't deploy last winter, and almost mirrors the DART for 2 Fd Amb, 2 RCHA, and 2CER. IF they were to deploy now, the DART would fall over the 2 Nov stand up for Roto 3 tng and cause severe shortages of pers.

 

[Spr.Earl]

As for DART pers. it's mainly made   up of all Engineering trades wheather you are Blue hat or a Green hat.
Every Reg.,Wing task's X pers for the DART Team for 6 months and it rotates through the country.
Also every Inf. Reg designates x pers. for the DART team for protection if needed.

While up in Cold Lake this last 3 week's word came down from my Unit in B.C. asking would I vol. for Hurricane Relief which I said yes DND was prepared but as someone stated no Air Lift or is it $$$$'s.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

As purely uninformed, but educated speculation, could the hesitation to deploy DART boil down to a shortage of airlift?   How easy is it to find the 29(or so) Hercules sorties required to deploy the DART right now?  

The CBC nailed this point in their coverage.  They said on average only 12 herc's are in service at any one time and they are usually fully tasked.  As such, there is no ability to arrange 29+ sorties to get to Haiti, much less try to support the team once they get there.




Matthew. 

 

[pbi]

As I have commented elsewhere, the DART is not a proper military undertaking and should be done away with as quickly as possible. Without meaning to denigrate the soldiers who compose it, the DART is IMHO a typical "feel good" gesture that we can ill afford and that distracts us from more appropriate issues. It confuses the role of the military with that of GOs or NGOs. Give the money to ICRC, DFAIT, etc. Get the military out of the direct humanitarianism game, except for support to Canadians during severe domestic ops. Cheers.

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

Just curious pbi, do you feel that the SAR Techs should also fall under a civie or coast guard umbrella of support and finance?

 

[Armymedic]

ref: air lift...

Try 24 Herc sorties and 7 Antonov sorties, and thats for kit.

I have to agree with pbi as to the irrelevance of a "force" to do such work.


What would be good, IMHO is the ability of major NGO's requesting specific capabilities from the CF to assist in a foreign disaster area (ie ROWPU, Role 1 or 2 med facilities).

 

[Kirkhill]

In some respects I am inclined to agree with pbi and armymedic, in spite of my posts on "niche roles for engineers".  My problem is essentially with NGOs.  I have a problem with NON-Governmental Organizations.

I thought one of the problems we were dealing with on this planet is the declining power and relevance of many national governments.  Much of the world believes that governments have no relevance to their lives.  Anarchists, corporations and much of the developing world, including much of Islam, is of that opinion, in my opinion.

NGOs just foster that belief, demonstrating that you can't rely on governments.  I won't discuss here the self-serving nature of many NGOs. 

I consider NGOs, despite the best intentions of the majority of their members to be as destabilizing to the established order of nation-states, in their own way, as anarchists, Al-Qaeda and the old Moscow and Beijing sponsored Liberation Fronts.

While I can agree that perhaps DART is not a job for the CF,  assuming that the CF becomes a solely War-Fighing organization, then I would still like DART to be stood up under Government auspices.  Perhaps under a paramilitary/civil department of the DND that would include the Militia, the Coast Guard and SAR organizations - amongst others.

I can be very flexible, but please..... rid me of NGOs.

Cheers.

 

[Armymedic]

Kirkhill,
Ack on the NGO's,

Change my opinion to:

then allow foreign gov'ts to ask for our capabilities at times of their crisis, because after all if the destination nation doesn't ask for help, we ain't sending it.

 

[Kirkhill]

Sounds like a plan Armymedic.

 

[pbi]

Just curious pbi, do you feel that the SAR Techs should also fall under a civie or coast guard umbrella of support and finance?

Not really, because SAR is actually a combat support function designed to rescue pilots downed on missions: the rescuing of civvies is incidental, although it has morphed into the main effort for our SAR organization. However, in the US the Coast Guard does various types of SAR work. Now, although the CG forms the "Fifth Armed Service" in the US, in peacetime it normally responds to the US Dept of Transport. So, I suppose, on reflection, that our CG could do more SAR than what they do now.

For all of you guys slanging NGOs, you are missing the fact that much of the world's most challenging humanitarian work is done by NGOs who regularly take far greater risks than we are prepared to with our soldiers. They often go to places that GOs will not go, under condtions no civil servant/GO employee would consider. These people are the real experts in humanitarian ops, not us. In my assessment, our role in a humanitarian op outside Canada should be limited to providing a secure environment and facilitation if and when required (ie: C-130 lift if commercial lift is not available, etc)

As far as the decline of governments goes, I think that is an outdated concept. First of all, we have more national governments now than we have ever had. Second, most of these groups fighting about various issues are not fighting to do away with governments; quite the contrary they are normally planning to establish governments of their own once they win. Third the multinational corporations need governments to function. Governments, overwhelmingly, provide the security, economic structure and legal framework that allows corporations to function without having their factories torched and their workers murdered every day. Unstable situations drive away major investment, they do not attract it. Government and industry are usually hand-in-hand. Cheers.

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

pbi you have mail