- Reaction score
- 4,591
- Points
- 1,260
Maybe they meant a "baselet"?PMedMoe said:Canada "opened" a base in Kuwait? I thought we were just using part of a U.S. base. ???
Maybe they meant a "baselet"?PMedMoe said:Canada "opened" a base in Kuwait? I thought we were just using part of a U.S. base. ???
milnews.ca said:Maybe they meant a "baselet"?
PMedMoe said:Canada "opened" a base in Kuwait? I thought we were just using part of a U.S. base. ???
The Department of National Defence is abandoning plans for three mobile, deployable Tim Hortons outlets, denying Canadian troops that familiar taste of home on future overseas missions.
As Canada's combat mission in Afghanistan was winding down in 2011, military officials proposed making it standard practice to have trailer-sized units on hand to sling coffee and donuts to soldiers.
A Tim's outlet at Kandahar Airfield, which operated for five years, generated $7.1 million in gross profit, much of which was plowed back into military support and services programs after expenses were paid.
The proposal to have trailers ready to go for other extended deployments was energetically endorsed by the country's overseas commander, according to documents obtained by The Canadian Press under the Access to Information Act.
"The potential availability of a Tim Hortons outlet for future missions will give ... additional flexibility to enhance the physical and emotional well-being of deployed personnel with a little taste from home," said a memo dated Dec. 14, 2011, which asked Lt.-Gen. Stuart Beare for his blessing.
Plans were so far advanced that the military's support services unit had planned to begin construction of the trailers sometime in January 2012, but they were cancelled before any work was started.
A defence spokeswoman, Lt. Michele Tremblay, said the coffee houses were "no longer required."
The proposal was initially drafted in the context of setting up a Tim's outlet to serve the 950 troops taking part in the Kabul training mission, she said.
The idea was abandoned when it was weighed against the $100,000 per trailer cost of construction, and the fact the units could be assembled within two months should future commanders decide they want one, Tremblay added.
The support services unit operates semi-independently from National Defence and is not funded by taxpayers ....
dapaterson said:I'd be curious to see the detailed accounting that shows $7.1M in profit - I suspect there are some hefty hidden subsidies in there.
Towards_the_gap said:'Is the CF a deployable, expeditionary mission oriented military force? Or a bloated, bureaucratic wagon train of commissaries, clerks and CANCAP employees with a thin, exhausted vanguard of fighting troops, that is more concerned with salaries/benefits and home comforts than actually achieving effects?'
UnwiseCritic said::facepalm:
Haha wow I can't believe this was even an idea. Good to see what takes priority in the defence of Canada. Though I suppose two countries have never gone to war that have a timmies. This could be more effective than the f-35 program.
Apple and oranges, I know, but if all the time and money that was put into Timmies was directed into, say, getting us better kit, I'm sure a lot more fighting troops would be happier. I indulged a couple of times, thought the novelty of it all was kinda fun, but I really could of cared less. I was more focused on doing my job than worrying about when my next coffee run was.PAdm said:So clearly you have no morale and welfare experience; leadership experience; corporate experience (meaning the management of DND); or small "P" politics experience. The Kaf Tim's needs to be put into context - a long term Cdn commitment in which CF personnel were suffering. Canadians loved us, coalition partners appreciated us. Everyone wanted in on the support the troops action. The result is a freakishly rare corporate/public/non-public hybrid to have PSP staff run a Tim's franchise in a war zone. It ticked 101 boxes. You will not see this again until we again commit to an e.g. 10 year mission. A 2 roto stint in Haiti will not see a Tim's pop up. I made the expectation management comment to one of the head shed behind the entire KAF Tim's deal and stated that it will be a roto 0 question next time.
All this said for me to conclude that Tim's was an excellent time and place situation with no downside for the troops. We do not need trailers packed for next time, but please do not dismiss the idea or the fact that we consider it as stupid or a poor priority. It was a big deal and made a difference. Happy troops are focused troops. You need to add more and more as one roto stretches into many more.
PAdm said:So clearly you have no morale and welfare experience; leadership experience; corporate experience (meaning the management of DND); or small "P" politics experience. The Kaf Tim's needs to be put into context - a long term Cdn commitment in which CF personnel were suffering. Canadians loved us, coalition partners appreciated us. Everyone wanted in on the support the troops action. The result is a freakishly rare corporate/public/non-public hybrid to have PSP staff run a Tim's franchise in a war zone. It ticked 101 boxes. You will not see this again until we again commit to an e.g. 10 year mission. A 2 roto stint in Haiti will not see a Tim's pop up. I made the expectation management comment to one of the head shed behind the entire KAF Tim's deal and stated that it will be a roto 0 question next time.
All this said for me to conclude that Tim's was an excellent time and place situation with no downside for the troops. We do not need trailers packed for next time, but please do not dismiss the idea or the fact that we consider it as stupid or a poor priority. It was a big deal and made a difference. Happy troops are focused troops. You need to add more and more as one roto stretches into many more.
PAdm said:So clearly you have no morale and welfare experience; leadership experience; corporate experience (meaning the management of DND); or small "P" politics experience.