Where is the evidence?
The recent budget from the Liberal government includes more money for the military. The increased funding is to be spread over a period of five years. What has the military said to date about how the additional funds will be spent? Where is the evidence to indicate that the monies will do much or anything to fill the gaps in the quality and quantity of military services that have existed prior to the cutbacks of the past ten or more years?
Without future purchases or increasing the number of personnel, I have suggested a savings that would result from disposing of the three subs that were purchased from the British. These second hand subs will just be a continuing drain on the public purse. It was a wrong decision then and it continues to be wrong. Can one imagine three subs floating at dockside doing little for the defence of the nation but gathering rust and whatever deposits are coming from the sea? Sink the subs, give them away, make them into museums, and do anything but use them for “defence” and money will be saved.
What is the story about the Snow Birds flying south, often during the winter months, to display their aerobatic skills to the Americans? Let the Americans use their own personnel to display flying skills with all the thrills and dangers that exist. The Snow Birds have suffered loss of personnel and equipment in the past. There are ongoing costs to keep the Birds flying. We will continue to pay for all personnel costs far in to the future with pensions and associated benefits. We do not need that continuing drain on military funding. Let the military become more involved in the defence of this country.
It has been said that major policy papers are being prepared for both foreign and military affairs. How much longer must we wait? Both these departments are stacked with competent and professional personnel. Why the long delay? If defence is important, if additional funds are being provided to make up for the deficiencies of the past then we should be seeing evidence that gaps are being filled. Where are the articles that should be written by those specialists within our universities, who should have something to say?
Can we expect a long address or article from the new Chief of the Defence Staff, whose appointment came directly from the prime minister? Will he present the facts and truths that must be revealed or will he stand before us singing the party line with words being dictated from within the prime minister’s office?
Where is the evidence?
Without future purchases or increasing the number of personnel, I have suggested a savings that would result from disposing of the three subs that were purchased from the British. These second hand subs will just be a continuing drain on the public purse. It was a wrong decision then and it continues to be wrong. Can one imagine three subs floating at dockside doing little for the defence of the nation but gathering rust and whatever deposits are coming from the sea? Sink the subs, give them away, make them into museums, and do anything but use them for “defence” and money will be saved.
What is the story about the Snow Birds flying south, often during the winter months, to display their aerobatic skills to the Americans? Let the Americans use their own personnel to display flying skills with all the thrills and dangers that exist. The Snow Birds have suffered loss of personnel and equipment in the past. There are ongoing costs to keep the Birds flying. We will continue to pay for all personnel costs far in to the future with pensions and associated benefits. We do not need that continuing drain on military funding. Let the military become more involved in the defence of this country.
It has been said that major policy papers are being prepared for both foreign and military affairs. How much longer must we wait? Both these departments are stacked with competent and professional personnel. Why the long delay? If defence is important, if additional funds are being provided to make up for the deficiencies of the past then we should be seeing evidence that gaps are being filled. Where are the articles that should be written by those specialists within our universities, who should have something to say?
Can we expect a long address or article from the new Chief of the Defence Staff, whose appointment came directly from the prime minister? Will he present the facts and truths that must be revealed or will he stand before us singing the party line with words being dictated from within the prime minister’s office?
Where is the evidence?
posted by croweagle at
11:32 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home