And what influence will Burney maintain in the Harper government over issues of BMD which he promotes. With Peter McKay as the lame duck in Foreign affairs, a politcal perk appointment, who will really be pulling the strings? Burney, O'Conner and Harper I would suggest.
Boy Harper's cabinet appointments look more and more American style all the time. And less and less accountable.
And whats good for the Military is good for the Military Suppliers whom O'Conner worked for.
NOW magazine said; Ottawa-area Tory MP Gordon O'Connor has on at least two occasions publicly pushed military equipment of former clients.
Gordon O'Connor, defence minister
Carleton-Mississippi Mills, Ont.
O’Connor was first elected as an MP in 2004. He has since acted as the critic for national defence. O’Connor was also a member of the national defence and veterans affairs committee and the subcommittee on veterans affairs. A former member of the Canadian Forces, he retired with the rank of brigadier-general. His military appointments included responsibility for planning the future force structure of the Canadian Forces and co-ordinating resources related to about 300 Canadian Forces equipment and infrastructure projects. He has since worked as a consultant and in a variety of business operations.
And even the Blogging Tories are not comfortable with O'Conners close ties to the Military Industrial establishment in Canada
Forestalling the appearance of conflict at Defence
Firstly, how will Mr. O'Connor's history - as both a retired officer, and a lobbyist - with the current leadership at DND affect his ability to work with them as minister? Does he have a problem with the current CDS or others in positions of influence at DND? Refusing to attend a simple meeting on such an important procurement issue suggests he might.
If anyone at DND has personal knowledge of tensions between Mr. O'Connor and either the civilian or military leadership at the Department, or equally if anyone can put these concerns to rest, they're invited to drop me an e-mail in complete confidence (damian dot brooks NO SPAM at gmail dot com).
Secondly, how will Mr. O'Connor overcome the appearance of a conflict of interest when it comes to military procurement issues if he is appointed MND? Because while Airbus is the focus of this discussion, it was hardly his only client when he worked for Hill and Knowlton Canada.
Western Star, one former O'Connor client, was in the initial running for the Iltis replacement. That procurement was hardly without controversy: the G-Wagen won by default when every other competitor withdrew from the bidding process.
General Dynamics Canada, another former O'Connor client, is one of the big kids on the defence contractor block. They were part of the successful Sikorsky bid on the Maritime Helicopter Project to replace the CF's Sea Kings.
BAE Systems, another ex-client of O'Connor's, recently won one of the CF-18 modernization contracts.
I bring these up not to suggest any impropriety - far from it - but to point out to Mr. O'Connor and the CPC that they will have to deal with some significant challenges should he become the Defence Minister in a Conservative government.
Underneath his calls for quicker procurement strategies, less complex bidding, streamlining of the process, leaves one to wonder who benefits from this more the public and taxpayers getting bang for their buck, or the Military equipment suppliers?
CTV.ca | Gov't to purchase 16 military aircraft: CPEarlier this month, the Conservative defence critic, retired general Gordon O'Connor, said he was concerned the government was rushing the process unnecessarily and made the requirements "so precise only one solution's possible."
But some say the acquisitions are inevitable, have been budgeted for and have such widespread support in Parliament they would be implemented by whichever party wins the election.
O'Connor - the former director of military requirements and an ex-industry lobbyist - said later there is nothing stopping the Liberals from going ahead with plans to replace aircraft.
Military wins no matter what after election
By STEPHEN THORNE
OTTAWA (CP) - The federal Conservatives say if elected they'll boost the national defence budget "in magnitude," assuring the military a win no matter who's in after the Jan. 23 vote. The Liberal government committed $12.8 billion to military expansion in last February's budget, which will bring the total defence budget to almost $20 billion within five years. Defence Minister Bill Graham has dangled tantalizing toys before Canada's military - new planes, ships and vehicles. He's expanding the forces by 5,000 personnel. But the Conservatives say they'll do even more for defence. "Certainly the Armed Forces aren't going to get less," said the Tory defence critic, retired general Gordon O'Connor. "There's going to be substantially more for the Armed Forces - in magnitude different." The Tories will boost military spending significantly - O'Connor wouldn't say how much - and expand personnel by 15,000, to 75,000, said O'Connor, who drafted the party's defence platform. All Liberal defence policies will be up for review, said O'Connor, including last spring's defence policy statement that was supposed to set the course for Canada's army, navy, air and special forces for 20 years. "We will review everything," O'Connor said. "We have our own policy. It may support what they are doing or it may modify what they are doing."
During the 2004 election campaign, Conservative Leader Stephen Harper promised an extra $5 billion in military spending over five years, 20,000 new soldiers, new tanks, new helicopter-carrying warships and muscular transport planes.
O'Connor, who retired as the director of military requirements and later became an industry lobbyist, said airlift now is his party's No. 1 defence priority.
But it's up in the air whether the Tories will go for 16 mid-range transport planes worth nearly $5 billion, as the Liberals announced Nov. 22, or opt for fewer of those supplemented by larger, heavy-lift aircraft capable of transporting troops and equipment over vast distances.
Under a Conservative government, the Liberal procurement project may go ahead or it may be modified, O'Connor said.
"We believe in airlift," he said. "I consider airlift as the No. 1 equipment requirement for the Armed Forces.
"But an airlift solution based on our policy may be different."
O'Connor said he expects Harper will announce his defence policy before Christmas.
He said the party won't be bound by preconceived ideas. They want to look at requirements before settling on what combination of aircraft would best serve defence.
A Conservative government would also buy more Arctic utility aircraft than the Liberals plan and base some of them further north, he added.
"I believe we should have a firm deployment of new aircraft in the Arctic," he said.
With the Liberals' blessing, navy planners are already in the early stages of acquiring new support ships and transport vessels, similar to those Harper promised in last year's election campaign.
O'Connor said he strongly supports streamlined military procurement practices, but he says the Liberal method will hurt competition and favour certain products - Lockheed Martin's C-130J transport plane, for example.
Prime Minister Paul Martin has said getting what the military needs takes precedence over regional and industrial benefits.
O'Connor said he also supports what he calls the "sensible" Liberal concept of setting out requirements based on performance needs. But he said regional and industrial benefits are a must in any military procurement.
"The biggest waste of time is in the Defence Department," O'Connor said. "They're spending four years now to arrive at a document that says this is what we want."
He said defence procurements have to be directed from the top down, not the bottom up.
"Things will be better for the military" under a Conservative government, O'Connor promised.
"In funding, you're going to see a substantial difference - quite a bit more than the Liberals. We've got to get this Armed Forces out of a hole."
Tags
Canada
Politics
Harper
Cabinet
Gordon O' Conner
Defense
DND
Conservatives
No comments:
Post a Comment