• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Gord O'Connor Report Card

Gord O'Connors Report Card - after one month of work

  • I vote for No Lowering flags for Canadian fallen -

    Votes: 29 67.4%
  • I agree Barring media from viewing Canadian fallen arriving Trenton was bad idea

    Votes: 8 18.6%
  • I agree Signing "NATO extension deal" with no input from public was not right way to do it

    Votes: 6 14.0%

  • Total voters
    43
  • Poll closed .
Teddy Ruxpin said:
3/3 here too...

However, -C overall unless the stated party defence policies become tempered with a sharp dose of realism.  Watch and shoot...the budget next week may tell all.

Well?
 
Since you asked... :)

Still a C-

IMHO, the budget contained nothing of real substance.  The much-vaunted massive personnel increase to the CF will create enormous problems, not the least of which is the avalability of adequate leadership; leaders are still leaving the CF in droves and no number of new recruits will change that.  Furthermore, I see little in the way of a plan to equip these new masses with even the basics of kit.  I am also very suspicious of these so-called "territorial" battalions and what their role is to be, how they're to be manned, what they're to be equipped with and what the impact on the existing Reserve Force structure will be.

Finally, I see that "a regular army presence" is to be restored in BC - whatever that means.

All in all, I am disappointed that the new budget did not follow up on the CDS' already well-entrenched action plan (probably because it was agreed to by the previous government) and that we find ourselves - yet again - awaiting political decisions on capital equipment purchases.  Instead, we're about to overload an already strained to the breaking point training system, right at the time where the operational tempo is at the highest its been in a while.  I suppose that there may be more to follow in the upcoming months - the Minister seems to be hinting as much, but until I see some "meat", my skepticism is still fairly strong.

My 2 cents.

TR
 
1 - disagree
2 - agree
3 - agree

Boy, who designed these questions?  "You agree to not agree to recommend to agree to disagree with the following idea?"

Use a simple statement; never say 'agree' or 'not agree' in the statement as this is considered 'leading' or 'pushing' and invalidates the question.
 
Teddy Rux,

I have read alot of your posts.  No question here to your experience/knowledge (particularily liked your informative post to CanuukTroop om that Iran Nuke Bomb thread).

Couple of modest questions...

Is the new "quest" for 13k Reg and 10k Res Frce troops too far out of reach?  If we emptied ALL resources...to train BMQ/SQ/Dp 1 could we not do it?  I think there are too many folks "hiding" in their jobs that really could be "forced" to train them (I am a Cl B Res Snr NCO) or...they have the "30 day" option to leave their jobs.  I am sure we could fill THOSE positions with people that are WILLING and CAPABLE of doing the job.  Case in point.  At the HQ I am at...1 Cpl was told she was "tasked" for X amount of months for Task "X"...her response?  OK. Her Sgt...found out SHE was tasked to Task "X"...2 months of moaning and trying to get out of it.  Oh...I should add that moaning and groaning is an understatement.  She was driving us CRAZY.  Get with it.  YOU are a Snr NCO.  Shut It.  Ruck Up.  Step Off.

We are here to DEFEND democracy...not practice it.  Why else would you tie those boots up?  ;)
 
Mud Recce Man said:
Is the new "quest" for 13k Reg and 10k Res Frce troops too far out of reach?  If we emptied ALL resources...to train BMQ/SQ/Dp 1 could we not do it?  I think there are too many folks "hiding" in their jobs that really could be "forced" to train them (I am a Cl B Res Snr NCO) or...they have the "30 day" option to leave their jobs.  I am sure we could fill THOSE positions with people that are WILLING and CAPABLE of doing the job.  Case in point.  At the HQ I am at...1 Cpl was told she was "tasked" for X amount of months for Task "X"...her response?  OK. Her Sgt...found out SHE was tasked to Task "X"...2 months of moaning and trying to get out of it.   Oh...I should add that moaning and groaning is an understatement.   She was driving us CRAZY.  Get with it.  YOU are a Snr NCO.  Shut It.  Ruck Up.  Step Off.

We are here to DEFEND democracy...not practice it.   Why else would you tie those boots up?   ;)

Sure, we could do it...if we're willing to drop absolutely everything else.  I can guarantee that the Regular formations are all but tapped out.  After all, it isn't merely a matter of conducting recruit training, but dealing with the follow-on PCF and specialist training afterwards.  That's where you run into trouble.  Formations are trying to kick units down range into the sandbox (to borrow American terminology  :D ), support all the schools and support recruiting efforts, all at the same time.  Making matters worse, we're beginning to hemmorage senior leadership (MCpl - CWO and Maj/LCol) - the very people who will form the foundation of the training staffs and the leadership of any "new" units.  Moreover, the recruits will also need basic personal kit issues, vehicles and weapons to train on, and a place in the order of battle - none of which has been fully thought through.

I agree completely - you signed on the dotted line so suck it up and get on with it.  However, that's half the problem.  After all, would you actually want these whiners training new recruits?

IMHO, we have the focus wrong.  I honestly believe we need to focus on retaining the people we have - both Regular and Reserve - before embarking on a massive recruiting campaign.  Things like resigning incentives, cash bonuses and preferential postings go a long way towards retaining people already trained, as do challenging and interesting jobs.  Moreover, the component transfer system is still broken and practically nothing has been done to encourage younger soldiers to bring friends into the fold (similar to the "recruit a buddy" initiatives in the UK)...  The more we can do to reduce the training burden, the better.

We're now straying away from the topic at hand, but the Minister obviously hasn't considered these factors in developing his plan, hence the C-.

My 2 cents, as always.

TR
 
"I agree with Michael on this, and I agree with the barring of the media at Trenton.  I do not think it was a bad idea."

- The Media was not 'barred' they were merely kept a respectful distance.  It rankled them, as that limited the 'grief' shots, which limits profits.  Bottom line is, they are a business and have a 'bottom line'.
 
Back
Top