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

Challenger/"VIP" Jet/CF Chopper Use (CDS, others) [merged]

I'm wondering why they don't just bring up security issues as the reason the General is moving around with government Jets?  Is it really wise to put the leader of the Canadian military on a commercial airline to another country, without proper protection?

He is not just some random MP, this is a high profile defense figure. Pretty sure there are a number of people who would knock the guy off given the chance. In my books, the government has a responsibility to ensure this man`s safety at all times.
 
I'm a >>little<< bit less pessimistic than I was when I first generally agreed with this.....
E.R. Campbell said:
But the CBC (radio) just reported (1130 Hrs) that Gen Natynczyk has done an about turn and is now offereing to pay back some money. That is, de facto an admission of guilt of wrongdoing, so CTV wins and Natynczyk loses and I guess he is finished.
Based on these reported paraphrases of quotes ....
.... if he said this after speaking to the PM and defence critics, I'm guessing he must be pretty sure he didn't break the rules.  It'll be interesting to see what unfolds from this point on.
 
Wonder if anyone has bothered to look at previous CDS' travel records and compare.  Could make for interesting rading - perhaps this CDS is using the aircraft less, not more.

But then, investigating like that might be too much like journalism.
 
Another interesting tidbit from the Globe & Mail's take of the latest, if quoted correctly, regarding who decides if there's been a mistake:
"Canada’s top soldier now says he will cut a cheque to defray the cost of taking a government jet to a Caribbean vacation last year if the Prime Minister’s Office requests it. ....“If the government, as the Prime Minister indicated, his office looks at that trip ... if the interpretation of the Treasury Board guidelines on this regard is incorrect, then I will reimburse as required,” he said ...."
I know it might be splitting hairs, but if this is correct, a PMO interpretation of TB rules is different from TB saying "rules were/weren't followed".  Or is my  :Tin-Foil-Hat: too tight from all the quote parsing?  ;D
 
As a related aside, I will vouch for the CDS being thrifty.....

...I once witnessed him in the Kanata Costco buying $20 pants. Nearly choked on my $1.99 hotdog.

Seriously though, rightly or wrongly, we belong to one of the more high-profile federal organisations, and unfortunately this brings greater scrutiny, particularly in times of economic woe. The optics simply aren't good...a recession, Canadians out of work, the economic basket-case that is our southern neighbour, proposed cuts at municipal, provincial and federal level. Then we see this, what appears to be a CDS jet-setting off to the Caribbean on vacation, regardless of the why's and wherefores.

I agree with all the points above about the cost of the Challenger vs the reimbursing of personally bought plane tickets, et cetera et cetera. And yes it smacks of 'gotcha' journalism. However that is world we live in, news is a business not a public institution, and they will go with the stories that sell.
 
E.R. Campbell said:
Here, according to the Globe and Mail is what PM Harper had to say today, during Question Period:

'On the current controversy surrounding Gen. Natynczyk, NDP defence critic Jack Harris asked why the general had been allowed to take flights worth more than $1-million in the nearly four years he had headed the military – many of them on Challenger jets reserved for government VIPs.

Mr. Harper, who met with Gen. Natynczyk on Monday, said the military chief understands the rules for taking government jets “and is certainly prepared to live according to those rules. The Chief of the Defence Staff does fly very frequently on government business, but obviously where there are alternatives, we will look into that usage.”'


It's not exactly a stonewall defence.
And here's Hansard's version of the exchange:
Mr. Jack Harris (St. John's East, NDP):  Mr. Speaker, the cost of the Chief of the Defence Staff's recent taxpayer-funded trips to events such as football games, hockey games and the Calgary Stampede have shocked Canadians. The government is now planning significant cuts to the Canadian Forces.  Will the Conservative austerity plan only apply to soldiers, sailors and airmen and women and not to the brass? Why did the Minister of National Defence approve over $1 million of flights to be taken by the Chief of the Defence Staff?

Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC):  Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence has outlined the rules under which ministers use government aircraft. I have spoken to the Chief of the Defence Staff. He understands what those expectations are and is certainly prepared to live according to those rules.  As members know, the Chief of the Defence Staff does fly very frequently on government business, but obviously where there are alternatives we will look into that usage.

Here's how the Defence Minister handled a similar question earlier:
Mr. Mathieu Ravignat (Pontiac, NDP):  Mr. Speaker, Conservative ministers are developing quite a passion for the use of high-flying government jets. The Minister of Finance and the Minister of National Defence make particular liberal use of the jets. The Prime Minister says that everything is fine because he pays the paltry equivalent of a commercial airline ticket.  Why have the Conservatives abandoned their commitment to respect taxpayers dollars when it comes to jetting around the country?

Hon. Peter MacKay (Minister of National Defence, CPC):  Mr. Speaker, just to throw a few facts into the mix, the policy for the Prime Minister and all ministers requires that commercial travel be utilized for public business, the government aircraft being used when commercial travel is not available.  I would remind the member opposite that when it comes to the liberal use of this aircraft, the Conservative government has reduced the average annual spending of the ministers' Challenger flights by approximately 80% over the previous Liberal government.
 
Not sure if this is the same as some of the other articles posted, but I put it up, simply because this jounalist has got the idea..


Up in the air: A general’s work is never done

george petrolekas Globe and Mail Update Tuesday, Sep. 20, 2011
Article Link

General Walter Natynczyk confronted the innuendos surrounding his use of Challenger jets in numerous interviews on Sunday. In one, the host prefaced a question on flights to Toronto by saying, “Well, I don’t want to get bogged down in the details …” Unfortunately, it’s precisely the details that count.

Notwithstanding the fact that reports have inflated the real costs of using Challenger jets, the value has been eclipsed by a misunderstanding of what occurs when the Chief of the Defence Staff travels. I was a special adviser to both Rick Hillier and Gen. Natynczyk and had the occasion to often fly on Challengers, both in Canada and overseas.

Some examples come to mind.

After a full day in Ottawa, the CDS boarded a Challenger for Rotterdam, accompanied by minimal personal staff and specialized communications equipment. On arrival, we discussed Afghanistan. We reboarded with the Dutch CDS and, throughout the seven hour flight to Dubai, the entire time was devoted to poring over maps and discussing Afghanistan, bilateral concerns and what the Dutch and Canadians could do to improve NATO’s efforts and to save lives.

On arrival in Dubai, the CDS went off to talk to the Canadian troops stationed there, something he always did; I got to go to sleep. The next morning, we departed for Kandahar.

Ostensibly, the visit was to attend a ceremonial function – a change of command. But aside from the short time spent on the ceremonial function, the next five hours involved the CDS meeting the ISAF commander, the Afghan CDS and the incoming Dutch commander, as well as talking to Canadian troops. At 3 p.m., we left Kandahar for Dubai and, after landing, transferred to a Challenger to fly back to Rotterdam. The CDS continued overnight to Canada for another full day of work in Ottawa the following day. The plane had served as office, bed, conference room and command centre. This is the gruelling pace that Gen. Natynczyk lives unbeknownst to many.

I witnessed many such trips. In the fall of 2006, for example, the briefing for Operation Medusa – the Canadian defence of Kandahar from a possible Taliban rout – was made aboard the airplane and orders issued. Just as Gen. Natynczyk launched the Canadian Forces humanitarian effort in Haiti from a Challenger, these things could not have been accomplished from Seat 3C on an Air Canada flight.
More on link
 
these things could not have been accomplished from Seat 3C on an Air Canada flight.

In my humble opinion there isn't much that can be accomplished from any seat on an Air Canada flight (no matter how close it may come to departing or arriving on time - I am told it has happened)
 
Interesting turn of events.  the Globe had a so what opinion peace.  CBC seems to think the CDS hasn't done anything wrong and now the Citizen had a "leave him alone" piece.  I wonder.  Media (CTV especially) made this into a story but now it would seem that since the CDS explained himself and a few others about the real cost, this whole story seems to be cooling off.  I wonder if the PM seemingly leaving him out to dry had an effect.  If the PM had staunchly defended him then maybe the press would have continued it's assault. Maybe now teh press is more interested in having the PM look like he isn't supporting the CDS...
 
Crantor said:
Interesting turn of events.  the Globe had a so what opinion peace.  CBC seems to think the CDS hasn't done anything wrong and now the Citizen had a "leave him alone" piece.  I wonder.  Media (CTV especially) made this into a story but now it would seem that since the CDS explained himself and a few others about the real cost, this whole story seems to be cooling off.  I wonder if the PM seemingly leaving him out to dry had an effect.  If the PM had staunchly defended him then maybe the press would have continued it's assault. Maybe now teh press is more interested in having the PM look like he isn't supporting the CDS...

Maybe. The Prime Minister is the best political chess player the Hill has seen in many, many years. :2c:
 
recceguy said:
Maybe. The Prime Minister is the best political chess player the Hill has seen in many, many years. :2c:

Well if their goal was to get the PM the whole time, he certainly has played it well.

He didn't defend the CDS so they may have left the General alone, and although he "threw him under the bus" from our perspective (our heated, emotional "why the f**k is the media on a witch-hunt even though the CDS has done nothing wrong," point of view), I felt that way because he didn't defend him when I thought that he should have. He certainly didn't "throw him under the bus" by actually, literally stating "the CDS was wrong and is going to pay the price for it."

A cooler head prevailed I suppose.
 
ballz said:
Well if their goal was to get the PM the whole time, he certainly has played it well.

He didn't defend the CDS so they may have left the General alone, and although he "threw him under the bus" from our perspective (our heated, emotional "why the f**k is the media on a witch-hunt even though the CDS has done nothing wrong," point of view), I felt that way because he didn't defend him when I thought that he should have. He certainly didn't "throw him under the bus" by actually, literally stating "the CDS was wrong and is going to pay the price for it."

A cooler head prevailed I suppose.

Just like the military, we are not always privy to why the higher ups do things the way they do, nor are we all entitled to a personal explanation.

:Tin-Foil-Hat: Perhaps that will be the next piece of 'gotcha' journalism. Another baseless story on how the PM threw our most senior soldier under the bus. It's a hell of a long way around the block to get at the PM, through trashing the CDS.  :Tin-Foil-Hat:
 
I don't think teh target was the PM.  Just became one as a result.  Opportunity...
 
Crantor said:
I don't think teh target was the PM.  Just became one as a result.  Opportunity...
Look hard, you'll see my tinfoil hat :Tin-Foil-Hat: smilie(s)  (One of our new smilies found under the [more] link)


Maybe I should have used our new  :sarcasm: one instead.


HAGO :salute:
 
recceguy said:
:Tin-Foil-Hat: Perhaps that will be the next piece of 'gotcha' journalism. Another baseless story on how the PM threw our most senior soldier under the bus. It's a hell of a long way around the block to get at the PM, through trashing the CDS.  :Tin-Foil-Hat:
Holy wilderness of mirrors, Batman - plots within plots?  ;D

From out of left field, though, maybe the simplest explanation is the best: 
  • Media suggests rules broken
  • PM asked & says "there are rules and we expect all to follow"
  • CDS says (clearly, promptly and to all concerned) "didn't do anything wrong, followed the rules, happy to pay back if found not to have followed rules"
  • media responds by jumping on ..... ?
  • End of story until determination comes thorugh?
We'll have to wait and see....
 
Ah yes.  Very neat.  Didn't notice that new smiley.  Will need to use that one in the near future... ;D
 
Editorial opinion turning? 

Some columns from Senator Colin Kenny ....
.... General Walter Natynczyk, Canada's Chief of the Defence Staff, has been skewered by simplistic reporting this week. He is right to be indignant, wrong to be surprised, and out of luck if he thinks many in the media are going to stop and put everything in perspective ....
.... and from columnist and former soldier Peter Worthington Joe Warmington
Only in Canada would you see our top soldier sucker-punched in this way. Gen. Walter Natynczyk has looked into the crying eyes of the parents of many of the 157 hero warriors killed in action in Afghanistan, and now the same people who condoned millions for a fake lake and a giant fence are worried about our top soldier’s travel expenses? Only coming out of NDP critics could such hypocrisy reign. It’s funny how we have taxpayers’ money for their leader’s state funeral but we must count every penny for the man leading our troops, not in peace time but in the middle of war ....  Let (NDP defence critic) Jack Harris talk to the parents of the next dead soldier so he can see just what is involved with leading brave soldiers during war time. And then ask him to take a Greyhound home from Trenton after he’s done.

- edited to fix attribution of second quote -
 
milnews.ca said:
Editorial opinion turning? 

Some columns from Senator Colin Kenny ....
First off, I gave milnews MilPoints, based only upon the quotes provided, because I thought they were informative for offering the other side of the question.

Then, having completely read both articles, I cannot recommend enough the first citation to the article by Senator Kenny. Now, much as the Senator admits to disagreeing with Gen Natynczyk's policies, I have often disagreed with the Senator's public views. In this case, however, he clearly illustrates that the CDS did the absolutely right thing and explains why the media witch-hunt is completely unjustified.


Sometimes even politicians get it right.
 
Journeyman said:
Sometimes even politicians get it right.
Yikes - are the planets in line or something?

edited to add following:
One more opinion, from QMI columnist Charles Adler:
.... So what about this trip to the Caribbean?

Natynczyk had spent the previous two Christmases with our troops serving in Afghanistan.

He was about to miss a much-deserved holiday with his family in order to pay respects to more of our fallen soldiers at a repatriation ceremony.

The minister of defence ordered him to join his family, and approved the use of the jet to get there.

It was a classy move on Peter MacKay’s part, and was completely justifiable ....
 
From what I've seen today, press and public opinion are turning strongly in support of the CDS. The whole flap was a stupid media creation and now the media is turning it around. I think the PM jumped the gun a bit saying that the CDS should reimburse any of those flights.
 
Back
Top