MacKay vs O'Connor as MND (merged)

[PPCLI Guy]

I eagerly await to see how Mackay does in the job. For those who don't live in NS and know of his stand on the Atlantic Accord he may not be very popular here and would have difficulty getting re-elected as he is seen by many to be a traitor to his home province.
cheers

Pretty sure he is elected as a FEDERAL MP, vice a provincial one.  As to comments about "traitorous" stance on the Atlantic Accords, clearly you have attended the same classes as the journalists that you just derided...or are content to form your opinions on the issue based on the rhetoric of self-serving provincial politicians.

Dave

 

[IN HOC SIGNO]

Pretty sure he is elected as a FEDERAL MP, vice a provincial one.  As to comments about "traitorous" stance on the Atlantic Accords, clearly you have attended the same classes as the journalists that you just derided...or are content to form your opinions on the issue based on the rhetoric of self-serving provincial politicians.

Dave

Exactly. As to getting re-elected I don't think he'll have any trouble there. the Liberals are not running a candidate as they agreed to let Elizabeth MAY run there un opposed by a Lib and the NDP has as much likelihood of winning in a Tory blue riding as does a Marxist Communist. I think you really should do your homework before you make such outlandish statements.

 

[3rd Herd]

Interesting historical comparison:

""It's not quite a General MacArthur problem, but it's the Canadian equivalent because you have a popular figure with the public, popular with the troops, who has become the spokesman on defence policy," said Carleton University professor Fen Hampson, director of the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs.

U.S. president Harry Truman famously dismissed the outspoken Gen. Douglas MacArthur during the Korean War after he ignored orders to refrain from political statements and called for an attack on China unless Communist forces laid down their arms.

While nobody is expecting Gen. Hillier to be shown the door, Prime Minister Stephen Harper is probably anxious to avoid a continuation of the conflicting sound bites emanating from his Defence Minister and his Chief of Defence Staff. "Hillier's triumph, MacKay's challenge
ALAN FREEMAN  August 15, 2007 http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20070815.HILLIER15/TPStory/National

 

[pbi]

I,for one, do not bemoan the departure of Mr O'Connor for one moment. IMHO he was the wrong man for the job under our political system. Unlike the US system in which members of Cabinet do not need to hold elected office, but can be selected from appropriate civilian expertise fields (or election contribution sources, however you want to look at it...), our Ministers must be politicians first. They must be politically savvy and have credibility with the PM. The success of their Depts will rise and fall based largely on that and their ability to work the party power machine in the Battle of the Ministries. Whether or not they actually know anything about Fishery, or Trade, or Defence is really secondary.

Mr O'Connor was, to put it mildly, an inept politician on the national stage.  He was, IMHO, a perfect example of "be careful what you wish for": for years we all sat around the mess moaning about not having an MND with any military experience. Well-we finally got one.  Too bad his experience was years out of date, and his conceptions (if they were actually his...) for a National Defense Policy were seemingly quite out of step with those of the CDS. He was (again IMHO) utterly lost in the political lion-pit and constantly appeared ill-informed on the issues of the day thus undermining the GoC, and by extension the CF. I usually cringed in anticipation each time he rose to speak in the House, wondering what PR disaster we would stumble into next. Given the PM's extreme concern over tightly controlled imaging and message, I am pretty sure I was not alone...

It is a very debatable point IMHO as to just how much of the recent procurement and reinforcement of the CF had anything to do with Mr O'Connor at all (except as a figurehead); how much was  Tory strategy developed prior to the election as part of Harper's overall vision; and how much was already underway or on the books under Minister Graham and the Liberals, with whom Gen Hillier appears to have enjoyed an equaly good if not superior relationship. In my view Mr Graham was a far better and much more respected Minister.

Mr Mackay cannot do worse, and one hopes that he will do much better.

Cheers

 

[pbi]

Pretty sure he is elected as a FEDERAL MP, vice a provincial one.  As to comments about "traitorous" stance on the Atlantic Accords, clearly you have attended the same classes as the journalists that you just derided...or are content to form your opinions on the issue based on the rhetoric of self-serving provincial politicians.

Dave

Good point Dave. If our Federal Ministers serve only the parochial interests of their home ridings, who serves the interests of Canada as a whole? Who makes the tough decisions based on the big picture, not just what the folks in Lower Bucket want? Who are the "statesmen" as opposed to the pork barellers and turf protectors? Maybe it's high time we looked at whether or not tying a Federal Minister to a particular riding is really a good thing or a recipe (not to say guarantee...) for parochialism and pork.

Cheers

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

As do I.  I was under the impression that the Conservative defence platform was largely the product of O'Connor as the resident defence "expert" and I have long felt that platform was riddled with hare-brained schemes, politically motivated "ideas" and out and out pointless concepts.

I believe that the current momentum in defence spending and planning was set in place by the Liberals - for all their faults - under Graham.  It was Martin and Graham, not the the current government, who selected Gen Hillier as the CDS, committed Canada to an expanded role in Kandahar, approved the CDS' transformation concepts and set in motion some (if not most) of the current procurement initiatives. 

I won't miss O'Connor at all.  As PBI said, he was inept.  Worse, he was obviously inept.  Keep your fingers crossed that the next guy is better.

 

[observor 69]

This from today's G&M  http://www.theglobeandmail.com//servlet/story/LAC.20070816.CODEFENCE16/TPStory/Comment

Give O'Connor credit where credit is due
J.L. GRANATSTEIN

Writes on behalf of the Council for Canadian Security in the 21st Century

August 16, 2007

In his brief, anodyne press conference after the swearing-in ceremony, Mr. Harper talked about the months since January of 2006 as a "historic period" for the Canadian Forces. The PM was right, and for all Mr. O'Connor's flaws, the minister who directed the Department of National Defence deserves the lion's share of the credit. After all, someone who was so regularly denounced by the likes of Dawn Black and Denis Coderre, the NDP and Liberal defence critics, can't be all bad. Gordon O'Connor wasn't, and he handled the important matters well.

 

[SiG_22_Qc]

DAmn!! ,  Rona Ambrose was on top of my MND wishlist :-*

I didnt think O'Connor did a bad job, Afghanistan is very hard to sell, that's all. If McKay can sell ice to Innu's, then he's probably fit for the job. If the objective could be shown as something concretelly achievable rather than a taliban-whack-a-mole, maybe he'd succeed.

O'Connor got the canadian army plenty of new equipment, from ships to tanks, to logistic aircraft. When are the combat helicopters coming? Hind-24 or blackhawks would look good...(guess i'll put them after Rona on the wishlist).

 

[geo]

Rona.... she has nice hair

 

[Sheerin]

Oh, no worries, I had no beef with anything you said.  It just seems that people seem to forget Mr Pratt and tar him with the same brush as others in that party. 

Agreed completely on your assessment vis a vis the recently departed Mr. O.

It's actually not that surprising that Pratt is often forgotten, given the fact that he held the office for six months. 

I seem to recall back in January of 06, before Harper announced the new cabinet that a lot of people on this board were worried about O'Connor given his track record as defence critic.  I also recall many hoping that Laurie Hawn would be appointed.   

 

[Edward Campbell]

While I was less than thrilled to see Mr. O'Connor appointed in the first place and while I am not unhappy to see him go I do not think Graham or Hillier deserves much credit for the big-ticket procurements.  Even though they almost certainly had the PM's personal support they had to be pushed through the powerful cabinet P&P committee - almost certainly against the well reasoned objections of several powerful ministers including Flaherty (whose officials remain, I believe, highly suspicious of DND's ability to manage its money) and Prentice, who was rumoured to have had some major spending plans of his own with the aim of buying long term aboriginal peace and prosperity, and against the objections of the Clerk (Lynch) who is also rumoured to be suspicious of DND's planning and management abilities.

The cabinet committees matter.  They, not the Liberals, provide the real opposition to the PM's plans and they, not the Senate, provide sober second thought on plans and policies.  Elcock and Hillier do not go to cabinet committee meetings; O'Connor had to make the strategic, managerial, financial, operational and political cases and he had to have made them well.

His lousy communication skills were a problem - a big one.  I also think he was hampered by his recent experience.  There were rumours floating about to the effect that he was trying to micromanage and to deal with matters with which he had been involved 15 years ago - matters which are not any of the minister's business.  He's getting on in years; I heard he was hard to brief - impatient with details, unsure of some of the strategic issues and mired in a cold war mindset.

I think he did a good job on the equipment/budgetting issues - better than most of his colleagues would have done.  I think he used his own close relationalship with Harper and his status as a retired general to good effect in committees.  He failed on TV and in parliament - that's what did him in, as it should have in this day and age.

I wonder how C.D. Howe would fare in the 21st century?  Would Canada's best ever minister of almost everything have survived any better than O'Connor?

 

[Babbling Brooks]

In assessing Gordon O'Connor's performance as MND, I think it makes sense to lay out just what we expect of a Defence Minister.  I've done that, and explored his accomplishments and gaffes in each area in a post over at The Torch:

http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2007/08/on-outgoing-minister-of-defence.html

Bottom line?  O'Connor failed on the most important aspect of his job: building and maintaining political support for the CF and its most visible mission.

 

[dapaterson]

[ O'Connor's ] lousy communication skills were a problem - a big one.  

(snip)

I wonder how C.D. Howe would fare in the 21st century?  Would Canada's best ever minister of almost everything have survived any better than O'Connor?

I believe you've answered your own question.  Howe was a good communicator; meaning he listened well as well as putting across his points.  He was also unafraid to bring people from the outside to promote change.  O'Connor, as a consumate insider to both the miltiary and the defence procurement industry, never made significant efforts in that way.

 

[Old Sweat]

To my simple mind, this paragraph by Edward explains just what is wrong with much of the public service mindset in Ottawa.

While I was less than thrilled to see Mr. O'Connor appointed in the first place and while I am not unhappy to see him go I do not think Graham or Hillier deserves much credit for the big-ticket procurements.  Even though they almost certainly had the PM's personal support they had to be pushed through the powerful cabinet P&P committee - almost certainly against the well reasoned objections of several powerful ministers including Flaherty (whose officials remain, I believe, highly suspicious of DND's ability to manage its money) and Prentice, who was rumoured to have had some major spending plans of his own with the aim of buying long term aboriginal peace and prosperity, and against the objections of the Clerk (Lynch) who is also rumoured to be suspicious of DND's planning and management abilities.

What troubles me is that while our forces are engaged in a shooting war, mandarins in Ottawa are objecting to providing them with the werewithal to do their job because of perceived managerial deficiencies. It may also be that other ministers wanted the money spent on their own priorities, and O'Connor may not have had a lot of support. (I was going to suggest he did not have a lot of friends, but I remembered the comment attributed to President Truman to the effect, that if you want a true friend in Washington, buy a dog.)

No matter what the reason, on his watch O'Connor got a lot of urgently needed kit, and he got it quickly. He may have been a bit of a cold warrior, he may have said some dumb things, he may have had the charisma of a snow shovel, but when all is said and done, he delivered.

Two other things. Don't forget that he was able to get the allowances for wounded troops and the funeral expense thing sorted out very quickly by Ottawa standards. Last, his vision for the north has largely been adopted.

Bottom line: he got more things right than wrong. Unfortunately the things he got wrong are those for which he was accused by the prosecutors in the court of public opinion - the media.

 

[GUNS]

There is an old saying that applies to our former MND.

When I do right,
No one remembers.

When I do wrong,
No one forgets.

I agree with Old Sweat, his +'s outnumber his -'s.

He did good.

 

[Haggis]

Don't forget that he was able to get the allowances for wounded troops and the funeral expense thing sorted out very quickly by Ottawa standards.

Bottom line: he got more things right than wrong. Unfortunately the things he got wrong are those for which he was accused by the prosecutors in the court of public opinion - the media.

True, but I would daresy he also had media support in fast tracking the allowance changes.  In both cases, what began as a MND feeding frenzy in a pool of MSM sharks ended up with the MSM actually assistng in his rescue from crimson-ink stained waters.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

In assessing Gordon O'Connor's performance as MND, I think it makes sense to lay out just what we expect of a Defence Minister.  I've done that, and explored his accomplishments and gaffes in each area in a post over at The Torch:

http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2007/08/on-outgoing-minister-of-defence.html

Bottom line?  O'Connor failed on the most important aspect of his job: building and maintaining political support for the CF and its most visible mission.

Outstanding op-ed....totally worth the read.


Matthew. 

 

[Brad Sallows]

The difficulty with laying too much credit at the feet of the previous government is that one has to disregard the Liberal habit of promising and stalling before one may credibly believe much would necessarily have come to pass in any timely fashion.

What's important is that many of the good ideas have come to pass, and many of the harebrained ones have been (or may yet be) set aside.  Where to lay the political credit for that is problematical.

 

[IN HOC SIGNO]

The difficulty with laying too much credit at the feet of the previous government is that one has to disregard the Liberal habit of promising and stalling before one may credibly believe much would necessarily have come to pass in any timely fashion.

What's important is that many of the good ideas have come to pass, and many of the harebrained ones have been (or may yet be) set aside.  Where to lay the political credit for that is problematical.

Agreed.....when all was said and done the Libs did a lot more saying than doing. At least this crowd has got us some hardware and sped up the acquisition process. Now if we can get some Naval assets fast tracked it would be awesome....BHS anyone?

 

[stegner]

Does anyone know in what units O'Connor served in?  Was he ever deployed abroad?