"Security on military bases to be reviewed by all-party Commons committee"

[The Bread Guy]

This from The Canadian Press:

The House of Commons defence committee will hold closed-door hearings on the state of security at Canadian military bases, The Canadian Press has learned.

Conservative MP James Bezan, the party's defence critic, proposed the idea, which was recently accepted by the all-party committee, although a date for the investigation has yet to be scheduled.

In the aftermath of a stabbing of two military members at a north Toronto recruiting facility last month, National Defence conceded that some elements of a full-scale security review at its installations were still ongoing 18 months after the terror attacks of October 2014.

Bezan says it's been clear since the 2014 deaths of Warrant Officer Patrice Vincent and Cpl. Nathan Cirillo —  attacks inspired by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant — that members of the Canadian military need better protection.

He says that at some bases, visitors can drive on to the property without being challenged by security, and the incident last month in Toronto shows a need to improve protection at recruiting centres.

Ayanle Hassan Ali, 27, faces nine charges, including three counts of attempted murder, after two soldiers were attacked and injured by a man with a knife. Police said the man said afterward that Allah told him to do it.

Bezan says MPs want to hear from senior members of the military, including possibly the chief of the defence staff, about what measures have been taken, what resources they need and what can be done to improve.

The motion to conduct the committee investigation passed on March 22, the same day the federal budget was tabled.

Bezan says he proposed holding the meetings behind closed doors to avoid compromising security procedures that are already in place, and insisted that findings of the committee can be reported to the public through the House of Commons ...

From the minutes of the 22 Mar 2016 NDDN meeting (highlights mine):

... On motion of James Bezan, it was agreed, — That the Committee undertake a study on the force protection measures and procedures that have been adopted by the Canadian Armed Forces since October 2014; that, in relation to the study, the Committee invite the Chief of the Defence Staff, General Jonathan Vance, and/or his representatives and any other person the Committee deems appropriate to appear as witnesses; that the Committee hold no less than two (2) meetings to conduct the study; that these meetings be held in camera to protect the operational security of the Canadian Armed Forces; and that the Committee report its findings to the House of Commons.

On motion of Mark Gerretsen, it was agreed ...

 

[Lightguns]

Ohhh boy!  A committee.

Sent from my XT1563 using Tapatalk

 

[MilEME09]

Perhaps this is the start of the end of base gates being left wide open for anyone to come in?

 

[OldSolduer]

Security of our bases and armouries was abandoned due to everyone going gaga over the "peace dividend" when the USSR broke up.
Security was exchanged for "fiscal prudence " meaning they didn't want to pay Commissionaires at the front gates and in the armouries.

In my mind this was a message to the troops - the security of our bases don't matter and neither do you.

Mile wide, inch deep.

 

[MilEME09]

Security of our bases and armouries was abandoned due to everyone going gaga over the "peace dividend" when the USSR broke up.
Security was exchanged for "fiscal prudence " meaning they didn't want to pay Commissionaires at the front gates and in the armouries.

In my mind this was a message to the troops - the security of our bases don't matter and neither do you.

Mile wide, inch deep.

Give me $300 million to recruit and train some more MP's, and upgrade facilities problem solved

 

[PuckChaser]

Give me $300 million to recruit and train some more MP's, and upgrade facilities problem solved

Why do you need more MPs to do base security? We just spent 10 years manning VCPs with all manner of Combat Arms troops.

 

[OldSolduer]

Why do you need more MPs to do base security? We just spent 10 years manning VCPs with all manner of Combat Arms troops.

I agree. I do think the issue will be the matter of PYs, training, op tempo among other things. Therefore we will probably see - Commissiionaires.

 

[Journeyman]

Committee reports that security measures need improvement. 

That costs money.  Money is no worry; campaigned on "improving infrastructure."

Local contractors benefit from Liberal largesse.

Liberals express shock that the military is ungrateful for the love and care being showered upon it.

:boring:

 

[dapaterson]

Why do you need more MPs to do base security? We just spent 10 years manning VCPs with all manner of Combat Arms troops.

Somewhat different threat levels, and different RoEs.

 

[jollyjacktar]

The reason they scaled down the gates was as a cost savings measure.  The almighty dollar rules all.

 

[George Wallace]

Security of our bases and armouries was abandoned due to everyone going gaga over the "peace dividend" when the USSR broke up.
Security was exchanged for "fiscal prudence " meaning they didn't want to pay Commissionaires at the front gates and in the armouries.

In my mind this was a message to the troops - the security of our bases don't matter and neither do you.

Mile wide, inch deep.

Don't forget the cries of some in the Public, who convinced their Members of Parliament, that seeing as they paid taxes, they wanted to see how their tax dollars were being spent on the military.


Now we have to rebuild the Front Gates on many of the Bases that demolished them and then go with the program that the Gate Guards had in Germany......Arm the Commissionaires.  >

 

[MilEME09]

Why do you need more MPs to do base security? We just spent 10 years manning VCPs with all manner of Combat Arms troops.

Because I believe we should handle our own security, not contract it out.

Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk

 

[PuckChaser]

Somewhat different threat levels, and different RoEs.

So regular CAF members are incapable of standing unarmed at a gate checking IDs? Gotcha.

 

[Scoobs]

I believe that we should have armed personnel, be it Combat Arms pers, MPs, BASF, etc.  at all of our installations.  Let's face it people, we are ALL a target.  As well, don't tell me that our troops can't be armed because some tree hugger is afraid to drive up.  My response would be, "then don't drive up".  After all, it is a military base we are talking about, not a day camp for kiddies.  I'm currently OUTCAN in the States and regularly go to NYC, which is terrorist target #1.  During major events the National Guard deploys to airports, train stations, etc and they are armed (personal side arms and service rifle) and loaded.  They are very visible on purpose and nobody bats an eye about it.

Security on Canadian facilities are a joke.  It needs fixed.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Halifax had a lot of Cl B or Cl C reservists on Force Protection not that many years ago; all armed and all with the appropriate ROE.  That cost $...

I think it is absurd and irresponsible to have military installations 'open for anyone to drive on', whether it be the ops or admin side of the house.  :2c:

 

[jollyjacktar]

And the reason the stood down the force protection class B call outs.  They needed to seriously cut back on operating expenses and also halved the Commissionaires too.  That was all pushed down onto the duty watch to try and cover.

 

[The Bread Guy]

So regular CAF members are incapable of standing unarmed at a gate checking IDs? Gotcha.

As with this situation, it's not that CAF members can't do it, but whether that's the best way to do it.  (What "best" means will vary, admittedly...)

I'm currently OUTCAN in the States and regularly go to NYC, which is terrorist target #1.  During major events the National Guard deploys to airports, train stations, etc and they are armed (personal side arms and service rifle) and loaded.  They are very visible on purpose and nobody bats an eye about it.

We're not the U.S., so it still makes sense to ask the question.

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

Because I believe we should handle our own security, not contract it out.

Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk

He said VCPs manned by Cmbt arm types. No contracting there

 

[MilEME09]

He said VCPs manned by Cmbt arm types. No contracting there

I was simply using MPs since A) they are a law enforcement entity, and B) most MP shacks are at the base entrance any way

Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk

 

[PuckChaser]

I was simply using MPs since A) they are a law enforcement entity, and B) most MP shacks are at the base entrance any way

Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk

Been to Pet? Not anywhere close.