VAdm Norman - Supply Ship contract: Legal fight

[Journeyman]

....Craig Oliver stated without reservation that Adm Norman would do nothing to harm the security of Canada and inferred that there will be blowback on the perpetrators of this farce.

I agree with the first bit.  But I suspect that once the media and average Canadian see that there's no linking a high-ranking military person to sexual abuse, inappropriate PW training 20-30 years ago, killing subordinates with their panties on your head, etc.... the "blowback" will be insignificant. 

The CDS can justify his actions as due diligence.  The other target would be the government.  Is the media likely to hold this government accountable for anything,  let alone something as uninteresting as military procurement....?!  [Maybe I missed the public outcry at the budget putting defence $$$ in abeyance]

There's another day or two... maybe three because it's the weekend... of voyeuristic interest in reading any 'blacked-out bits,'  then it's no longer news.  Even for a wrongful dismissal suit, if there's cause, won't make it to page 3.

 

[jollyjacktar]

I do not see this causing our CDS any problem, even with the revelatory trend happily moving in Vice-Admiral Norman's favour. Even a hint of impropriety would require such action as he took.

The government, and Irving, by comparison, will likely not look good as this continues to develop, and I'll not weep much for either.

:goodpost:

I'll add that should this all go pear shaped for the sunshine gang, I expect the monetary costs to be paid out as a result will be eye watering.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Personally, I found the view of Richard Fadden (ex-head of CSIS) more interesting: First of all, he called the type of politically driven / civil service arses-covering secrecy at issue here "quasi-confidential" as opposed to truly being national secret. Then he went on to state that this type of information is leaked over coffee by everyone on a daily basis in Ottawa. He finally concluded that, he sincerely hopes that this is not the type of leak at issue, but that to justify the unprecedented action taken, there is something truly much more nefarious at issue. He intimated that otherwise ....


Modified to replace "serious" with the word that was on the tip of my tongue and finally came to me: "nefarious".

 

[ModlrMike]

I do not see this causing our CDS any problem, even with the revelatory trend happily moving in Vice-Admiral Norman's favour. Even a hint of impropriety would require such action as he took.

The government, and Irving, by comparison, will likely not look good as this continues to develop, and I'll not weep much for either.

The CDS can justify his actions as due diligence.  The other target would be the government.  Is the media likely to hold this government accountable for anything,  let alone something as uninteresting as military procurement....?!  [Maybe I missed the public outcry at the budget putting defence $$$ in abeyance]

I'm not sure I can agree with you. If the CDS acted at the urging of a cabinet official, or if the flash-to-bang time was protracted, it looks bad on the General. Of course neither the CDS nor Cabinet are going to admit that, but from what little has already been released, we can infer some political butt covering.

 

[Kirkhill]

I'm not sure I can agree with you. If the CDS acted at the urging of a cabinet official, or if the flash-to-bang time was protracted, it looks bad on the General. Of course neither the CDS nor Cabinet are going to admit that, but from what little has already been released, we can infer some political butt covering.

The CDS, like every other soldier, still gets orders to follow.  And those orders come from elected civilians via their civilian minions. 

In any event, regardless of any orders, all that the CDS did was relieve him of duties, effectively suspend him, until the issue could be cleared up.  The Admiral would have been unable to function effectively in any event with an ongoing investigation hanging over him.

I don't see any issue affecting the CDS.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Not quite how it works, Chris, but I agree with the gist of your post.

You may recall that, after it came out that the CDS had suspended the admiral, the minister indicated that he supported that decision of the CDS - not that he had ordered it. Same for the PM.

The investigation at the base of this affair does not originate from the Department of defence, but rather from the Government - who did not know where it would go after passing it to the RCMP.

Obviously, if as CDS I am approached by RCMP officers feeling me they will soon raid the house of my right hand man and that the actual investigation revolves around "leaking classified information", instead of mentioning that it is a 'leak" inquiry into cabinet pseudo-confidential information, my first reflex would be "Shit, he is talking to the Russians", or something and I would not want him anywhere near anything until I know more. It might have been different if the CDS had known from the start what, apparently, is truly at stake here from what bits are known.

And if I was the CDS, knowing what I now know, and considering the time elapsed, I would be on my Minister's ace everyday to tell him "get the damn RCMP to either charge him now or clear him, otherwise I'll throw a wrench in your lovely plans by taking him back in his functions. Period".

But that's just me.  [

 

[George Wallace]

The CDS, like every other soldier, still gets orders to follow.  And those orders come from elected civilians via their civilian minions. 

That is insinuating that the CDS was ordered to relieve him of his position.

I tend to agree with Loachman and Journeyman, in suspecting that if allegations were laid against the VCDS, the CDS was being diligent in removing him from his post.  There was no implication of "guilty" on the part of the CDS; but a cautionary move to remove a person from a position of authority until the investigation had run its course.  Would you not think that to be the common procedure of any organization when it had a member being investigated in a similar manner?

 

[Kirkhill]

I'll stand corrected by both of you. 

 

[Edward Campbell]

Maybe some of you are following this more closely than I ~ it doesn't get very many of "column inches" in The Economist, the Financial Times, the South China Morning Post or even the Globe and Mail, which are my main sources of news and opinion ~ bit it seems to me that:

    1. Immediately before the election the CPC government (Stephen Harper, prop) fiddled more than just a few systems, potentially to shore up votes in selected ridings;

    2. One of Scott Brison's very first acts on being named President of the Treasury Board was to initiate a senior level (TB Secy and A/Secy's) review of those "fiddles"
        to ensure that there was some modicum of bureaucratic oversight ~ not an unreasonable precaution, given that Liberals had done that sort of thing time and
        time and time again over the decades centuries;

    3.  The fairly public Norman e-mail put what he (Brison) had hoped would be a low key but important pice of "good management" off the rails;

    4. Someone in his office ~ a neophyte political staffer, as they almost all were in late 2015 ~ over-reacted and called in the RCMP, saying that either
        'trust' or national security had been breached;

    5. The RCMP conducted a thorough investigation but they may have also jumped to a conclusion if what Ontario Superior Court Justice Kevin Phillips
          says is both properly reported and a fair and accurate reading of the law;

    6. Vice Admiral Norman may soon be in a good position to cause the government HUGE political embarrassment; and

    7. Embarrassment is what frightens politicians more than anything else ~ Justin Trudeau isn'r afraid of Putin or free trade with China: it is screw-ups
          in cabinet and in the bureaucracy that keep him awake at nights.

Is that a fair reading of what has transpired?

 

[George Wallace]

I wonder is this may be part of what is going on with the VCDS being relieved of his duties, a side affect of this investigation:

Police arrest Toronto man on suspicion of spying for P.R. China is a thread posted in the Military Current Affairs & News forum here.

It in no way means that he was in any way involved, but more likely may be a sign that the Security at Irving is not up to snuff.

 

[Navy_Pete]

I wonder is this may be part of what is going on with the VCDS being relieved of his duties, a side affect of this investigation:

Police arrest Toronto man on suspicion of spying for P.R. China is a thread posted in the Military Current Affairs & News forum here.

It in no way means that he was in any way involved, but more likely may be a sign that the Security at Irving is not up to snuff.

That was a completely different story that far predated this; in this case the guy worked for a class society that was doing work with Irving on the CSC RFP.  He called the chinese embassy and offered them sensitive information.  There would have had a standard NDA between Irving and the company he worked for.  I hate to say it, but there really isn't any blame on Irving here either.

If I had to guess it probably had to do with specific requirements on the combat side; but to be honest that kind of info is available in Jane's and wikipedia after it's built (range, speed etc).  It's super amateur hour spy attempts, and I think it may have even predated when Adm Norman became CRCN.

 

[Monsoon]

Is that a fair reading of what has transpired?

It seems not: https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/trudeau-sought-rcmp-probe-of-cabinet-leaks-on-navy-supply-ship/article34802910/?ref=http://www.theglobeandmail.com&service=mobile

According to the source for this piece (which can only have been the Liberals themselves trying to get ahead of the story), the direction for an RCMP investigation came from the PM himself.

Add in two interesting facts:

• The order for the investigation came days after Norman testified in Parliament that he was worried the government cost envelope for the CSC project was way insufficient; and
  
• Both of the journalists who reported the Project Resolve leak are now employed as Liberal political staffers.

And you've got yourself the makings of a scandal that goes right to the top. Something along the lines of:

"We need to get rid of this Admiral we don't like without the political blowback of firing him directly. Why don't you tell us who the source was for your Davie story so we can trigger a police investigation, and we'll give you a nice cushy job."

 

[McG]

So, now there is a cabinet level leak (sorry an "insider") that is leaking information about the investigation into leaks?  Will that be another investigation that needs to get started now?

 

[Kirkhill]

op: op:

At least a two bag movie this one.

 

[ModlrMike]

I'm suddenly reminded of that classic Shakespearean tragedy... Richard II. Particularly Act 5 "Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?"

 

[Halifax Tar]

Its really sad that with the exception of this forum and my uniformed friends this story is making nary a ripple with the public...

Support for the military, a mile wide, no depth.

 

[Monsoon]

Its really sad that with the exception of this forum and my uniformed friends this story is making nary a ripple with the public...

Support for the military, a mile wide, no depth.

I've actually been surprised at the heft of the reporters the various outlets have assigned to this one: it's not just the usual "defence beat" guys (although about half of them are now Liberal staffers...). When the Globe/CTV puts Robert Fife on a story (and he accepts it), it's because they smell something delectable. If there hasn't been a lot of recent coverage it's because there hasn't been much to report; stories like this take months to get up a head of steam. I suspect things will start to get interesting after the publication ban on the RCMP affidavit gets lifted on Friday.

 

[runormal]

Its really sad that with the exception of this forum and my uniformed friends this story is making nary a ripple with the public...

Support for the military, a mile wide, no depth.

Do we really expect the general public to be on "the edge of their seat", regarding this or any other issue related to the military?

I agree, it'd be awesome if everyone cared about the issues surrounding the military. However outside of the P-Res, most civilians have very little interaction with the military in their day to day life.

Hell citizens of Toronto thought that they were being invaded.. when they did an excercise.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/military-exercise-toronto-us-election-twitter-1.3817563

That should show everyone the disconnect that the general public has with the military.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I've actually been surprised at the heft of the reporters the various outlets have assigned to this one: it's not just the usual "defence beat" guys (although about half of them are now Liberal staffers...). When the Globe/CTV puts Robert Fife on a story (and he accepts it), it's because they smell something delectable. If there hasn't been a lot of recent coverage it's because there hasn't been much to report; stories like this take months to get up a head of steam. I suspect things will start to get interesting after the publication ban on the RCMP affidavit gets lifted on Friday.

I hope you are right.

Do we really expect the general public to be on "the edge of their seat", regarding this or any other issue related to the military?

I agree, it'd be awesome if everyone cared about the issues surrounding the military. However outside of the P-Res, most civilians have very little interaction with the military in their day to day life.

Hell citizens of Toronto thought that they were being invaded.. when they did an excercise.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/military-exercise-toronto-us-election-twitter-1.3817563

That should show everyone the disconnect that the general public has with the military.

Well stated.  Still a sad state of affairs. 

 

[Lightguns]

Well, they are not calling you "Federal Welfare".  They are not denying you a mortgage because you are in the army can't be trusted to pay a mortgage or making you pay a premium on a loan because of your military rank.  They are not barring you from their town because army guys are all molesters, rapists and trouble makers.  No one is giving you the finger when you drive in an army bus through their town.  And I kinda miss being called a baby killer.........  Things are 100% better than 30 years ago.