- Reaction score
- 8,198
- Points
- 1,160
E.R. Campbell said:I agree and, in both cases, I think, the operational requirement originated in the office of the MND. Oh, it's true that the CF said we want strategic transports and heavy lift helicopters, but the MND of the day, Gordon O'Connor, drove the process. I think O'Connor did two things right:
1. He secured cabinet support first and then he went and told DND to fast track it;
2. He, and Peter MacKay, kept their cabinet colleagues, especially the President of the Treasury Board and PWGSC's minister, "on side" throughout the process.
The poor old F-35 has been allowed to become a political orphan. It doesn't really matter how good, or not so good, it might be, it lacks a political "cheering section" and that makes it constantly vulnerable.
But....
I thought the argument against the Conservatives in general and MacKay in particular were that they were deemed to be overly accepting of the F-35 and were essentially "cheerleading".
With respect, I believe that the biggest difference between the F35 and the CH147/C17 (and the JSS-AOR) projects is the Liberals withdrew their support of the F35 project in order to differentiate themselves from the Conservatives. A political football game ensued.
All of the projects were launched by the Liberals, in particular Paul Martin. It can be debated whether this was the result of Conservative pressure; Martin-Manley vs Trudeau-Chretien differentiation; public outcry (at least public support) or effective military salesmanship. It is likely, in my view, a combination of those stars aligning.
The Age of Aquarius may now have passed and the F35 is the victim of timing.
Having said that, I think Jammer is overly pessimistic. The Liberals will beat up on the Conservatives for mismanaging the file and complain about buying too many or too few while spending too much or too little money. At the same time I can't see Trudeau alienating Montreal and the Canadian aerospace industry by pulling a Chretien and cancelling the programme.