[BeaverFever]

You know, when I started read this article, I thought it was immaterial...$1M over 3 years is not alot of money.


BUT then I read that the jets were flying the CDS to family vacays and sporting events, which is not ok. $1M over 3 years is not alot of money but these resources should be used to work-related travel only. If conservatives are so obsessed with "efficiencies" well here's one for you. Let him fly commercial when he's travelling for pleasure or personal business, the risks are not "exceedingly high".

[Freakinoldguy]

peck420 peck420:

The vacation part I agree with, even though it was official government business that caused him to miss his scheduled commercial flight....

$1:

The trip, Cyr says, was "not deemed to be a personal trip as the vacation delay was service-related."

Also from the article.

I could personally give a shit how and where he flys on service matters but there is a limit to my patience and this holiday delay has hit it.

When did the DND change it's policies towards leave that you couldn't take or had to delay? I find this rather strange considering that when I missed annual leave because of "Service Reasons" nobody flew me to my intended holiday destination on the Governments dime.

This kind of grandious use of government funds for what appears to be personal perks kind of reminds me of the 80's largess that the Senior Officers felt they were entitled to.

[Bruce_the_vii]

SprCForr SprCForr:

I'm OK with it. It offers the flexibility he needs, what with troops in combat and the need to stay in touch.

That maybe the point, thanks for the good post.

[OnTheIce]

Wow, a tad overboard?

This isn't some paper pusher, the is the Chief of Defense Staff. It would be embarrassing to have this man fly on a commercial liner considering his position.

[Regina]

Considering his position and responsibility I don't see the big deal and don't have a problem with it. He also takes commercial aircraft when possible. It's just a great political sound bite right now.

[SprCForr]

What isn't apparent from a story like that are things like crew proficiency flights. Kills two birds with one stone. The crews keep up their rating, the boss gets where he needs to go.

[Bruce_the_vii]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Wow, a tad overboard?

This isn't some paper pusher, the is the Chief of Defense Staff. It would be embarrassing to have this man fly on a commercial liner considering his position.

I don't mind having the top leaders fly around at government expense. When the Governor of the Bank of Canada was David Dodge he said when he declined a second seven year posting that the job was too arduous, particularly the international travel. These guys have a heavy work load and flying is a huge drain. Just put them in a private jet where they can relax, perhaps read their infile. I see the point the government should maybe fly the Chief of Staff to his holiday, given that his time is barely his own.

[Yogi]

BULLSHIT!

I drive a 9 year old Dodge, which I paid for, all the while purchasing limousines for 'Canada's elite' to be chauffeured around in.
As long as the 'vehicle' is in good mechanical order & being staffed by competents... (Chevy's & Volvo's come to mind)

So the guy missed his 'original flight' due to attending a repat ceremony (just one 'reason' for the 'need' to expense a corporate jet for personal use) whilst virtually all other Canadians would feel honored to be able to attend, and then head off on holiday on a later scheduled flight feeling, rightly so, a great sense of pride!

This govt has become so bloated and self-important, and whenever confronted with mis-management of taxpayers $$$ tries to 'justify' the expense.
Time for them to see what it is like to work for a living, and live within their means!

[OnTheIce]

Yogi Yogi:

BULLSHIT!

I drive a 9 year old Dodge, which I paid for, all the while purchasing limousines for 'Canada's elite' to be chauffeured around in.
As long as the 'vehicle' is in good mechanicle order & being staffed by competents... (Chevy's & Volvo's come to mind)

So the guy missed his 'original flight' due to attending a repat ceremony (just one 'reason' for the 'need' to expense a corporate jet for personal use) whilst virtually all other Canadians would feel honored to be able to attend, and then head off on holiday on a later scheduled flight feeling, rightly so, a great sense of pride!

This govt has become so bloated and self-important, and whenever confronted with mis-management of taxpayers $$$ tries to 'justify' the expense.
Time for them to see what it is like to work for a living, and live within their means!

Another out of touch post from Yogi...."I'm a dude with a 9 year old truck so our high ranking officials should be a cheap-ass like me."

[Yogi]

I wouldn't call it 'being cheap-ass'! There is absolutely nothing wrong with my 'nine year old Dodge' which only has 125k on it. It has been properly cared for and still looks/runs as new. I call that 'good management of my $$$'!
Comparison:
My son just bought a 2012 Ford Explorer, with every conceivable option available. By comparison, what can he do with his 'top of the line vehicle' that I cannot do with mine?

Same as 'flying first class vs coach; The back of the plane lands very soon after the front of the plane'!

[andyt]

Yeah, high ranking officials should be cheap asses. Not just with social programs but with their own perks even more so - set an example.

From the Globe and Mail:

$1:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Friday that Ottawa would look over Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Walter Natynczyk’s flight record, making it clear the soldier would have to repay some of the costs for any travel that could not be justified as part of his job.

The controversy comes at a terrible time for Gen. Natynczyk, who is supposed to be leading by example in chopping spending at the Canadian Forces to help the Harper government tame the deficit by 2015.

The Department of National Defence is already grappling with accusations that it suffers from bloat at headquarters – levelled by the military’s own former chief of transformation. Lieutenant-General Andrew Leslie, now retired, said in a leaked report that the department and the Forces could in fact cut 11,000 people as part of efforts to save $1-billion a year.

The flight costs appear exorbitant, even for a private plane. For instance, figures released by the Defence Department indicate it cost $23,231.30 to fly the general to Toronto from Ottawa in January, 2009, to attend a Canadian Forces appreciation night at a Maple Leafs game.

Asked about this Friday, the Prime Minister failed to come to Gen. Natynczyk’s defence and instead sent a message about the need for frugality. He said senior government officials should pony up their own cash to help defray the cost of non-work-related trips on public jets.

“As you know, when I travel, whenever I travel or, for that matter, any of our ministers travel, on government aircraft that is for personal usage, we reimburse the treasury the [equivalent] commercial cost of that,” Mr. Harper told reporters during a visit to Saskatoon.

“When [the jets] are used for personal or private travel, that we expect that travel at commercial rates to be reimbursed to the taxpayers,” he said.

“That’s what I do and I think that’s protocol that should be respected across government.”

Harper has it backwards tho. When jets are used for personal travel, the official should refund the true cost of that travel, which is around $3000 an hour. Otherwise what "I flew to Vegas on a govt jet, which cost $50,000, but you can get a package flight for $400, so here's $400 to defray towards that 50k"?

[OnTheIce]

Yogi Yogi:

I wouldn't call it 'being cheap-ass'! There is absolutely nothing wrong with my 'nine year old Dodge' which only has 125k on it. It has been properly cared for and still looks/runs as new. I call that 'good management of my $$$'!
Comparison:
My son just bought a 2012 Ford Explorer, with every conceivable option available. By comparison, what can he do with his 'top of the line vehicle' that I cannot do with mine?

Same as 'flying first class vs coach; The back of the plane lands very soon after the front of the plane'!

But you're not one of the heads of our military. Apples to oranges.

Just because your cheap, doesn't mean we should be cheap for the sake of being cheap while letting a high ranking military official ride in coach.

Only in Canada do we treat our high ranking military officials like this...."you're not that important, fly commercial". We're worried about a MP getting a chubby due to an alleged spy yet we advocate that a man like this ride a commercial liner?

Really?

And what does the Ford have over the Dodge? Resale value

[OnTheIce]

andyt andyt:

Yeah, high ranking officials should be cheap asses. Not just with social programs but with their own perks even more so - set an example.

From the Globe and Mail:

$1:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Friday that Ottawa would look over Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Walter Natynczyk’s flight record, making it clear the soldier would have to repay some of the costs for any travel that could not be justified as part of his job.

The controversy comes at a terrible time for Gen. Natynczyk, who is supposed to be leading by example in chopping spending at the Canadian Forces to help the Harper government tame the deficit by 2015.

The Department of National Defence is already grappling with accusations that it suffers from bloat at headquarters – levelled by the military’s own former chief of transformation. Lieutenant-General Andrew Leslie, now retired, said in a leaked report that the department and the Forces could in fact cut 11,000 people as part of efforts to save $1-billion a year.

The flight costs appear exorbitant, even for a private plane. For instance, figures released by the Defence Department indicate it cost $23,231.30 to fly the general to Toronto from Ottawa in January, 2009, to attend a Canadian Forces appreciation night at a Maple Leafs game.

Asked about this Friday, the Prime Minister failed to come to Gen. Natynczyk’s defence and instead sent a message about the need for frugality. He said senior government officials should pony up their own cash to help defray the cost of non-work-related trips on public jets.

“As you know, when I travel, whenever I travel or, for that matter, any of our ministers travel, on government aircraft that is for personal usage, we reimburse the treasury the [equivalent] commercial cost of that,” Mr. Harper told reporters during a visit to Saskatoon.

“When [the jets] are used for personal or private travel, that we expect that travel at commercial rates to be reimbursed to the taxpayers,” he said.

“That’s what I do and I think that’s protocol that should be respected across government.”

Harper has it backwards tho. When jets are used for personal travel, the official should refund the true cost of that travel, which is around $3000 an hour. Otherwise what "I flew to Vegas on a govt jet, which cost $50,000, but you can get a package flight for $400, so here's $400 to defray towards that 50k"?

Not a chance!

What your suggesting is ludicrous.

This is National Security. The dude is allowed to have a personal life and he has to be protected.

[SprCForr]

The Challenger Sqn flew 170 hrs last year EMPTY. The personnel must maintain proficiency and if some of those hours can get used in shuttling the CDS, PM, GG or whoever to various places, all the better.

[Gunnair]

SprCForr SprCForr:

The Challenger Sqn flew 170 hrs last year EMPTY. The personnel must maintain proficiency and if some of those hours can get used in shuttling the CDS, PM, GG or whoever to various places, all the better.

Whoa whoa - easy there big fella. Can't run around with an agenda if there's logic about that'll undermine it.

Stand down and let the foamers foam.