Yet voters need a scapegoat and so – with the enthusiastic help of some of the Defence Minister’s Conservative colleagues – the words “F-35” and “Peter MacKay” became synonymous.
The piling on became so egregious, speculation sprinted around Parliament Hill that Mr. MacKay was set to quit politics, and decamp to Bay Street with his new wife, Nazanin Afshin-Jam.
Those rumours appear wrong. The Defence Minister has his critics – he is politically naïve, even not that bright, say some who have worked with him – but no-one questions that he is disciplined and determined.
Marriage and the birth of his first child next spring appear to have focused his mind on the future. People close to him at the time of the A-G’s report expressed doubts that he would hang around and be the government’s fall guy.
He seems to have decided to do just that – determined to rehabilitate his reputation by leading the National Defence department into the post-Afghanistan era.
He also appears to have resolved to run as a potential successor to Stephen Harper when the time comes, after years of equivocating on whether he would ever contest the Conservative leadership. The first sign of that came at last year’s post-election convention, where the former Progressive Conservative party leader duelled with the former Reform wing of the party, many of whom openly support Jason Kenney as the next leader.
This is hardly the first time Mr. MacKay has gone for a metaphorical walk in the snow.
He was a man of promise when he ran for the leadership of the PCs in 2003.
But after he won the crown by signing a deal with rival candidate David Orchard, in which he agreed not to merge the party with the Canadian Alliance, he became known as a man of broken promises, damaged goods as a future leader.
He rebuilt his reputation slowly, via a grinding touring schedule Ted Nugent would balk at (6,000 shows and counting). The annual trek to Kandahar to eat Christmas dinner with the troops was made more palatable by his enthusiasm for the soldier’s life and a genuine belief that military intervention can do good in the world.
And then along came the F-35 “debacle.”
It is too late to persuade people that Mr. MacKay did not deserve all the opprobrium poured on him over the F-35s. It is true Michael Ferguson, the Auditor-General, concluded the Minister was not informed of cost-overruns and risks by the DND bureaucracy. It’s true that in the year up to the A-G’s report coming out, Mr. MacKay was not fully apprised about the file by Julian Fantino, then Associate Minister of Defence for procurement, who was not obliged to report to the Defence Minister.
But Mr. MacKay was an enthusiastic advocate for the plane and claimed it was chosen as part of a “competitive, rigorous process” in June, 2010. Even if he was misled, he looks like a stooge and it does little to boost his reputation as a canny political leader.
That deep cleanse will come from achieving what his department has called “important milestones” going forward. These include procurement and overseas deployment issues, but appear increasingly to be geared toward domestic considerations: search and rescue operations; use of new technology like satellite, sonar and unmanned aerial vehicles to patrol the Arctic; and the mental health of returning Afghan vets.
For Mr. MacKay, whose mother is a psychiatrist, improving the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder is said to be a top priority. He found $11.4-million from his own departmental budget earlier this summer to redirect toward mental-health care for returning soldiers.
Another project close to the Minister’s heart is the delivery of the long-promised search and rescue planes for the air force, a purchase originally earmarked by the Liberals in 2003 but now finally given Cabinet approval, with delivery set for 2015.
The hope may be the happy corollary of the Canadian Forces being more visible at home fighting floods and fires, not to mention swooping from the skies in new rescue choppers, will be the reconstruction of the Minister’s public image.
After all, no-one knows better than Peter MacKay how fickle the line between repute and disrepute.
Original Article
Source: national post
Author: John Ivison
No comments:
Post a Comment