tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8446351548038522890.post974738027035490188..comments2024-03-28T16:15:19.319-04:00Comments on Saideman's Semi-Spew: By Jove, We Have a Crisis in Civ-Mil RelationsSteve Saidemanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09881915512311951902noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8446351548038522890.post-43134817645373140042011-06-23T10:01:11.604-04:002011-06-23T10:01:11.604-04:00Im not saying the system is perfect or even all th...Im not saying the system is perfect or even all that good either. But it has to be understood on its own terms. Otherwise, we end up with impractical reform proposals or simply saying "well, this sucks." If we acknowledge the system, its advantages, and its limitations, then we can arrive at practical reforms proposals.<br /><br />Also, it's important to note that Westminster systems have fairly robust intra-executive oversight mechanisms. These need to be acknowledged too. If we only look at executive/legislative relations, we miss this other important angle.<br /><br />All this to say, I think we actually agree on a lot. I'd like to see a major reform of Canada's national security legislation and the creation of a standing committee armed with security clearance. But, as the detainee situatioon makes clear, that can only take you so far. In the end, it's the CF's own oversight committees, officers of Parliament, and the intra executive mechanisms that do the day to day oversight, while opposition MPs are there to highlight major problems and put pressure on the govt to create a public inquiry or royal commission a la Somalia.Philnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8446351548038522890.post-29032333531708293432011-06-23T09:03:34.149-04:002011-06-23T09:03:34.149-04:00But that system sucks. If the opposition does not ...But that system sucks. If the opposition does not know what is going on, it cannot hold folks to account. If the backbenchers of the party in govt have no ability to know what is going on, they cannot hold their party leaders to account.<br /><br />You may say this is the way the system is, but I can say it sucks. Yep, an advanced academic term to describe the status quo. <br /><br />I am not saying that the US way is better. I am saying that non-British systems are better. In Denmark and Holland, their parliaments have committees that do oversight. <br /><br />Of course, it is my American training/birth/identity/whatever that drives this--I don't trust the executive. I do not think legislatures should micro-manage military campaigns, but they should have the ability (via committees with clearances and closed meetings) to know what is going on. It does mean that they cannot speak about such stuff directly, but the Danes, Dutch, and others manage.Steve Saidemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09881915512311951902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8446351548038522890.post-17568461954006138712011-06-23T08:59:14.799-04:002011-06-23T08:59:14.799-04:00Right. But in practice that means opposition MPs h...Right. But in practice that means opposition MPs holding the government to account. Not all party MPs attempting to oversee the military directly. T'is the nature of the system.Philnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8446351548038522890.post-20489084828046021702011-06-23T08:04:19.573-04:002011-06-23T08:04:19.573-04:00Ok, how about the old Reagan line? Trust but veri...Ok, how about the old Reagan line? Trust but verify? After all, what is the Canadian parl's investigation into detainees if it is not oversight?Steve Saidemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09881915512311951902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8446351548038522890.post-76576516374200921762011-06-22T22:58:29.430-04:002011-06-22T22:58:29.430-04:00Oh boy, I dont even know how to respond to that on...Oh boy, I dont even know how to respond to that one. I'll just say that there is no government unless MPs express confidence in one.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8446351548038522890.post-38361695509314233642011-06-22T20:36:46.269-04:002011-06-22T20:36:46.269-04:00MPs in non-British parliaments do oversight. Brit...MPs in non-British parliaments do oversight. British style parliaments trust their governments. Their mistake. We will keep having this argument, Mr. Crown. Until your new child keeps you too comatose to post.Steve Saidemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09881915512311951902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8446351548038522890.post-26606125053674929312011-06-22T20:06:05.625-04:002011-06-22T20:06:05.625-04:00Er, who has poor oversight over the military? The ...Er, who has poor oversight over the military? The MPs whose jobs isnt to oversee the military but rather the government? Or the government whose job it actually is to keep an eye on the military?Phil Lnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8446351548038522890.post-78453978326396266632011-06-22T10:10:38.762-04:002011-06-22T10:10:38.762-04:00Steve
The political context is that we have had a...Steve<br /><br />The political context is that we have had a decade of fighting on two fronts without the rise in spending that has happened in the US. We now have a new war and a new round of defence cuts.<br /><br />On top of this it is pretty clear that the UK has a problem with strategy. Last year the UK Parliamentary Select Committee on Public Administration did a report on Who Does UK Strategy? Answer: Nobody <br /><br />It looks like you are on the right track by asking who does the thinking.Robin Brownhttp://PDnetworks.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.com