Why not have an outside, impartial agency review the NSPS

Canada is not alone in facing public challenges over its future shipbuild programs; Australia faces much the same sort of public questioning over its future naval fleet. Canada hopes to re-rationalize the NSPS and "add ons" through an in-house defence review rather than go the route of a previous new Liberal government in holding a fully public defence review -- the 1994 Review.

But there is a third option, as the Australians found: get the Rand Corporation to do the study of the ship building quandary. This puts most of the cards on the table. And provided the prevailing strategic rationale for new warships can be accepted politically such a study should be able to confirm or recommend adjustments to the NSPS Implementation Plan.

A major factor in all of this debate is that the strategic rationale for naval forces and thus capabilities should be non-partisan. In this very complex world situation, the tools needed to ensure national security should be separated from the rough and tumble of partisan politics. The assessment of risk to national security, however, is traditionally left to the government of the day. Woe betide them though should they get it wrong.

The Australian Naval Study can be found under:

Australia's Naval Shipbuilding Enterprise: Preparing for the 21st Century | RAND
http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1093.html

Share

Leave a Reply to Howie Smith Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.

3 thoughts on “Why not have an outside, impartial agency review the NSPS”