We all now that there are budget restrictions, but if the ever so wise congressmen think of this as a permanent way of doing things, wouldn't it make the AFP less effective on the original role that they were tasked to do?
Note that everything mentioned in 4threich's article can actually be used for military purposes. Assuming the report is accurate, and not the embellished with an editor's musings, lets parse what's been described:
“The idea of having this type of ship,” he explained, “is to equip the Navy with facilities that can alternately be used as a military transport vessel
Military potential for that goes without saying.
floating hospital or
Given the nature of amphibious operations, the Marines need a mobile hospital that can go where they are employed. Useful for disaster relief, but a basic necessity for combat ops.
on-site crisis management command center whenever a big disaster occurs.”
Command, Control, Communications. These are must-have in modern combat.
When employed in a disaster relief scenario, the PN gets to practice using all the elements above in a real-world scenario that has comparable stress levels as actual combat.
How exactly does all of this detract from the AFP's primary mission?