Government hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

I have long said that you could fund the CAF to 4 percent of GDP, but we would still lag behind in NATO and be much the same where we are.

It's never the money, it's politics. It's procedures. It's the pork-barreling in our defence spending that makes us a paper tiger in NATO.

My only hope in all of this for the CAF and the GoC, whatever the political stripe that may be, is that it will rouse them out of the "Peace Dividend" slumber. The world has been unstable since 1945. We have used geography, proximity, and association as a Defence Policy ever since. ICBMs don't care how close to the U.S. or how far from Russia/China we are.

Don't give us a dime more, but let us spend money on defence like it matters. The fact we follow the same rules for purchasing a fighter aircraft as we do for buying office furniture for a Service Canada office is disgraceful. Don't treat defense procurement as a stimulus package for Canadian Industry. There I said it.

We spend so much money, time, and effort trying to get that money to stay in Canada; be it by awarding contracts to companies with no capability to produce items without first "retooling" and"developing the production lines", or by hamstringing perfectly competent and competitive bidders by forcing the project to be made in St. Margaret de Poutain de Champignon, QC because the ruling government either lost the seat in the election, or won it with promises.

We spend so much money and staff hours jumping through TBS regulations that are great for other departments, but are terrible for defence procurement. Some items you have to sole source, because there are technologies and capabilities no one else makes. By doing the bid process, you get companies clamoring for a project they can't deliver on, but because they tick the bright boxes on the score sheet....

I truly and honestly belief we need to split from PSPC and legislate that its not beholden to TBS, only to the PBO/PCO. The guiding principles of this new Defence Procurement department should be "Off the shelf, from somewhere else" if there isn't an industry in Canada.

BOOTFORGEN has demonstrated how well we do when we are able to actually get what we need, instead of lining the pockets of a Canadian company that got lucky.

That, but with tanks, fighters, ships, weapons systems....

 

[lenaitch]

The election down under should be interesting with respect to the submarine issue. Continuity is imperative if the Aussies have any hope at succeeding there. The proposed new Eastern submarine base should add some spice


Same old same old with Trudeau lots of talk and posing but very little substance. Maybe if trialed by fire he would stand out as well but I look at the lack of real response with regard to our own defence priorities as damming. What moves to secure our own nationality has he even broached? None as far as I know. We sit on our hands on the fighter replacement. I mean we lie our way to whatever measly GDP percentage we are currently at by including non CAF expenditures like the CCG when the CCG has very little constabulary ability. That being taken up mostly by our Kingston Class. Even from a non kinetic standpoint you think we could be helping out with the refugee situation in Poland unless they dont want or need it but I find that hard to believe

While not willing to give this government, or any in recent memory, a pass on defence spending, is there any standard benchmark for NATO partners to be judged against when it comes to their %/GDP? I wasn't aware that CCG spending was lumped into any figure the government has used, but I have read that other nations include such services as border enforcement and para-military federal police into their percentage.

 

[suffolkowner]

While not willing to give this government, or any in recent memory, a pass on defence spending, is there any standard benchmark for NATO partners to be judged against when it comes to their %/GDP? I wasn't aware that CCG spending was lumped into any figure the government has used, but I have read that other nations include such services as border enforcement and para-military federal police into their percentage.

I'm not super familiar with it so Im not sure if expenditures are "approved" or not. I have a couple documents around here somewhere so maybe ill take a look on the weekend. The inclusion of other enforcement and para-military forces is true but to compare it to what our non CAF can contribute is weak on the part of the federal government. If I was NATO I would say nice try

 

[Weinie]

The election down under should be interesting with respect to the submarine issue. Continuity is imperative if the Aussies have any hope at succeeding there. The proposed new Eastern submarine base should add some spice


Same old same old with Trudeau lots of talk and posing but very little substance. Maybe if trialed by fire he would stand out as well but I look at the lack of real response with regard to our own defence priorities as damming. What moves to secure our own nationality has he even broached? None as far as I know. We sit on our hands on the fighter replacement. I mean we lie our way to whatever measly GDP percentage we are currently at by including non CAF expenditures like the CCG when the CCG has very little constabulary ability. That being taken up mostly by our Kingston Class. Even from a non kinetic standpoint you think we could be helping out with the refugee situation in Poland unless they dont want or need it but I find that hard to believe

He's been trialed by fire once.......................Emergencies Act was the result.

 

[QV]

While not willing to give this government, or any in recent memory, a pass on defence spending, is there any standard benchmark for NATO partners to be judged against when it comes to their %/GDP? I wasn't aware that CCG spending was lumped into any figure the government has used, but I have read that other nations include such services as border enforcement and para-military federal police into their percentage.

I'd agree with the CCG being lumped in if they doubled as an armed force capable of naval warfare operations, but they can't and are basically unarmed civilians. Including them is playing games.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Increasing our military budget without massive oversight to how it's spent would be meaningless. We can spend $1100 ea. on ergonomic office chairs but not buy helmets with NVG mounts. Our military is built for comfy HQs, not warfighting.

 

[FSTO]

Does anyone think that, at a bare minimum, that we get a Foreign Policy Document so that we can tailor a Defence Policy based on our Foreign Aims and Interests. SSE is now horribly out of date.

I am not very hopeful this will happen. Cripes ze Germans did a 180 in about 72 hrs!

 

[OldSolduer]

I am not very hopeful this will happen. Cripes ze Germans did a 180 in about 72 hrs!

There's a good reason for ze Germans to do the about face. A number of years ago a German Army captain told me "Russia is too close".

Russia and Germany have a history shall we say. In that part of the world things like that aren't forgotten easily.

 

[FSTO]

There's a good reason for ze Germans to do the about face. A number of years ago a German Army captain told me "Russia is too close".

Russia and Germany have a history shall we say. In that part of the world things like that aren't forgotten easily.

That is our issue, despite the shrinking world, the powers that be in Canada still believe we live in a fireproof house and that the world loves us.

 

[OldSolduer]

That is our issue, despite the shrinking world, the powers that be in Canada still believe we live in a fireproof house and that the world loves us.

Amen brother - we learned a long time ago that not everyone loves Canada.

 

[Blackadder1916]

While not willing to give this government, or any in recent memory, a pass on defence spending, is there any standard benchmark for NATO partners to be judged against when it comes to their %/GDP? I wasn't aware that CCG spending was lumped into any figure the government has used, but I have read that other nations include such services as border enforcement and para-military federal police into their percentage.

Yes, there is a definition and it can be found in this document. https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2021/6/pdf/210611-pr-2021-094-en.pdf

An excerpt.

NATO defines defence expenditure as payments made by a national government specifically to meet the needs of its armed forces, those of Allies or of the Alliance. A major component of defence expenditure is payments for Armed Forces financed from within the Ministry of Defence (MoD) budget. Armed Forces include Land, Maritime and Air forces as well as Joint formations such as Administration and Command, Special Operations Forces, Medical Service, Logistic Command, Space Command, Cyber Command, etc. They might also include "Other Forces" like Ministry of Interior troops, national police forces, gendarmerie, carabinieri, coast guards etc. In such cases, expenditure is included only in proportion to the forces that are trained in military tactics, are equipped as a military force, can operate under direct military authority in deployed operations, and can, realistically, be deployed outside national territory in support of a military force. Also, expenditure on Other Forces financed through the budgets of ministries other than MoD is included in defence expenditure.
. . . .

 

[lenaitch]

Yes, there is a definition and it can be found in this document. https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2021/6/pdf/210611-pr-2021-094-en.pdf

An excerpt.

Thanks for that. Seems fairly clear.

But I found this. No idea of the veracity of the source, I just stumbled across it.

Excerpt:

The Components of U.S. Military Spending​

If you really want to get a handle on what the United States spends on defense, you need to look at multiple components.​

​

The $715 billion base budget for the Department of Defense is the main contributor to the defense budget, but there are a number of other agencies that protect our nation as well, and much of their spending is devoted to the military effort. They include the Department of Veterans Affairs ($113.1 billion). Funding for the VA has been increased by nearly $30 billion over 2018 levels. That's to fund the VA MISSION Act and the VA's healthcare system. The other agencies are: Homeland Security ($54.9 billion), the State Department ($63.6 billion), and the FBI and Cybersecurity in the Department of Justice ($10.3 billion).​

 

[KevinB]

Thanks for that. Seems fairly clear.

But I found this. No idea of the veracity of the source, I just stumbled across it.

Excerpt:

The Components of U.S. Military Spending​

If you really want to get a handle on what the United States spends on defense, you need to look at multiple components.​

​

The $715 billion base budget for the Department of Defense is the main contributor to the defense budget, but there are a number of other agencies that protect our nation as well, and much of their spending is devoted to the military effort. They include the Department of Veterans Affairs ($113.1 billion). Funding for the VA has been increased by nearly $30 billion over 2018 levels. That's to fund the VA MISSION Act and the VA's healthcare system. The other agencies are: Homeland Security ($54.9 billion), the State Department ($63.6 billion), and the FBI and Cybersecurity in the Department of Justice ($10.3 billion).​

It doesn’t count for NATO, but is more an explanation of what realistically goes into defense and truer costs.

I don’t think it does a good job in some ways, as it basically paints the State Department under defense, but it also explains the what, why, and where of other costs that are key to National Defense that aren’t in the DoD budget.

For instance veterans affairs, the VA funding is a result of having a standing Military, but it isn’t a direct DoD expense.

Cyber Security aspects as well defend the national infrastructure, but very few are under DoD etc.

It’s a decent manner of comparison for counties, as far as a budget allocation for Defense goes but still has flaws.

 

[childs56]

While not willing to give this government, or any in recent memory, a pass on defence spending, is there any standard benchmark for NATO partners to be judged against when it comes to their %/GDP? I wasn't aware that CCG spending was lumped into any figure the government has used, but I have read that other nations include such services as border enforcement and para-military federal police into their percentage.

https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2021/6/pdf/210611-pr-2021-094-en.pdf

 

[GR66]

With a different leader/party in government I would have seen an excellent opportunity to re-open the Keystone XL pipeline project and the Energy East pipeline.

An agreement to meet our NATO commitment of 2% of GDP (and agreement to take part in the US BMD program) as the carrot for the US combined with a major PR campaign to secure ethical North-American sourced oil and gas for the US and Canada while energy prices are soaring, Russian oil is taboo and President Biden is taking heat for looking to enemy states (and "supposed allies not acting like friends during this crisis" states) Iran, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and the UAE to take up the slack.

Sadly, this government never seems to miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

 

[daftandbarmy]

With a different leader/party in government I would have seen an excellent opportunity to re-open the Keystone XL pipeline project and the Energy East pipeline.

An agreement to meet our NATO commitment of 2% of GDP (and agreement to take part in the US BMD program) as the carrot for the US combined with a major PR campaign to secure ethical North-American sourced oil and gas for the US and Canada while energy prices are soaring, Russian oil is taboo and President Biden is taking heat for looking to enemy states (and "supposed allies not acting like friends during this crisis" states) Iran, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and the UAE to take up the slack.

Sadly, this government never seems to miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

 

[FJAG]

I think that misses the analogy.

In order to have a swing and a miss, you need to at least swing.

We haven't swung in a long time.

 

[Kirkhill]

Does anyone think that, at a bare minimum, that we get a Foreign Policy Document so that we can tailor a Defence Policy based on our Foreign Aims and Interests. SSE is now horribly out of date.

I am not very hopeful this will happen. Cripes ze Germans did a 180 in about 72 hrs!

I have no faith in Justin seeing the light.

On the other hand I have hopes for Chrystia Freeland, Anita Anand and most of this team

The Prime Minister announces changes in the senior ranks of the Public Service

The Prime Minister also congratulated the following individuals who have retired from the Public Service, and thanked them for their dedication and service to Canadians

pm.gc.ca

 

[YZT580]

With a different leader/party in government I would have seen an excellent opportunity to re-open the Keystone XL pipeline project and the Energy East pipeline.

An agreement to meet our NATO commitment of 2% of GDP (and agreement to take part in the US BMD program) as the carrot for the US combined with a major PR campaign to secure ethical North-American sourced oil and gas for the US and Canada while energy prices are soaring, Russian oil is taboo and President Biden is taking heat for looking to enemy states (and "supposed allies not acting like friends during this crisis" states) Iran, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and the UAE to take up the slack.

Sadly, this government never seems to miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

believe that congress already tried this and the democrats shot it down in flames

 

[dapaterson]

I think that misses the analogy.

In order to have a swing and a miss, you need to at least swing.

We haven't swung in a long time.

Three wives, out of wedlock child, inviting a Cpl to a clothing optional resort... Sounds like a swinger to me.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

I have no faith in Justin seeing the light.

On the other hand I have hopes for Chrystia Freeland, Anita Anand and most of this team

Still waiting for him to make a decision of Huawei. So why should we expect a decision o increased defense spending anytime soon?