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....

 

[Kirkhill]

So, 2% or maybe more … ?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1504179716563034114

She's in. Chrystia may be in. Now for the rest of Cabinet and the Liberal Party backers.

 

[dapaterson]

With D/PM who is also Min Fin in, nobody else matters.

 

[Kirkhill]

With D/PM who is also Min Fin in, nobody else matters.

Your fingers to God's eyes....

 

[Retired AF Guy]

Interesting item from Jean Charest who is running for leader of the CPC.

Jean Charest: It's time to increase defence spending

My Conservative government will make significant changes and upgrades to our nation's military capabilities.​

By: Jean Charest

National security is a necessity, not a luxury. The war in Ukraine has illustrated the need to bolster our security capabilities here in Canada. The current government has remained content to underfund national defence for too long. The Liberal governments' inaction has undermined our ability to support our allies, most recently Ukraine.

Democracy is at stake. Lives are at stake. The world needs more from Canada. Now.

Recent shipments of lethal equipment, while welcome, are long overdue from the government and have been obstructed in many cases by further logistical challenges – a price you pay for being late out the blocks.

We need to stop playing catch up and start getting ahead with all public policy, but with national security policy in particular. Anticipation and planning are critical to protecting and defending our values when they are threatened by armed aggression and tyrants.

Our military procurement system is broken. For years experts have been warning about our incompetence at making major defence purchases. The past few weeks have shown us the price of our inaction.

While our allies, the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia, have entered into a new security pact to counter China in the Pacific, Canada wasn't even invited to the table.

Germany, Sweden, and other NATO allies promise to increase their military spending to prepare for the uncertain times ahead. Canada has a moral responsibility to act. Now is the time.

If elected as the leader, my Conservative government will make significant changes and upgrades to our nation's military capabilities. I will move quickly to ramp up Canadian defence spending to two percent of GDP, increase personnel to 100,000 and equip our forces for the challenging times ahead. I will modernize our cyber security infrastructure to prepare for future risks. And I will fix our embarrassing procurement system to ensure we get the equipment we desperately need.

The current conflict has also driven home the need to assert our sovereignty, especially in our North. As major sea lanes, essential to global trade and export of our natural resources, open within our arctic territory, we must be on high alert to Russian and Chinese encroachment. Neither recognizes our sovereignty there. In fact, no one really recognizes our sovereignty there and the imbalance in our military investments compared to our allies explains why that's the case.

The war in Ukraine is a cruel reminder of why we cannot ignore these threats. Russia has a modern military base in the arctic - another area where indecision and delay could be extremely costly unless addressed.

A proud Canada must assert its sovereignty in the North and generate military support through major investments in equipment and coordination with our NATO allies. We need to get our act together.

The threats remain real and demand immediate attention from leaders willing to act in the best interests of their respective nations.
Canadians need experience and expertise overseeing our military. We need a government that supports our military.

A Conservative government that places tangible outcomes ahead of politics will lead us through these dangerous times. This country's brightest minds and the best technology must be available and incentivized to contribute to our security, especially as warfare becomes more technological and unpredictable.

That includes investing in cybersecurity to protect the military and our critical industries. As with so many things, our energy sector is on the cutting edge of technology for defending itself from cyberattacks, and we need a government that doesn't vilify it but leans on its prowess to protect the country and the economy.


Jean Charest served as the leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada from 1993 to 1998, deputy prime minister in 1993 and as the premier of Quebec from 2003 to 2012.

Link

 

[TacticalTea]

Interesting item from Jean Charest who is running for leader of the CPC.



Link

Ah for fuck's sake.

I had sworn to myself I wouldn't vote for him, and now look how's massacred my promise.

Have any of his rivals said anything about the military, yet?

 

[Kilted]

Interesting item from Jean Charest who is running for leader of the CPC.



Link

Isn't our authorized strength already over 100,000?

 

[FSTO]

Now I know that they (both the Liberals and the Conservatives) will not give details. I just have this feeling that there is no plan to better use the money. That there isn't going to be a clear eyed assessment on what sort of forces we need to do the jobs and duties we want.

Jean Charest's tweet has nothing in it to change my mind.

 

[Remius]

Ah for fuck's sake.

I had sworn to myself I wouldn't vote for him, and now look how's massacred my promise.

Have any of his rivals said anything about the military, yet?

Not yet. Charest is the only one to present actual policy plans. Polievre is mostly sound bites with little detail on how he would do whatever. Brown and Lewis I think not much. But we can cut them all a break since they all recently announced they would run. I’m sure events in Ukraine will all shape their platforms.

 

[Furniture]

Isn't our authorized strength already over 100,000?

I suspect he is talking about Regs, not Reg/Res combined.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I think that is mostly because they don't know what absolute dire straights the CAF is in.
I think when a CFP snaps in half - and a CF18 drops out of the sky there will be huge complaints of why things where not fixed before that.

Well tragedy makes for heady news and higher ratings.

 

[dangerboy]

It looks like our cupboards are bare:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1504206283183898628

 

[GK .Dundas]

It looks like our cupboards are bare:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1504206283183898628

The cupboard is not only bare but half the shelves are missing.
You know I have spent almost 20 years when the subject of either foreign policy or defence giving what I felt was a realistic appraisal of the state of our military.
I usually got one of three responses.
First , it can't possibly be that bad. Second , this is Canada , every body likes us or The Americans will protect us.

 

[Good2Golf]

With D/PM who is also Min Fin in, nobody else matters.

 

[daftandbarmy]

So, 2% or maybe more … ?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1504179716563034114

What?

 

[Kirkhill]

View attachment 69509

@dapaterson
Not to pour too much more salt but as was previously noted...

Melanie Joly said:
Canada is not a nuclear power, it is not a military power,” she told CTV Power Play host Evan Solomon. “We’re a middle-sized power and what we’re good at is convening and making sure that diplomacy is happening, and meanwhile convincing other countries to do more.

Pixie dust, unicorns and rainbows ...

 

[MilEME09]

@dapaterson
Not to pour too much more salt but as was previously noted...



Pixie dust, unicorns and rainbows ...

Cause talking did so well at stopping the Russo-Ukrainian war

 

[TacticalTea]

@dapaterson
Not to pour too much more salt but as was previously noted...



Pixie dust, unicorns and rainbows ...

Such a ridiculous perspective.

I guess our contribution to WW2 was useless? We didn't go to Korea? Afghan didn't happen either? And nothing happened in Bosnia?

Clueless twitter-Party.

 

[Remius]

Such a ridiculous perspective.

I guess our contribution to WW2 was useless? We didn't go to Korea? Afghan didn't happen either? And nothing happened in Bosnia?

Clueless twitter-Party.

Ultimately though you are talking about the past. We aren’t a military power anymore and haven’t been for a while . It’s an honest statement. As much as I think her words are a bit misplaced she isn’t wrong in this case.

That doesn’t mean we can’t contribute. But let’s be honest about what we can actually do with what we have. And it isn’t that much in the grand scheme.

We lament that we are under equipped, under manned and lack capabilities and that the cupboard is worse than bare and yet when someone points it out we get offended.

I take her comments as a good sign that maybe, finally the gvt is actually admitting that we can’t do as much on the military side of things instead of saying a bunch of BS about how we are more than capable and that we contribute our share blah blah. The first step is admitting we have a problem and fix it.

Her statement and Anand saying that maybe we need to aggressively start increasing our defence spending and commitments is a sign that maybe a new narrative on defence spending is coming.

Like most, I’ll believe it when I see it but at least the gvt isn’t living in denial or trying to convince Canadians that everything in defence is all fine and dandy.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Ultimately though you are talking about the past. We aren’t a military power anymore and haven’t been for a while . It’s an honest statement. As much as I think her words are a bit misplaced she isn’t wrong in this case.

That doesn’t mean we can’t contribute. But let’s be honest about what we can actually do with what we have. And it isn’t that much in the grand scheme.

We lament that we are under equipped, under manned and lack capabilities and that the cupboard is worse than bare and yet when someone points it out we get offended.

I take her comments as a good sign that maybe, finally the gvt is actually admitting that we can’t do as much on the military side of things instead of saying a bunch of BS about how we are more than capable and that we contribute our share blah blah. The first step is admitting we have a problem and fix it.

Her statement and Anand saying that maybe we need to aggressively start increasing our defence spending and commitments is a sign that maybe a new narrative on defence spending is coming.

Like most, I’ll believe it when I see it but at least the gvt isn’t living in denial or trying to convince Canadians that everything in defence is all fine and dandy.

Agree. It's a cold hard truth.

It's statements like these though that might actually wake up the Canadian public to our true position on this planet.

 

[SupersonicMax]

@dapaterson
Not to pour too much more salt but as was previously noted...



Pixie dust, unicorns and rainbows ...

Well, this is true. We are not a military power. Maybe we were in the past but it’s not the case anymore, probably since the Korean War. We contribute to warfare in that we’ll provide people and equipment an contribute to someone else’s initiative. We chose our battles. And that’s the key, right there, to our contribution.

Canada, as a generally rational nation, measures its military involvement well. When Canada participates militarily, it sends a message to the World and gives legitimacy to a military operation. When we do not, that also sends a powerful message. When we are asked to participate militarily to an operation, it is not because of our military might: it’s because it gives legitimacy.