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....

 

[Furniture]

Good backgrounder article. Wish more people could or would read it.

They'd have to care about defense, and if people cared about defense we wouldn't be in this position.

 

[JLB50]

They'd have to care about defense, and if people cared about defense we wouldn't be in this position.

Exactly. And once the big conflict comes people will say “why didn’t the government warn us?”

 

[OldSolduer]

They'd have to care about defense, and if people cared about defense we wouldn't be in this position.

The vast majority of Canadians only care when there are casualties. Trust me on this. As soon as we withdrew from Afghanistan the care dried up.

 

[dimsum]

The vast majority of Canadians only care when there are casualties on the news.

 

[Quirky]

Exactly. And once the big conflict comes people will say “why didn’t the government warn us?”

It’s too late at this point. Nevermind international commitments, there is nothing, besides geography, from stopping a determined enemy taking control of vast portions of land. Our expert convening means nothing.

 

[Spencer100]

It’s too late at this point. Nevermind international commitments, there is nothing, besides geography, from stopping a determined enemy taking control of vast portions of land. Our expert convening means nothing.

The enemy doesn't even need to invade to take control of vast portions. CCP and the Globalist types are fighting over the spoils at this point.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I don’t think anyone wants our lands, except the Arctic perhaps. What they may want is us weak(ened) as a nation that borders the US and for the US to be in disarray as a nation (I think both our countries are close to that point…).

“Go for the gas trucks, not the tanks”

 

[dimsum]

Globalist types

Like...UN? NATO? EU?

 

[Good2Golf]

Like...UN? NATO? EU?

WEF…

 

[daftandbarmy]

WEF…

 

[Spencer100]

WEF…

Yes,

Globalist is short hand. I knew IF I'd I used that term people would be upset or complain. Here's the thing "Globalist" is short hand for the groups that believe in the post nation state, are corporatists, the technocrats, using things like the Green new Deal. Trudeau in our country is an example.

 

[JLB50]

In the meantime Australia continues to forge ahead with its “damn-the-torpedoes-full speed-ahead”:approach to defence spending. If only our PM had some cajoles. Hell, even one would be an improvement.

Australia unveils biggest overhaul in defense spending in decades | CNN

Australia has unveiled a radical shakeup of its defense spending billed as the most significant review of its military preparedness since World War II, shifting its emphasis onto long-range strike capabilities and building munitions at home.

www.cnn.com

 

[dimsum]

In the meantime Australia continues to forge ahead with its “damn-the-torpedoes-full speed-ahead”:approach to defence spending. If only our PM had some cajoles. Hell, even one would be an improvement.

Australia unveils biggest overhaul in defense spending in decades | CNN

Australia has unveiled a radical shakeup of its defense spending billed as the most significant review of its military preparedness since World War II, shifting its emphasis onto long-range strike capabilities and building munitions at home.

www.cnn.com

“Damn the torpedoes” isn’t always the best strategy for procurement.

Also, as I’ve noted in another thread, it’s also a bit of “oh this is expensive, let’s scale back what we’re planning to get” for their Army.

 

[The Bread Guy]

They'd have to care about defense, and if people cared about defense we wouldn't be in this position.

As someone smarter than me has said more than once around these parts, support is a mile wide and an inch thin.

 

[JLB50]

In the meantime Australia continues to forge ahead with its “damn-the-torpedoes-full speed-ahead”:approach to defence spending. If only our PM had some cajoles. Hell, even one would be an improvement.

Australia unveils biggest overhaul in defense spending in decades | CNN

Australia has unveiled a radical shakeup of its defense spending billed as the most significant review of its military preparedness since World War II, shifting its emphasis onto long-range strike capabilities and building munitions at home.

www.cnn.com

My auto-correct seems to have changed “cajones” to “cajoles”. Slight difference in meaning. LOL

 

[Spencer100]

My auto-correct seems to have changed “cajones” to “cajoles”. Slight difference in meaning. LOL

I can't wait till auto-correct has been replaced with AI and it just changes the whole sentence to something approved.
"this has be corrected to approved thought.....Your social credit score has been adjusted accordingly"

 

[Lumber]

I don't even know who to respond to; the idle paranoia is so great, I should just give everyone a tin hat.

Anyways, outside of a major war that forces us to dramatically increase defence spending, I can't see Canada ever making significant and long-lasting increases to our defence spending and posture. And why should any government do that? We have no real existential threats. The only country we share a land border with is our biggest partner and best-friend. Someone mentioned that there may be those (China, Russia, US) interested in our Arctic resources, but that's not even an existential threat. We're hardly using them, it'd be expensive to develop them, and even more expensive to defend them. If someone really wanted to grab some of it, I'd expect a bigger reaction from the US than from us.

So, spending will ebb and flow as we involve ourselves with middle power politics and regional conflicts, but we'll never truly become a "world" military power because frankly, we don't need to be.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I don't even know who to respond to; the idle paranoia is so great, I should just give everyone a tin hat.

Anyways, outside of a major war that forces us to dramatically increase defence spending, I can't see Canada ever making significant and long-lasting increases to our defence spending and posture. And why should any government do that? We have no real existential threats. The only country we share a land border with is our biggest partner and best-friend. Someone mentioned that there may be those (China, Russia, US) interested in our Arctic resources, but that's not even an existential threat. We're hardly using them, it'd be expensive to develop them, and even more expensive to defend them. If someone really wanted to grab some of it, I'd expect a bigger reaction from the US than from us.

So, spending will ebb and flow as we involve ourselves with middle power politics and regional conflicts, but we'll never truly become a "world" military power because frankly, we don't need to be.

But we're 'Post-National' anyways, so it doesn't matter, right?

Conrad Black: Canada could be a world power, but not without rethinking our goals​

Cease the feckless pursuit of popularity that is of little practical utility — Part of the A Serious Canada series

A new geopolitical order is taking shape. The globe is rapidly realigning under American and Chinese spheres of influence and the pandemic has only raised the stakes. How can Canada finally get serious about its internal stability and external security so it can effectively play a role as a middle power? That is the question this National Post series will answer. Today: Conrad Black on the past, present and future of the Canadian nation.
Without it ever having been a matter of national debate or even public articulation, Canada’s foreign policy has evolved in the post-Cold War era to one of relatively tenuous connection to traditional allies and a nebulous pursuit of popularity in the developing world. The end of the Cold War and of the bipolarized era has enabled Canada to play a relatively detached role that more accurately reflects the musings of its leaders than any identifiable strategic interest. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has said that Canada is “post-national” and has hotly pursued a temporary seat on the Security Council of the United Nations, unsuccessfully courting a large number of underdeveloped and questionably democratic countries. For much of its history Canada’s foreign policy was dictated by its comparative insecurity as an independent sovereign state. It can afford its present policy without danger to its security, but the point of it is not clear.

Conrad Black: Canada could be a world power, but not without rethinking our goals

Cease the feckless pursuit of popularity that is of little practical utility — Part of the A Serious Canada series

nationalpost.com

 

[Halifax Tar]

I don't even know who to respond to; the idle paranoia is so great, I should just give everyone a tin hat.

Anyways, outside of a major war that forces us to dramatically increase defence spending, I can't see Canada ever making significant and long-lasting increases to our defence spending and posture. And why should any government do that? We have no real existential threats. The only country we share a land border with is our biggest partner and best-friend. Someone mentioned that there may be those (China, Russia, US) interested in our Arctic resources, but that's not even an existential threat. We're hardly using them, it'd be expensive to develop them, and even more expensive to defend them. If someone really wanted to grab some of it, I'd expect a bigger reaction from the US than from us.

So, spending will ebb and flow as we involve ourselves with middle power politics and regional conflicts, but we'll never truly become a "world" military power because frankly, we don't need to be.

We're generally in agreement. But would you consider us middle power ? Do we even qualify for that.

I think for me the big take away is that Canada can continue as it is, but the Government and citizenry have to realize we become less and less of a voice on the world stage going down this path.

 

[Brad Sallows]

The chief reason for other countries to be prepared to kick in is in case the US decides it doesn't want to. If the US becomes significantly isolationist, a lot of situations that look stable will suddenly cease to be so.