• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Government hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

Status
Not open for further replies.
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....
 
Regardless, it is painful but we need to get pulled into the 21st century when it comes to many of our practices, data included. Trying to hold onto old methods and compromising over the years gave us the crappy data we have now.
Yeah, all that makes sense, but I guess it's just that the data conversion is now a forced function without resources to do it, and will be a lot of after the fact triaging as things break.

I'm all for data cleanup, but frankly we did a crap job of it on the DRMIS conversion a decade ago, and have had garbage building up since, so this is probably 20 years of 'paying it forward' catching up to us.

Anyway, 2024 problem! Merry Xmas!
 
Yeah, all that makes sense, but I guess it's just that the data conversion is now a forced function without resources to do it, and will be a lot of after the fact triaging as things break.

I'm all for data cleanup, but frankly we did a crap job of it on the DRMIS conversion a decade ago, and have had garbage building up since, so this is probably 20 years of 'paying it forward' catching up to us.
We looked at legacy data for the JAG's Comprehensive Information Management Project. It was considered entirely beyond our capability to incorporate it. Compared to DRMIS JAG CIMP was very, very lightweight. Good luck in ever getting it under control.

Target Canada enters the chat.

🍻
 
Sounds like alot this comes down to I'd being shite with IT, which we all know all to well. Is it to much to ask for all our accounts to be integrated? If I log into DWAN why a new password for EMAA, monitor mass, etc.... if civi global corporations can pull ot off, so ca we
 
Sounds like alot this comes down to I'd being shite with IT, which we all know all to well. Is it to much to ask for all our accounts to be integrated? If I log into DWAN why a new password for EMAA, monitor mass, etc.... if civi global corporations can pull ot off, so ca we

EMMA is the same login as DWAN now. You can technically make your MM the same password too.
 
Sounds like alot this comes down to I'd being shite with IT, which we all know all to well. Is it to much to ask for all our accounts to be integrated? If I log into DWAN why a new password for EMAA, monitor mass, etc.... if civi global corporations can pull ot off, so ca we
Or, do what the US does and have a Common Access Card, which combines everything. One PIN to remember for all unclassified IT sites, plus your ID card, meal card for DFACs, PKI…

Of course, that means that we must be able to get a new CAC in minutes if we lose it. Also, all DND-affiliated folks would need to be part of this program.
 
One PIN to rule them all.

Eye Of Sauron cat GIF
 
Sounds like alot this comes down to I'd being shite with IT, which we all know all to well. Is it to much to ask for all our accounts to be integrated? If I log into DWAN why a new password for EMAA, monitor mass, etc.... if civi global corporations can pull ot off, so ca we
When I had to deal with a large civilian company we worked for, you had to change the password every 90 days and couldnt be repeated and there were multiple logins that all had to be different. We of course overcame all this by sharing the same passwords between us and with our superior for each application eg

Canada1, Canada2
 
When I had to deal with a large civilian company we worked for, you had to change the password every 90 days and couldnt be repeated and there were multiple logins that all had to be different. We of course overcame all this by sharing the same passwords between us and with our superior for each application eg

Canada1, Canada2

If you make security difficult, people will find a way to be lazy and reduce it.
 
The trucks are an interesting thing

The LSVW is supposed to be replaced close to (or less?) what we have now 1300 instead of the original 2879

The MSVS Milcots = 1300
The MSVS-SMP - 1587

The HLVW I think I read somewhere is going to be a max of 500?

And then I think I read that the LUVW-Milcot (1061) and LUVW-SMP (1159) were going to be replaced with one common vehicle with add on armour but at half the fleet so like 1100 total

edit

edit no 2

"The LVM project will acquire up to 542 heavy trucks and as many as 1,113 light trucks to replace the Heavy Engineer Support Vehicle (HESV), Heavy Logistics Vehicle Wheeled (HLVW), and Light Support Vehicle Wheeled (LSVW), all of which entered service in the 1990s."

According to Wikipedia we currently have:

591 x HLVW plus 59 x HESV = 650 Heavy vehicles being replaced by 542 heavy trucks (a 16.6% decrease in fleet size)
1333 x LSVW being replaced by 1113 light trucks (a 16.5% decrease in fleet size)

Yep....Canada's Back!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top