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....

 

[Castus]

I’m curious if the CAF has any data tracking those in the field forces for each service with restrictive family situations? Additionally while there may not be anything wrong with single parents, service couples with school age kids etc. they all do reduce the maximum number of deployable personnel.

That may not matter if all we strive for is a BG, a six pack of fighters, a pair of LRP, and a frigate on a rotating basis, but it certainly would if we tried to deploy all our forces in the case of a large scale war.

If the data exists, it's probably deep in the archives of the Army G1 cell...

On the other hand, "virtual" soldiering is becoming more of a thing. Those 19 year olds that have become 39 year olds with buggered backs might have a lot more opportunities to contribute more directly to supporting new 19 year olds without having to exert themselves to the same extent.

A 39 year old Company Drone Operator might be a thing.

It would have been nice to have other opportunities in the infantry (or other arms) than rifle company and recce platoon. That began to materialise once I was gone, but it's also why I went to a combat support corps. However, a drone operator needs to be in close proximity to fighting sub-units to be effective. We aren't talking about theatre level ISR here, but rather tactical & micro UAS in support of troops in contact, whether than be an infantry platoon on the attack, engineers recce-ing enemy obstacles, artillery target acquisition or extending the range of an armoured recce cavalry screen. All of these people need to be capable of operation in the field for prolonged periods, defending themselves and being a positive force multiplier for the assault forces, rather than a burden that requires troops re-allocated to force protection. That is common across all combat support corps, besides combat arms tradesmen who are not in assault roles.

What I would like to see is more positions for combat support corps in manoeuvre units. That's another story entirely.

Oof Canada buckle up.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1775864832320844135

As we have been over many, many times, Canada doesn't care.

 

[YZT580]

I was stupid enough to buy a '97 Civic @ 10 000$ back then, yes

don't feel bad, my brother bought a Gremlin

 

[Good2Golf]

don't feel bad, my brother bought a Gremlin

…at least it wasn’t a Pacer…

 

[SeaKingTacco]

…at least it wasn’t a Pacer…

I had a Monza…

 

[Good2Golf]

I had a Monza…

Luxury!

 

[Furniture]

Luxury!

I feel like it's time to break out Grampa Simpson...

 

[MilEME09]

Given our manpower issues, we likely have a lot of budget not used for wages etc due to all those missing bodies. To me the short term solution would be to increase the authorized training days for the PRes, including weekends you get about 42 days. Double that to 84, yes not every soldier will make it but it would allow more training time. This creates a short term gain for the CAF and more proficient soldier's.

 

[SupersonicMax]

Given our manpower issues, we likely have a lot of budget not used for wages etc due to all those missing bodies. To me the short term solution would be to increase the authorized training days for the PRes, including weekends you get about 42 days. Double that to 84, yes not every soldier will make it but it would allow more training time. This creates a short term gain for the CAF and more proficient soldier's.

The money « saved » from unpaid salaries is already reallocated to other uses.

 

[Remius]

What exactly would be an example of non-deployable support work ? Because I think, like others, you are getting units confused with individuals.

One example I could see is some HRA/FSA types.

We have a shortage. You could ease that by making all or most of the clerk positions in CFRCs and Dets into CR PSE positions. That would be a lot of clerks freed up. Less cost to post in various dets and so on.

 

[Halifax Tar]

One example I could see is some HRA/FSA types.

We have a shortage. You could ease that by making all or most of the clerk positions in CFRCs and Dets into CR PSE positions. That would be a lot of clerks freed up. Less cost to post in various dets and so on.

Again, yes the CFRCs aren't deployable. That doesn't mean the individual HRA/FSAs posted to them aren't.

I am also not supportive, at all, of letting the PS into our recruiting centers, in any capacity. If they are already there, they should be removed.

 

[Remius]

Again, yes the CFRCs aren't deployable. That doesn't mean the individual HRA/FSAs posted to them aren't.

You are missing my point. Yes the individuals are but we put undo pressure on the CAF by manning positions that don’t need CAF requirements. Not advocating getting rid of anyone but those positions would be better served elsewhere.

I am also not supportive, at all, of letting the PS into our recruiting centers, in any capacity. If they are already there, they should be removed.

Why? Those positions are pretty much administrative and mostly background. Front end recruiters and MCCs should definitely be uniformed pers. Clerks processing recruiting paperwork and files? That can easily be done by civilians.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

Again, yes the CFRCs aren't deployable. That doesn't mean the individual HRA/FSAs posted to them aren't.

Those individuals are deployable, yes, but the CAF doesn't Force Generate from a CFRC, or a School, or from a BIS or Clothing Stores.

The RCN and its Fleets are their own beast in this regard, but the CA and RCAF often don't use this methodology. The Lead Mounting Organization draws internally first, sends it back up to the L1, eventually it has to be farmed out to other L1s to see if it can be filled, and dependingnon priority, its filled from someone operational or the position is No Filled.

I would love to be able to scour the CAF and build a composite TO&E to support my operation. As it stands, there are many L1s and subordinate formations that would get their face in a knot and tell me to stay the hell out of their kitchens. The loudest of which are CMP, CFIOG, and other non-deployabe formations that would rather see Bloggins ride as desk in Ottawa than free them us to fill an operational role.

 

[ueo]

I don’t think it necessarily needs to be done in the actual BN, but at least at the same base.

We've done this dance befor. 3 RCR ran its own basic inf crses early 70's, RCR BS in Pet mid 80's morphed into meaford in a bit of a power struggle, etc.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Those individuals are deployable, yes, but the CAF doesn't Force Generate from a CFRC*, or a School, or from a BIS or Clothing Stores.

Yes they do. I have deployed with people from all of those organizations. I deployed on my first Afghan deployment from CFB Halifax Clothing Stores.

*For CFRCs I don't know if I have deployed with someone from one of those, but I don't see why they couldn't.

The RCN and its Fleets are their own beast in this regard, but the CA and RCAF often don't use this methodology. The Lead Mounting Organization draws internally first, sends it back up to the L1, eventually it has to be farmed out to other L1s to see if it can be filled, and dependingnon priority, its filled from someone operational or the position is No Filled.

And this part of the problem, we have to be careful and allow the different commands some autonomy on how they do this, as they have different needs. Blanket solutions don't work.

I would love to be able to scour the CAF and build a composite TO&E to support my operation. As it stands, there are many L1s and subordinate formations that would get their face in a knot and tell me to stay the hell out of their kitchens. The loudest of which are CMP, CFIOG, and other non-deployabe formations that would rather see Bloggins ride as desk in Ottawa than free them us to fill an operational role.

Im the first person look at Ottawa with bombastic side eye, but we have to careful here too. There are desk jobs being done there that need to be done, and probably contribute more to operational success than many people actually on operations. You lamented about staff work in another thread, yes we are bad at staff work. Making it worse wont help.

 

[Halifax Tar]

You are missing my point. Yes the individuals are but we put undo pressure on the CAF by manning positions that don’t need CAF requirements. Not advocating getting rid of anyone but those positions would be better served elsewhere.

Why? Those positions are pretty much administrative and mostly background. Front end recruiters and MCCs should definitely be uniformed pers. Clerks processing recruiting paperwork and files? That can easily be done by civilians.

The answer this is not not further civilianization. The answer is recruiting and retention.

 

[Remius]

The answer this is not not further civilianization. The answer is recruiting and retention.

Then why put soldiers and sailors in what are essentially civilian functions?

 

[QV]

I don't think you appreciate the depth and stupidity of the travel cuts, and how arbitrary it is.

We don't often agree, but this is exactly correct.

 

[Brad Sallows]

lol, we don't have multiple crews per hull, we have multiple hulls per crew.

Considering how long it takes to build ships, that almost sounds like an idea for having a navy that can expand rapidly in emergencies - provided the ships are run often enough.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Then why put soldiers and sailors in what are essentially civilian functions?

Mixed, maybe, but surely not all. The US seems to profit by putting good NCOs in recruiting.

 

[Kirkhill]

65 Billion CAD$.
Never. Gonna. Happen.

Canadian oil and gas exports rose significantly in 2022 and show little sign of abating despite a call by Canada’s minister of environment and climate change to ‘phase-out unabated fossil fuels.’

Total exports in Canada rose 22.5 per cent in 2022, representing an increase of more than $142 billion, says a recent Statistics Canada report. Over half the increase – $76.9 billion – was driven by a major uptick in oil and gas exports. The share of energy products as a proportion of total exports rose from 21.2 per cent in 2021 to 27.2 per cent in 2022.

https://www.canadianenergycentre.ca/canadas-oil-and-gas-sector-barrels-ahead-with-record-annual-exports

Japan is the largest LNG buyer in the world, importing approximately 77 million (77,327,079) tons in 2019, down 6.6 % (tons) from 2018. Its import dollar value in 2019 was approximately $39.8 billion (4.4 trillion yen) and shares approximately 23.4% of the world's net LNG imports (330 million tons ≈ 467.9 Bcm³).

We need to find another 40 BCAD in revenue annually.

That is equivalent to the Japanese annual LNG market.
It is also something like one month of Europe's energy buy on the open market.

In 2022 our oil and gas exports increased by 76 BCAD, the increase alone in that year, when there was no business case for pipelines, was double what our defence increase needs to be.

....

We have people that want us to spend money on defence. Those same people want to give us money for fuel.

Sell fuel. Get money. Spend money. Buy defence.

Sell fuel and buy guns.

Niema problema.