• 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....
 
“We need to send $2 billion of military equipment manufactured in Canada to Ukraine to use now. Ukraine can't wait "a few years."

If Canada actually replaced the kit, I agree. But they won’t and everybody knows it.

As for the ammunition, the hold up must be entirely ideological because by now Canada could have scaled up production of at least that. It’s totally mystifying why we have not done so when throwing so much money around.

Ukraine will be around in a couple of years and it’s the better and proper role for Europe to see to that much more aggressively than we should ever have to be - and if they don’t then that’s on Europe and not us.

Our contributions militarily to Ukraine while seemingly large to Canadians, (you of course know they are just a NATO rounding error so far), but huge in the context of what little Canada had to offer- it has now become a sacrifice and not much more than that.

I’m sorry but I’ve come to the view that we are spending far too much money on Ukraine’s needs - both military and civil- and the whole thing is so far out of balance that feds are now going to position contributions to Ukraine as part of Canadian defence spending. The CAF will never be treated with the happy largess that Ukraine receives from Ottawa and so I don’t support it at the current levels until we have things together here.

More than a part of me suspects that the Deputy Prime Minister cares more for the defence of Ukraine than the defence of Canada - or at least sees 'opportunities for cost savings'. After all, she has an ethnic tie to Ukraine that she clearly values quite highly. I might speculate that she is comfortable spending Canadian money on Ukraine's defence, and American money on Canada's defence, since we've been getting away with this for so long.
 
  • Humorous
Reactions: ueo
Its telling of the PMs priorities in that he himself personally announces the large dollar figure social welfare spending programs that intrude into provincial space yet delegates to his subordinate cabinet ministers the announcement on a core federal responsibility.

Likely not an indication of anything substantive tomorrow but we will see.
 
Its telling of the PMs priorities in that he himself personally announces the large dollar figure social welfare spending programs that intrude into provincial space yet delegates to his subordinate cabinet ministers the announcement on a core federal responsibility.

Likely not an indication of anything substantive tomorrow but we will see.
And this being released as a zoom meeting? Really?
 
H Herc or J Herc? That's how to tell if the DPU is "keep the really old stuff running" or "newer stuff".
 
I would absolutely love for the Herc they're offering for media to travel to Trenton not show up or leave them trapped in Trenton due to maint issues while they're announcing 20% cuts to O&M funding.
Hanger will be closed due to the door mechanism failing
 
I remember first hearing about this ‘update’ and thinking it made sense just to tweak/refresh and publish in short order. It’s several years later now and it’s still being called an update which seems to under appreciate the situation wrt world events and CAF challenges. Quite concerning and my expectations are low. I hope to be surprised tomorrow by some substance and acknowledgement of the requirements to achieve the stated objectives.
 
That's sad because hangers are cheaper than cost of the maintenance from not having them.

We had a saying when I worked at the farm. "You pay for an equipment shed whether you build one or not"
It takes fewer levels of approval to wastefully burn $100M in vote 1 over a decade than to spend half that in vote 5 at the start of a system’s life cycle.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top