• 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....
 
Also, RFI for IFM came out today. Pleasantly surprised to see 81mm and 120mm mortars alongside almost 100 SPGs.

"The Indirect Fires Modernization project scope is considering two quantitative capability levels, each with two qualitative capability levels, for government decision making regarding a funding allocation for the project. The deliverables associated with this recommendation will include: a) 80 to 98 Self Propelled, 52-calibre 155mm Howitzers b) Mortar Systems: i. Highest Capability Level: a. 99 x 120mm Mortar Systems integrated into an 8x8 Armoured Combat Support Vehicle. b. 85 x 81mm Mortar Systems integrated into a Light Tactical Vehicle."

What do our local artillerists think of this?
 
Last edited:
Also, RFI for IFM came out today. Pleasantly surprised to see 81mm and 120mm mortars alongside almost 100 SPGs.

"The Indirect Fires Modernization project scope is considering two quantitative capability levels, each with two qualitative capability levels, for government decision making regarding a funding allocation for the project. The deliverables associated with this recommendation will include: a) 80 to 98 Self Propelled, 52-calibre 155mm Howitzers b) Mortar Systems: i. Highest Capability Level: a. 99 x 120mm Mortar Systems integrated into an 8x8 Armoured Combat Support Vehicle. b. 85 x 81mm Mortar Systems integrated into a Light Tactical Vehicle."

What do our local artillerists think of this?

See here:

🍻
 
Hearing rumours of budget cuts to pay for Latvia next year. There are also apparently reserve units who have stood down for the rest of the FY.
 
Also, RFI for IFM came out today. Pleasantly surprised to see 81mm and 120mm mortars alongside almost 100 SPGs.

"The Indirect Fires Modernization project scope is considering two quantitative capability levels, each with two qualitative capability levels, for government decision making regarding a funding allocation for the project. The deliverables associated with this recommendation will include: a) 80 to 98 Self Propelled, 52-calibre 155mm Howitzers b) Mortar Systems: i. Highest Capability Level: a. 99 x 120mm Mortar Systems integrated into an 8x8 Armoured Combat Support Vehicle. b. 85 x 81mm Mortar Systems integrated into a Light Tactical Vehicle."

What do our local artillerists think of this?
"Hold my breath, I do not"
 
Hearing rumours of budget cuts to pay for Latvia next year. There are also apparently reserve units who have stood down for the rest of the FY.
doubtful on both accounts, 1st if we are going to hit 2% GDP by 2032 or earlier, there can't be any cuts, 2nd with how short we are on manpower Reserve units have budget to spare, my units going straight to end of may as we always do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ytz
doubtful on both accounts, 1st if we are going to hit 2% GDP by 2032 or earlier, there can't be any cuts, 2nd with how short we are on manpower Reserve units have budget to spare, my units going straight to end of may as we always do.


Don't know where these rumours are from. But at least air force wing I am at, we haven't been asked to return anything to the centre.

I am not going to rule out that there might not be some local issue where a given region or brigade overspent and is pulling back from lower. But the idea that there are national orders on this, seems suspect.
 
Can you post the info listed in the RFI or the RFI itself?
Also, RFI for IFM came out today. Pleasantly surprised to see 81mm and 120mm mortars alongside almost 100 SPGs.

"The Indirect Fires Modernization project scope is considering two quantitative capability levels, each with two qualitative capability levels, for government decision making regarding a funding allocation for the project. The deliverables associated with this recommendation will include: a) 80 to 98 Self Propelled, 52-calibre 155mm Howitzers b) Mortar Systems: i. Highest Capability Level: a. 99 x 120mm Mortar Systems integrated into an 8x8 Armoured Combat Support Vehicle. b. 85 x 81mm Mortar Systems integrated into a Light Tactical Vehicle."

What do our local artillerists think of this?
 
whether we like it or not, I think 4 CMBG, and potentially even a 3 CDN Air Div needs to be on the table for europe

When one door closes . . . It's an opportunity to get a foot back in the door.

🍻
 
If we want to get to 2% or higher of GDP, eventually it will mean expansion of the CAF, our existing force structure needs to get filled out first, but after that there would still be plenty left over. The easy button is pull a Freeland and give everyone a pay rise, what the CAF needs is flexibility, the current op tempo has shown 3 brigades is not enough, heck Afghanistan showed that as well. We need to stand up an additional brigade, ideally 2, plus an increase to the RCAF, and RCN.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top