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....

 

[Remius]

I think your approach is reasonable. Here is where I would tweak:

3) there is a problem here. Plenty of open source information on it. Canada will need to fix this problem in a big way and not allow status quo. I'm not talking trade, which could remain status quo.

Trade should,still happen with China. But not with the BS things they want to tack on.

4) it would make better sense to integrate more with US, supply chain is better/closer

Recent events have shown how easy it can be disrupted, treaties be damned.

8) American might still be better due to NORAD integration

Not if the US is going at things alone.

Get just enough to be integrated for that. Anything else, look elsewhere. The US defense industry is already spooked by this but those are consequences their actions.

 

[ytz]

If Canada does it's duty by being a good neighbor

Battered spouse syndrome is hard to understand until you see it.

 

[ytz]

I think everybody here should brace for substantial changes in procurement decisions after the election. I'm not even sure the winner makes a difference. If we start seeing double digit unemployment in different parts of the country, due to tariffs, it will be untenable to hand multi-billion dollar contracts to American firms. And there will be a political preference to use procurement dollars to cement new trading relationships. American kit out. European, Japanese and Korean kit in.

 

[Kirkhill]

Or, you know, put on our Big Boy pants and build up our own defense industry...

We will probably do better with some friendly help.

 

[Underway]

I think everybody here should brace for substantial changes in procurement decisions after the election. I'm not even sure the winner makes a difference. If we start seeing double digit unemployment in different parts of the country, due to tariffs, it will be untenable to hand multi-billion dollar contracts to American firms. And there will be a political preference to use procurement dollars to cement new trading relationships. American kit out. European, Japanese and Korean kit in.

I don't think we'll see double digit unemployment. Last time that happened in Canada was 1994. Hight of COVID it briefly went to 9.6%. Even the financial crisis it didn't hit 9% and that was a full meltdown of the economy. However there will be massive supply chain re-adjustments because the US is hitting everyone.

As far as mulitbillion dollars to US firms, that depends if its Lockheed Martin Canada (US firm but Canadian employees like Ford). My only concern really isn't the F35, its the River Class Destroyer Program. That program is headed up by LMC on the combat management side, and we're billions into the radar and combat management systems. So Canadians, if for political reasons are going to screw us so bad if they can't make that differentiation. Army projects are a joke compared to this one. Not to mention the LMC makes the Canadian proprietary CMS 330, owned by us and its world class.

 

[Furniture]

I don't think we'll see double digit unemployment. Last time that happened in Canada was 1994. Hight of COVID it briefly went to 9.6%. Even the financial crisis it didn't hit 9% and that was a full meltdown of the economy. However there will be massive supply chain re-adjustments because the US is hitting everyone.

As far as mulitbillion dollars to US firms, that depends if its Lockheed Martin Canada (US firm but Canadian employees like Ford). My only concern really isn't the F35, its the River Class Destroyer Program. That program is headed up by LMC on the combat management side, and we're billions into the radar and combat management systems. So Canadians, if for political reasons are going to screw us so bad if they can't make that differentiation. Army projects are a joke compared to this one. Not to mention the LMC makes the Canadian proprietary CMS 330, owned by us and its world class.

Last time America seriously engaged in a trade war with the world was 1930... I think we all know how that went for everybody.

We should be preparing for "unprecedented" times, not the 2008/2009 stock bump. I'm not saying this to be alarmist, but a 30-40% increase in the price of most clothing for Americans is not nothing.

That said, I'm with you in worrying that people will throw the baby out with the bath water... The RCD, P-8. and F-35 programmes are critical to our defence, and we need to keep them on track. Beyond those... Maybe we should be shopping elsewhere, if only to remind American defence contractors that our dollars matter too.

 

[Underway]

I'm going to refocus off of tariffs and back on Cdn mil procurement.

That said, I'm with you in worrying that people will throw the baby out with the bath water... The RCD, P-8. and F-35 programmes are critical to our defence, and we need to keep them on track. Beyond those... Maybe we should be shopping elsewhere, if only to remind American defence contractors that our dollars matter too.

I think a good process would be to examine new projects, not currently running ones. Cost would be terribly prohibative for changing a lot of our own projects at this time. But new things like the Indirect Fires Modernization could easily be Euro. If its from a US company but built in Canada we can probably get away with it. I mean are we going to ditch the LAV because it's built by a US company? No that's crazy. We'll keep building and using them.

The new PM may also just spend some political capital and say "Hey we can't just change our supplier at this point, and we need to get to 2%, but going forward new projects should be looked at with a new lens. Just like anything else turning away from US suppliers will take time and require a significant investment to build that up. We're going to ween ourselves off."

 

[Kirkhill]

Play mix and match.

Buy stuff from the Yanks to meet their and our needs. Buy other stuff from the best of the rest. Learn how to build the stuff that meets our particular requirements.

 

[FJAG]

Last time America seriously engaged in a trade war with the world was 1930... I think we all know how that went for everybody.

There are obviously a few folks in the White House who don't know.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Do we actually expect the winner of the election to spend 2% at a sustained rate.

 

[GR66]

Do we actually expect the winner of the election to spend 2% at a sustained rate.

Realistically do they have much choice?

 

[Fabius]

If the US loses focus and ceases to hold Canada to account, does the rest of NATO have enough sway or attention span to hold Canada to 2%?

Will Canada care if a few NATO countries like Poland and Finland complain about Canada not meeting 2%?

I am not sure of the answers. It’s likely 50/50 on whether Canada meets 2% or not if the US loses focus. It’s also likely 50/50 on whether Canada keeps striving for 2% if there is any apparent easing of geopolitical pressures.

 

[childs56]

I think your approach is reasonable. Here is where I would tweak:

3) there is a problem here. Plenty of open source information on it. Canada will need to fix this problem in a big way and not allow status quo. I'm not talking trade, which could remain status quo.

We can learn a lot from China and their supply chain management, manufacturing and their processes. We need to be careful not to share specific processes, hardware and tactics with them, but we should be exploring further trade with both China and India.

4) it would make better sense to integrate more with US, supply chain is better/closer

We are already so integrated with the US supply chain that we will have a hard time getting away from it. But that chain works both ways. We supply lots of components that the US requires to make the bigger things operate

8) American might still be better due to NORAD integration

I think Canada needs to remain part of NORAD but we need to get more detection and intervention equipment of our own. If the US wants in or information from that equipment they can pay for it. Afterall I would not want us to have a information surplus with the US.

 

[Cloud Cover]

If the US loses focus and ceases to hold Canada to account, does the rest of NATO have enough sway or attention span to hold Canada to 2%?

Will Canada care if a few NATO countries like Poland and Finland complain about Canada not meeting 2%?

I am not sure of the answers. It’s likely 50/50 on whether Canada meets 2% or not if the US loses focus. It’s also likely 50/50 on whether Canada keeps striving for 2% if there is any apparent easing of geopolitical pressures.

Personally, I think Canada will not meet 2%, and even if we did it would be a short period of time with no actual intention of a general build up in defence capability. Our politicians will say many blustery things, allocate a lot of money, and spend as little of it as possible. Just cynical old me though.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Realistically do they have much choice?

Yes. We owe NATO nothing. Defending Europe is voluntary for us, in theory. They should be saying “Thank you” to Canada, oh and pay us back.

 

[Underway]

Do we actually expect the winner of the election to spend 2% at a sustained rate.

Yes. Because the US is now a regional competitor. If they don't know what's going on in the Arctic because we aren't able to tell them they will go there themselves (as an example). And that no longer looks quite so friendly or helpful.

When your going through a breakup you now have to be self sufficient and can no longer rely on your former partner to provide the stuff they used to.

This is no longer about NATO. It's about us. Internal selfish personal motivation will now drive us. No one has said the quiet part loud yet though because we're still going through the breakup process. Self reflection comes later.

We're going to have to find something else to complain about now as ignoring defence spending will no longer be a topic.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I think everybody here should brace for substantial changes in procurement decisions after the election. I'm not even sure the winner makes a difference. If we start seeing double digit unemployment in different parts of the country, due to tariffs, it will be untenable to hand multi-billion dollar contracts to American firms. And there will be a political preference to use procurement dollars to cement new trading relationships. American kit out. European, Japanese and Korean kit in.

On the bright side economic down turns usually lead to a boost in recruiting...

Yes. We owe NATO nothing. Defending Europe is voluntary for us, in theory. They should be saying “Thank you” to Canada, oh and pay us back.

I don't believe that's a theory, I believe its the truth.

Yes. Because the US is now a regional competitor. If they don't know what's going on in the Arctic because we aren't able to tell them they will go there themselves (as an example). And that no longer looks quite so friendly or helpful.

You know that and I know that. My concern is an LPC Gov will bank on hope. The will just try to ride out the storm and hope that DJT loses the next election, the Dems return to power and we can go back to spewing empty words and being an economic and military leech.

 

[Underway]

Valid concern but the trust has been broken. No matter who is in the Whitehouse we won't fully trust them again for a long time.

 

[Remius]

You know that and I know that. My concern is an LPC Gov will bank on hope. The will just try to ride out the storm and hope that DJT loses the next election, the Dems return to power and we can go back to spewing empty words and being an economic and military leech.

Carney has been pretty blunt about that. And it is looking like some action is being done to start aligning to the new reality. Now that the rest of the world is subjected to what we have been for a few months I suspect we’ll start seeing an acceleration of those things.

The Bulwark article I posted in another thread credits Carney with calling the time of death of the old world reality.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Valid concern but the trust has been broken. No matter who is in the Whitehouse we won't fully trust them again for a long time.

You and I know that. I suspect should the Dems regain government the LPC will be swooning and grovelling back tout suite.

Carney has been pretty blunt about that. And it is looking like some action is being done to start aligning to the new reality. Now that the rest of the world is subjected to what we have been for a few months I suspect we’ll start seeing an acceleration of those things.

The Bulwark article I posted in another thread credits Carney with calling the time of death of the old world reality.

He sure has. Deeds not words.