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....

 

[Stoker]

That may change if we do go with the KSS-III, it sounds like there is a lot of QOL features in the sub that make it more enjoyable to be on compared to the rest of the fleet, except maybe Astrix.

Unless they're nukes the QOL is actually pretty restrictive. To each their own.

 

[Halifax Tar]

People generally don't want to be on submarines. They may recruit new people who want the life but sailors generally already in the Navy usually don't volunteer. That may change of course when the decision to buy is made. If the Navy was smart they would build a recruiting program highlighting the extra benefits the submariners get, how new the equipment is and so forth and make it a perceived elite force. I would recommend recruiting out of Canada as well and try and attract other navies submariners. That would of course mean a signing bonus etc to truly attract more people.

I think you're on to something. Maybe recruit directly into Sub service. Do other Navies do this ?

Even the best QOL for a sub is unlikely to meet that of a surface ship, but that can be compensated in other ways.

 

[Stoker]

I think new subs would enough to get some trained people to take the plunge (pun intended), particularly if there was a bonus attached to it. Fully agree recruiting will be far easier using the steps you outlined.

We have issues filling bunks on ships getting tax free and risk allowance. A bonus will hopefully help.

 

[Stoker]

I think you're on to something. Maybe recruit directly into Sub service. Do other Navies do this ?

Australia poached members for their Collins Class program. I would open it up to Korea, the US , Germany and other Nordic nations.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Australia poached members for their Collins Class program. I would open it up to Korea, the US , Germany and other Nordic nations.

Ya the Aussies are still willing to take our people, or so I am told.

But why not recruit Canadians right off the street into the submarine service ? Offer substantial tax free signing bonuses.

Maybe even create sub occupations for those that serve on Subs.

 

[Stoker]

Ya the Aussies are still willing to take our people, or so I am told.

But why not recruit Canadians right off the street into the submarine service ? Offer substantial tax free signing bonuses.

Maybe even create sub occupations for those that serve on Subs.

Yes Australia still do, apparently they took quite a few pilots from us that way as well. I would imagine any program would try and get Canadians from the get go as well. The only issue is it takes years to train someone from the street, getting trained submariners from other countries would even with delta training and class packages would be quicker. Offer them instant citizenship, paid move, housing and a signing bonus with extra allowances people would come. Now of course that would mean we would have to get serious with our program, not nickel and diming everything through the treasury board. As well it would mean serious infrastructure upgrades.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Yes Australia still do, apparently they took quite a few pilots from us that way as well. I would imagine any program would try and get Canadians from the get go as well. The only issue is it takes years to train someone from the street, getting trained submariners from other countries would even with delta training and class packages would be quicker. Offer them instant citizenship, paid move, housing and a signing bonus with extra allowances people would come. Now of course that would mean we would have to get serious with our program, not nickel and diming everything through the treasury board. As well it would mean serious infrastructure upgrades.

I think we should to both.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Maybe even create sub occupations for those that serve on Subs.

Wait what? We don't have submariner as a occupation already?

 

[dapaterson]

Wait what? We don't have submariner as a occupation already?

No. We have Naval Warfare Officers. We have Maritime Technicians. We have Naval Communicators. We have Sonar Operators. We have cooks. And every other trade needed to operate and fight the platform.

When selected for submarine service they undergo additional training, but they remain in their parent occupation.

 

[IKnowNothing]

Canada being Canada, we'll end up with their weird upgrade proposal that puts the Panther turret on the leopard hull. Why? cause its cheaper, and Canadian governments historically love cheaper

Hell, undertaken immediately to get all 74 remaining tanks to a common and not only deployable but state of the art configuration for the remainder of the hulls useful lives would be a massive interim capability upgrade.

Buy time to sort out the comprehensive vision of what the RCAC needs to look like after a complete recapitalization.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Wait what? We don't have submariner as a occupation already?

What @dapaterson said.

 

[PrairieFella]

Hell, undertaken immediately to get all 74 remaining tanks to a common and not only deployable but state of the art configuration for the remainder of the hulls useful lives would be a massive interim capability upgrade.

Buy time to sort out the comprehensive vision of what the RCAC needs to look like after a complete recapitalization.

The vision is done(ish). Our new doctrine is out, our new TTPs are being finalized, subunits realigned and trained on the cav concept, speciality courses like Assault trooper, ADFS, etc. ready (except for the advanced recce course). We need kit. Fucking desperately.

We shall also see what comes out of the army level reorg. I can imagine smaller units may be folded into the larger ones but that's no big deal.

 

[dapaterson]

What @dapaterson said.

But with the addition of a MMT or two on board as well, right?

 

[IKnowNothing]

The vision is done(ish). Our new doctrine is out, our new TTPs are being finalized, subunits realigned and trained on the cav concept, speciality courses like Assault trooper, ADFS, etc. ready (except for the advanced recce course). We need kit. Fucking desperately.

We shall also see what comes out of the army level reorg. I can imagine smaller units may be folded into the larger ones but that's no big deal.

Does this vision call for three symmetrical tank regiments?

This is kind of a key piece.

 

[Halifax Tar]

But with the addition of a MMT or two on board as well, right?

Apparently we had Naval Storesmen on the OBoats up to the early 80s. Or so I am told.

But no I don't think that's necessary. I think the following FLS is sufficient.

 

[Stoker]

Apparently we had Naval Storesmen on the OBoats up to the early 80s. Or so I am told.

But no I don't think that's necessary. I think the following FLS is sufficient.

Yes they did. FLS is a great gig to be on. All the tax free and benefits, the money made on R&Q, and a medal to boot. More than likely all part of the large maintenance team that follows the subs from port to port. That's a great go as well.

 

[Navy_Pete]

So you are proposing training facilities in Saskatchewan? HMCS Unicorn would be an appropriate location.

Sorry, South Korea, not Saskatchewan. Believe it was the last two on the Tide class.

But expect if South Korea was delivering subs, we'd do a lot of trianing in South Korea, same as we did with the Vic class in the UK. Similar things would apply for Spain and other countries in the running.

The RCN is pretty shit at thinking about personnel, training and required infrastructure for ships and people to operate whatever shiny toys they are looking at.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Yes they did. FLS is a great gig to be on. All the tax free and benefits, the money made on R&Q, and a medal to boot. More than likely all part of the large maintenance team that follows the subs from port to port. That's a great go as well.

It would be great to expand FLS again, especially for the RAMPs so that there is on the ground tech staff to assist in planning and contracting before the ship shows up. When you have a 2 week RAMP, having to spend the first 4 or 5 days working out the contract and technical details leads to a lot of lost time.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Sorry, South Korea, not Saskatchewan. Believe it was the last two on the Tide class.

But expect if South Korea was delivering subs, we'd do a lot of trianing in South Korea, same as we did with the Vic class in the UK. Similar things would apply for Spain and other countries in the running.

The RCN is pretty shit at thinking about personnel, training and required infrastructure for ships and people to operate whatever shiny toys they are looking at.

Part of the briefing note should include:

"The food is better in Korea"

 

[Navy_Pete]

Part of the briefing note should include:

"The food is better in Korea"

Of the top of my head I had some amazing food from India, Nepal and the Carribean in the UK, to be fair.