Author Topic: The Defence Budget [superthread]  (Read 460145 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline FSTO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 37,790
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,605
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1750 on: May 07, 2017, 08:54:40 »
Significant changes to elections were coming as well.

Colour me very sceptical that there will be any extra money.

Offline Journeyman

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 520,900
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,643
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1751 on: May 07, 2017, 08:56:25 »
Transport Minister Marc Garneau:
"I think Canadians recognize that when we call upon our military to go into troubled spots, into war areas, we need to properly [equip them] and we need to take care of them afterwards."
That suggests that our elected representatives are not Canadian;  such "recognition" from Parliament is routinely lacking.


If Garneau is the Defence talking head, does that mean we can expect Sajjat to pronounce upon how he's resolved crude oil tanker traffic issues?


Edit:  1st-coffee grammar
« Last Edit: May 07, 2017, 09:04:31 by Journeyman »

Offline LunchMeat

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 17,760
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 721
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1752 on: May 07, 2017, 09:01:46 »
That suggests that our elected representatives are not Canadian; such "recognition" from Parliament is routinely lacking.


If Garneau is the Defence talking head, does that mean we can expect Sajjat to pronounce how he's resolved crude oil tanker traffic issues?

I'm quite astonished as to the number of cabinet ministers speaking on behalf of other ministries in this current government. Isn't that "talking out of lane" essentially?

Should it not be the ADM making these comments not Transport Minister etc.?
"The most important six inches on the battlefield is between your ears.” ~General James "Mad Dog" Mattis, USMC

Offline MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 35,290
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,521
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1753 on: May 07, 2017, 09:25:14 »
The senates part 2 report on our defense will be released tomorrow, time to see some more details that just about everyone on this site already knows
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Offline Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 84,385
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,842
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1754 on: May 07, 2017, 09:28:04 »
Quote
Quote
"No money had been identified for that. There are a number of significant expenditures that we are going to have to make,"

I hope this is the Trump affect. Expenditures means actually now rather than commit funds to the future.

Quote
Quote
The Liberals have been clear, Garneau said, that 65 fighter jets the previous Conservative government wanted to buy won't be enough to support Canada's commitments to NORAD and NATO.

Is this still the Liberal excuse to buy the Super Hornet?

Quote
"I think Canadians recognize that when we call upon our military to go into troubled spots, into war areas, we need to properly [equip them] .....

To properly equip the RCAF that means expending funds on the F-35 like the rest of NATO. The Trump affect again or not?

Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

jollyjacktar

  • Guest
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1755 on: May 07, 2017, 09:32:36 »
I expect I shall have as much faith later this month in things getting significantly better under this government as I do now, which is slim to none.  A Trudeau never changes his spots.  Too much like the elder I fear.

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 130,540
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,453
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1756 on: May 07, 2017, 09:46:48 »
Lunchmeat, by ADM, I'll assume you mean the Associate Minister of National Defence (usually shortened AMinDef) and not referring to just any Associate Deputy Ministers.

Truth is, while the various Ministers have "lanes" where it comes to the exercise of their various ministerial powers and their powers to bind the government, there are no such distinctions on matters of politics. We had gotten used to a more strictly enforced regimen for public engagement from the Harper government, while this government seems to be Ok with looser restrictions on the various ministers. And in central Canada, Garneau is turning out to be a major player/spokesperson for this government: he is simply everywhere on just about all topics.

This said, It would seem to me that the Trudeau government considers its upcoming Defence Policy a major event, a defining policy of its administration that will let them spend their way into the next election (you may read this as meaning starting one year after tabling of policy, heavy porkbarreling in all provinces). As such, they are now in the lead up phase and all major players will be constantly talking about it.

I hope I am wrong and that they truly mean they wish to finally put "partisan" politics out of military budgeting and policy and they wish to provide what is actually required in a non partisan fashion. But I'll believe it when I see it.

On the other hand, those of us who followed the "public consultation" over the internet in the development of this policy review will recognize the fact that  the overwhelming majority of people that answered the "money" section indicated that the CAF needed more, or at the very least, no less funding than now. That was pretty amazing, as it meant that ordinary (?) Canadians, who don't like to spend on defence, recognized that there was a major funding deficit there.

Offline Humphrey Bogart

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 105,529
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,942
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1757 on: May 07, 2017, 10:08:14 »
I've been hard on this government in the past but if they put together a coherent Defence Policy I'll be happy.

One of the things that worries me is the government has no National Security Strategy, to me that's even more pressing than a Defence Policy as the Defence Policy should be tied to the National Security Strategy.

The Defence Policy Review asked three questions:


1.  The main challenges to Canada’s security
2.  The role of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) in addressing current threats and challenges
3.  The resources and capabilities needed to carry out the CAF mandate

Question 1 shouldn't be asked as the answer should be provided by a National Security Strategy.  Question 2 and 3 Are the the National Military Strategy (i.e. Defence Policy Review)

If we had a National Security Strategy we wouldn't need to ask question 1.

Offline cavalryman

    Done with the demented bureaucracy.

  • You can't put a pricetag on patriotism
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Full Member
  • *
  • 34,090
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 411
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1758 on: May 07, 2017, 10:30:20 »
Significant changes to elections were coming as well.

Colour me very sceptical that there will be any extra money.
President Trump doesn't care about our electoral system.  He does care about our defence spending and bilateral trade.  [:D

Offline PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 910,385
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,942
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1759 on: May 07, 2017, 10:39:58 »
New money is useless without gutting the current defense procurement gongshow. What good is new equipment that takes 20 years to show up?

Offline standingdown

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 53,465
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,341
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1760 on: May 07, 2017, 10:59:30 »
Don't worry PuckChaser, the new berets should only take a year or so to procure.

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 197,175
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,291
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1761 on: May 07, 2017, 11:04:30 »
I expect I shall have as much faith later this month in things getting significantly better under this government as I do now, which is slim to none.  A Trudeau never changes his spots.  Too much like the elder I fear.

JJT - I am at the "willing to hold my breath for a week or two stage"  ie very cautiously optimistic.

The reality of Canada is that the only people that can get things like this done ARE the Liberals.  I don't like it but that is the way it is.  Canadians have been immersed in George Brown's ink for way too long so that the only people many of them are willing to trust are the Liberals.

For their part the Liberals have been successful by having no principles.  And I say that in a surprised "good way".  When stuck between principle and survival the Liberals will choose survival every time.

The Donald is the impetus - without doubt.  But Canadians would never let the Conservatives bow to the Donald.   On the other hand they will let the Liberals paint it red, put a flag on it and declare victory even as they bend over.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2017, 11:08:47 by Chris Pook »
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline Sandyson

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Member
  • *
  • 3,205
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 108
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1762 on: May 07, 2017, 12:27:29 »
Even if new money is budgeted for Defence, will Treasury allow them to spend it?  In a couple of years the Liberals have to go to the poll and Defence procurement won't win as many votes as the heritage garden at the corner of main and fourth, or the new drop-in centre gazebo. Very few people see Defence except on the news. An important question is what is the dollar/vote return? 

Offline jmt18325

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 22,430
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,211
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1763 on: May 07, 2017, 12:28:23 »
I think this is one of those things that you need too just wait and find out about.  All the political grandstanding on this site really changes nothing.

jollyjacktar

  • Guest
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1764 on: May 07, 2017, 12:32:06 »
JJT - I am at the "willing to hold my breath for a week or two stage"  ie very cautiously optimistic.

I have had my hopes dashed too many times or felt the lash of my first Trudeau (post Clark) - Chrétien and subsequent years up to this day to have much, if any, faith in the masters I see across the river daily.  (I have a splendid view of Parliament Hill in the distance from work)  As I've said before, I don't know which is crueler, the hand that promises food and just makes a show of it (Cons) or the hand that you already know doesn't want to feed you (Libs).

Offline PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 910,385
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,942
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1765 on: May 07, 2017, 12:39:18 »
I think this is one of those things that you need too just wait and find out about.  All the political grandstanding on this site really changes nothing.

As opposed to the political grandstanding done around the Defense budget by the politicians? Lets keep in mind Sajjan blamed the Tories for cuts as his government deferred $8B CAD in equipment purchases. Garneau is the first minister of anything to come out and say that defense spending has been chronically low by both parties. Allow us to be at least a little bit skeptical of someone who has as almost as much time as a politician than in the CAF finally having a "come to Jesus" moment on defense spending.

Offline Sandyson

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Member
  • *
  • 3,205
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 108
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1766 on: May 07, 2017, 12:54:54 »
Re: I think this is one of those things that you need too just wait and find out about.  All the political grandstanding on this site really changes nothing.

Yeah, but it's fun.

Offline jmt18325

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 22,430
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,211
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1767 on: May 07, 2017, 13:00:38 »
As opposed to the political grandstanding done around the Defense budget by the politicians? Lets keep in mind Sajjan blamed the Tories for cuts as his government deferred $8B CAD in equipment purchases.

Actually, he didn't single them out for that.  He was in fact very careful to blame past governments going back a long way for the problems that exist.  The reality is, the system is so broken that the CAF can't spend the money that it has.  This isn't the first time that money has been profiled for that reason, and it wasn't only by this government.

Offline PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 910,385
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,942
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1768 on: May 07, 2017, 13:34:45 »
Actually, he didn't single them out for that.  He was in fact very careful to blame past governments going back a long way for the problems that exist.

He strongly implied, but did not name the Tories directly.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2017/05/03/harjit-sajjan-hole-defence-spending_n_16407284.html

Quote
'Troubling position'

"We are now in the troubling position where status quo spending on defence will not even maintain a status quo of capabilities," the minister said.

"Current funding has us digging ourselves into a hole. A hole that gets deeper every year. As a percentage of GDP, we are spending less on defence today than we were in 2005."

Yet Sajjan was light on details when it came to how the Liberals intend to get out of that hole.

In case you've forgotten, 2005 was the last year the Liberals were in power before the Tories took over in 2006.

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS?locations=CA For reference, our military spending by % of GDP from 1988 to 2015. 2017 has us at 0.88%, lower than its ever been, even under the decade of darkness. It also wouldn't be dropping if the Liberals hadn't reneged on their promise to maintain the Tory spending increase escalator.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 123,720
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,808
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1769 on: May 08, 2017, 10:24:08 »
Even if new money is budgeted for Defence, will Treasury allow them to spend it?  In a couple of years the Liberals have to go to the poll and Defence procurement won't win as many votes as the heritage garden at the corner of main and fourth, or the new drop-in centre gazebo. Very few people see Defence except on the news. An important question is what is the dollar/vote return?

If the money spent creates jobs in key ridings, then I suspect it will be spent.

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 197,175
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,291
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1770 on: May 08, 2017, 11:15:32 »
If the money spent creates jobs in key ridings, then I suspect it will be spent.

Does it work any better if you start by accepting political realities and asking what single-sourced national suppliers could bring to the warehouse right now? 

What small arms can you acquire through Diemaco?  What ammunition can you acquire through GD Canada?  What can you acquire through Rheinmetall? GDLS? L-M? Local suppliers of boots, radios, civilian vehicles?

I suggest that is the way that CD Howe and Beaverbrook looked at their problem.

A poor pair of boots is better than no boots.  Fill the bins with what's available to buy some breathing room.  Next work on improving the quality of the product (life expectancy).  Finally look to add new capabilities.

And bugger TB rules.  They are set by the politicians in any case.  That which is made can be unmade.
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline FSTO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 37,790
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,605
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1771 on: May 08, 2017, 11:39:30 »
My worry is that nobody is looking at the root problem which is the layers upon layers of oversight, reports and returns and sticky fingers from departments and interest groups that have no business having a say in defence equipment procurement. When DND says it cannot spend the money its not because they don't want to spend it, its that time runs out before contracts can be signed.
On CTV's Question Period, Lew Mackenzie touched on this issue. But Marc Garneau (the de facto DND Spokesman now) did not mention procurement process as an issue just the lack of money.
I'm not very confident that the root causes will be looked at in the coming weeks, months, years.

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 197,175
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,291
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1772 on: May 08, 2017, 11:49:30 »
My worry is that nobody is looking at the root problem which is the layers upon layers of oversight, reports and returns and sticky fingers from departments and interest groups that have no business having a say in defence equipment procurement. When DND says it cannot spend the money its not because they don't want to spend it, its that time runs out before contracts can be signed.
On CTV's Question Period, Lew Mackenzie touched on this issue. But Marc Garneau (the de facto DND Spokesman now) did not mention procurement process as an issue just the lack of money.
I'm not very confident that the root causes will be looked at in the coming weeks, months, years.

And the back of mind there is a lingering suspicion that the politicians and bureaucrats don't really want the system fixed.

The bureaucrats get paid regardless if anything shows up in the warehouse.  In fact the less that shows up the less they have to do.

The politicians, in the meantime, get to blame non-performance on the soldiers and bureaucrats and the rule of law, make grandiose announcements (repeatedly) and never have to worry about having capabilities they don't really want to use and spending money they don't really want to spend.
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

jollyjacktar

  • Guest
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1773 on: May 08, 2017, 12:09:27 »
I'm not very confident that the root causes will be looked at in the coming weeks, months, years.

Agreed.  The elephant in the room that nobody at the decision level wants to acknowledge. Even if they have the balls to do so, I'm not confident they would take any action that would correct the issue.

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 130,540
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,453
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1774 on: May 08, 2017, 12:44:33 »
And bugger TB rules.  They are set by the politicians in any case.  That which is made can be unmade.

And the back of mind there is a lingering suspicion that the politicians and bureaucrats don't really want the system fixed.

Think on the Project Resolve: That is exactly what happened. The Conservatives changed the rules so the contract could be let out in a timely fashion. That really pis**d off the civil servants at procurement. When the new government came in they tried to block it and go back to the old rules. I find it funny that nobody in that scenario questioned how ISL knew to send a letter demanding review and that it would be considered by the government. I guess civil servants that leak in order to advance their pet projects are OK, it's just the uniformed personnel that can't maneuver to get the materiel they know to be required for the job instead of just anything the civil servants want.