Author Topic: The Defence Budget [superthread]  (Read 471666 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 73,470
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,569
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1850 on: July 09, 2018, 19:04:51 »
Trudeau government's planned defence spending from Dave Perry of CGAI--note big capital boost in mid-2020s, for new RCAF fighters and RCN CSCs (via a tweet):
https://twitter.com/DavePerryCGAI/status/1016363536971436034

Quote

Bets on those 88 new planes and 15 new ships?

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 207,355
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,726
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1851 on: July 09, 2018, 22:15:00 »
Looks like the intention is for a constabulary force right about the time the oilsands are phased out.......

The future's so bright I've got to wear shades.
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Online Ostrozac

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 32,220
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 719
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1852 on: July 10, 2018, 03:10:07 »
Looks like the intention is for a constabulary force right about the time the oilsands are phased out.......

The future's so bright I've got to wear shades.

There's really nothing wrong with building a constabulary/counterinsurgency force. There is room for such a force in the world's spectrum of conflict. What is wrong is if we delude ourselves that such a force can go toe to toe with any serious fighting force. A constabulary force has no business in the Baltics or North Korea, but might prove quite useful in places like Mali or Haiti. But that would require cutting our coat according to the cloth, instead we seem to be existing in a strange half-world, where our doctrine says we can fight a high-end opponent, but our equipment says we only fight low-end rag-tag insurgents. This contradiction has significant risk; the truth may catch us up one day, and we may end up in a fight with an enemy that we simply can't handle.

Online suffolkowner

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 12,310
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 343
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1853 on: July 15, 2018, 14:22:44 »

Offline PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 922,590
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,184
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1854 on: July 15, 2018, 14:47:03 »
Are we actually making progress on Strong Secure Engaged?

Considering the current speed of the procurement process, I strongly doubt any of these projects were started after the 2015 Election, or even after SSE was released in early 2017.

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 213,575
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,102
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1855 on: July 15, 2018, 15:09:29 »
Considering the current speed of the procurement process, I strongly doubt any of these projects were started after the 2015 Election, or even after SSE was released in early 2017.

Both those projects were on public record and published in DND’s Defence Acquisition Guide (DAG) before the 2015 election and certainly before SSE.

Perhaps the CANSOF King Airs may advance, but not sure Cormorant upgrade will happen before the 2019 election. ???

Regards
G2G

Online suffolkowner

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 12,310
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 343
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1856 on: July 16, 2018, 14:23:40 »
so we're progressing at treading water that's something at least! baby steps

Offline Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 97,930
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,152
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1857 on: March 05, 2019, 09:08:08 »
Quote
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4379 on: Yesterday at 19:22:52 »
Quote
Quote from: Colin P on Yesterday at 12:22:01 Sigh we will be a "near peer" to Singapore


FJAG: I don't think that we'll measure up.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equipment_of_the_Singaporean_Army

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Singapore_Air_Force#Aircraft

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Singapore_Navy#Current_fleet
:brickwall:


MILITARY SPENDING LESS THAN PROMISED - National Post - 5 Mar 19 - LEE BERTHIAUME

OTTAWA • The federal government will invest billions of dollars less in new military equipment than promised this year, raising concerns about the readiness of the Canadian Forces and the prospect that Canada will fall short on another NATO spending target. The Trudeau government in 2017 released a defence policy that included dramatic increases in the amount of money to be spent on new aircraft, ships, armoured vehicles and other military equipment each year for the next two decades. The investments are considered vital to replacing the Canadian Forces’ aging fighter jets, ships and other equipment with state-of-theart vehicles and weapons.

Yet while the government is on track to invest more in new equipment for the second year in a row, budget documents show the Defence Department will still fall short more than $2 billion (35% is a huge amt) on the government’s plan to spend $6.5 billion.The government spent $2.3 billion less than planned last year, largely because of delays in projects such as the government’s huge plan to buy new warships, though also because some things ended up costing less than expected.

The department’s top civil servant, deputy minister Jody Thomas, told a House of Commons committee last week that about $700 million was because some projects came in under budget (gov't/Cdn military procurement under budget??) and other “efficiencies (don't buy anything), so we didn’t need that money. (??)

But Thomas acknowledged the department was to blame for some of the other underspending, and industry has also faced challenges in delivering on projects — although she said it shouldn’t be a surprise there have been some problems given the number of projects underway. “There are going to be some slowdowns by us,” she said, adding: “If money isn’t moving quite quickly enough because of a problem with a particular supply chain, a particular supplier, a contract, the way we’ve defined a project, we work with industry to try to resolve that.”

Still, Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan acknowledged to the same committee that while the government is spending more on military equipment than previous years, “we need to get enough people to be able to handle the volume of projects. (more civ/mil at HDHQ) We need to get better at that.” Defence officials have previously blamed a shortage of procurement experts for some project delays and cost overruns. That shortage was created by successive cuts to the department starting under the Liberals in the 1990s and continued under the Conservatives earlier this decade.

While the fact the department saved money on some projects was seen as a positive development, Conservative defence critic James Bezan said he is nonetheless concerned that hundreds of millions of dollars in promised new investments aren’t being realized.
“Despite the explanation that was given by officials at committee, we still feel projects are falling behind, promises are going to be broken and ultimately the Canadian Armed Forces will not get the equipment that it needs in a timely manner,” Bezan told The Canadian Press. “The whole idea that they’re finding efficiencies is good news. But at the same time, those dollars should be getting re-invested in other capital projects that aren’t off the books yet.”

The underspending doesn’t just mean delivery of some promised equipment will be delayed, said defence analyst David Perry of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute; it also threatens Canada’s ability to meet a key NATO spending target. “So the military is not getting re-equipped as fast as intended when the defence policy was published,” Perry said in an interview. “And we had basically reassured NATO that we were going to really do a good job at spending on recapitalization, and we’re not nearly as far ahead as we should be on that.”
Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Offline Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 97,930
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,152
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1858 on: March 27, 2019, 11:10:58 »
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/once-again-the-federal-budget-turns-a-blind-eye-to-canadas-military-needs

Once again, the federal budget turns a blind eye to Canada's military needs - National Post - David Krayden - 27 Mar 19
    Opinion: Were the Liberals ever serious about their big defence plan? They cut defence spending in 2018 and are ignoring it in 2019

Last week’s federal budget offered relatively modest spending with targeted funding after years of spending from a government that seemed to believe the deficit will solve itself. Unfortunately, the Canadian Armed Forces again escaped the finance minister’s gaze and for the second consecutive year, national defence is conspicuous by its absence from the budget.

You might recall the fanfare when Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan released the Liberals’ defence policy review in 2017: “Strong, Secure, Engaged.” It was already more than six months overdue and there was a feeling among defence analysts and most journalists that the Liberals had to deliver a document that suggested serious resolve. Sajjan promised a whopping 70-per-cent increase in defence spending, pledging to drive funding up to $32.7 billion from $18.9 billion. Naval ships, combat-support vehicles and 88 fighter jets would be replaced through “an open and transparent competition.”

There was one large disclaimer

But there was one large disclaimer. All of this would happen over the next decade, assuming the realities of 2017 would remain constant during that period. How well would any government have done predicting the military needs of 1942 based on the geopolitics of 1932?

In any case, we’ve yet to see any indication that the Liberals were serious about the plan. They cut defence spending in 2018 and have ignored it in 2019. Was there an alternative motive to the 2017 defence review? Canada was still in the midst of NAFTA negotiations with an American president who was increasingly critical of our defence contribution, especially as it pertained to NATO. Donald Trump had repeatedly cited Canada as one of the deadbeat members of NATO that refuses to fund its military at two per cent of its GDP — despite having promised to do so and notwithstanding that we have done so in the past. With Budget 2019, Canada is no closer to meeting that pledge, spending 1.23 per cent of its GDP on national defence.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s desultory approach to defence capital acquisition may well be defined by the fighter jet fiasco that grows more bizarre with every twist and turn of the story. It was the Liberal government of Jean Chrétien that joined the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter development program. It was Stephen Harper’s Conservative government that dithered on procuring the aircraft. It is the current Trudeau government that decided to start the whole process again. In the meantime, the Liberals considered buying some interim Super Hornets from Boeing before ultimately deciding to pick up some used Australian F-18s — just as the Royal Australian Air Force took delivery of its first F-35s.

Perhaps the best speech of this year’s just-concluded Manning Networking Conference in Ottawa was delivered by former chief of defence staff Gen. Rick Hillier. Hillier, whose career was defined by integrity and a politics-be-damned leadership style, told the conservative gathering that if Canada “buys a fighter aircraft that is anything but the F-35, we will have lost our minds.”

The last prime minister who consistently funded the Canadian military was Louis St-Laurent. All successive administrations — Liberal and Conservative — have to varying degrees played the shell game with defence spending. While lauding a capital acquisition project here, they will starve another project over there to pay for it. While promising consistent funding, they will squeeze the military at the first opportunity when a fiscal need emerges elsewhere.

They will squeeze the military at the first opportunity

With defence procurement being so hamstrung by petty politics and policy inertia, no amount of government funding can guarantee a combat-capable military if those dollars are not efficiently and effectively spent. As Hillier said, “Our acquisition process in Canada, in particular for the Department of National Defence, is abhorrent. It is pointless to give the Department of National Defence increased spending if you then tie them in a Gordian knot where they can’t actually spend the money.” Sadly, that’s exactly what we’re doing.

— David Krayden is a former Royal Canadian Air Force public affairs officer and legislative assistant on Parliament Hill. He has worked in print, radio and television journalism and is currently the Ottawa bureau chief for The Daily Caller, a Washington-based media outlet.


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

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 73,470
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,569
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1859 on: April 05, 2019, 14:34:29 »
Australian defence spending--smaller armed forces--getting close to twice Canada's (with 2/3 the population), soon at 2% of GDP; Canada' 2019-20 defence budget is at C$ 21.6 billion, scroll way down to Table A2.13a (https://budget.gc.ca/2019/docs/plan/anx-02-en.html#33-Outlook-for-Program-Expenses):

Quote
Australia’s 2019-20 defence budget increases to $38.7bn

The Australian Government’s 2019-20 defence budget has increased by A$2.3bn ($1.6bn) to A$38.7bn [Oz dollar almost same as Canadian] ($27.52bn) and A$175.8bn ($125.02bn) to 2022-23.

In its annual budget statement, the government said the rise from the last financial year is in line with its commitment to increase the defence budget to 2% of GDP by 2020-21.

The defence budget aims to increase the country’s commitment to regional and global security, boost investment in advanced defence capabilities and create several Australian job opportunities.

In a statement, Australian Defence Minister Christopher Pyne said: “The Morrison Government’s number one priority is keeping Australians safe and secure. The 2019-20 budget sees continued strong investment in Australia’s national security, with a particular focus on enhancing our regional security, building defence capability and supporting Australia’s sovereign defence industry.”

The country will continue to support the US-led international Counter-Daesh coalition in Iraq, assist Afghanistan in controlling its security and increase support level to South East Asian countries.

Currently, more than 2,300 Australian defence personnel are deployed around the world in support of several operations.

More than A$200bn ($142.23bn) will be invested by the government in defence capabilities over the next decade until 2028-29.

Capabilities include the purchase of F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, P-8A Poseidon aircraft, E-7A Wedgetail and EA-18G Growler upgrade, as well as continuing the country’s ship and submarine building.

In order to safeguard the government and Australian Defence Force networks from cyber-attacks, investments will continue to be made to strengthen cyber defence.

The budget has also allocated funds for investment in the Australian Signals Directorate, including the Australian Cyber Security Centre, and for the establishment of cybersecurity ‘SPRINT teams’ and a Cyber Security Response Fund...

Approximately A$47.5bn ($33.78bn) has been dedicated by the government for the procurement of new capabilities since the 2018-19 budget release.
https://www.army-technology.com/news/australian-defence-budget-increases/

Some governments and countries are serious.

Mark
Ottawa


Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 97,930
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,152
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1860 on: April 05, 2019, 14:54:11 »
Yeah, but who really cares. ;D
Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 113,070
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,413
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1861 on: April 05, 2019, 15:06:03 »
Australian defence spending--smaller armed forces--getting close to twice Canada's (with 2/3 the population), soon at 2% of GDP; Canada' 2019-20 defence budget is at C$ 21.6 billion, scroll way down to Table A2.13a (https://budget.gc.ca/2019/docs/plan/anx-02-en.html#33-Outlook-for-Program-Expenses):

Some governments and countries are serious.

Mark
Ottawa

Yes.  When you are alone in that area of the world you have to be.
Optio

Offline Dimsum

    West coast best coast.

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 181,270
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,329
  • I get paid to travel. I just don't pick where.
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1862 on: April 05, 2019, 15:22:13 »
Yes.  When you are alone in that area of the world you have to be.

They also, by default, provide air defence for NZ.
Philip II of Macedon to Spartans (346 BC):  "You are advised to submit without further delay, for if I bring my army into your land, I will destroy your farms, slay your people, and raze your city."

Reply:  "If."

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 73,470
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,569
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1863 on: April 05, 2019, 15:36:40 »
And the US will provide for our air defence if we are not up to our NORAD tasks. Putting RCAF's priority on NORAD gives us "defence against help":

Quote
Canada-US security arrangements: Still defending against help?
https://www.cigionline.org/articles/canada-us-security-arrangements-still-defending-against-help

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline RDBZ

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 2,930
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 90
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1864 on: April 08, 2019, 05:01:57 »
Australian defence spending--smaller armed forces--getting close to twice Canada's (with 2/3 the population), soon at 2% of GDP; Canada' 2019-20 defence budget is at C$ 21.6 billion, scroll way down to Table A2.13a (https://budget.gc.ca/2019/docs/plan/anx-02-en.html#33-Outlook-for-Program-Expenses):

Some governments and countries are serious.

Mark
Ottawa

There wouldn't be too many metrics against which the ADF would be smaller than the Canadian Forces though.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 73,470
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,569
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline RDBZ

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 2,930
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 90
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1866 on: April 09, 2019, 03:19:34 »
ADF 60,000 active, 20,000 reserve:
https://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.asp?country_id=australia

CAF 64,000 active, 30,000 reserve:
https://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.asp?country_id=canada

Mark
Ottawa

When comparing the ADF and CF, and their funding, two questions seem apparent: for what roles do you really need uniformed personnel, and how long do you spend money on obsolescent equipment, even if it remains serviceable, to the detriment of investment in new platforms and capabilities?

Offline Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 173,135
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,261
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: The Defence Budget [superthread]
« Reply #1867 on: April 09, 2019, 06:38:09 »
I'd be interested in seeing a breakdown of the Canadian and Australian budgets by major line items/votes.  The Australian military does not have a defined benefit pension plan - I'm curious how much that takes off the books for them.
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr