Canada moves to 2% GDP end of FY25/26 - PMMC

[McG]

This gives extra time to get the security clearance done without issues

Time is not the critical path. If an occupation must have any interaction with information or technology that is restricted to Canadian citizens (even the least amount of interaction), then that occupation will not work for a permanent resident.

 

[KevinB]

If you are not a Canadian citizen you are not permitted to handle crypto, including devices capable of crypto even if unloaded.

Regardless of country of origin.

Why spend the time and effort?

Down here, a non US Citizen can get a TS+ if working directly for the USG. I know a few folks who do work for DRC that aren’t Canadian and have TS+ from you guys.

In DoD, FVEY and some NATO country citizens can be waivered in uniform (still need a green card to join) for certain levels, and are considered a US person for ITAR and NOFRN access. Generally most of the folks doing that are either a SOF transfer, or in a pipeline to an MOS that will see them getting US citizenship before they hit OFP.

I would assume that Canada follows the same standards for uniformed personnel? Granted that would be a tiny fraction of PR personnel joining the CAF.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Sounds a bit like the US/UK are trying to get in on the small nuc reactors niche.

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/09/15/trump-visit-us-and-britain-to-sign-major-new-nuclear-power-pact.html

 

[Ludoc]

Down here, a non US Citizen can get a TS+ if working directly for the USG. I know a few folks who do work for DRC that aren’t Canadian and have TS+ from you guys.

In DoD, FVEY and some NATO country citizens can be waivered in uniform (still need a green card to join) for certain levels, and are considered a US person for ITAR and NOFRN access. Generally most of the folks doing that are either a SOF transfer, or in a pipeline to an MOS that will see them getting US citizenship before they hit OFP.

I would assume that Canada follows the same standards for uniformed personnel? Granted that would be a tiny fraction of PR personnel joining the CAF.

Although I am quoting you, this is also trying to clarify why we can't just keep PRs away from the crypto fill devices and call it good from further up in the thread.
-------------------------
We can get non-Citizens TS clearance. That isn't the problem (it takes too long to get anyone TS, but that is a different problem). The issue is they still aren't citizens. The ITAR/Controlled Goods/Crypto/IP/etc rules that we sign when we purchase military equipment (I am talking specifically about radios but am sure it is touches other technology) does not allow us to give access to that equipment to non-citizens.

Does the section have 152s or 163s on their fighting gear? Do they sometimes take their FFO off and leave it in the back of the LAV? Then permanent resident can't be part of that section, they have access to those radios. Does the TAPV have a 117G installed? When it does we can never let a PR access that vehicle without an escort.
Are there some trades that we can reasonably be assured won't have access to radios? Yes, but not as many as you think (I am talking about the Army, I can't speak for the Navy or Air Force). Combat Arms, RCEME trades, Sigs and Medics can all be expected to access vehicles where radios are installed. What does that leave? Cooks and Clerks?

What are the solutions?
1. Negotiate with the Americans for less restrictions on their kit.
2. Create a quicker path to citizenship for those serving.
3. Stop buying stuff from the Americans.

Each of those come with their own problems, need to studied and require someone very high up to champion which one we choose. They are big projects need to be supported by the Government of Canada, not just DND.

I truly think hiring PRs is a good idea and part of the way forward for the CAF. However, there are a lot of follow on effects that NDHQ didn't consider before enacting this policy. They should have been ironed out before we hired a bunch of people that we can't employ. All we have done is find a way to sour a bunch more people on the CAF by hiring them and then having to force OTs on them. Hiring PRs is a good idea but not presently practical for most of the Army.

 

[KevinB]

1) Negotiating a deal with us to follow the same rules as we do down here.
Basically a PR from a nation that has equipment X should not be an issue. That covers comms, Night Vision and a bunch of other things. As far as ITAR goes, Canada should create the legal system for a Canadian Person (meaning Canadian citizen or PR) and have penalties for ITAR violations.
*we also have specific cutouts for dual citizens who live abroad that aren’t considered US persons as far as ITAR and cannot access restricted data and equipment that if they lived in the US they could.

2) It’s 2 years for a PR down here in Uniform to get citizenship. Generally we restrict certain trades to citizens, but that is fairly SOF specific and the pipeline works so one can generally do all the ‘leg work’ in a conventional unit that they can be on selection at the 18month mark / and come citizenship have a date to start the rest of the pipeline. How long is PR to naturalization in Canada?

 

[Ludoc]

You are preaching to the choir. The Canadian Citizens only thing creates a lot of other problems. We can't even give a radio to a mutual ally participating in a Canadian exercise. When we used to run MAPLE RESOLVE, we planned to have some Aussies show up and act as OCTs. But as non-Candians we would not be able to supply them with a Harris radio, never mind they are Five-eyes allies. Same thing with the French, doesn't matter they are part of NATO.

Even more frustrating is when Americans were on MR. There are a lot of hoops to jump through to get crypto. So sometimes one American unit would show up with it and another would not. I couldn't use an SKL (American built crypto device) to put an approved key (if the other unit brought it with them, it must have been approved for use) into a Harris radio (also American built) of the unit that didn't show up with the crypto key.

The rules are very prescriptive, and the authority to waive them is very high and, in a multinational context, it is not always clear who has that authority. There are many scenarios that aren't allowed according to policy but present exceeding low risk. I wish there was a way to staff (in a timely fashion) requests for waivers.

 

[McG]

I would assume that Canada follows the same standards for uniformed personnel?

Canada does, but Canada does not own the restrictions that prevent non-citizens from contributing.

Create a quicker path to citizenship for those serving.

A quicker path to citizenship still means years of giving someone a paycheque for a job CAF cannot employ them to do.

 

[KevinB]

Canada does, but Canada does not own the restrictions that prevent non-citizens from contributing.

There are a number of doors inside ITAR to allow for access. Mostly used for SOF interoperability, but they do exist.

A quicker path to citizenship still means years of giving someone a paycheque for a job CAF cannot employ them to do.

Then perhaps the CAF should revisit that policy, especially if an accommodation cannot be found with the USG in terms of service usage.

 

[CountDC]

One of the problems is that the RegF is short of people and is having trouble enlisting enough to meet even its current authorized levels never mind the increased levels required for an expanded force. At the same time you've got a bunch of Reservists who want to serve in the military but don't want to leave their communities and are currently being extremely under utilized.

Do you plan to square that circle by letting Reg Force applicants select at enrollment which form of Reg Force service they want...Postable or non-Postable?

Yes - have stated that for years. Be just as easy as Spec Pay. 1 - not post, 2 - post within Canada, 3 - post anywhere. If you want to change it you have to file at least one year prior and during that year you can still be posted.

Why does it take so long for a security clearance? Canada has a million immigrates in about a year; 5000 from Gaza, thousands of students, TFW, etc. Don't they get a least a criminal check?

many are brought in without proper screening as they are "refugees".

Are there some trades that we can reasonably be assured won't have access to radios? Yes, but not as many as you think (I am talking about the Army, I can't speak for the Navy or Air Force). Combat Arms, RCEME trades, Sigs and Medics can all be expected to access vehicles where radios are installed. What does that leave? Cooks and Clerks?

Don't know about now but in the past many clerks had 404's and drove vehicles on exercises including the comms truck. I did CP duty several times after driving it to location. Hate radio checks. Good way to get off it once was to do radio check and then transmit a code change over the air. Oops. Got some sleep so I was fit to drive the next day instead of being up all night.

 

[daftandbarmy]

You are preaching to the choir. The Canadian Citizens only thing creates a lot of other problems. We can't even give a radio to a mutual ally participating in a Canadian exercise. When we used to run MAPLE RESOLVE, we planned to have some Aussies show up and act as OCTs. But as non-Candians we would not be able to supply them with a Harris radio, never mind they are Five-eyes allies. Same thing with the French, doesn't matter they are part of NATO.

Even more frustrating is when Americans were on MR. There are a lot of hoops to jump through to get crypto. So sometimes one American unit would show up with it and another would not. I couldn't use an SKL (American built crypto device) to put an approved key (if the other unit brought it with them, it must have been approved for use) into a Harris radio (also American built) of the unit that didn't show up with the crypto key.

The rules are very prescriptive, and the authority to waive them is very high and, in a multinational context, it is not always clear who has that authority. There are many scenarios that aren't allowed according to policy but present exceeding low risk. I wish there was a way to staff (in a timely fashion) requests for waivers.

Well, there's always the old standby

 

[dapaterson]

Then perhaps the CAF should revisit that policy, especially if an accommodation cannot be found with the USG in terms of service usage.

CAF does not own that policy

 

[rmc_wannabe]

Well, there's always the old standby

We're reviting Despatch Riders and kilometres of line, so why the hell not ?

 

[daftandbarmy]

We're reviting Despatch Riders and kilometres of line, so why the hell not ?

I've participated in some effective, low level training using this particular signaling device.

Luckily, someone thought of adding the button on the side that lets you use morse code