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

[Kirkhill]

At risk of re-opening HIMARS wounds

For US$705 million, the U.S. authorizes the sale of additional HIMARS rocket artillery systems to the Australian Army

The U.S. government has authorized the possible sale of an additional batch of High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) to the Australian Army.

www.zona-militar.com

Package 1

1.6 BUSD for 42 launchers with GMRLS and PrSM missiles

Package 2

0.705 BUSD for 48 more launchers. This includes resupply vehicles and trailers as well as training rounds.

And Australia is manufacturing both GMRLS and PrSM missiles locally under licence.

https://www.minister.defence.gov.au/media-releases/2025-06-06/australia-signs-long-range-precision-strike-missile-agreement-united-states

https://www.minister.defence.gov.au/media-releases/2025-03-17/albanese-government-purchases-more-guided-missiles-part-future-made-australia

 

[Jarnhamar]

I’ve mentioned this before. People are right to be skeptical.

Right.

But your arguments all hinge on the LPC

That's because this thread is talking about the Government of Canada, which is currently run by the Liberals, moving to 2% GDP by end of FY 25/26 as promised by Prime Minister Mark Carney. You're free to constantly inject but conservatives comments, I just don't see it as germaine to this discission.

I do see the Liberal track record, considering this is still the Liberal party made up of many of the same Liberal members over the last 10 years, and with many of the same policies from the last elections, as relevant.

Carney and the perception he has or is doing nothing.

Some money is flowing and we're being told to spend spend spend. Not argung that isn't great. It's not the first time we've seen big promises. I'll wait until some of those big ticket items land and proof the procurement system is unfucked.

I disagree with your take that it’s all the LPC and by extension Carney’s fault.

Please show me where I said Canadas military woes are all the LPC's fault so I can recind the comment.

You started with “The Liberal party doesn't take the defense of Canada seriously.”.

They don't. Apparently they could have met our NATO obligation 10 years ago but chose not to.

And completely ignore or brush off the role the CPC had in this as well.

CPC doesn't take the defence of Canada seriously either. Neither does the Bloc, NDP, Green party.

This is a cultural ingrained issue that crosses all party lines.

Sure.

Maybe, just maybe there is a bit of light in that dark tunnel with a more pragmatic approach borne or necessity and events. What I see is Carney taking a pragmatic approach.

And I'm taking a pragmatic approach to his promises

 

[brihard]

Anyone know what our %GDP NATO spending is on track to hit by the new year versus what it was last new year?

 

[MilEME09]

Lol. I'm waiting for somebody to try their luck and ask for a Japanese toilet.

All it takes is someone not paying attention and signing something. Thats how the SALH almost got a leo 1 about 20 years ago, wasnt until it was on the rail car ready to go that someone put the brakes seeing where its going.

 

[brihard]

All it takes is someone not paying attention and signing something. Thats how the SALH almost got a leo 1 about 20 years ago, wasnt until it was on the rail car ready to go that someone put the brakes seeing where its going.

Never say ‘no’ to your own ADREP. Make some other asshole do it. They have to catch it every single time; you only have to get lucky once.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Happy to do that when we can get back to talking about defence and not partisan whining about what should have happened a decade ago (which I don't think anybody disagrees with).

I don't know if you're still in or not. But there's been more than just me here saying that the changes are real and money is flowing. Let's be happy about that. And encourage the government to do more.

Deflection, trying to sound conciliatory while still minimizing my valid point about Canada’s long-term failure to meet NATO’s target. Seems like subtly reframing the debate from accountability ("what should have happened”) to vague optimism (“let’s be happy about that”) which avoids responsibility and makes critique sound petty. Thats fine.

I’m glad progress is finally happening, no disagreement there.
Acknowledging improvement, which is starting to appear to be happening, doesn’t erase the fact that Canada first pledged 2% back in 2014 and still hasn’t met it over 10 years later. Over 90% of that time the Liberals were at the helm.

Discussing that delay isn’t “partisan whining” it’s holding governments accountable for the commitments they make under NATO.
We can celebrate progress and still be honest about how long it took. The fact that it's apparently so easy to reach 2% shows the Liberal party (and Conservatives for a year) weren't serious about each it.

Carney isn't 10 for 10 on meeting his deadlines, we'll see what it looks like in 5 months. I'm particularly excited for the pay raise, and to see the excuses if it doesn't happen.

 

[PrairieFella]

Pain

 

[Czech_pivo]

Pre Carney or post Carney?

 

[Jarnhamar]

Anyone know what our %GDP NATO spending is on track to hit by the new year versus what it was last new year?

Most estimates ive seen for 24/25 are between 1.37% and 1.4%.

2023 was around 1.29%

 

[MilEME09]

Never say ‘no’ to your own ADREP. Make some other asshole do it. They have to catch it every single time; you only have to get lucky once.

Reminds me of my PLQ, we had 2 EOD people on our course, we put in a adrep for explosives to do explosive excavation of trenches cause it was the middle of winter and we had qualified people. Only denied by A coy OC due to budget.

 

[PuckChaser]

Honestly, you don't sound happy that money is flowing.

Is it really flowing if we don't have a dramatic shift away from the risk allergy procurement policies we have yet? Or exponentially changed delegation of financial authorities? If the current government is waiting until November near the budget release to cut the zip ties on our hands, 2% GDP by 31 Mar 26 is a pipe dream. I've had multiple procurements (that are confirmed deliverable before FY end) denied that are 7 figure rounding errors in the scale of 2% GDP because they'd have to go to PSPC who turned off taking files in September or individuals refused to do elevated callups from NMSOs.

2% of GDP is going to buy us thousands of pallets of printer paper and new office chairs at this rate.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Reminds me of my PLQ, we had 2 EOD people on our course, we put in a adrep for explosives to do explosive excavation of trenches cause it was the middle of winter and we had qualified people. Only denied by A coy OC due to budget.

What about snowcrete

 

[Cloud Cover]

That predates the current fiscal environment.

It always reminds me of a mobile trash can.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Pre Carney or post Carney?

I believe that’s a Harper project.

 

[ytz]

Anyone know what our %GDP NATO spending is on track to hit by the new year versus what it was last new year?

As per the PBO estimate, we should be at 1.49% for FY25/26. We need about $15B to put us at 2%. Though not all of that has to be strictly CAF spending obviously. It'll be interesting to see where we get. I would bet about 1.8% by end fiscal and 2% in the next fiscal.

 

[ytz]

Is it really flowing if we don't have a dramatic shift away from the risk allergy procurement policies we have yet? Or exponentially changed delegation of financial authorities? If the current government is waiting until November near the budget release to cut the zip ties on our hands, 2% GDP by 31 Mar 26 is a pipe dream. I've had multiple procurements (that are confirmed deliverable before FY end) denied that are 7 figure rounding errors in the scale of 2% GDP because they'd have to go to PSPC who turned off taking files in September or individuals refused to do elevated callups from NMSOs.

2% of GDP is going to buy us thousands of pallets of printer paper and new office chairs at this rate.

100%. The project I'm on has lost 12 months. Half to internal governance. Half to TBS. I agree that it's going to be damn hard to get to 2% without reform.

There's definitely money flowing though. And I've seen the rounds first hand to see what can move. It's all just chaotic now because till there's reform they are simply going to push what is easy and ready. If they don't have some loosening of the rules, once they run out of the easy stuff, they're going to hit a wall.

I like the DIA idea (bad acronym aside). Hopefully, we see them get the authorities they need. That'll be the test.

 

[RangerRay]

Very, very true.

The complaints and leaks are starting. And it's easy to see who is disgruntled by the change.

I thought the leak about insufficient funding for poppies was telling.

WTAF!?

 

[Halifax Tar]

Canada pledged to reach 2% in 2014 and still hasn’t done so. Looking at policy outcomes this 2% has been promised repeatedly, over differenr defence policies. Now were taken to believe that Carney is going to do in 9 months what consecutive governments failed to do in 129 months? Just by writing checks?Pretty spectacular if it happens. There's ample reason not to believe this promise of a Christmas miracle.

What worries me, is that this pivot is just a reaction to DJT and his presidency. And if DJT loses the midterms and then crashes in the next election every things will go back to 2023.

 

[ytz]

What worries me, is that this pivot is just a reaction to DJT and his presidency. And if DJT loses the midterms and then crashes in the next election every things will go back to 2023.

Good point. Very possible. But the fact that we're going to be doing more at home does mitigate some of this risk. We'll get 2%. And probably stay there. The 5% talk is pure fantasy though. Keep in mind that industry wants this as much as the CAF. And also American protectionism doesn't end with Trump.

 

[ueo]

If the Japanese had been smart they would have used a couple of freighters and small task force to hit Prince Rupert or one of the larger Alaskan coastal communities.

Land a few hundred marines near Prince Rupert, attack the town , burn, blow up up some of the infrastructure, raise havoc for a few hours and then depart. The resulting shock would have forced authorities both in Canada and US to spend far more resource than they did in protecting the coasts. The number of fortifications and equipment was only a portion that had been recommended back in 1936. I do give the Canadian authorities some credit for actually being aware of the threat and doing something prior.

Yep! Norway early 40's springs to mind.