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

[FJAG]

Maybe we get our units to established strength first. Then we might be in a better position to grow from there.

Establishing them at full strength is relatively easy. Just use their equivalent RegF establishment. At roughly 135 ARes units @ appx 600 each gets you to roughly 83,000. Add in the HSvcs and MP reserves and AirRes and NavRes and Bob's your uncle. Then comes the hard part.

To be fair, a good chunk of NATO is doing the same exercise after Ukraine and as defence spending ramps. Ukraine has shown why proper mobilization schema need to be developed.

I hate to say it but really, it's been entirely too long getting here. This all started in 2014 and then again in a bigger way in 2022 and it's only now we're forming a "Tiger Team" on the subject.

It's probably a good exercise. Way too many people, inside and outside the institution, assume that growing during wartime will be easy. Just cause we did it 85 years ago. A reality check is sorely needed.

I appreciate that for the last decade we've had a government uninterested in military matters (and yes, I'm including the post Afghanistan Harper years) but that was zero reason for the CAF to ignore putting some flesh on our mobilization outline plans. It's not like they weren't told that their plan was inadequate by their own committee in 2005.

As J.L Granatstein and LGen (Ret’d) Charles Belzile stated when discussing mobilization (or “activation”) of the reserves in their 2005 ten-year review of the Special Commission of the Restructuring of the Reserves 1995:

"... Another way of putting this is that no planning is being done for a major war.

This is shortsighted in the extreme. A military that thinks in terms of turning itself into a great host in a crisis is very different from one that is small, thinks small, and plans for very little.

The Canadian Forces needs a plan"

If anything, at least they'll learn why and how they should fix what ails our current reserve force.

Creating a proper mobilization plan should never have been a problem. Creating the plan is one thing, creating the transformation program that would make transformation possible (even before you start bandying about increasing the ResF numbers is the hard part. It requires a true Transformation Champion to carry that forward in the long term. That's been lacking.

You properly point out some of the issues above - there are dozens more, even long before you put the price tag on the structural changes required in the CAF before you look for your first new recruit.

I've been on the transformation bandwagon since Granatstein and Belzile's report in 2005 when I was the Senior ResF Legal Advisor and sat on the Chief of Reserves and Cadet's Council and when it was my job to do so (or at least what I thought was what my job entailed). I brought forward an outline of the necessary changes to the legislation (surprisingly few) and regulatory changes (a lot more) needed for what was necessary to create a mobilizable CAF (a large group of folks even before you talk 100,000) and a JAG PRL (a really small group of folks - 65 of us) and there was zero interest at either JAG or the CRes&C Council to move on any of that. That was well before getting into the heavy lifting things like infrastructure, logistics, training, leadership, equipment, etc., etc.

I have yet to hear of a CAF MGen being appointed to head this. Hell, when LGen Leslie brought forward his transformation plan in 2011 it was mostly quietly buried. I'll repeat it. You need a long-term Transformation Champion to put such a plan into effect - I'm talking at the MND and/or the CDS level.

In the two decades that followed 2005 I sadly concluded that there simply was neither an appetite nor seriousness within the higher strata of CAF leadership for meaningful change. Their answer to a problem is to fine tune the system slowly and deliberately until their next posting. My guess is that the outcome to this process is that somewhere along the line over the next half decade, some LCol is going to come up with an outline plan, it will then be costed, found too expensive and shelved in its entirety.

Do I sound bitter. Yes I do. Over half a century of cynicism will do that to you.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

To be fair, a good chunk of NATO is doing the same exercise after Ukraine and as defence spending ramps. Ukraine has shown why proper mobilization schema need to be developed.

It's probably a good exercise. Way too many people, inside and outside the institution, assume that growing during wartime will be easy. Just cause we did it 85 years ago. A reality check is sorely needed.

If anything, at least they'll learn why and how they should fix what ails our current reserve force.

It was not easy then, and won't be easy now.

 

[Remius]

Establishing them at full strength is relatively easy. Just use their equivalent RegF establishment. At roughly 135 ARes units @ appx 600 each gets you to roughly 83,000. Add in the HSvcs and MP reserves and AirRes and NavRes and Bob's your uncle. Then comes the hard part.

that isn’t what I was saying. Most reserve units are well below their current established strength. And worse is their effective strength.

Get them to where they should be then look at expanding from there.

 

[FJAG]

that isn’t what I was saying. Most reserve units are well below their current established strength. And worse is their effective strength.

Get them to where they should be then look at expanding from there.

I get that. But there are units already at their full ARE (at least on paper) while many aren't. At neither end of the scale are these units effective because of the "come when you feel like it" attitude to training and many other factors.

Making ARes units effective (and one first has to determine, effective at what - generating individuals, platoons, companies, battalions, brigades, divisions?) and increasing their size are two separate but interrelated challenges. IMHO you start that challenge by switching the paper model they need to recruit to and build to on day one. At the same time you set the degree of capability you expect that unit to reach. And again, at the same time, you put all the enablers in place needed to get them to the FOC. It's going to be slow progress in any event. Establishments are easy, capability objectives a bit harder and enablers damn difficult.

It's not the paper establishment model that limits ARes units from becoming effective. It's the lack of a target and the enablers to get there. I disagree with the idea of an intermediate step to fill the ARE first and then adopt a new establishment. That's just fine tuning a dog that don't hunt. The CAF ResF (and its RegF) need a major overhaul with a defining vision.

 

[daftandbarmy]

that isn’t what I was saying. Most reserve units are well below their current established strength. And worse is their effective strength.

Get them to where they should be then look at expanding from there.

You can build up numbers but they will, inevitably, drop once the mainly part time soldier/full time student based population moves on with their lives.

I've seen 100 troops on parade and then, in a few months, that dwindles to 30 or so.

The current structure is unsuitable for sustaining a consistently high level of manning/ parade strength, which inevitably impacts leadership systems, training programs and operational readiness.

 

[MilEME09]

Start by removing the come as you please mentality.

100% this, if they follow through with this every reserve units will likely be authorized to max peacetime strength for battalions and Regiments. So instead of 1 platoon we get 2 on ex? The show up when you want mentality needs to end. I see it all the time, going to wainwright? Less troops show up from calgary, more from Edmonton. Going to suffield? Reverse it, its amazing how petty troops can be just cause the drive is a little longer. I strongly agree that the service model for the Reserves needs to be mandatory. With some kind of system in place to account for sick time etc.

 

[Eaglelord17]

You can build up numbers but they will, inevitably, drop once the mainly part time soldier/full time student based population moves on with their lives.

I've seen 100 troops on parade and then, in a few months, that dwindles to 30 or so.

The current structure is unsuitable for sustaining a consistently high level of manning/ parade strength, which inevitably impacts leadership systems, training programs and operational readiness.

There are ways to encourage retention and recruiting.

For example if they made a bunch of Nelles Block type buildings (4 to a room, communial bathrooms and a mess hall) in the larger cities, offered free lodgings in said rooms and assistance paying for schooling (or completely paying for schooling), you would get a bunch of recruits as schooling is getting too expensive for your average joe to simply afford between the cost of housing and schooling.

Make part of the conditions that you have to serve for so many years after completing schooling in return for having it paid.

Even if you just built apartment buildings with cheap rent for service members/reservists in most cities it would seriously encourage people to join and stay in.

All sorts of carrots can be applied for longer term retention, it is all about how much we want to spend on doing so.

 

[MilEME09]

that isn’t what I was saying. Most reserve units are well below their current established strength. And worse is their effective strength.

Get them to where they should be then look at expanding from there.

Much of this is the recruiting system as well, hundreds of recruits at various stages and you maybe get half a dozen sworn in a month. Its not effective. The second issue is many units have ES in the 60-70% but their TES is down below 40%, this has been compounded by resF instructors augmenting the reg force right now so the ResF cant train it self.

 

[daftandbarmy]

There are ways to encourage retention and recruiting.

For example if they made a bunch of Nelles Block type buildings (4 to a room, communial bathrooms and a mess hall) in the larger cities, offered free lodgings in said rooms and assistance paying for schooling (or completely paying for schooling), you would get a bunch of recruits as schooling is getting too expensive for your average joe to simply afford between the cost of housing and schooling.

Make part of the conditions that you have to serve for so many years after completing schooling in return for having it paid.

Even if you just built apartment buildings with cheap rent for service members/reservists in most cities it would seriously encourage people to join and stay in.

All sorts of carrots can be applied for longer term retention, it is all about how much we want to spend on doing so.

Like other industries whose workforce is on the decline due to dwindling population numbers and the prevailing decline in volunteerism, service sector/tourism etc, we might want to rely on immigration programs to boost numbers.

Service guarantees citizenship!

 

[FJAG]

Like other industries whose workforce is on the decline due to dwindling population numbers and the prevailing decline in volunteerism, service sector/tourism etc, we might want to rely on immigration programs to boost numbers.

Service guarantees citizenship!

I agree generally and am not hung up on the security clearance issues - those are admin details and not the principle of the thing.

But . . . that needs to be thought through - we don't want to become a foreign legion (although I like both the French and Spanish uniforms more than ours ) Serving one's country ought to be an opportunity that is attractive to the country's own youth. We need to make reserve service something that benefits the needs of our youth and that sustains that attitude as they progress through the changing stages of their lives.

 

[ytz]

I hate to say it but really, it's been entirely too long getting here. This all started in 2014 and then again in a bigger way in 2022 and it's only now we're forming a "Tiger Team" on the subject.

I appreciate that for the last decade we've had a government uninterested in military matters (and yes, I'm including the post Afghanistan Harper years) but that was zero reason for the CAF to ignore putting some flesh on our mobilization outline plans. It's not like they weren't told that their plan was inadequate by their own committee in 2005.

I appreciate the work they did. But those commissions mean squat. Nowhere does actual policy say we should be ready to mobilize to several hundred thousand in the event of a high intensity conflict. There wasn't even a defence policy really before CFDS under Harper. Then came SSE. And now ONSAF. And none of them have really discussed mobilization in earnest.

But it's not just the institution. A whole lot of regular Canadians simply think that mobilization means you show up at your nearest armoury or recruiting centre and get handed a rifle and set of combats. You can see this with recent public discourse after Trump's talk of annexation. That is their understanding of mobilization. And of course, the politicians they elect reflect that understanding.

So this is the first real attempt to study mobilization in earnest, in probably decades. And it's going to take a ton of work when their analysis eventually comes out.

But also, it requires a serious discussion of what we want the CAF to do. CFDS, SSE and ONSAF have failed to really start those conversations about the institution itself. Most of those defence policies have basically been consolidated shopping lists. Not actual deep thought on foreign policy and the CAF's contribution to it.

 

[Kirkhill]

You can build up numbers but they will, inevitably, drop once the mainly part time soldier/full time student based population moves on with their lives.

I've seen 100 troops on parade and then, in a few months, that dwindles to 30 or so.

The current structure is unsuitable for sustaining a consistently high level of manning/ parade strength, which inevitably impacts leadership systems, training programs and operational readiness.

Ensure that while you have those volunteers engaged they learn useful skills before they stop parading. Once they are ready to stop parading take them off thecactive rolls and track them on the supplementary rolls. Reach out to them again in 10 to 15 years time and see if the wish to become active again once their lives have settled into a routine.

That is how you get the 300,000.

You have a force of 100,000 that gives you 5 years of service and then goes dormant.
Every year you transfer 20,000 from the active rolls to the supplementary rolls.
Every year you take in 20,000 new entries.
Currently I believe the intake is on the order of 6,000 or so reservists

20 from 6 is a jump but a scalable jump.

If you want to build the supplementary faster then you add in all the reg force releases.

...

As to getting people through the gates, tell them that you are serious this time and that you need 100,000 people in the ranks in two years and that they won't be waiting five years for a top secret security clearance when an all the info they will receive is either unclassified or at worst restricted.

You lot that want to recruit PhDs for Cosmic jobs will have to recruit separately.

 

[Kirkhill]

Meanwhile, how do you find kit for this new army?

USMC General has an idea for suppliers.

“When you come with it [a prototype], don’t come with one with the intention to take it home with you and all the data that was collected while we conducted an exercise together,” Lt. Gen. James Glynn, commander of Marine Corps Forces Pacific, said Thursday at AFCEA’s TechNet Indo-Pacific in Hawaii.

....

“Come with five. Take one or two home and leave three with us and we’ll continue to work on it,” he added. We’ll give you access to all the data that’s coming off of it and we’ll do everything we can to break it with the goal of making it better.”

General tells industry to bring more prototypes to help forces move at speed - Breaking Defense

"If we have the prototypes, prototypes can move very quickly to what we actually operate on," Marine Corps Forces Pacific Commander Lt. Gen. James Glynn said.

breakingdefense.com

Glynn said in the future dynamic operating environment, the name of the game is speed. Forces don’t have time to wait for perfect solutions or the acquisition community to take years to develop something.

“Partner with us to fail. Got no problem when it doesn’t work,” he said. “If we have the prototypes, prototypes can move very quickly to what we actually operate on.”

 

[daftandbarmy]

Ensure that while you have those volunteers engaged they learn useful skills before they stop parading. Once they are ready to stop parading take them off thecactive rolls and track them on the supplementary rolls. Reach out to them again in 10 to 15 years time and see if the wish to become active again once their lives have settled into a routine.

That is how you get the 300,000.

You have a force of 100,000 that gives you 5 years of service and then goes dormant.
Every year you transfer 20,000 from the active rolls to the supplementary rolls.
Every year you take in 20,000 new entries.
Currently I believe the intake is on the order of 6,000 or so reservists

20 from 6 is a jump but a scalable jump.

If you want build the supplementary faster then you add in all the reg force releases.

...

As to getting people through the gates, tell them that you are serious this time and that you need 100,000 people in the ranks in two years and that they won't be waiting five years for a top secret security clearance when an all the info they will receive is either unclassified or at worst restricted.

You lot that want to recruit PhDs for Cosmic jobs will have to recruit separately.

How you track reservists once they leave the unit....

 

[Kirkhill]

The TAPVs failed.
Great!
Fix the broken stuff.

 

[Kirkhill]

How you track reservists once they leave the unit....

Forgive me Prime Minister for I have SINned.

They seem to have no trouble finding me when they want money.

 

[ytz]

My personal suggestion is something akin to the GI bill with a reserve commitment. You sign up for 6-24 months of full time service till you reach OFP. Once you reach OFP, you owe 4 years at a reserve unit with mandatory attendance requirements. Every year, of that reserve service, $10k is released as a postsecondary grant, starting with the first $10k at the end of OFP. We will have fully trained reservists getting subsidized education and actually attending their units activities. End of Year 4? Subsidized mortgage, like a VA loan in the US.

In my time on exchange in the US, I was surprised to see how many young people enlisted for 5 years. Just to get the VA healthcare, GI Bill education benefits and VA Loans. 5 years of service also let them save money and get employable skills that often let them do actual jobs while going to school after. There are plenty of Canadian kids who would do the same if the benefits here were accurate. But military service has to be shown to definitively provide a leg up. Not just a paycheque for the summer.

Will add too, that I think the Reg F does a terrible job of giving enlisted members quals. Folks like me will get graduate degrees that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars (especially when pay is included). But we won't even make sure that POET gets electronics techs a 2 yr college diploma. The fear of those techs being employable elsewhere is entirely against the spirit of supporting junior members. I recently was on a promo board for warrants and chiefs of a tech trade. Kinda sad at how few had college diplomas. I wish Borden had an actual college. Would be nice to have the same 2 for 1 subsidized education plans that officers get.

 

[MilEME09]

Serving one's country ought to be an opportunity that is attractive to the country's own youth. We need to make reserve service something that benefits the needs of our youth and that sustains that attitude as they progress through the changing stages of their lives.

You mean like keeping our technical training upto speed with industry standards so people can challenge their journeyman ticket after DP2 and actually be able to pass?

 

[daftandbarmy]

Will add too, that I think the Reg F does a terrible job of giving enlisted members quals. Folks like me will get graduate degrees that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars (especially when pay is included). But we won't even make sure that POET gets electronics techs a 2 yr college diploma. The fear of those techs being employable elsewhere is entirely against the spirit of supporting junior members. I recently was on a promo board for warrants and chiefs of a tech trade. Kinda sad at how few had college diplomas. I wish Borden had an actual college. Would be nice to have the same 2 for 1 subsidized education plans that officers get.

FWIW, I recall that the British Army has an internal, and very active, Army Education Corps whose role included upgrading the formal education qualifications for (mainly NCM) members.

An underprivilege kid who joined the Infantry from a dire background in an urban ghetto somewhere, with few formal educational qualifications, could work their way through all the educational requirements to graduate with the Canadian equivalent of Grade 12. Promotion board requirements were aligned with academic achievement as well.

I recall helping many a NCM working through 'Maths and English' homework for the next exam, or even invigilating on tests, on operations or back in the barracks ...

 

[FJAG]

Every year you transfer 20,000 from the active rolls to the supplementary rolls.

Don't forget that that is a component transfer - same from RegF to SuppRes. That needs consent. It's too late for those that are in but new enrollment forms must include a consent to serve in the ResF (or RegF) as applicable for a fixed term and could/should include a consent to transfer to the SuppRes for X years. It can be done up front if done right.

My personal suggestion is something akin to the GI bill with a reserve commitment. You sign up for 6-24 months of full time service till you reach OFP.

I agree with everything you say except this part about full-time service. Not that I'm against that as an option, but I also want to capture the high school and university students while they are young and need cash but want to finish their education. For current or graduating high school students the summer break is around two months. Using two summers and a one weekend per month in the winter model, you get 5 months of service. Pretty much any trade in the army should be able to reach OFP in five months of one-station training with some course design remodeling.

subsidized education

You mean like keeping our technical training up to speed with industry standards so people can challenge their journeyman ticket after DP2 and actually be able to pass?

I agree. The biggest benefit we can give to young kids is education benefits and to me that includes leveraging community colleges and their quals with summer training that takes the CC courses and puts them into a military context. We can use obligatory service provisions for paying for both CC or university tuition and associated costs. You just don't pay a salary while they are at school, just when doing the military courses.

Incidentally, we need to leverage our cadet corps organizations and support a lot. Those are great feeder systems. One could also do that with the Rangers. If we're looking at a 200,000 Supp Res (which are based on previous service) then we should leverage the Rangers (which are off the street walk ins) for a low cost militarized community service organization which leads to ResF service.