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

[PrairieFella]

I think a way to think about this. Whatever project is planned, try and make a case for an order/lot size that is big enough to get production in Canada. Otherwise, there's a risk that said project drops down on the priority list. Doctrine will be rejigged to fit whatever is bought. Unfortunate reality.

For example. If the CA wants tanks. Put in a project for say 120 tanks and you'll end up stalled forever because that's just a proposal that vendors will offer to build at home. Ask for 300 and you might get production in Canada. All of a sudden the government thinks tanks are sexy and the minister is in the news arguing about why the CA needs lots of tanks.

I really hate that this is what the job is now.....

I mean if we're actually about to spend 125BB USD on defence, that money better be used to build domestic industry and not just suck the wealth of Canada into Lockmart and Yank private equity firms. We desperately need investment into the private sector in Canada, this is one way to do it while ensuring they arent poached by the EU/USA or even worse, China.

 

[dapaterson]

I think a way to think about this. Whatever project is planned, try and make a case for an order/lot size that is big enough to get production in Canada. Otherwise, there's a risk that said project drops down on the priority list. Doctrine will be rejigged to fit whatever is bought. Unfortunate reality.

For example. If the CA wants tanks. Put in a project for say 120 tanks and you'll end up stalled forever because that's just a proposal that vendors will offer to build at home. Ask for 300 and you might get production in Canada. All of a sudden the government thinks tanks are sexy and the minister is in the news arguing about why the CA needs lots of tanks.

I really hate that this is what the job is now.....

Sovereign defence production capacity is in many ways more important than the standing peacetime CAF.

Our pers gen doctrine (MOB MOCs for the win!) tells us we can create sailors / soldiers / aviators with a focused skillset more quickly than we can start turning out equipment and materiel; the investment focus should be less on "folks waiting on their rucksacks" and more on "national capacity to produce rucksacks, and CAF capacity to train personnel".

The CAF mindset is fixated on "today we must fight" instead of "how do we ensure military readiness for a long fight", and it shows.

 

[Furniture]

I think a way to think about this. Whatever project is planned, try and make a case for an order/lot size that is big enough to get production in Canada. Otherwise, there's a risk that said project drops down on the priority list. Doctrine will be rejigged to fit whatever is bought. Unfortunate reality.

For example. If the CA wants tanks. Put in a project for say 120 tanks and you'll end up stalled forever because that's just a proposal that vendors will offer to build at home. Ask for 300 and you might get production in Canada. All of a sudden the government thinks tanks are sexy and the minister is in the news arguing about why the CA needs lots of tanks.

I really hate that this is what the job is now.....

I'd suggest that in serious countries, this is how things have always operated to some extent.

We just got too comfortable being unserious, and buying a few toys on occassion from whoever promised a new french fry plant in return.