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

[Kirkhill]

Interesting training, compensation, and maybe some form of "bling" for fancy civilian occasions.

Free range membership alone is not going to attract the kind of people we need.

The compensation issue is a debatable one. I think the more interesting the training and the less the feckery the less need there will be for compensation.

If you can indulge people's "hobbies", permitting them to practice wall-climbing, tearing down engines, setting up comms nets, learn medical skills, build stuff, and spend time on ranges making things go bang, then you will have less demand for beer money.

 

[Kirkhill]

You shouldn't be relying on the CAF to provide you with fitness or marksmanship.

The civilian world provides better opportunities for both.

Get out and improve yourself.

But if it is provided by the military then you will draw more bodies into the fold.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Yes. You are again introducing information that everyone knows.

I'm glad to hear that, I was starting to get concerned.

The proposal we are discussing puts an indoor range in CFB Halifax, so you are looking at the dockyard, Stadaconda, or Shearwater. Even old 5 Div offices in RA Park are already being taken over by RCN. Local armouries are not part of nearby bases. So where do you build exquisite indoor ranges in CFB Halifax without impacting the Navy?

Why do we have to use existing infrastructure ?

Lots of unused DND/Crown land around the HRM.

 

[ytz]

But if it is provided by the military then you will draw more bodies into the fold.

Y'all need to stop trying to get the government to subsidize your hobbies. And let's be clear, it's your hobbies. It's not that far from that mayor who tried to argue that public transit should be defence spending. How many 19 yr old college students can spare the time and money for a range hobby? Really, it'll be DND paying for it, so a bunch of old guys can LARP being defenders of the realm, when all is said and done. It won't be potential or actual recruits given the pressures on young people these days.

And the value of subsidizing this broadly is very questionable. We don't need mobilized nurses and mechanics and IT techs training at a range every week before they deploy. Heck, if we're doing to subsidize something these days, should probably be flying drones and hacking computers.

 

[Kirkhill]

A PY is a full time RegF position. There are not PYs in the CIC.

I will try and rephrase my thoughts

The Cadet organizations are not army. They are not CAF.
They are civilians with an interest in matters military.
That interest is deliberately fostered by the CAF.
There seems to be general agreement that the effort by the CAF has advantage to the CAF.
Part of the CAF's effort is providing support to the organization through 5 to 10,000 staff.
That staff is trained and administered, and compensated, through the Reserve (apologies for the Primary Reserve error).
Those Reservists are engaged in Class A or Class B service.

Support to the Cadets include access to DND premises and facilities.

....

i would apply the same logic to engage 300,000 adult civilans, perhaps even revitalizing the Dominion of Canada Rifle Association, established in 1868. Cadets were formalized in 1879 with Militia General Order 18.

 

[ytz]

i would apply the same logic to engage 300,000 adult civilans,

You shouldn't.

There's a very important reason that CIC are military. It ensures that adults who work with a vulnerable population (minors) in the name of the CAF and DND, are subject to the National Defence Act and the Code of Service Discipline. If there was a way to apply the same legal authority without a uniform, we probably would do that.

Beyond that, you keep assuming the 300k will be highly active. I think that's a reach. For all we know, it ends up being an annual form they fill out to certify they are still in. The exact design of that force, the skills requirements and readiness it will have are still left to be determined. And given all the issues we already have with PRes in Canada (with employers) I wouldn't assume a training burden that is even a fraction. They are essentially bench warmers to ensure that something can be fed into the pipeline when PRes gets fully mobilized. What skills does a bench warmer need beyond a pulse?

 

[PuckChaser]

And the value of subsidizing this broadly is very questionable. We don't need mobilized nurses and mechanics and IT techs training at a range every week before they deploy. Heck, if we're doing to subsidize something these days, should probably be flying drones and hacking computers.

How to tell me you have no idea how LSCO or Army operations work without telling me you have no idea how those things work.

Drones and cyber are enablers for hard sea, land and air power. On their own they are absolutely useless novelty items.

 

[ytz]

How to tell me you have no idea how LSCO or Army operations work without telling me you have no idea how those things work.

Your LSCO training plan involves sending nurses and HRA clerks to the range every week?

Okay.....

Drones and cyber are enablers for hard sea, land and air power. On their own they are absolutely useless novelty items.

Correct. Which is why I said, there's more value in training that skill. Something you can't really train effectively on short notice. You can train a drone operator to shoot well enough to stay alive. The other way around? Not so much. Which is also why, there's increasingly selection for flying drones (formal or informal) for anything beyond a palm sized Hornet. We don't give them to every rifleman.

 

[Kirkhill]

Y'all need to stop trying to get the government to subsidize your hobbies. And let's be clear, it's your hobbies. It's not that far from that mayor who tried to argue that public transit should be defence spending. How many 19 yr old college students can spare the time and money for a range hobby? Really, it'll be DND paying for it, so a bunch of old guys can LARP being defenders of the realm, when all is said and done. It won't be potential or actual recruits given the pressures on young people these days.

And the value of subsidizing this broadly is very questionable. We don't need mobilized nurses and mechanics and IT techs training at a range every week before they deploy. Heck, if we're doing to subsidize something these days, should probably be flying drones and hacking computers.

Hang on!

Do you want to attract people to support the CAF?
Do you want to pay for them?
No matter how you slice it engaging people, training them, retaining them and employing them will take money.
Even if you don't pay them a single, solitary penny.

The skills that the CAF requires are available in the community. Many folks in the community develop those skills on their own time because they enjoy the activity. These can be mistaken for "hobbies". Those folks also enjoy hanging out with other people that enjoy the same "hobbies".

Rifle shooting, kayaking, mountaineering, snowmobiling, driving boats, comms and computers.... you name it and there are people paying out of their own pocket to develop skills that the CAF pays to develop.

Indulge those people in a CAF approved facility with CAF approved supervision and instruction and you will generate a pool of skilled individuals on which the CAF can draw.

This isn't about "US" getting the government to pay for "OUR " hobbies.

This is about the CAF trying attract useful support at minimum cost.

Those 300,000 auxiliaries represent a potential call out list, a rolodex, of individuals known to and available to the CAF. Individuals that don't have pensions attached.

 

[PrairieFella]

How to tell me you have no idea how LSCO or Army operations work without telling me you have no idea how those things work.

Drones and cyber are enablers for hard sea, land and air power. On their own they are absolutely useless novelty items.

I think youre misunderstanding what he's saying. Its a waste of resources for your med o to spend substantial amounts of time firing a service rifle is what he's saying. That said to quibble, I disagree with him on mechanics, they absolutely have to fire often. Theyre often in A1 echelons at least in my part of the LSCO world.

Drones and cyber are not novelty items at all. Its like saying GPS was a novelty item compared to a map and compass. Theyre a revolution in military affairs.

 

[Kirkhill]

You shouldn't.

There's a very important reason that CIC are military. It ensures that adults who work with a vulnerable population (minors) in the name of the CAF and DND, are subject to the National Defence Act and the Code of Service Discipline. If there was a way to apply the same legal authority without a uniform, we probably would do that.

Beyond that, you keep assuming the 300k will be highly active. I think that's a reach. For all we know, it ends up being an annual form they fill out to certify they are still in. The exact design of that force, the skills requirements and readiness it will have are still left to be determined. And given all the issues we already have with PRes in Canada (with employers) I wouldn't assume a training burden that is even a fraction. They are essentially bench warmers to ensure that something can be fed into the pipeline when PRes gets fully mobilized. What skills does a bench warmer need beyond a pulse?

Give them a reason to stay active and they will.

Just like any other body of volunteers.

 

[PuckChaser]

Your LSCO training plan involves sending nurses and HRA clerks to the range every week?

Okay.....

Nope, but a monthly marksmanship range along with the annual PWT builds and actual skill. Rifle marksmanship and practice is always something you wish you had more of when you're on a 2 way range. Thinking that nurses or HRAs could never possibly have to discharge their weapon says to me we should just civilianize them.

Drones and cyber are not novelty items at all. Its like saying GPS was a novelty item compared to a map and compass. Theyre a revolution in military affairs.

You completely missed my point because you didnt read the last sentence.

 

[Kirkhill]

I am suspecting that the biggest divide in this discussion is between those that expect they will be issued with individuals with a defined set of skills that they can command into a position and those that see a body of people with a pool of skills that can be asked to do a job.

Most of us work in a market where we engage people with skills for a particular task.
We don't have the luxury of shoving Bloggins into the line.

 

[PrairieFella]

You completely missed my point because you didnt read the last sentence.

How much hard sea power did Ukraine have? They somehow found a way to close the Black Sea using only drones with no functional navy (I did read the sentence btw, thank you for your concern).

 

[PuckChaser]

How much hard sea power did Ukraine have? They somehow found a way to close the Black Sea using only drones with no functional navy (I did read the sentence btw, thank you for your concern).

They used drones to make up for the lack of a navy. Both sides are using them on land because they have a lack of maneuver ability. You're just arguing to argue.

 

[ytz]

Nope, but a monthly marksmanship range along with the annual PWT builds and actual skill. Rifle marksmanship and practice is always something you wish you had more of when you're on a 2 way range. Thinking that nurses or HRAs could never possibly have to discharge their weapon says to me we should just civilianize them.


You completely missed my point because you didnt read the last sentence.

I don't think even supporters at HRUs like JOSG go to the range once a month.....

Not that I don't think once a month would be nice for most people. In an ideal world....

But we're talking mostly about reservists here. Or rather somebody who has a lower commitment than PRes. You're not going to build a 300k force, substantially involving working professionals, if you start insisting that minimum commitment is one range day per month.

The question here is what does it take for the CAF to keep a mechanic working at Canadian Tire in a state of readiness, such that they can be quickly trained (30-60 days) if national mobilization is declared. The bar for them is very different than what anybody is doing in the Reg F and PRes today. I would suggest to you that if somebody has a civilian trade or profession that maps substantially to a CAF occupation, our concern will be largely that they maintain that competency first, so that we can use it during wartime. Beyond that, the concern isn't immediate readiness but trainability in a proscribed amount of time.

 

[ytz]

I am suspecting that the biggest divide in this discussion is between those that expect they will be issued with individuals with a defined set of skills that they can command into a position and those that see a body of people with a pool of skills that can be asked to do a job.

Most of us work in a market where we engage people with skills for a particular task.
We don't have the luxury of shoving Bloggins into the line.

Goes back to how quickly we would want people trained in a national mobilization scenario. How quickly are we assuming that PRes will achieve readiness that lets them relieve RegF units and personnel? And behind that how quickly are we assuming that the MobF is spun up to back fill the PRes?

One theory I've heard: PRes splits into a relief force and training element. The former immediately start working towards being a follow on force for the RegF. The latter start training the MobF to be be follow-on force after that. If the Ukrainians are training soldiers within weeks, there's no reason that Mob F needs anything more than verification checks (health, fitness, specialist quals currency) that ensures they can show up at a training centre and be at combat readiness in say 6-8 months.

Second theory: We never deploy MobF. They are a home guard in being. They get called up to perform functions at home. Manage logistics, guard facilities, expand healthcare, etc. They do this to allow the PRes to quickly ready a larger relief force. Ironically, this scenario probably has a higher training and readiness burden for MobF given that they maybe tasked immediately, with little to no warm up.

 

[ytz]

Drones and cyber are not novelty items at all. Its like saying GPS was a novelty item compared to a map and compass. Theyre a revolution in military affairs.

Not novelties. But do require specialist skill. Especially as tactical drones get larger. Last thing we want is some random troop taking down a low flying Apache because he/she doesn't understand airspace deconfliction. As we understand the domain more, we are also starting to understand what should and should not be a specialist skill. That's why some of this stuff (like Cyber) gets spun into a trade. And if it's not a trade, it's often at least a unit qual.

That said to quibble, I disagree with him on mechanics, they absolutely have to fire often. Theyre often in A1 echelons at least in my part of the LSCO world.

That's a function of them being in an A1 echelon. Not a function of them being a mechanic. You don't need every mechanic at TSS going to the range every month.