Extra 2 billion for CF budget

[Benoit]

I was just watching a news program called issues and answers when something caught my attention. The leader of the PC party Mr.harper, said that in order for our military to stay operational and for it to keep its comittment to NATO the canadian government has to add on an extra 2 billion dollars a year to the CF Budget for the next 10 years. He said he wants an increase in personell, better equipment, over all a better military. Any thoughts or comments on this?

 

[stukirkpatrick]

The thing is, Mr Harper is not yet the leader of the New Conservative Party, (the announcement as to the leader is on the 20th of March), so who knows whether his party‘s platform will reflect this view pretty soon.

Its a good thing to hope for, as the former Alliance always seemed to be pro-military spending, but with the Liberals up to the ultimate decision, it will need a lot of lobbying (and maybe another crisis like Haiti) to wake the gov‘t in power up to the fact that the CF are still important in modern times.

 

[Benoit]

Very Very true

 

[nULL]

i‘m sure the liberals would like having a top knotch military as well, just they can‘t "find" the money. remember, defence spending is just one part of a government‘s budget. look at countries such as the old soviet union, which pumped billions of dollars from their federal budget into defence - a strong military does not equal a prosperous country.

hopefully paul martin could stem the leak of money from the liberal party and make it more efficent, but the opposition saying they will do XYZ is nothing but a cheap marketing ploy at best. what are they supposed to say, "no, we will not increase spending?"

besides, the opposition parties have a vested interest in making it seem like the military is useless and weak in their present form; they‘re trying to scare you into voting for them. last i heard, canada was able to sent troops to haiti, and the military is still functioning.

 

[pte anthony]

Functioning on what level and with what equipment is the question Null, I agree with you that the statement is probably no more then a ploy to grab votes from those who seek a larger and more sophisticated military. Truth is there are many big ticket items that the current military needs to keep up its operational status and commitments home and abroad. :soldier:

 

[Garry]

null,

Had to re-write this post too many times, so I‘m going to stop trying.

I suggest you take a longer look at the various party platforms.

Cheers-garry

 

[nULL]

garry, it‘s amazing how fast a party platform disintegrates, or at the very least "reforms" to meet the current situation of the day. i know that the conservatives would be able to increase military spending by cutting social programs which the liberals have tended to, but at what voting cost? if they really want to be an effective government, they‘ll need to form a majority government, and to do THAT they‘re going to have to compromise their traditional role as a truly "right-of-centre" party that the old reform party was.

my opinion is that if the conservatives get into power, we‘re going to see a paul-martin like government. certain attributes normally associated with right-wing parties mixed with a social net with some cuts in it (also like martin) to keep large numbers of canadians from going and storming parliament hill.

 

[Infanteer]

I‘m inclined to agree with nULL. There is nothing really hitting us hard domestically to prompt any political party to rock the boat if elected. Since memories of 9/11 have taken a back seat to sports for mainstream society, no one really seems to care about the fact that we are still at war.