• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Government hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have long said that you could fund the CAF to 4 percent of GDP, but we would still lag behind in NATO and be much the same where we are.

It's never the money, it's politics. It's procedures. It's the pork-barreling in our defence spending that makes us a paper tiger in NATO.

My only hope in all of this for the CAF and the GoC, whatever the political stripe that may be, is that it will rouse them out of the "Peace Dividend" slumber. The world has been unstable since 1945. We have used geography, proximity, and association as a Defence Policy ever since. ICBMs don't care how close to the U.S. or how far from Russia/China we are.

Don't give us a dime more, but let us spend money on defence like it matters. The fact we follow the same rules for purchasing a fighter aircraft as we do for buying office furniture for a Service Canada office is disgraceful. Don't treat defense procurement as a stimulus package for Canadian Industry. There I said it.

We spend so much money, time, and effort trying to get that money to stay in Canada; be it by awarding contracts to companies with no capability to produce items without first "retooling" and"developing the production lines", or by hamstringing perfectly competent and competitive bidders by forcing the project to be made in St. Margaret de Poutain de Champignon, QC because the ruling government either lost the seat in the election, or won it with promises.

We spend so much money and staff hours jumping through TBS regulations that are great for other departments, but are terrible for defence procurement. Some items you have to sole source, because there are technologies and capabilities no one else makes. By doing the bid process, you get companies clamoring for a project they can't deliver on, but because they tick the bright boxes on the score sheet....

I truly and honestly belief we need to split from PSPC and legislate that its not beholden to TBS, only to the PBO/PCO. The guiding principles of this new Defence Procurement department should be "Off the shelf, from somewhere else" if there isn't an industry in Canada.

BOOTFORGEN has demonstrated how well we do when we are able to actually get what we need, instead of lining the pockets of a Canadian company that got lucky.

That, but with tanks, fighters, ships, weapons systems....
 
Put it this way….if an RCAF Spitfire that had flown air patrol over Normandy during D-Day was to fly, the same duration as Canada’s CF-18s have been to date, that Spitfire would have still been flying in front line service after we had received our first CF-18s…
Then again, if an RCAF Spitfire was compared to USAF KC-135 or B-52, they would be still flying. :sneaky:
 
Put it this way….if an RCAF Spitfire that had flown air patrol over Normandy during D-Day was to fly, the same duration as Canada’s CF-18s have been to date, that Spitfire would have still been flying in front line service after we had received our first CF-18s…
Then again, if an RCAF Spitfire was compared to USAF KC-135 or B-52, they would be still flying. :sneaky:

Or a Dak . . .


Douglas Dakota Mk. III(Serial No. ), FZ671, C/N 12256, later (Serial No. 12944), in the markings of No. 437 Squadron, RCAF, coded Z-2B, painted as a Second World War camouflaged transport.

FZ671 was delivered to the No. 48 Squadron, RAF on 4 Feb 1944. This Dakota made at least two flights into Arnhem for Operation Market Garden. The first one was on 17 Jul 1944. The Pilot Officer on the first lift was Flight Lieutenant A.C. Blythe, RCAF, who went on to win a DFC. It also went in on the third lift on 19 Sep 1944, with Pilot Officer A.M. Smith.
It joined 4No. 37 Squadron, RCAF in Sep 1945 and also served with Nos. 426, 429, 435, and 437 Squadrons, No. 25 Ambulance, and No. 1 Air Navigation School through the years as FZ671. Its Serial Number changed to 12944 with the Canadian Armed Forces in June 1970. It was transferred to No. 429 Squadron at Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, in March 1975, and then to No. 429 Communications Squadron in Winnipeg, Manitoba, from 1979 to 1980. 12944 was struck off strength with the RCAF on 14 Apr 1989. It now resides in the Heritage Air Park as Dakota EZ761.
 
The issue with Defence Spending is the fiscal pressures will be exacerbated by Inflation. Defence Inflation is also more pronounced than regular inflation so the problems are magnified in a hyper-inflationary environment.

The Parliamentary Budget Officer warned about this problem 10 years ago. I will dig up the report (our Govt's archiving is pretty bad).

And they just put out another update:


Key highlights:

We underspent each of the 4 years since SSE was published

Inflation is expected to cause additional pressures going forward

Screenshot_20220318-080534_Adobe Acrobat.jpg
 
Last edited:
The issue with Defence Spending is the fiscal pressures will be exasperated by Inflation. Defence Inflation is also more pronounced than regular inflation so the problems are magnified in a hyper-inflationary environment.

The Parliamentary Budget Officer warned about this problem 10 years ago. I will dig up the report (our Govt's archiving is pretty bad).

And they just put out another update:


Key highlights:

We underspent each of the 4 years since SSE was published

Inflation is expected to cause additional pressures going forward

View attachment 69549
The word you're looking for is exacerbated.
 
A bit of optimism ...
... Defence Minister Anita Anand said this week that she will be tabling “aggressive” options to significantly boost Canada’s rate of defence spending once the cabinet starts planning its spring budget. Depending on how it goes, this could spell the biggest surge in Canadian defence spending in more than 50 years.

Canada, of course, has one of the most lacklustre defence spending records in NATO. While members of the alliance are expected to spend 2 per cent of national GDP on defence, Canada only spends about 1.4 per cent. Speaking to CBC this week, Anand said she was drafting proposals under which Canada could hit or exceed the 2 per cent baseline. That would be roughly an extra $10 billion to spend on the military each year.

Pessimists, however, will argue that the Canadian Armed Forces’ problem is not merely one of spending, given that it can’t seem to spend the money it already has. Last year, for instance, the Department of Defence failed to spend $1.2 billion of its allocated budget, continuing a trend of lapsed defence spending that has been occurring quite regularly since the government of Stephen Harper.

The Canadian military also has a penchant to make procurement far more expensive and painful than it needs to be. We’ve brought this up before, but when the British Army replaced its standard-issue pistols in 2010, it took them three years and $14.5 million. For the Canadian Army, replacing the exact same pistol has required 15 years and more than $100 million.

We also happen to have
one of the most top-heavy militaries in NATO. Despite an ever-shrinking pool of enlisted personnel, Canada retains about as many generals and admirals as at the height of the Cold War ...
We'll see ...
 
A bit of optimism ...

We'll see ...
I’ve been hinting that Anand is laying the groundwork for an increase to or close to 2%.

What remains to be seen is how much of this will be real tangible things or more smoke and mirrors.

With Force reconstitution there is a golden opportunity to make some real institutional changes.
 
Post Somalia orders to shrink to about 65 GOFOs,then accelerating growth starring under Hillier, hitting its stride under Vance.

From an organizational norms perspective, a lot of it reads as Vance using new positions and promotions as a tool to keep subordinates happy and preventing them from working to undermine him.

Frankly, given the CAF's operational outputs, three Cpls in a trenchcoat would probably be sufficient.
 
Post Somalia orders to shrink to about 65 GOFOs,then accelerating growth starring under Hillier, hitting its stride under Vance.

From an organizational norms perspective, a lot of it reads as Vance using new positions and promotions as a tool to keep subordinates happy and preventing them from working to undermine him.

Frankly, given the CAF's operational outputs, three Cpls in a trenchcoat would probably be sufficient.
I for one always thought the CDS should have been a MG, with CCA, CRCN and CRCAF a 1* - a few OUTCAN 1*'s for a total of 6 max.
Makes it easier to cull Col's for 1* positions and the 1*'s should be keen to prove they should be the next 2* CDS.
 
I for one always thought the CDS should have been a MG, with CCA, CRCN and CRCAF a 1* - a few OUTCAN 1*'s for a total of 6 max.
Makes it easier to cull Col's for 1* positions and the 1*'s should be keen to prove they should be the next 2* CDS.
Yeah but then we have an even quieter voice than the 3* NZ Chief of Defence Force :ROFLMAO:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top