• 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....
 
I think what need is to have 75% of our enrollees do short contracts, meaning 1 engagement, and be very selective about who we offer a career too.

I also think if you want to shrink the full time force that's going to have to come from the Army as the RCN and RCAF are too technical and operational to rely on part timers for full time commitment.
3 - 5 years. If they stay after that then great.
Without statements to 'do stuff' by all parties, how else would you run an election campaign? 'Vote for us - we're really nice?'
They do have a basic statment talking about Northern Canadian Defence.
 
How do we get these conversations where the solution to all CAF problems encompasses both increased retention and accelerated attrition?

It wouldn't be Army.ca if we didn't circle argue our own points lol. C'mon man!

Fiddler On The Roof Broadway GIF by GREAT PERFORMANCES | PBS
 
I'd argue that point #2 is directly related to the political directives from the previous Federal Government. This item could be turned around by a simple change in policy with a new Federal Government.

Is Carney the guy that's going to steer the ship to starboard and get us back to the center?
 
if they get creative accounting and include the coast guard 2.5

There's an actual definition for what counts and doesn't for NATO. And for the CG, it's the portion that can operate with/under the navy overseas. It's going to be hard to be creative enough for others to buy random claims of capability.

I do believe in a major decapitation of the headquarters in Ottawa including GOFOS, Cols, LCols, CWOs and MWOs and civilian equivalents and the multitude of regulations, policies etc that they are managing. Last time I looked we had some 8,000 of those for a total force of roughly 61,000 full timers. We have something like 13,500 commissioned officers for 47,500 NCMs. That just strikes me as too many although every position is undoubtedly completely justifiable to those working in the heart of the beast.

A huge part of why HQs and Staffs have grown is the proliferation of decision-making and the large areas the forces they lead cover. What was the frontage of Division in WWII vs today? What do commanders have to consider that that they did not back then? There was a Modern War Institute podcast on this topic from a few months ago. Good listen.

 
Unpopular opinion: Cpl should not be upper middle class pay rates.

Even more unpopular opinion (for this forum): you get what you pay for (in quality and quantity).

Don't want to pay more? Better be improving on every other issue on the list. As MilEME09 alludes to, that pay its needed to ensure appropriate quality of life that will recruit and retain enough numbers. If you don't want to pay more, you gotta fix all the rest.
 
Even more unpopular opinion (for this forum): you get what you pay for (in quality and quantity).

Don't want to pay more? Better be improving on every other issue on the list. As MilEME09 alludes to, that pay its needed to ensure appropriate quality of life that will recruit and retain enough numbers. If you don't want to pay more, you gotta fix all the rest.
Compare CAF Techs at Cpl to their civilian equivalents.

Then let's talk about CAF pay.
 
Then they should not be paying upper middle class housing rates on base

I would say implement a housing allowance at each base and make everyone live on the economy, be it rent or own. Monthly rate based on local prices adjusted yearly.
Everyone gets the same, from Pte to LCol. Here is a $1000/month tax free allowance to live in Bloggins Lake, Alberta, stay xx kms within the base.

Shut down CFHA completely and sell off all permanent base housing.

How many base locations couldn’t support everyone living on the economy….eventually?
 
Compare CAF Techs at Cpl to their civilian equivalents.
Plumber and Heating Tech, max Cpl incentive 77k per year plus maybe some TD.
Friend who is plumber/gas fitter without any supervisory responsibilities working doing locates and inspecting compressor stations, unionized, holidays, sick pay, etc. $44/hour 91k per year before overtime or training courses.

Your point?

Edit: In Medicine Hat, a place that sucks for paying trades well unless you're self employed.
 
Plumber and Heating Tech, max Cpl incentive 77k per year plus maybe some TD.
Friend who is plumber/gas fitter without any supervisory responsibilities working doing locates and inspecting compressor stations, unionized, holidays, sick pay, etc. $44/hour 91k per year before overtime or training courses.

Your point?

Edit: In Medicine Hat, a place that sucks for paying trades well unless you're self employed.
The CAF Cpl gets 15% employer contributions to retirement, plus paid training and ongoing paid professional development.
 
The CAF Cpl gets 15% employer contributions to retirement, plus paid training and ongoing paid professional development.
Yep, he gets employer contribution pension, just spent a week in Edmonton at an industrial safety conference.
 
I would say implement a housing allowance at each base and make everyone live on the economy, be it rent or own. Monthly rate based on local prices adjusted yearly.
Everyone gets the same, from Pte to LCol. Here is a $1000/month tax free allowance to live in Bloggins Lake, Alberta, stay xx kms within the base.
Which would just see skyrocketing rental rates in those areas, as well as market jumps for buying homes.
Shut down CFHA completely and sell off all permanent base housing.
Not everyone is financially independent enough to buy a home, and with deployments etc having housing available ensures that you don’t see young families out in the streets.

ESQ’s and PMQ’s also provide options for divorced members who may or may not have dependents.
How many base locations couldn’t support everyone living on the economy….eventually?
Support or offer available affordable options?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top