Government hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

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....

 

[Brad Sallows]

I doubt the age of "peace through prosperity" is over. Governments need to stop leeching prosperity, so that it can work its magic.

I also doubt that it's mere coincidence that as prosperity takes a kick from "events" (eg. pandemic and pandemic mitigation), peace also takes a kick.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Military recruiting issues may be ‘more serious’ than senior ranks letting on: Hillier - National | Globalnews.ca

Until the recruitment issue is addressed, the Canadian Forces will continue to be "in a huge amount of trouble," retired Gen. Rick Hillier warned.

globalnews.ca

The Big Cod exposing the ugly truth.

 

[Quirky]

Military recruiting issues may be ‘more serious’ than senior ranks letting on: Hillier - National | Globalnews.ca

Until the recruitment issue is addressed, the Canadian Forces will continue to be "in a huge amount of trouble," retired Gen. Rick Hillier warned.

globalnews.ca

The Big Cod exposing the ugly truth.

Ah yes, the sexual misconduct and right wing extremist boogyman. That is part of the problem, but those things exist in every large company, you just don’t hear about it.

Lack of housing on bases, pay, old garbage equipment and lack of purpose and direction are the biggest problems.

 

[WestIsle]

Ah yes, the sexual misconduct and right wing extremist boogyman. That is part of the problem, but those things exist in every large company, you just don’t hear about it.

Lack of housing on bases, pay, old garbage equipment and lack of purpose and direction are the biggest problems.

A huge issue the chain seems to be ignorant of is the posting system messing up the workup cycle. Officers rolling into platoons and companies for less than the workup cycle has led many units to be on perpetual workup for years to get people their checks in the box while also never deploying themselves. There is too much demand and pressure to produce for NDHQ and its burning out the line units not to mention what its doing to the officer corps.

 

[Weinie]

A huge issue the chain seems to be ignorant of is the posting system messing up the workup cycle. Officers rolling into platoons and companies for less than the workup cycle has led many units to be on perpetual workup for years to get people their checks in the box while also never deploying themselves. There is too much demand and pressure to produce for NDHQ and its burning out the line units not to mention what its doing to the officer corps.

I am just glad I retired end of May.

 

[dimsum]

There is too much demand and pressure to produce for NDHQ the GoC and its burning out the line units not to mention what its doing to the officer corps.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Ah yes, the sexual misconduct and right wing extremist boogyman. That is part of the problem, but those things exist in every large company, you just don’t hear about it.

Lack of housing on bases, pay, old garbage equipment and lack of purpose and direction are the biggest problems.

There you have it ... but that lack of purpose is NOT the CF's fault; nor is it the Government of Canada's fault. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his team have asked Canadians, over and over again, what they want ... and they never, ever say - not more than about 10% of them, anyw3ay - that they went more more money or effort or anything else spent on defence.

The people of Canada - your friends and neighbours, maybe even your family members - think that the CF is a waste, a useless bunch of layabouts who are constantly demanding new "toys for the boys" but rarely do anything useful.

I am pretty sure that Pierre Poilievre's Conservatives have received the same message as have Trudeau's Liberals: defence doesn't matter.

Until Canadians change their minds there will be no change. What will make them change their minds?

 

[dimsum]

I am pretty sure that Pierre Poilievre's Conservatives have received the same message as have Trudeau's Liberals: defence doesn't matter.

Correct. If the CPC wins next election, DND will not get a windfall of money because frankly, nobody cares.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

A huge issue the chain seems to be ignorant of is the posting system messing up the workup cycle. Officers rolling into platoons and companies for less than the workup cycle has led many units to be on perpetual workup for years to get people their checks in the box while also never deploying themselves. There is too much demand and pressure to produce for NDHQ and its burning out the line units not to mention what its doing to the officer corps.

I find as much as we preach the "4 kinds of officers" thing as a deterrent, we forget that is it's also very much a real aspect of employing people to their strengths.

Some people are great as Platoon/Troop Commanders, but would suck hard as a Staff officer at the Unit or Command level; that's OK

Some people are amazing, intellectual Staff Officers that have the charisma of a wet sock; that's OK.

Some people have the project management skills to see an idea sprout wings and take off, but would buckle at the weight of sub-unit or unit command; That's OK

Even with "succession planning" to identify our star streamers; we need to see where a person's strengths are, where their own desires are, and employ them in a useful and rewarding environment.

"Breadth of experience" needs to become a sentence that is verboten for 80 percent of the CAF: you cannot post people into character, nor can you post them into intellect or organizational skills.

A quote from the kids movie "Kung Fu Panda" actually fits well for what I see our major downfall is:

"You can choose where you plant that seed, but no matter what you do, that seed will grow to be a peach tree. You may wish for an apple or an orange, but you will get a peach. But if you nurture it, it will grow and bear fruit, even if it's not the kind you wanted."

If we as the CAF stopped trying to believe we can have an "all singing, all dancing" member/officer by posting them every 3 years somewhere our of their depth, maybe more folks would want to stay on instead of picking a civilian workplace that let's them stay in the lane they want to.

 

[dimsum]

If we as the CAF stopped trying to believe we can have an "all singing, all dancing" member/officer by posting them every 3 years somewhere our of their depth, maybe more folks would want to stay on instead of picking a civilian workplace that let's them stay in the lane they want to.

I agree in principle that people are better suited to some things, but in many cases people don't really know how suited they are (or aren't) until you put them in those positions, sometimes with some stress to see how they do.

Example: How would anyone know whether they are a good project officer if they never get put into a project? Having a bit of staff work at the tactical level doesn't really translate well.

This is a personal one because I didn't think I'd like project/staff work, but I found out I really did.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Correct. If the CPC wins next election, DND will not get a windfall of money because frankly, nobody cares.

Not to mention the piggybank is empty. It took 3-4 PM's to pay off JT dad's debt, I suspect the cycle will repeat.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

I agree in principle that people are better suited to some things, but in many cases people don't really know how suited they are (or aren't) until you put them in those positions, sometimes with some stress to see how they do.

Example: How would anyone know whether they are a good project officer if they never get put into a project? Having a bit of staff work at the tactical level doesn't really translate well.

This is a personal one because I didn't think I'd like project/staff work, but I found out I really did.

I can agree with that as well, and I believe that comes from true mentorship and career management as opposed to the current position management we currently have.

 

[Good2Golf]

Not to mention the piggybank is empty. It took 3-4 PM's to pay off JT dad's debt, I suspect the cycle will repeat.

Probably 5-6 PMs to pay off Junior’s sunny ways…

 

[Kirkhill]

A huge issue the chain seems to be ignorant of is the posting system messing up the workup cycle. Officers rolling into platoons and companies for less than the workup cycle has led many units to be on perpetual workup for years to get people their checks in the box while also never deploying themselves. There is too much demand and pressure to produce for NDHQ and its burning out the line units not to mention what its doing to the officer corps.

I hear that a lot. But is that a CAF thing or an Army thing?

The system seems to work fine to sustain a Naval Force continuously operating out of two ports, an Air Force, also on continuous operations, the majority of the purple trades (those not attached to the army), the Special Forces and a permanently staffed NDHQ.

So the Army (and its Reserves and its training system) are the odd men out.

Some nasty and inconsiderate souls could ask the question does National Defence require an Army?

 

[KevinB]

I hear that a lot. But is that a CAF thing or an Army thing?

The system seems to work fine to sustain a Naval Force continuously operating out of two ports, an Air Force, also on continuous operations, the majority of the purple trades (those not attached to the army), the Special Forces and a permanently staffed NDHQ.

So the Army (and its Reserves and its training system) are the odd men out.

Some nasty and inconsiderate souls could ask the question does National Defence require an Army?

I think you are missing the effects on the RCN and RCAF.
SOF doesn’t have those issues as at user end the postings aren’t occurring. Staff rotates but the deployable forces are fairly isolated.

 

[Kirkhill]

I find as much as we preach the "4 kinds of officers" thing as a deterrent, we forget that is it's also very much a real aspect of employing people to their strengths.

Some people are great as Platoon/Troop Commanders, but would suck hard as a Staff officer at the Unit or Command level; that's OK

Some people are amazing, intellectual Staff Officers that have the charisma of a wet sock; that's OK.

Some people have the project management skills to see an idea sprout wings and take off, but would buckle at the weight of sub-unit or unit command; That's OK

Even with "succession planning" to identify our star streamers; we need to see where a person's strengths are, where their own desires are, and employ them in a useful and rewarding environment.

"Breadth of experience" needs to become a sentence that is verboten for 80 percent of the CAF: you cannot post people into character, nor can you post them into intellect or organizational skills.

A quote from the kids movie "Kung Fu Panda" actually fits well for what I see our major downfall is:

"You can choose where you plant that seed, but no matter what you do, that seed will grow to be a peach tree. You may wish for an apple or an orange, but you will get a peach. But if you nurture it, it will grow and bear fruit, even if it's not the kind you wanted."

If we as the CAF stopped trying to believe we can have an "all singing, all dancing" member/officer by posting them every 3 years somewhere our of their depth, maybe more folks would want to stay on instead of picking a civilian workplace that let's them stay in the lane they want to.

The key to everything is recognizing, in your lingo, that there are, and always will be, four types of officers (and troops), and then exploiting them for what they CAN do. That means not putting everyone through the same career programme. No company, successful or otherwise, would consider trying to make all its mechanics payroll clerks for a season.

 

[dapaterson]

The system seems to work fine to sustain a Naval Force continuously operating out of two ports, an Air Force, also on continuous operations, the majority of the purple trades (those not attached to the army), the Special Forces and a permanently staffed NDHQ.

Wicked sense of humour there.

 

[Kirkhill]

I agree in principle that people are better suited to some things, but in many cases people don't really know how suited they are (or aren't) until you put them in those positions, sometimes with some stress to see how they do.

Example: How would anyone know whether they are a good project officer if they never get put into a project? Having a bit of staff work at the tactical level doesn't really translate well.

This is a personal one because I didn't think I'd like project/staff work, but I found out I really did.

In non-military terms you give people a shot at small scale projects and see how they handle them with coaching. If they are good, or even just show promise, you give them another one. Some of them you turn into full time project managers. Some get further promotion. Others get relegated to Special Projects For Life.

And some fitters never leave the shop floor.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I hear that a lot. But is that a CAF thing or an Army thing?

The system seems to work fine to sustain a Naval Force continuously operating out of two ports, an Air Force, also on continuous operations, the majority of the purple trades (those not attached to the army), the Special Forces and a permanently staffed NDHQ.

So the Army (and its Reserves and its training system) are the odd men people out.

Some nasty and inconsiderate souls could ask the question does National Defence require an Army?

There, FTFY

 

[FJAG]

I am pretty sure that Pierre Poilievre's Conservatives have received the same message as have Trudeau's Liberals: defence doesn't matter.

Interesting point.

While the CPC's Policy Declaration states that:

171. ... A Conservative Government will work towards spending at least the NATO recommended two (2) percent of 67 our GDP on National Defence

It also lists 23 policy categories of which "National Defence and Security" is number 22. That basically tells me how far down the line and out of sight and out of mind Defence is even for the CPC.

If that isn't bad enough, there are only eight policy statements under that topic. There were seven before the last National Convention when this one was added:

172. National Standard of Training for PTSD Service Dog Trainers The Conservative Party will create a National Standard of Training for PTSD Service Dog Trainers for Veterans. This standard must be developed to include a standard for PTSD Service Dogs and a standard for training the recipient veteran.

I don't want to be overly critical because there are some good, and long standing policy statements in there, but the point is that there hasn't been much recent debate or promulgation of any serious defence or security issues or initiatives. Just the occasional regurgitation of the usual motherhood things which didn't get fixed under Harper either.