• 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....
 
Hey - don't try to push that onto another community.

Wow that is a perfect idea. The Kingfisher to MPA. Similar aircraft used by other countries. No need to buy from Boeing. No need to buy weapons for it. So get that in the minister ear. Move some of the equipment from the CP140. This the best idea I have seen in a long time. Liberals will love it. Many stones at once. New planes for surveillance. No weapons. That is always a good thing in Justin world. Looks to be doing something when doing nothing or even less. Plus there are those RAAF C-130J coming available. It could be prefect. I get excited thinking about it.

All boxes checked.
 
Wow that is a perfect idea. The Kingfisher to MPA. Similar aircraft used by other countries. No need to buy from Boeing. No need to buy weapons for it. So get that in the minister ear. Move some of the equipment from the CP140. This the best idea I have seen in a long time. Liberals will love it. Many stones at once. New planes for surveillance. No weapons. That is always a good thing in Justin world. Looks to be doing something when doing nothing or even less. Plus there are those RAAF C-130J coming available. It could be prefect. I get excited thinking about it.

All boxes checked.
I'm not sure whether I'm happy that Canadians at least hear of the CP-140 Aurora, even though it's called a "surveillance aircraft" in most media, or that I'm sad because it is still essentially an anti-submarine platform that also does surveillance.

An ASW aircraft can do surveillance. A surveillance aircraft can't necessarily do ASW.
 
I'm not sure whether I'm happy that Canadians at least hear of the CP-140 Aurora, even though it's called a "surveillance aircraft" in most media, or that I'm sad because it is still essentially an anti-submarine platform that also does surveillance.

An ASW aircraft can do surveillance. A surveillance aircraft can't necessarily do ASW.
My favourite is when the media calls it a "spy" plane. Like did when it was tasked to the sandbox etc. And they did call it that too.

Spy plane most people think SR71 or U2 and then the picture is a 1950's style converted prop airliner......and think what is that?
 
Any informed thoughts on what MND is announcing tomorrow in Halifax? P-8s? 😉
Could it be the finalized contract for the F35s? The GoC did say that would be done before the end of the year.... I would normally expect this at an airbase, but with the Halifax International Security Forum currently ongoing, it would probably have more impact with the attendees if such a large and significant purchase was announced at that venue.
 
Well here is the big Halifax announcement. Basically, an office. LOL.

Look to be doing something but in reality, doing less than nothing! Liberals are awesome!

On second thought...spend money on offices and civil service is very important coming vote time. So success!

 
Well here is the big Halifax announcement. Basically, an office. LOL.

Look to be doing something but in reality, doing less than nothing! Liberals are awesome!

On second thought...spend money on offices and civil service is very important coming vote time. So success!

Not even an office. Just a PROPOSAL to build an office...which hasn't been approved by NATO yet.
 
Well here is the big Halifax announcement. Basically, an office. LOL.

Look to be doing something but in reality, doing less than nothing! Liberals are awesome!

On second thought...spend money on offices and civil service is very important coming vote time. So success!

I think you may be surprised how much NATO consists of "offices".

Also, from the media advisory, NATO Chair of the Military Committee was also going to be there. Of course the announcement was going to be NATO-centric.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top