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]

Luckily, we still issue bayonets

Damn. Think I'm gonna hafta watch that again tonight.

 

[markppcli]

And sadly our allies already think we are a joke. According to a friend who was over with 2VP this past year, our allies didn't have nice things to say, and our own troops nearly got them selves killed multiple times from safety violations. Long story short our reputation has been harmed.

Interesting. I know the Spanish generally don’t like us but that’s typically because we expect them to work past 5 pm at night in the field.

 

[dimsum]

and our own troops nearly got them selves killed multiple times from safety violations.

So, will there be safety investigations? If that happened in the RCAF you best believe that there would be investigations.

 

[Maxman1]

Not a supporter of the Liberals, but in fairness they've recently gotten the military RPAS/JUSTAS, the F-35, new frigates, CC-330s and P8s. That's actually not bad when you think about relevant kit being purchased.

I tend to think that perhaps the problems that the army is having is that it hasn't gotten their own house in order and other than GBAD and a bunch of UORs needs to really figure out what it needs to be to stay relevant in the eyes of government. The Latvia mission seems like a good stepping stone if it plays its cards right.

A broken clock is right twice a day.

 

[MilEME09]

So, will there be safety investigations? If that happened in the RCAF you best believe that there would be investigations.

Second hand info but sounds like majority of incidents got swept away quietly

 

[YZT580]

Second hand info but sounds like majority of incidents got swept away quietly

that works until there is a ramp ceremony.

 

[daftandbarmy]

So, will there be safety investigations? If that happened in the RCAF you best believe that there would be investigations.

Hundreds of exhausted youngsters doing live fire with small arms, tanks, and indirect fire, while the engineers are blowing obstacles, at night in the rain...

... what could go wrong?

 

[KevinB]

Hundreds of exhausted youngsters doing live fire with small arms, tanks, and indirect fire, while the engineers are blowing obstacles, at night in the rain...

... what could go wrong?

Still doesn’t mean any potential incidents shouldn’t be investigated to try to mitigate risk in the future.

 

[KevinB]

Still doesn’t mean any potential incidents shouldn’t be investigated to try to mitigate risk in the future.

To quote myself.

To often Militaries try to either ignore or place blame for incidents. You can run an investigation into an incident simply to try to find causes that can be mitigated in the future. There isn’t a need to find a specific person or people to blame - but generally that is how things go.

Quite often it isn’t one specific thing that causes incidents, it’s a sequence of events that if one portion was omitted then nothing serious would have likely happened.

Quite often Investigations get into searching for the ‘root cause’, failing to see the forest from the trees. One can also miss the entire root system is rotten that way as well…

 

[dapaterson]

The difference between the Army and the RCAF when it comes to safety is that the Army is looking to fix the blame, while the RCAF is looking to fix the problem.

 

[MJP]

While I have no doubt there are issues and always will be, the fact we have gone down an army.ca rabbithole based on anecdotes from a friend of a friend is hilarious. We have no idea what actually happened, how it was investigated but here we are trying to drown people to prove they are witches. Peak Army.ca

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

And it was a nice way of keeping people from flying to the UK to stroke their ego, I mean compete in the Cambrian.

Hey I'm in the room!

We all know that’s not true. Our procurement system is a mess.

Retention is a problematic issue, but I can tell you from personal experience that no one likes going to Latvia and looking like a third rate army.

Look? We are a 3rd rate Army now.

 

[Rifleman62]

The difference between the Army and the RCAF when it comes to safety is that the Army is looking to fix the blame to lowest ranking person., while the RCAF is looking to fix the problem.

 

[daftandbarmy]

The difference between the Army and the RCAF when it comes to safety is that the Army is looking to fix the blame, while the RCAF is looking to fix the problem.

Now, now...

... I, for one, have witnessed negligence of the highest order causing in injuries, resulting from bad decisions by the most senior people, that weren't investigated...

 

[KevinB]

I tend to believe it’s more a middle rank. As no one believes it when a Pte is thrown under the bus.

Throw a Major and a WO under the bus for a BGen and LCol who were actually culpable…

I mean historically speaking.

 

[CountDC]

Not a supporter of the Liberals, but in fairness they've recently gotten the military RPAS/JUSTAS, the F-35, new frigates, CC-330s and P8s. That's actually not bad when you think about relevant kit being purchased.

I tend to think that perhaps the problems that the army is having is that it hasn't gotten their own house in order and other than GBAD and a bunch of UORs needs to really figure out what it needs to be to stay relevant in the eyes of government. The Latvia mission seems like a good stepping stone if it plays its cards right.

Is this the RPAS you refer to ttps://www.c4isrnet.com/unmanned/2023/11/23/canada-delays-36-billion-reaper-buy-until-drones-can-work-in-arctic/

Wasn't the F-35 on order when the Liberals took office? Isn't that the deal we paid big penalties on when they cancelled it and Trudeau said we would never buy them?

New frigates are not a given yet as the first isn't due until 2030 and the last in 2040 (or did that change again). Not bad for a project that started in 2008 to replace ships that were supposed to be retired around 2010. Good thing the Liberals changed track in 2016 deciding to buy off-the-shelf design and saving 2 years then extended the new bidding deadlines a few times to umm lose that 2 years savings.

330's and P8s don't know about. Are they really the only plane the CAF could use for that role or should there be a bidding process instead of sole source?

Basically I don't trust any party when it comes to defence spending as we are always the punching bag for them. Wouldn't be surprised if we received an F-35 today that it would somehow show up in the Ukraine next week with the Liberals going "we don't know how it happened and will investigate what went wrong with the CAF" and then some low to mid level officer with an NCM or two is offered as sacrifices.

 

[QV]

How much of our current problems as a country are a result of an effective and prolonged war of strategic doctrine executed by our adversaries. Economic warfare, social warfare, psychological warfare... all of this degrades us steadily. Look no further than common sense to identify which areas we are being deliberately and effectively targeted in.

 

[markppcli]

Is this the RPAS you refer to ttps://www.c4isrnet.com/unmanned/2023/11/23/canada-delays-36-billion-reaper-buy-until-drones-can-work-in-arctic/

Wasn't the F-35 on order when the Liberals took office? Isn't that the deal we paid big penalties on when they cancelled it and Trudeau said we would never buy them?

New frigates are not a given yet as the first isn't due until 2030 and the last in 2040 (or did that change again). Not bad for a project that started in 2008 to replace ships that were supposed to be retired around 2010. Good thing the Liberals changed track in 2016 deciding to buy off-the-shelf design and saving 2 years then extended the new bidding deadlines a few times to umm lose that 2 years savings.

330's and P8s don't know about. Are they really the only plane the CAF could use for that role or should there be a bidding process instead of sole source?

Basically I don't trust any party when it comes to defence spending as we are always the punching bag for them. Wouldn't be surprised if we received an F-35 today that it would somehow show up in the Ukraine next week with the Liberals going "we don't know how it happened and will investigate what went wrong with the CAF" and then some low to mid level officer with an NCM or two is offered as sacrifices.

The 330s and P8s are massive wins for the CAF. Sole sourcing is frankly the most efficient way we can procure anything, every bidding process turns into a legal shit show while we consistently try and “Canadianize” everything at great cost.

 

[MilEME09]

While I have no doubt there are issues and always will be, the fact we have gone down an army.ca rabbithole based on anecdotes from a friend of a friend is hilarious. We have no idea what actually happened, how it was investigated but here we are trying to drown people to prove they are witches. Peak Army.ca

Respectfully, you may call is hearsay, but when a trusted friend and respected NCO, who's entire civilian career is safety investigations tells me things he reports are being swept under the rug. I'll believe him, this wasn't a my friends uncles second cousin story but a first hand account.

 

[dapaterson]

The 330 was not a sole source. It was an open competition, and one bidder failed to meet the qualification standard.

For the P8, the market survey identified that there was only one aircraft that met the specification. That is not considered sole source, either.