• 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....
 
One sentence in that article strikes me as interesting - the overall budget will be higher. So will it be at least $900M higher per year?
 
Man I can’t handle cuts anymore. Every day I try and stay motivated and it’s just not working anymore.

I’ve stopped GAF about my secondary duties months ago, it’s wonderful. Takes 5minutes and a few emails out of my day, then I move on. Need to be realistic with how much you can accomplish in one work day.

The only people who will remember you staying and going home late is your family.
 
DND's budget cut is a given, here's the CBC increase of $100m https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cbc-funding-st-onge-1.7129784
Media should not be state funded, period.

(Sorry, I mean taxpayer funded - because it sounds so much better...)


We have all kinds of problems that we could fix in a fairly straightforward manner.

Giving the CBC $100M MORE of taxpayer dollars just so they can lie to me about pretty much everything & rarely let the same public that funds them to even comment on the stories they choose to follow...when they already have an annual budget of over a billion dollars?

"It's okay Freeland, save your strength...I'll go punch myself in the stomach today."
 
Media should not be state funded, period.

(Sorry, I mean taxpayer funded - because it sounds so much better...)


We have all kinds of problems that we could fix in a fairly straightforward manner.

Giving the CBC $100M MORE of taxpayer dollars just so they can lie to me about pretty much everything & rarely let the same public that funds them to even comment on the stories they choose to follow...when they already have an annual budget of over a billion dollars?

"It's okay Freeland, save your strength...I'll go punch myself in the stomach today."
There are taxpayer funded media outlets around the world that are, in my mind, worth it. BBC, ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation), DW in Germany, even the NPR in the US.

The problem with the CBC (TV) is that since we’re so close to the US, historically we were split between watching Canadian or (more often than not) American networks before the rise of cable and later the Internet. The Brits, Aussies, etc didn’t have easy access to US shows so it gave their homegrown media more space to flourish. Also, they don’t have ads.

The Aus Broadcasting Corporation still has, in my mind, a genius idea. They have a radio channel called Triple J (JJJ) which is a national no-commercials channel that is music-oriented towards folks 18-35. The frequencies are fairly close together so regardless of where you are in Australia, JJJ will be roughly around the same place. They also had huge concerts featuring Australian talent and really great shows where they brought in international stars…all taxpayer funded. This is what CBC Radio 3 should have been.
 
There are taxpayer funded media outlets around the world that are, in my mind, worth it. BBC, ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation), DW in Germany, even the NPR in the US.

The problem with the CBC (TV) is that since we’re so close to the US, historically we were split between watching Canadian or (more often than not) American networks before the rise of cable and later the Internet. The Brits, Aussies, etc didn’t have easy access to US shows so it gave their homegrown media more space to flourish. Also, they don’t have ads.

The Aus Broadcasting Corporation still has, in my mind, a genius idea. They have a radio channel called Triple J (JJJ) which is a national no-commercials channel that is music-oriented towards folks 18-35. The frequencies are fairly close together so regardless of where you are in Australia, JJJ will be roughly around the same place. They also had huge concerts featuring Australian talent and really great shows where they brought in international stars…all taxpayer funded. This is what CBC Radio 3 should have been.
Here is a good primer from HUB Dialogues on a potential reason why our Cultural Industry seems to suck so bad.

 
Some much needed heating and cooling upgrades coming to base Edmonton. Eco friendly or not, some of those older buildings like 222 needed a HVAC over haul 20 years ago

 
Base housing upgrades/expansion would be a no-brainer for the government I'd think. Would count toward our 2% GDP commitment. Spending would be 100% Canadian industry. Would aid in retention. Would relieve housing pressure on neighbouring communities. Wins for everybody.
 
It seems that the LPC are spending more on the CAF after all ;)


Cost of Liberal government's defence plan has jumped by $50B, PBO says​

Projected cost of new equipment over 20-year period has risen to nearly $215 billion, assessment shows​


The cost of the Liberal government's nearly seven-year-old marquee defence plan has jumped by over $50 billion — mostly due to anticipated work on modernizing continental defence and delays in projects that should be underway — the federal budget watchdog said Wednesday.

The Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer released an update to its projections for the impact of Strong, Secure and Engaged, the 2017 defence policy document.

The new assessment shows the projected cost of purchasing new equipment under the plan over a 20-year period has increased to $214.8 billion, up from the PBO's previous assessment of $164 billion.

When the federal government initially laid out its plan, it did not include the projected cost of modernizing NORAD. In 2023, then-Defence Minister Anita Anand announced that Canada would invest over $38 billion in improving aerospace and maritime defence alongside the United States.

Those figures are now folded into the PBO's estimate, along with $12 billion attributed to the rising cost of new equipment — brought on in part by delays in acquiring new fighter jets, frigates and drones.

Easy to say we will spend this amount over 20 years when you know that there isn't anyway to be held to it. My fav part is "delays in projects that should be underway".
I didn't mention any particular network, but it is noted that the post just above mine was from the CBC.

Assuming they don't gut it, can we assume that if the government changes, the CBC will become a puppet voice for the new government in power? That's what they are constantly being accused of.
No, they are accused of being a voice for the liberals. Even when they are not in power CBC still curves things in their favour as they know the conservatives are not CBC friendly.
 
One sentence in that article strikes me as interesting - the overall budget will be higher. So will it be at least $900M higher per year?
I think it's a lot of 3 card monty, with future spending and hand waving money under DND budgets.

Sure, capitol spending on future kit is great, but does absolutely nothing to sustain existing equipment. Buying stuff for Ukraine is also great, but similarly does nothing to keep our stuff going.

The delays in those capitol projects means the existing kit is past their end of life and costs to maintain it are exponential.

We asked for a budget increase on the in-service side to account for trying to fix old, broken unicorn kit. The same budget as this year would have had shortfalls for the in service butcher bill that has built up over a decade of neglect, so the cut is a knee capping with a bit of 'toxic positivity leadership' thrown in to salt the wound.

So glad to be getting posted away from the RCN for a few years, I am just exhausted by trying to do even more with even less for 15 years and seeing ships deploy to HR missions below fishing boat standards and not having basic combatant capabilties like working CBRN or DC. Lot of dice rolling by the Navy, and I don't accept that level of risk they are taking is responsible for a peace time navy, especially as it means they are totally unprepared to surge to anything real as we are already at capacity to do basic shit.
 

It’s interesting though that the increased support for defence spending noticeably faltered when those polled in one one poll were asked if defence should trump other priorities.

It remains highly probable that Canadians will still prioritize domestic policies outside of the constitutional federal governments responsibilities if given any chance to do so.
 
Mile wide, but an inch deep.

Social programs and handouts are what canadians want.
That has been the overall sentiment for decades. It was like that in Afghanistan.

And yeah, if I wasn’t someone connected to Defence, I would prioritize domestic social programs, etc as well. It’s the same argument (from the other side) as the folks who say not to give any money to foreign aid.
 

It’s interesting though that the increased support for defence spending noticeably faltered when those polled in one one poll were asked if defence should trump other priorities.

It remains highly probable that Canadians will still prioritize domestic policies outside of the constitutional federal governments responsibilities if given any chance to do so.

Mile wide, but an inch deep.

Social programs and handouts are what canadians want.

It is interesting to see how polls can be influenced by the pollster: which questions are asked, the order they are asked and the backstory supplied. Then, of course, there is the interpretation of the results. A game that anyone can play.

My take is that it is encouraging that the profile of the defence issue is on the rise. That is encouraging. It is also encouraging that even in the counter poll (Pollara) the importance of defence is rising and it is rising among women as well as men. Women have always been a lagging indicator going back at least to the days of Homer and his lyre. So if they are becoming more tolerant of defence spending that is encouraging to this militaristic old fart.

The other bit that I see as being open to spinning is TRUMP.

If you say that Trump is demanding more defence spending then a good chunk of the population, male and female, will immediately shout you down.

If you say that Jens Stoltenberg, on behalf of NATO and the embattled people of Ukraine is requesting more defence spending then that same population will be queueing up demanding to know where they can sign the petition.

If you say that our international trade is tied to being a good international partner and contributing to the common weal of nations you will get a thumbs up.

If you say that our international trade is tied to being a good American partner and contributing to the defence of the US of A you will get a thumbs down.

Over all, from a CAF perspective, I think there is more good news than bad in the latest trends. This tide is a rising tide and it will lift all boats.

One of the bigger indicators is the amount of headline inches and screen time that is being devoted to the discussion by all media, on both sides of the border and on both sides of the Atlantic. And the amount of the coverage is distinctly counter to the current government's policies.

Here I am including the intersectional issues of Covid, Hamas, Protesters, Foreign Interference, Labs and Wuhan, and foreign governments conducting operations on Canadian soil.

Enuff.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top