Government hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

I’d love to know where you think we have 20,000 surplus bodies. The Navy and Air Force can barely function at present manning, and the Army has maybe 15000 in the Field Force.

See below

I suspect he’s wiling to cut across the board to make a leaner and meaner force.

Maybe the Army could get by with 1 CMBG, 1 CLBG, and 1 CSSB? As well as parsing the other services as well.

Bingo @KevinB

I would do a wholesale amalgamation of Formations, HQs, Fleets, Wings across the board.

I would make equipment divestments. I would close bases and I would ruthlessly cut various headquarters in Ottawa and elsewhere.

The Navy would immediately lose 3 Halifax Class Frigates, 6 Kingston Class Patrol Vessels to cannibalization with parts, $$$, and personnel reallocated to the current fleet to keep it running until procurement catches up.

All Victoria Class Submarines would be centralized on one coast. Multiple HQs would be closed and personnel reallocated to the fighting force.

The Army would immediately lose a Brigade and the equipment, PYs, etc would be transferred to the other two brigades.

2 CMBG would be my first choice but I would re-role portions of it in to a rapid reaction Regiment and keep that based in Petawawa. I would probably give it to CANSOF to manage and simply expand CSOR. They can carry the lineage of the Royal Canadian Dragoons as I Iike the idea of Parachute Dragoons . There are enough high quality candidates currently employed sweeping lines to achieve this.

We would keep an Infantry Battalion in Petawawa and a Battalion in Gagetown for some representation and for DOMOPS availability. Rest of 2CMBG gets merged with 5 CMBG and the Brigade HQ can remain in Québec.

All of the Tanks can go out West, there is a nice disused building in Wainwright that is brand spanking new, and currently the largest ball hockey rink in the CAF, which can become the new home of the Lord Strathcona's Horse.

CCSB = Gone
CADTC = Moved to Gagetown and amalgamated with CTC
CMTC = Gone
5th Cdn Div = Gone
4th Cdn Div = Gone
Various Reserve HQs/Formations = Amalgamated/Gone

Many Officers would find themselves out of work and would be given severance/buy out packages.

The Air Force would see some base closures, some amalgamation of units as well. I know there are many efficiencies to be found.

Tbh, I consider the Air Force the most operationally capable and expeditionary focused element we've got, next to CANSOF at the moment. The Navy and Army are morbidly obese.

the list above is not exhaustive.... I don't have enough time today to draw a mind map

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

The Canadian Army is something around 44000, with 20000 reservists. How you eliminate 20000 full time positions from that and keep three Bdes would be an interesting numbers game.

It would be situation no change for you and others at the coal face.

Well, other than some potential movement and growing pains. You certainly wouldn't be working in a Potemkin Unit anymore with notional strengths

There would be some serious pain and trauma that would result from the chemotherapy given to the institution. Such pain and trauma is necessary to cure the disease.

There would also be a lot of sad pandas who would find themselves looking for other work. I don't mind if those sad pandas come from the near 50% of the CAF that are currently undeployable

 

[ArmyRick]

See below


Bingo @KevinB

I would do a wholesale amalgamation of Formations, HQs, Fleets, Wings across the board.

I would make equipment divestments. I would close bases and I would ruthlessly cut various headquarters in Ottawa and elsewhere.

The Navy would immediately lose 3 Halifax Class Frigates, 6 Kingston Class Patrol Vessels to cannibalization with parts, $$$, and personnel reallocated to the current fleet to keep it running until procurement catches up.

All Victoria Class Submarines would be centralized on one coast. Multiple HQs would be closed and personnel reallocated to the fighting force.

The Army would immediately lose a Brigade and the equipment, PYs, etc would be transferred to the other two brigades.

2 CMBG would be my first choice but I would re-role portions of it in to a rapid reaction Regiment and keep that based in Petawawa. I would probably give it to CANSOF to manage and simply expand CSOR. They can carry the lineage of the Royal Canadian Dragoons as I Iike the idea of Parachute Dragoons . There are enough high quality candidates currently employed sweeping lines to achieve this.

We would keep an Infantry Battalion in Petawawa and a Battalion in Gagetown for some representation and for DOMOPS availability. Rest of 2CMBG gets merged with 5 CMBG and the Brigade HQ can remain in Québec.

All of the Tanks can go out West, there is a nice disused building in Wainwright that is brand spanking new, and currently the largest ball hockey rink in the CAF, which can become the new home of the Lord Strathcona's Horse.

CCSB = Gone
CADTC = Moved to Gagetown and amalgamated with CTC
CMTC = Gone
5th Cdn Div = Gone
4th Cdn Div = Gone
Various Reserve HQs/Formations = Amalgamated/Gone

Many Officers would find themselves out of work and would be given severance/buy out packages.

The Air Force would see some base closures, some amalgamation of units as well. I know there are many efficiencies to be found.

Tbh, I consider the Air Force the most operationally capable and expeditionary focused element we've got, next to CANSOF at the moment. The Navy and Army are morbidly obese.

the list above is not exhaustive.... I don't have enough time today to draw a mind map

To the Napkin forces discussion with you

 

[markppcli]

It would be situation no change for you and others at the coal face.

Well, other than some potential movement and growing pains. You certainly wouldn't be working in a Potemkin Unit anymore with notional strengths

There would be some serious pain and trauma that would result from the chemotherapy given to the institution. Such pain and trauma is necessary to cure the disease.

There would also be a lot of sad pandas who would find themselves looking for other work. I don't mind if those sad pandas come from the near 50% of the CAF that are currently undeployable

I think your numbers are way off on all counts. If you take 20k away from us you wouldn’t be able to flesh out your rapid reaction unit let alone anything else.

Undepoyable isn’t that same as not ready to deploy.

 

[MilEME09]

Or just stop paying consultants billions of dollars, stop infringing on provincial competence, stop funding ideological indoctrination in the government, etc.

There's plenty of taxpayer money to go around already, no need to steal more. Just stop wasting it.

"We are going to need to hire a consultant to study this"

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

I think your numbers are way off on all counts. If you take 20k away from us you wouldn’t be able to flesh out your rapid reaction unit let alone anything else.

Undepoyable isn’t that same as not ready to deploy.

The former CDS seems to think differently:

Canada 'just can’t get around' army cuts, Hillier says

The Canadian Forces “just can’t get around” the need to reduce the number of full-time soldiers in order to maintain a well-trained, capable army while meeting the demand for a slimmed-down budget, retired general Rick Hillier says.

www.ctvnews.ca

Personnel expenses are your biggest capital line item (roughly 60%) and are what you have the most control over.

If you want the fancy new gear, the money needs to come from somewhere. Many personnel are not gainfully employed at the moment.

CAF needs way less tail, way more tooth.

 

[markppcli]

The former CDS seems to think differently:

Canada 'just can’t get around' army cuts, Hillier says

The Canadian Forces “just can’t get around” the need to reduce the number of full-time soldiers in order to maintain a well-trained, capable army while meeting the demand for a slimmed-down budget, retired general Rick Hillier says.

www.ctvnews.ca

Personnel expenses are your biggest capital line item (roughly 60%) and are what you have the most control over.

If you want the fancy new gear, the money needs to come from somewhere. Many personnel are not gainfully employed at the moment.

CAF needs way less tail, way more tooth.

View attachment 83612

Cutting tail for tooth is why we can’t process applicants, can’t train our people, and can’t fix our vehicles. Our reddest trade is Signals, we need a ton more IT and Comms people and that need is going to increase no decrease. We need people to train them. We need staff to plan that. We can’t procure because funded projects have no one, literally, working on them. We need people there.

That’s a 10 year old article, I don’t think he was right then and it was a bit hypocritical given the amount of .com’s he built in the CAF. It’s yet more wrong now. 20,000 is the entire regular army.

 

[Cloud Cover]

I am deeply suspicious of the CBC getting things so right, about national defence, and having that as the top headline on their website.

What’s also concerning and suspicious (to me) is that even the worst MND in living memory is now openly calling out his own government and the PM over defence readiness, equipment status, spending, recruitment- all of it. An epic political implosion is occurring over national defence and not even the PMO can keep a lid on it. This suggests to me that the forthcoming budget may have been pointing towards a nasty surprise for the CAF.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/bill-blair-trudeau-canadian-armed-forces-readiness-1.7137369

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Cutting tail for tooth is why we can’t process applicants, can’t train our people, and can’t fix our vehicles. Our reddest trade is Signals, we need a ton more IT and Comms people and that need is going to increase no decrease. We need people to train them. We need staff to plan that. We can’t procure because funded projects have no one, literally, working on them. We need people there.

That’s a 10 year old article, I don’t think he was right then and it was a bit hypocritical given the amount of .com’s he built in the CAF. It’s yet more wrong now. 20,000 is the entire regular army.

Disagree,

I cited the article because it's as relevant today as it was when I read it then. They were also talking about the same things then.... shocker.... CAF change is measured is geological periods

You can't process people because your hiring practices are a joke. You also send the worst of the worst to recruiting group. CFRG is basically a dumpster fire....

Individual Training itself is too long and the CAF has too expensive tastes for its own good. The instructor to troop ratio on courses is WAY OFF where it needs to be and I'm being generous.

One thing I think the Navy did right with the current Naval Experience program is putting new hires directly on Ships. They will learn through experience.

We train people like this in my current work place. Actual classroom work is only 6 weeks split in to 2 parts. The rest is all OJT.

I would personally have a small training cadre in every unit that manages the trainees and assign them coaches. I would also pay the coaches a bonus to make it worth their while. They would need to take some training to be coaches but PLQ should cover this.

We make our Conductors and Engineers take a coaching course and then we pay them $80.00 extra every trip they take a trainee with them. All our Locomotives have a 3rd seat built to accommodate trainees.

There are many ways to design a training program, the CAFs is but one way.

As for trades being RED... and I'm glad you mentioned SIGS. I don't think it's a coincidence that an organization with notoriously bad leadership whose school is named Canadian Forces School of Communications & Electronics (CFSCE) and also has another name.... "Common F###ing Sense Cannot Exist" is RED.

CAF trades are RED because they are undesirable, CAF trades are undesirable because they are dysfunctional, suffer from poor morale, poorly led, or combinations of all of the above.

 

[markppcli]

Disagree,

I cited the article because it's as relevant today as it was when I read it then. They were also talking about the same things then.... shocker.... CAF change is measured is geological periods

We agree it’s equally as valuable then as now. We disagree on its value.

You can't process people because your hiring practices are a joke. You also send the worst of the worst to recruiting group. CFRG is basically a dumpster fire....

We hire based on intakes, I’m surprised yo don’t know that. Our intakes are limited by our training establishment. Not saying there’s not efficiency to be found there but your characterization of it is way off. Similarly I disagree with worst of the worst to the recruiting group, maybe their head quarters by the actual coal face? Not true.

Individual Training itself is too long and the CAF has too expensive tastes for its own good. The instructor to troop ratio on courses is WAY OFF where it needs to be and I'm being generous.

One thing I think the Navy did right with the current Naval Experience program is putting new hires directly on Ships. They will learn through experience.

When NEP puts people to ships we shall see, I don’t know how effective it’ll be. I am completely and totally opposed to making operational units the trainers. It reduces readiness, it make progression in collective training impossible, and dilutes cohesive teams. I need people going into the combat arms that can already need their operational function point.

We train people like this in my current work place. Actual classroom work is only 6 weeks split in to 2 parts. The rest is all OJT.

Neat, I don’t see that working for us.

I would personally have a small training cadre in every unit that manages the trainees and assign them coaches. I would also pay the coaches a bonus to make it worth their while. They would need to take some training to be coaches but PLQ should cover this.

See above

We make our Conductors and Engineers take a coaching course and then we pay them $80.00 extra every trip they take a trainee with them. All our Locomotives have a 3rd seat built to accommodate trainees.

You can add space for trainees, we can’t. I won’t be adding a trainee spot in the or at for an operational platoon.

There are many ways to design a training program, the CAFs is but one way.

Agreed, but I see our requirements for someone arriving at work far more inline with the RCMP and CN Rail.

As for trades being RED... and I'm glad you mentioned SIGS. I don't think it's a coincidence that an organization with notoriously bad leadership whose school is named Canadian Forces School of Communications & Electronics (CFSCE) and also has another name.... "Common F###ing Sense Cannot Exist" is RED.

CAF trades are RED because they are undesirable, CAF trades are undesirable because they are dysfunctional, suffer from poor morale, poorly led, or combinations of all of the above.

We agree here.

 

[MilEME09]

Cutting tail for tooth is why we can’t process applicants, can’t train our people, and can’t fix our vehicles. Our reddest trade is Signals, we need a ton more IT and Comms people and that need is going to increase no decrease. We need people to train them. We need staff to plan that. We can’t procure because funded projects have no one, literally, working on them. We need people there.

That’s a 10 year old article, I don’t think he was right then and it was a bit hypocritical given the amount of .com’s he built in the CAF. It’s yet more wrong now. 20,000 is the entire regular army.

Frankly our tail is fat, yes, but its also in about ten different knots making it impossible to function correctly. We need our processes to be stream lined, red tape cut, and people enabled to do their jobs without being reviewed by 4 levels of command. We had thousands of PR candidates apply by couldn't get a single one in uniform because of delays. Heck I had my appointment for a new ID card back in september and I still haven't gotten it. How is any of this even remotely acceptable? if this were a private business a new person would be fired every week.

 

[markppcli]

Frankly our tail is fat, yes, but its also in about ten different knots making it impossible to function correctly. We need our processes to be stream lined, red tape cut, and people enabled to do their jobs without being reviewed by 4 levels of command. We had thousands of PR candidates apply by couldn't get a single one in uniform because of delays. Heck I had my appointment for a new ID card back in september and I still haven't gotten it. How is any of this even remotely acceptable? if this were a private business a new person would be fired every week.

That’s because we have one guy doing ID cards nationally. We need more people doing that not less. I agree we have assume dysfunctions, but we are running into problems because we are lacking enough people in those support functions.

 

[Rifleman62]

2 days ago, I was told by a Bgen that stating obvious problems was showing bad attitude, we need to have a positive mind set…. The issues is more then money.

Met a few like that, Col's and BGen. Mostly PRes. That's how they get ahead. That's how they "acquire" OMM/CMM.
Bet he was a PRes.

 

[Halifax Tar]

See below


Bingo @KevinB

I would do a wholesale amalgamation of Formations, HQs, Fleets, Wings across the board.

I would make equipment divestments. I would close bases and I would ruthlessly cut various headquarters in Ottawa and elsewhere.

The Navy would immediately lose 3 Halifax Class Frigates, 6 Kingston Class Patrol Vessels to cannibalization with parts, $$$, and personnel reallocated to the current fleet to keep it running until procurement catches up.

All Victoria Class Submarines would be centralized on one coast. Multiple HQs would be closed and personnel reallocated to the fighting force.

The Army would immediately lose a Brigade and the equipment, PYs, etc would be transferred to the other two brigades.

2 CMBG would be my first choice but I would re-role portions of it in to a rapid reaction Regiment and keep that based in Petawawa. I would probably give it to CANSOF to manage and simply expand CSOR. They can carry the lineage of the Royal Canadian Dragoons as I Iike the idea of Parachute Dragoons . There are enough high quality candidates currently employed sweeping lines to achieve this.

We would keep an Infantry Battalion in Petawawa and a Battalion in Gagetown for some representation and for DOMOPS availability. Rest of 2CMBG gets merged with 5 CMBG and the Brigade HQ can remain in Québec.

All of the Tanks can go out West, there is a nice disused building in Wainwright that is brand spanking new, and currently the largest ball hockey rink in the CAF, which can become the new home of the Lord Strathcona's Horse.

CCSB = Gone
CADTC = Moved to Gagetown and amalgamated with CTC
CMTC = Gone
5th Cdn Div = Gone
4th Cdn Div = Gone
Various Reserve HQs/Formations = Amalgamated/Gone

Many Officers would find themselves out of work and would be given severance/buy out packages.

The Air Force would see some base closures, some amalgamation of units as well. I know there are many efficiencies to be found.

Tbh, I consider the Air Force the most operationally capable and expeditionary focused element we've got, next to CANSOF at the moment. The Navy and Army are morbidly obese.

the list above is not exhaustive.... I don't have enough time today to draw a mind map

Air movements and LRP are ridiculously busy and don't get the recognition they deserve.

For the Navy in waist lines maybe... But We defiantly aren't floating in people, mean while our government issued to do list keeps growing.

I don't think we need a regular force Army, beyond some SOF, so I'm probably too biased to comment on them.

*Side note, NEPs don't go direct to ships. But the ones I am at sea with right now seem to be loving it; and every one of them wants to sign on after the year, until we started hitting these heavy seas today. Now a few of them are taking naps lol

 

[MilEME09]

That’s because we have one guy doing ID cards nationally. We need more people doing that not less. I agree we have assume dysfunctions, but we are running into problems because we are lacking enough people in those support functions.

administrative jobs we can outsource to civi's to free up PYs for other duties. I agree we do not have enough people in the right places.

 

[Rifleman62]

I am completely and totally opposed to making operational units the trainers.

Are not operational units doing training all the time to maintain operational status?

Would you be uncomfortable with an established Training Coy or Pl+ in an operational unit?

 

[Halifax Tar]

Never said it would operate like one. The CAF seems to take all the wrong lessons from Organizational Behaviors, Business Schools, etc though.


Ammunition wouldn't be JIT in my business, that would be like saying fuel or parts for cars should be delivered JIT. Ammunition is a consumable and should be treated as such.

One of the problems with the CAF is what they allocate their funds towards:

The CAF is too large for its funding envelope and it has too many layers of superfluous bureaucracy. To be frank, they need to make deep cuts to their management structure, divest excess infrastructure and antiquated equipment which is becoming increasingly expensive to operate and reinvest in leaner and meaner Military.



I think @daftandbarmy hit the nail on the head with their comment on "Happy Talk vs Hard Talk".

Current CAF Culture is a large part of the problem and if I had to assess the Leadership style and current institutional trends, it would probably straddle between Avoider/Accommodator on the chart below:

This isn't to say there aren't strong individual leaders as there most certainly are. I don't believe the institution cultivates a strong leadership culture and it certainly doesn't value getting things done.

Sad fall from grace for an organization that used to pride itself on its ability to develop leaders.


I agree with this, the problem is the CAF does neither JIT or Stockpiling, and if it does, it does it poorly. The truth is no business that wants to be successful does purely JIT logistics.

We are selective on what we use JIT for. We use it for Locomotives because it makes no sense to have more Locomotives running than you actually need to run your operation. These are $million+ dollar assets and having a bunch sit idle burning fuel as an added expense line is bad business.

We do keep a small Reserve for emergencies but we keep 95% of them constantly moving. As such, we have a robust maintenance and inspection cycle to keep them operational with information that is fed in real-time to our fleet management team.

One of my Locomotives broke last week. It was lifted within 12 hours and sent to the Shops for repair within 6 hours and I had a replacement 2 days later that traveled halfway across the Country to get to me.

Car parts are something that we do keep a large stock of. Bearings, hoses, valves, knuckles, etc will break from wear and tear frequently and we generally have them repaired within a day to keep product moving to customers. This is easy to maintain because we use common & standardized parts for all our cars that are interchangeable, no matter the car or commodity being transported.

Our problem is we dont seem to do any Logistics strategic planning. Its not cool enough for that kind of attention. Instead us behind the curtains people keep propping up this institution.

I recently heard a GO/FO Log O, in person, tell me its time we start letting things fail... I was shocked...

 

[markppcli]

Are not operational units doing training all the time to maintain operational status?

Would you be uncomfortable with an established Training Coy or Pl+ in an operational unit?

Sorry let me rephrase, I’m opposed to Operational Units conducting DP1 / Operational Function Point training.

 

[TacticalTea]

I recently heard a GO/FO Log O, in person, tell me its time we start letting things fail... I was shocked...

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

We agree it’s equally as valuable then as now. We disagree on its value.

Which is completely fine, I don't expect anyone to agree completely on anything. That type of constructive tension is what the CAF needs more of.

We hire based on intakes, I’m surprised yo don’t know that. Our intakes are limited by our training establishment. Not saying there’s not efficiency to be found there but your characterization of it is way off. Similarly I disagree with worst of the worst to the recruiting group, maybe their head quarters by the actual coal face? Not true.

Yes we hire based off intakes but the time it takes from application to trained soldier/sailor/airmen from entry to OFP is WAY TOO LONG. We aren't building rocket scientists here.

Training establishments aren't going to grow in size and it's a fools errand to think it will. What we can control is the velocity of throughput for our school houses.

I think there is a lot of fat that could be shaved off QSTPs in many different programs.

I will use Air Assault School as an example:

It's 12 days long. Days are 18 hour days each and time usage is maximized. They squeeze a lot of information in to a very small window of time with Ex Checks built in throughout. They put 150+ candidates through the course with 8 instructors. If the CAF ran a similar course, it would be 6+ weeks long, 8 to 4 coffee course with weekends off. It would be capped at 30 students and would have have 8 instructors, a couple of storesman, a Course Warrant Officer and a Platoon Comd because the CAF always needs an Officer.
 
CAF IT across the board is boutique in nature goes with the most expensive option. Now I will admit that the product at the other end is very proficient technically speaking but how much value are we getting for what we are spending?

I've been to many different training establishments around the globe and seen how our partners do things and ours is not the only RIGHT way.
 
There will always be a need to have School Houses simply to teach advanced skillsets and courses.

When NEP puts people to ships we shall see, I don’t know how effective it’ll be. I am completely and totally opposed to making operational units the trainers. It reduces readiness, it make progression in collective training impossible, and dilutes cohesive teams. I need people going into the combat arms that can already need their operational function point.

Disagree. The Army could learn from the Navy in this regard. The Navy has been doing it for years...

FDU & NTOG are rather small units that manage to generate very capable teams continuously for operations while also running school houses and serving as centres of excellence for their respective skillsets.
 

Neat, I don’t see that working for us.



See above



You can add space for trainees, we can’t. I won’t be adding a trainee spot in the or at for an operational platoon.

Who said anything about integrating them in to rifle companies? Separate entity contained within the Battalion it self.

Company X is going to the range today... Recruit Bloggins and their Section in training will also be accompanying them to do some shooting.

IPSWQ is running... Training Section will also be doing the shoot.

The Reserves have been training people this way for decades. There will be a need at times to consolidate for CT but this could also be managed at the Brigade Level. It would help tremendously if we didn't have a bunch of paper units at half strength in all our formations.

There are a lot of ways to skin this cat. This would also cut down on superfluous cost moves and relocations around the Country.

Agreed, but I see our requirements for someone arriving at work far more inline with the RCMP and CN Rail.

CN actually has their own School. All training is conducted there and their model is more in line with the CAF.

CN Campus
+1 844-872-4626

CN Campus - Google Search

It's World Class:

We have a similar setup in Calgary but mostly only run advanced courses there and do things slightly differently. Both methods have advantages and disadvantages.

Air movements and LRP are ridiculously busy and don't get the recognition they deserve.

For the Navy in waist lines maybe... But We defiantly aren't floating in people, mean while our government issued to do list keeps growing.

I don't think we need a regular force Army, beyond some SOF, so I'm probably too biased to comment on them.

*Side note, NEPs don't go direct to ships. But the ones I am at sea with right now seem to be loving it; and every one of them wants to sign on after the year, until we started hitting these heavy seas today. Now a few of them are taking naps lol.

Yes, the Air Force runs the best program IMO. The Navy needs to divest Ships and HQ Bloat and put the people it does have to better use.

We need a standing Army simply to maintain certain functions and a general purpose combat capability.

Special Operations Forces should be expanded.