• 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....
 
I honestly feel like this was why Anita Anand was punted to TBS.

She was said to have been far more persuasive (adamant) about meeting the 2% marker than Blair was, mainly because she has a future in politics, maybe even as Leader of the LPC.

Blair is headed to pasture soon, so he was the easier mark for bad policy.
Yet Anand never really said much in public. At least Blair, for all his faults, has been quite vocal of late.
 
Yet Anand never really said much in public. At least Blair, for all his faults, has been quite vocal of late.
Again, because he doesn't have a future to worry about. He was damaged goods coming into the MND role as it is. He can be as vocal as he wants, without consequece, but also without clout because no one cares what he has to say.

Anand didn't have that same luxury without shooting herself in the foot in the process.
 
Bill Blair about why Canada won’t spend 2% on defence:


Also, there is no point throwing money into a department of the government that is designed to be systemically disfunctional.
I honestly feel like this was why Anita Anand was punted to TBS.

She was said to have been far more persuasive (adamant) about meeting the 2% marker than Blair was, mainly because she has a future in politics, maybe even as Leader of the LPC.

Blair is headed to pasture soon, so he was the easier mark for bad policy.

That Canada’s contribution to Alliance security need to be a junior minister (Defence in Canada is way down the pecking order….somewhere between Sports and Physical Activity and Canadian Heritage…) pitching the case to their fellow cabinet ministers, says how unserious Canada is as a member of the Alliance.

Yet Anand never really said much in public. At least Blair, for all his faults, has been quite vocal of late.

So his vocalist output is worth…what?
"Trying to go to cabinet, or even to Canadians, and tell them that we had to do this because we need to meet this magical threshold of two per cent. ... Don't get me wrong. It's important, but it was really hard convince people that that was a worthy goal, that that was some noble standard that we had to meet."
1714622661015.gif
 
Not disagreeing there, but Canada’s apathy towards National Defence is fairly unique for a G7 nation.

Except for a few actually on the front line, of course ;)


EUROPE AT A STRATEGIC DISADVANTAGE: A FRAGMENTED DEFENSE INDUSTRY​


When Russia invaded Ukraine last year, the European continent was unprepared for war. European rejection of large-scale conflict had become so deeply ingrained that many leaders were incapable of believing that Russia would conduct such an invasion despite repeated Russian warnings, such as the illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014. The end of the Cold War had led many European countries to reduce their defense budgets, and further cuts after the financial crisis of 2008 along with systemic underinvestment in the defense sector had only weakened the continent’s defense infrastructure. This, coupled with increasingly expensive defense technology, led to a reduction in national force volumes and stockpiles, which in turn limited the operational capabilities and effectiveness of European armies.

 
Not disagreeing there, but Canada’s apathy towards National Defence is fairly unique for a G7 nation.
Both Pretty Boy Justin (and friends) as well as Pierre Polyester have no intention of seriously increasing the defence budget, otherwise they would now be informing the public of the true seriousness of the threats posed by China, Russia and their axis-of-evil buddies. Canada has no equivalent of Winston Churchill to sound an alarm. Hell, even Neville Chamberlain realized at the 11th hour what Nazi Germany was up to. Our leaders will wait till it’s almost midnight and then cry out, “Hey, America, help us…those guys on the other side of the world aren’t playing fair…they’re…UN-CANADIAN!”
 
We are ONLY a G7 country because the US wants us there to counter the Europeans - we are NOT there because we act like we belong there or deserve to be there.
Are we even a G7 country anymore?

I know we are considered a G7 nation, but in practical & real terms...are we?


Considering Mexico, a country with widespread poverty & a massive cartel problem, recently overtook us as America's largest trading partner...I'm starting to have my doubts that we are still in that club.

Part of what made us a G7 country is our natural resources, the extraction & development of which Justin has targeted & has allowed to die slowly ever since he came into office...
 
Are we even a G7 country anymore?

I know we are considered a G7 nation, but in practical & real terms...are we?


Considering Mexico, a country with widespread poverty & a massive cartel problem, recently overtook us as America's largest trading partner...I'm starting to have my doubts that we are still in that club.

Part of what made us a G7 country is our natural resources, the extraction & development of which Justin has targeted & has allowed to die slowly ever since he came into office...
Well, given that the G7 is essentially a “club”, we’re one until the club decides that we’re not.
 
Well, given that the G7 is essentially a “club”, we’re one until the club decides that we’re not.
That's true but it's a club based on quite different values than merely defence issues. In fact, I'd say that defence is well down the list of other economic, cultural, even climate issues. Remember that for a while it was the G8 with Russia included. In 2014 the G8 didn't expel Russia when seized Crimea but merely suspended membership. Russia decided to walk on its own in 2017. There are constant talks to expand the membership rather than contract it.

Quite frankly it's much easier to form new "clubs" to address common issues while keeping the G7 perking along. I don't think that our membership there is at risk. Neither is our membership in NATO. It's always good to have a bad example at the table when you want to call someone out in order to make a point.

🍻
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top