• 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....
 
Not to beat the FWSAR project to death but wasnt there something about LM having an issue with simulator/training duplication?
Are the winning contracts decided by a committee?
Still doesnt get to the why on the technical points or how to weigh them. Or how we failed to test the Oshkosh MSVS properly and subsequently failed it, only for Oshkosh to win back its lost profits.
Mistakes are going to be made in the process and adjustments made. I'm curious about those adjustments
Whose to say we wouldnt have problems getting the C-27J up and running as well, its not like it or the G222 had a great reputation?
 
Companies are usually okay with indirect offsets. They can buy a lot of Amish furniture for all their offices around the world if needed.

Or get labour multipliers for establishing service providers to the country where they didn’t exist before…Circa 1982

1719002036376.gif
1719002078017.gif
 
Not to beat the FWSAR project to death but wasnt there something about LM having an issue with simulator/training duplication?
Nobody is suggesting they'd be perfect. But replacing a Herc with a higher performing Herc would have been a much easier project.

Are the winning contracts decided by a committee?
No. Bid criterias have to be provided in advance. And bid scoring usually evolves multiple independent evaluators per criteria.

Still doesn't get to the why on the technical points or how to weigh them.
If you're talking about FWSAR, the biggest change made was the dropping of simultaneity of performance criteria. With that criteria, the 295 would definitely not have been successful. They met all the range, speed and payload criterias. But could not meet them at the same time. When they threatened not to bid, Industry Canada went to bat for them by lobbying against the criteria. They wanted an Airbus bid, so that they could leverage more direct offsets from LockMart and Alenia.

Having qualified on meeting range, speed and payload individually, Airbus just put up a lower price and offered more direct offsets than they knew Alenia could.

Whose to say we wouldnt have problems getting the C-27J up and running as well, its not like it or the G222 had a great reputation?
For one, we at least wouldn't have fundamental problems on range, speed and payload.
 
To be fair we're still beating freeloaders like Spain and Luxemburg.

Nato-Defense-Spending_Percentage_Site.jpg
 
I doubt it. Canadians are pretty insular and happily ignorant about the world.
In the same way that the average American, Australian, or someone not right next to a hotspot would be insular.

If the UKR war spilled over to Poland or an established NATO country, I think the sentiment would change. The public has put it largely out of their minds because to them, the war has become static.
 
In the same way that the average American, Australian, or someone not right next to a hotspot would be insular.

If the UKR war spilled over to Poland or an established NATO country, I think the sentiment would change. The public has put it largely out of their minds because to them, the war has become static.

I wish I had your optimism.

Support for the CAF is at best a mile wide and an inch thick.
 
I wish I had your optimism.

Support for the CAF is at best a mile wide and an inch thick.
Agreed - but many Canadians trace their heritage to NATO countries. If those other countries get attacked, the war stops being “a Russia/Ukraine” thing and an “European” thing.

I would suspect that the Polish-Canadian diaspora would care very much if Poland were attacked, etc.
 
Agreed - but many Canadians trace their heritage to NATO countries. If those other countries get attacked, the war stops being “a Russia/Ukraine” thing and an “European” thing.

I would suspect that the Polish-Canadian diaspora would care very much if Poland were attacked, etc.

Ill give you a cheers when they themselves are lining up for the homeland across the sea.

Caring is one thing, its also hollow and cant really be measured. Show me actions. Deeds, not words.
 
Ill give you a cheers when they themselves are lining up for the homeland across the sea.

Caring is one thing, it’s also hollow and cant really be measured. Show me actions. Deeds, not words.
I’d suspect that much of the grassroots action would be like what Ukrainian-Canadians did - fundraising, accepting refugees, that sort of thing.

If Poland (for example) were attacked, it would be really hard not to justify NATO Article 5. They were/are skirting around taking action because UKR isn’t a NATO country. If RUS attacks an established one, then that situation is exactly why NATO was established.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top