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....

 

[RangerRay]

At the end of the day, how do we address people might not want to do these jobs? There's a reason most people that join the reserves want to go combat arms, if it's your part time gig, they want something cool and memorable. Not to slag the CSS dudes here, but doing a level three live attack is a lot more sexy than running a coy CP ex. Nevermind the fact that a ton of CSS courses take several years worth of summers to get to QL3/4.

When I was on infantry QL2/3, one of my course mates was a cook in civie life. When I asked him why he didn’t sign up as a cook, he said “That’s my day job, man. I want to blow shit up!”

Made sense to me.

 

[mariomike]

At the end of the day, how do we address people might not want to do these jobs? There's a reason most people that join the reserves want to go combat arms, if it's your part time gig, they want something cool and memorable. Not to slag the CSS dudes here, but doing a level three live attack is a lot more sexy than running a coy CP ex. Nevermind the fact that a ton of CSS courses take several years worth of summers to get to QL3/4.

When we were 16, our parents signed us for SSEP. My friends went Infantry, I chose Service Corps. No regrets.

 

[PrairieFella]

When we were 16, our parents signed us for SSEP. My friends went Infantry, I chose Service Corps. No regrets.

There is nothing wrong with it. I recognize that just as much as anyone else here, but it's undeniable it's a lot harder of a sell to get the average part-time recruit looking to blow stuff up to jump into the cook trade or a supply tech.

 

[Kirkhill]

Too many combat arms in the Army Reserve. Need a lot more support - truckers and MMTs and cooks.

Can't we just add a platoon of transport to every reserve combat arms unit? Along with, perhaps, a sigs section?

 

[PrairieFella]

Can't we just add a platoon of transport to every reserve combat arms unit? Along with, perhaps, a sigs section?

I'm all for it. That's how it used to be before all the supporters were consolidated at the service battalions and signals regiments.

 

[mariomike]

That's how it used to be before all the supporters were consolidated at the service battalions and signals regiments.

Nothing new about Service Battalions.

32 Service Battalion - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

MSE Op was/ is a good trade.

 

[PrairieFella]

Nothing new about Service Battalions.

32 Service Battalion - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

I'm aware, but the combat arms units used to have maintainers, transport, medical, sigs, etc attached, just like Reg units. It was folly to fold those capabilities 100% back to their home units. We rolled everything back into the B echelon and dilapidated the A1 and A2 echelons.

This isn't to say the Svc Bns shouldn't exist. It's important to have those guys in place for the brigade, but if we want to organize the reserves realistically, we need those supporters supporting the combat trades.

 

[Halifax Tar]

For real though. You want more reservists, give them a bag of money every year they're OFP, DAG Green, attend an annual or bi-annual reserve concentration and in compliance with the SRP-R. Giving them a big, fat bonus for being a useful soldier at their rank level could certainly incentivize people to stick around.

I think performance bonuses are a great thing and we should them more.

 

[PuckChaser]

I think performance bonuses are a great thing and we should them more.

Sounds more like a "please show up" bonus, not really linked to performance.

 

[Remius]

Sounds more like a "please show up" bonus, not really linked to performance.

Not unlike a “please don’t leave” bonus.

 

[dapaterson]

I'm aware, but the combat arms units used to have maintainers, transport, medical, sigs, etc attached, just like Reg units. It was folly to fold those capabilities 100% back to their home units. We rolled everything back into the B echelon and dilapidated the A1 and A2 echelons.

This isn't to say the Svc Bns shouldn't exist. It's important to have those guys in place for the brigade, but if we want to organize the reserves realistically, we need those supporters supporting the combat trades.

Having lived though those years, I will say that the majority of units misemployed, undertrained, and undersupervised those not in core trades... mind you, they do that for most of their core trades as well.

 

[mariomike]

Not unlike a “please don’t leave” bonus.

Aka "Retention Bonus."

 

[rmc_wannabe]

Aka "Retention Bonus."

CMP and TBS have been alerted:

 

[PrairieFella]

Having lived though those years, I will say that the majority of units misemployed, undertrained, and undersupervised those not in core trades... mind you, they do that for most of their core trades as well.

So the alternative is to not train like we fight with supporters internal to the units? It seems to work fine in the Regs, so let's take some lessons learned and apply them to the ARes

 

[FJAG]

I'm aware, but the combat arms units used to have maintainers, transport, medical, sigs, etc attached, just like Reg units. It was folly to fold those capabilities 100% back to their home units. We rolled everything back into the B echelon and dilapidated the A1 and A2 echelons.

We didn't have AEchs per se in the 60s or 70s. Oh, there was the odd mechanic here and there but they weren't part of the establishment. Things were a bit different during the 10/90 days when there was a surplus of folks coming back from CFE but there were only a few 10/90 units and that phase was brief. Same, same with AD. There was an uptick of full-timers in ARes AD regiments but that didn't extend to the rest of the ARes.

Back in the 60s - before the days of the service battalions - we did have Militia RCASC, RCEME, RCAMC and RCOC coys/dets/etc in the districts but those too were small and poorly equipped independent CSS entities and not in the nature of unit A Echs belonging to the units.

This isn't to say the Svc Bns shouldn't exist. It's important to have those guys in place for the brigade, but if we want to organize the reserves realistically, we need those supporters supporting the combat trades.

The issue is not whether folks are in an ARes service battalion or in an ARes combat arms units A Ech. The issue is that you can't realistically do much CSS on Class A time. It needs full timers.

As long as you do not have ARes combat arms units at full strength, with minimal equipment and with no mission, but are only seen as a pool of augmentees, there is no need for an ARes A Ech - just some type aggregated full-time CSS usually provided through a base support infrastructure. True, the priorities are low and the service spotty but where would you find the PYs to provide that staff for ARes unit A Echs when there aren't enough to fill current RegF PYs properly?

So the alternative is to not train like we fight with supporters internal to the units? It seems to work fine in the Regs, so let's take some lessons learned and apply them to the ARes

My solution is to aggregate ARes units and meld them with a core of RegF into 30/70 battalions which do have a slice of RegF equipment and A Ech CSS.

 

[dapaterson]

So the alternative is to not train like we fight with supporters internal to the units? It seems to work fine in the Regs, so let's take some lessons learned and apply them to the ARes

OK.

Step one: Units stop doing their own recruiting, and stop holding any pre-OFP personnel.

Step two: Unit Command means a minimum of 400 trained personnel. So the odds and sods of the Infantry, Armoured and Artillery in the Army Reserve get amalgamated.

Step three: Units stop selecting who gets loaded on career courses.

 

[PrairieFella]

OK.

Step one: Units stop doing their own recruiting, and stop holding any pre-OFP personnel.

Step two: Unit Command means a minimum of 400 trained personnel. So the odds and sods of the Infantry, Armoured and Artillery in the Army Reserve get amalgamated.

Step three: Units stop selecting who gets loaded on career courses.

Sounds good to me. Anything more than one regiment per brigade is superfluous. No need for 5 infantry cap badges in 38 CBG for example.

 

[dapaterson]

Sounds good to me.

Unfortunately, your voice is not one of the ones heard ... I agree, those would be improvements.

 

[FJAG]

OK.

Step one: Units stop doing their own recruiting, and stop holding any pre-OFP personnel.

Step two: Unit Command means a minimum of 400 trained personnel. So the odds and sods of the Infantry, Armoured and Artillery in the Army Reserve get amalgamated.

Step three: Units stop selecting who gets loaded on career courses.

I have no problem with units doing recruiting but tend to agree that pre-OFP personnel should be in a BTL holding/training unit.

Onboard for amalgamation but not until amalgamation with a substantial RegF contingent occurs and that the CO and key bn staff are in-service RegF. That should cure the career course selection issue. Amalgamation of just ARes units with ARes units just perpetuates the problem. Canada has done that in the past several times and it leads to nothing but increased attrition. By this point in time one should realize that amalgamation of ARes units with nothing else being done is well within the definition of insanity.

 

[Kirkhill]

We didn't have AEchs per se in the 60s or 70s. Oh, there was the odd mechanic here and there but they weren't part of the establishment. Things were a bit different during the 10/90 days when there was a surplus of folks coming back from CFE but there were only a few 10/90 units and that phase was brief. Same, same with AD. There was an uptick of full-timers in ARes AD regiments but that didn't extend to the rest of the ARes.

Back in the 60s - before the days of the service battalions - we did have Militia RCASC, RCEME, RCAMC and RCOC coys/dets/etc in the districts but those too were small and poorly equipped independent CSS entities and not in the nature of unit A Echs belonging to the units.



The issue is not whether folks are in an ARes service battalion or in an ARes combat arms units A Ech. The issue is that you can't realistically do much CSS on Class A time. It needs full timers.

As long as you do not have ARes combat arms units at full strength, with minimal equipment and with no mission, but are only seen as a pool of augmentees, there is no need for an ARes A Ech - just some type aggregated full-time CSS usually provided through a base support infrastructure. True, the priorities are low and the service spotty but where would you find the PYs to provide that staff for ARes unit A Echs when there aren't enough to fill current RegF PYs properly?


My solution is to aggregate ARes units and meld them with a core of RegF into 30/70 battalions which do have a slice of RegF equipment and A Ech CSS.

The discussion is not about maintainers. It is about transport drivers.

@dapaterson suggested that there was a shortage of drivers and suggested re-roling combat arms units to transport coys. My suggestion was to add a transport platoon to each combat arms unit. Not maintainers, which I agree need to be full timers, but drivers.

Likewise I was suggesting adding a Comms Section to each unit.

And if I had my druthers every unit would also have a Light Anti-Aircraft platoon that could double as a Heavy Weapons platoon.