Liberal (Minority/Majority) Government 2025 - ???

[PPCLI Guy]

We need a short war against machines to reach us the dangers of automation and abominable intelligence.

We could call it the Butlerian Jihad....

 

[QV]

Very much agreed. I think the main value of a degree was that I learned how to learn. And some specialized subject matter. The only reason I think officers should have one these days is because I don't think high schools produce the literacy and critical thinking they used to. Nor are young people nearly as mature these days at 18-19.

On the pay front? Straight up pay people what it takes to fill the job. And SF is basically some variation of infantry and MP. So now way they get paid less than those guys. And I actually worry that once these people get trained and cleared, the risk of getting poached is high.



100%. Not just risk. We need to stop treating security as a secondary duty. Taking it seriously requires trained, dedicated and committed professionals. And professionals are never cheap.

The CAF does have dedicated professionals - it just didn't prioritize security nor listen to the professionals. Recall, the older pubs with security written into it were suggestive but always subject to the commander's decision which was influenced by many other restraints (budgetary etc).

That said, what the RCAF is doing will hopefully professionalize that aspect and it's good thing. It should be a purple trade under VCDS however, and employed everywhere inside and OUTCAN as I've written on this subject before. It is a force multiplier enabling all other CAF functions just like every other important supporting role.

 

[YZT580]

Very much agreed. I think the main value of a degree was that I learned how to learn. And some specialized subject matter. The only reason I think officers should have one these days is because I don't think high schools produce the literacy and critical thinking they used to. Nor are young people nearly as mature these days at 18-19.

On the pay front? Straight up pay people what it takes to fill the job. And SF is basically some variation of infantry and MP. So now way they get paid less than those guys. And I actually worry that once these people get trained and cleared, the risk of getting poached is high.



100%. Not just risk. We need to stop treating security as a secondary duty. Taking it seriously requires trained, dedicated and committed professionals. And professionals are never cheap.

If you would think back to those distant days for a moment, I am assuming you have a standard 4 year degree possibly enhanced later with a masters. So you have taken 20% of your working career just to get started. I am also assuming, which is dangerous territory, that your specialized subjects brought you to your current career. Could you have gotten to the same point practical knowledge wise with a course or courses dedicated to that specialized subject matter in a shorter time with possibly greater insight and knowledge producing a more useful ab initio employee? Or was that general information a necessary part of your maturity?
I ask because both teaching, nursing, and flying amongst many others I am sure, have gone from specialized training only to a mandatory degree and I wonder if we are wasting resources in areas where we could save time, money and end up with a better employee as a result

 

[HavokFour]

So this is where Hansen landed, great to see he'll have a hand in shaping our space programs.

Carney appoints astronaut Jeremy Hansen to advise government on new space strategy

Prime Minister Mark Carney has appointed Jeremy Hansen as a special adviser on space -- just as the United States takes note of Canada’s efforts to shift its space partnerships toward Europe.

www.ctvnews.ca

 

[lenaitch]

That said, what the RCAF is doing will hopefully professionalize that aspect and it's good thing. It should be a purple trade under VCDS however, and employed everywhere inside and OUTCAN as I've written on this subject before. It is a force multiplier enabling all other CAF functions just like every other important supporting role.

Then it would like have to be a military role. You're not likely to get armed civilians readily accepted in many other countries, regardless of who their employer is. Even within Canada, the process to have armed security guards is fairly onerous, and they only carry sidearms. I can't image what hoops would have to be leapt to allow for more firepower.

 

[QV]

Then it would like have to be a military role. You're not likely to get armed civilians readily accepted in many other countries, regardless of who their employer is. Even within Canada, the process to have armed security guards is fairly onerous, and they only carry sidearms. I can't image what hoops would have to be leapt to allow for more firepower.

The new RCAF security force are military.

The security force needs to be soldiers subject to the CSD and be deployable.

 

[Eaglelord17]

The new RCAF security force are military.

The security force needs to be soldiers subject to the CSD and be deployable.

A large portion should be duty watch, yeah it sucks but realistically it should be part of the job.

 

[brihard]

Then it would like have to be a military role. You're not likely to get armed civilians readily accepted in many other countries, regardless of who their employer is. Even within Canada, the process to have armed security guards is fairly onerous, and they only carry sidearms. I can't image what hoops would have to be leapt to allow for more firepower.

Nah, we've tackled this before. Other entities exist with special legislated/regulated powers and who have armament and training beyond just sidearms. Two that come immediately to mind are the Parliamentary Protective Service (not cops, not peace officers, not licensed security guards, yet have C8s and active shooter training) and the emergency response teams at the various nuclear sites- I can't recall the specifics form when I did a regulatory dive on them but they're regulated under one of the acts pertaining to nuke stuff, and if recollection serves may have super limited peace officer status.

Hypothetically, Parliament could amend the NDA to enable regulation of a civilian component of a security force that would only work in Canada and would not be subject to deployment, and could carry some or most of the 'we know we'll be doing this same thing more or less the same way every day into eternity' armed security tasks, leaving it to a smaller SF trade to deal with the stuff needing more versatility or nimbleness. It would be a way to mitigate the impact on PY caps within CAF.

There are of course many other considerations as to whether that would be wise or not. I'm just saying a civilian 'DND security force' with necessary training, equipment, and use of force powers could be done and could be reasonably straightforward.

 

[YZT580]

Nah, we've tackled this before. Other entities exist with special legislated/regulated powers and who have armament and training beyond just sidearms. Two that come immediately to mind are the Parliamentary Protective Service (not cops, not peace officers, not licensed security guards, yet have C8s and active shooter training) and the emergency response teams at the various nuclear sites- I can't recall the specifics form when I did a regulatory dive on them but they're regulated under one of the acts pertaining to nuke stuff, and if recollection serves may have super limited peace officer status.

Hypothetically, Parliament could amend the NDA to enable regulation of a civilian component of a security force that would only work in Canada and would not be subject to deployment, and could carry some or most of the 'we know we'll be doing this same thing more or less the same way every day into eternity' armed security tasks, leaving it to a smaller SF trade to deal with the stuff needing more versatility or nimbleness. It would be a way to mitigate the impact on PY caps within CAF.

There are of course many other considerations as to whether that would be wise or not. I'm just saying a civilian 'DND security force' with necessary training, equipment, and use of force powers could be done and could be reasonably straightforward.

Is there an advantage to standing up a civilian force which would be limited to Canada as opposed to adding PYs to the Forces and having all available anywhere?

 

[Haggis]

Nah, we've tackled this before. Other entities exist with special legislated/regulated powers and who have armament and training beyond just sidearms. Two that come immediately to mind are the Parliamentary Protective Service (not cops, not peace officers, not licensed security guards, yet have C8s and active shooter training) and the emergency response teams at the various nuclear sites- I can't recall the specifics form when I did a regulatory dive on them but they're regulated under one of the acts pertaining to nuke stuff, and if recollection serves may have super limited peace officer status.

Nuclear Safety Control Act s 27.2(1).

 

[brihard]

Is there an advantage to standing up a civilian force which would be limited to Canada as opposed to adding PYs to the Forces and having all available anywhere?

I mean, there would certainly be some. Pay and comp: while base pay may not be a whole ton lower, it wouldn’t have to come with a 25 years and out unreduced pension. Other HR related institutional costs like CAF provision of primary healthcare wouldn’t have to be borne. Hiring people to work in Canada without the same mobility expectations would probably be easier; in some respects.probably it would become a farm team for uniformed SF recruiting. Most of the advantages would probably be economic efficiency ones.

Against this there are definitely plenty of disadvantages; a larger pool of OFP deployable SF gives CAF tons more flexibility. It’s costlier and less efficient, but operationally almost certainly better.

I’m not taking a strongly considered position either way; people closer to the problem would be better for that. Though personally I would lean to give CAF the PYs and funding. I’m just saying if CAF/DND wanted civilian armed security with long guns and good kit and training, it’s definitely doable.

I’ve seen SF spoken of mostly in the RCAF context, but will they play a role at navy, army, or CANSOF force protection?

 

[Haggis]

I mean, there would certainly be some. Pay and comp: while base pay may not be a whole ton lower, it wouldn’t have to come with a 25 years and out unreduced pension. Other HR related institutional costs like CAF provision of primary healthcare wouldn’t have to be borne. Hiring people to work in Canada without the same mobility expectations would probably be easier; in some respects.probably it would become a farm team for uniformed SF recruiting. Most of the advantages would probably be economic efficiency ones.

Against this there are definitely plenty of disadvantages; a larger pool of OFP deployable SF gives CAF tons more flexibility. It’s costlier and less efficient, but operationally almost certainly better.

I’m not taking a strongly considered position either way; people closer to the problem would be better for that. Though personally I would lean to give CAF the PYs and funding. I’m just saying if CAF/DND wanted civilian armed security with long guns and good kit and training, it’s definitely doable.

I’ve seen SF spoken of mostly in the RCAF context, but will they play a role at navy, army, or CANSOF force protection?

Now that the Commissionaires have lost the right of first refusal for GoC protective services I suspect we'll see a lot of new providers pop up in an attempt to capitalize on that (notwithstanding the crap storm that came out of the lates CRA contract). Some may even recruit and plan for this eventuality.

 

[ytz]

If you would think back to those distant days for a moment, I am assuming you have a standard 4 year degree possibly enhanced later with a masters. So you have taken 20% of your working career just to get started. I am also assuming, which is dangerous territory, that your specialized subjects brought you to your current career. Could you have gotten to the same point practical knowledge wise with a course or courses dedicated to that specialized subject matter in a shorter time with possibly greater insight and knowledge producing a more useful ab initio employee? Or was that general information a necessary part of your maturity?
I ask because both teaching, nursing, and flying amongst many others I am sure, have gone from specialized training only to a mandatory degree and I wonder if we are wasting resources in areas where we could save time, money and end up with a better employee as a result

I have said this before. Today's high school graduate isn't anything like yesterday's high school graduate. This largely means that a program like OCTP would fail spectacularly today.

It's amazing how many folks here will get worked up about the recent increases in failure at CFLRS and then think it's a great idea to lower standards further.

I get it. A lot of folks think university degrees are pointless. I don't even entirely disagree with the sentiment. Unfortunately, that time period and education is necessary to produce a mature individual who can handle officership. That's just where society and the education system are at these days.

And this is before we discuss how we got to a fully degree'd officer corps. Hello Somalia Inquiry.

 

[ytz]

I’ve seen SF spoken of mostly in the RCAF context, but will they play a role at navy, army, or CANSOF force protection?

I strongly suspect once SF gets rolling, there will be more demand for the trade. You can go SharePoint surfing to see where this is going. Or if you have MESH access. I fully expect the CA and RCN to come calling once they see what SF does in Cold Lake, Bagotville, Trenton, etc.

I can even see substantial descoping of the MP trade, in favour of SF.

 

[brihard]

I strongly suspect once SF gets rolling, there will be more demand for the trade. You can go SharePoint surfing to see where this is going. Or if you have MESH access. I fully expect the CA and RCN to come calling once they see what SF does in Cold Lake, Bagotville, Trenton, etc.

I can even see substantial descoping of the MP trade, in favour of SF.

I’ve been out for a few years now, I don’t have access to any of that. I’m just a dirty civvie now, drinking from the RUMINT.

 

[ArmyRick]

Another good watch from Northern perspective. Some very good questions getting asked. And we need some answers in this Carney Liberal Canada of "Trust us, don't ask" governing.

Why is the EU discussing our "associate membership" while our Liberal government won't discuss it in Canada's parliament

 

[daftandbarmy]

I don't think you can blame Carney for the BC results as much as Eby:

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

 

[HavokFour]

Taking measures to combat the obvious scapegoating that's currently happening with how things may be shaping up for a particular side.

[Bloomberg]Canada Bans Its Diplomats From Being Seen With US Candidates​

Archive

 

[Kirkhill]

Germany leads push against EU’s ‘associate membership’ label for Canada

Governments are split over the idea, which Ursula von der Leyen floated in her 2026 State of the Union address.

www.politico.eu

Europe not so sure it wants Canada.

 

[brihard]

Germany leads push against EU’s ‘associate membership’ label for Canada

Governments are split over the idea, which Ursula von der Leyen floated in her 2026 State of the Union address.

www.politico.eu

Europe not so sure it wants Canada.

Looks Ike they’re hung up on the term to use but actively want to push forward on the actual tangible initiatives. That’s fine; the name doesn’t particularly matter.