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

[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.