Canada Defence Force

M

Mikeymike

Active Member
The government looks to be making more defence cuts.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/department-national-defence-budget-billion-1.6981974

I think the Canadian government and parties needs to have a serious look at what level of capability they wish to maintain and ensure adequate funding for it. Currently, they seem to desire a wide range of capabilities but are only willing to finance a portion of them. They need to prioritize what they actually want from the forces and fully commit to them, rather than half-assing them all resulting in brittle capabilities. This would mean admitting to the public that the forces can't do everything that's expected of them but at least you would have proper capabilities.
 
John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Mikeymike said:
The government looks to be making more defence cuts.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/department-national-defence-budget-billion-1.6981974

I think the Canadian government and parties needs to have a serious look at what level of capability they wish to maintain and ensure adequate funding for it. Currently, they seem to desire a wide range of capabilities but are only willing to finance a portion of them. They need to prioritize what they actually want from the forces and fully commit to them, rather than half-assing them all resulting in brittle capabilities. This would mean admitting to the public that the forces can't do everything that's expected of them but at least you would have proper capabilities.
Click to expand...
IMHO defence cuts will continue until allies apply some serious pressure on Canada.
 
John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
This is the Nation Post's take on yesterday's defence announcement. Junior has recently announced several billions for AI research, billions for new housing and the dental program is now starting along with all sorts of new programs. The defence update is the latest expenditure. Currently the deficit is $40 billion. Where exactly is the required money coming from? Also, no mention of the massive amount of money needed for new electrical infrastructure needed for junior's carbon free Canada.

John Ivison: The new Liberal defence policy's in no hurry to face dangerous global realities (msn.com)
 
John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
This article discusses what a 2% GDP could look like. Note that it was prepared prior to this week's defence update so some numbers are different. As per the paper, the update does strengthen Arctic defence but falls short in other areas. Also discussed in this article is subs and a recommendation some should be nuclear. There is also a link suggesting Canada will be the worst performing advanced economy out to 2060, not an encouraging prospect for defence.

What Spending Two Per Cent of GDP on National Defence Means for Canada - Canadian Global Affairs Institute (cgai.ca)
 
D

Delta204

Active Member
Lots to unpack from this defense update - even though the submarine topic is bound to dominate the discussion. The next few years will be critical if these initiatives are to be successful, I do think the report acknowledges that more needs to be done besides replacement / buying kit; there's lots of large organizational challenges ahead like improving procurement, rebuilding military housing that is in very poor condition to help with retention etc. I hope the leadership (military and civilian) is up to the task; will likely need a strong and competent Defence Minister to see this through.

There is a veiled comment on page 22 that mention the Five Eyes partners and development of military capability. Could be setting the foundation for some type of AUKUS announcement down the road. While everyone wonders about submarines (especially SSN's), I personally think Canada could makes it's own splash by partnering with the US on a different type of cutting edge military platform - my personal pick would be NGAD. If the US is willing to share SSN technology with close allies then I think programs like NGAD would also be potentially open? Could even name the RCAF variant Arrow II and finally correct a Canadian historical injustice!;)
 
John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Delta204 said:
Lots to unpack from this defense update - even though the submarine topic is bound to dominate the discussion. The next few years will be critical if these initiatives are to be successful, I do think the report acknowledges that more needs to be done besides replacement / buying kit; there's lots of large organizational challenges ahead like improving procurement, rebuilding military housing that is in very poor condition to help with retention etc. I hope the leadership (military and civilian) is up to the task; will likely need a strong and competent Defence Minister to see this through.

There is a veiled comment on page 22 that mention the Five Eyes partners and development of military capability. Could be setting the foundation for some type of AUKUS announcement down the road. While everyone wonders about submarines (especially SSN's), I personally think Canada could makes it's own splash by partnering with the US on a different type of cutting edge military platform - my personal pick would be NGAD. If the US is willing to share SSN technology with close allies then I think programs like NGAD would also be potentially open? Could even name the RCAF variant Arrow II and finally correct a Canadian historical injustice!;)
Click to expand...
I think NGAD is something the US won’t share with others, just like the F-22. At $300 billion each (low estimate) I guess pilot shortage wouldn’t be an issue though. Surface ships are a concern for me. I realize layered defence systems along with future directed energy weapons supposedly will protect surface ships but given recent advances in missile technologies and the increasing number of nations developing them I have my doubts. Add in AI and a sufficient number for a swarming attack…the odds don’t look good. SSNs are a significant investment but IMO offer the best combination of survivability and deterrent.
 
S

south

Well-Known Member
Sobering blog post in War on The Rocks regarding Canada’s defence readiness. The author posits a fundamental mismatch between Canadas self perception, awareness of changing environment, and willingness to fund the force appropriately. This leads to a force with ageing equipment, compounded by chronic personnel shortages leading to significantly reduced readiness when compared to NATO and other commitments.
 
John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
south said:
Sobering blog post in War on The Rocks regarding Canada’s defence readiness. The author posits a fundamental mismatch between Canada's self perception, awareness of changing environment, and willingness to fund the force appropriately. This leads to a force with ageing equipment, compounded by chronic personnel shortages leading to significantly reduced readiness when compared to NATO and other commitments.
Click to expand...

A good article that very accurately describes the current and near future condition of our armed forces. I would add that given Canada's poor economic performance combined with the long term planned acquisitions of new kit, the more distant future may not be great either. Despite some increased public awareness about the negative global situation, the general public apathy is a huge problem that allows pollies (almost forces them) to fund $hit to get re-elected. Sadly, I think only significant political and economic pressure from allies, especially from the US, will put a dent in this apathy. Realistically the odds of stuff hitting the fan within 5-10 years are pretty high now and even 5-7% GDP commitment now won't matter. Just my two cents.
 
D

Delta204

Active Member
John Fedup said:
Another voice pointing out how Canada needs to step up wrt defence spending. Limited effect on junior’s government IMHO. A new Conservative, perhaps better, but their record isn’t much better. A combined US and Canadian pressure effect could be successful with a new Conservative government….hopefully!

Click to expand...
Spending is one thing, but getting value for the money spent could perhaps be the bigger challenge. The current Defence Minister has even suggested this is a problem with his department. Blair steals a page from the Harper playbook to justify cuts to National Defence | CBC News

There have long been reports of a top heavy, growing bureaucracy that has plagued the armed forces - just like the rest of the Canadian public service. Forces top heavy with generals as rank and file significantly shrinks | Ottawa Citizen

Increased spending can come with all sorts of political challenges especially if it leads to an embarrassing waste of funds; I wonder if this accounts for much of the reluctance by the current government to meet these spending targets.
 
John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Delta204 said:
Spending is one thing, but getting value for the money spent could perhaps be the bigger challenge. The current Defence Minister has even suggested this is a problem with his department. Blair steals a page from the Harper playbook to justify cuts to National Defence | CBC News

There have long been reports of a top heavy, growing bureaucracy that has plagued the armed forces - just like the rest of the Canadian public service. Forces top heavy with generals as rank and file significantly shrinks | Ottawa Citizen

Increased spending can come with all sorts of political challenges especially if it leads to an embarrassing waste of funds; I wonder if this accounts for much of the reluctance by the current government to meet these spending targets.
Click to expand...
Certainly some valid points wrt to the DND bureaucracy, civilian and uniform. However, decades of screwing with defence budgets just enhanced the bureaucracy problem IMHO. Canada doesn’t have any competent leadership (military or political) to address defence needs for the evolving geopolitical $hitshow. Defence has not been a priority for any government in the last 35-40 years. We now are begetting see the consequences, at least some of us.
 
K

KipPotapych

Well-Known Member
“Today, the Prime Minister and I announced that Canada expects to spend two percent of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on defence by 2032. I believe that this represents a credible, responsible, and achievable target date, which will allow Canada to ramp up its spending and procurement capacity on a realistic timeline, in line with commitments by several allies who have made comparable pledges.”

Statement from Defence Minister Bill Blair on Canada’s work to reach the NATO defence investment pledge by 2032 - Canada.ca

The Minister of National Defence, the Honourable Bill Blair, issued the following statement today
www.canada.ca www.canada.ca

On the other hand,

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre says he won't commit to meeting the two per cent NATO defence spending target if he becomes prime minister.

"I make promises that I can keep and right now we are, our country, is broke," Poilievre said. "I'm inheriting a dumpster fire when it comes to the budget.

"Every time I make a financial commitment, I'm going to make sure I've pulled out my calculator and done all the math. People are sick and tired of politicians just announcing that they're going to spend money without figuring out how they're going to pay for it."

 
John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Here’s an article suggesting recent cuts were not directed at the bureaucracy but rather at basic maintenance. It is true and worth repeating, you can’t fix stupid. Oh BTW junior, stupid starts at the top.

Loading…

www.cbc.ca
 
John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Well, some more "you can't fix stupid". Can't believe the US hasn't slammed Canada over this. I am sure there will be a response no later than after the election. Hard to believe these fools would actually think the AUKUS members would want such an unreliable partner as a tier two member...tier FO is more realistic.

MSN

www.msn.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top