- Reaction score
I would argue that the integration of the armed forces that occurred during the mid '60s accomplished that and that unification wasn't really needed and went too far (just a vanity project of Hellyer IMO). Going back to an integrated tri-service isn't likely to happen, as it probably would've been done by now.
From what I've read in these forums, DND HQ is bloated and over staffed. Splitting DND into 2 departments may not require more admin personnel. If we had a Ministry of Defence, with a Dept. of National Security (with Army, AF, SOF, etc. and a Dept. of Maritime Security, with Navy, Coast Guard, and other sea assets), might not require setting up another admin system (just splitting up the bloated one we have and using it more efficiently).
I realize that this idea isn't at all likely to happen, but I've never been a fan of unification, went too far IMO. DND might as well be changed to the Dept. of International Commitments, as that 's basically it's function, NOT defending Canada. As pack ice melts and the Arctic opens up more, there will be more interest from China and Russia in the Arctic and we will need a more robust navy to defend our territory there. Maybe a separate navy might not be the answer, but I don't see the unified armed forces as being effective in defending the Arctic (more focus is on international commitment fulfillment than defending our territory). Something needs to change IMO.
Is the issue that unification was a bad idea or an idea done badly? Although I'm not familiar with their individual structures, a number of nations have a singular defence structure. Bureaucracy is an organism. Each individual 'client base' may be smaller, but when you create two of something from one of something, you have to replicate functions. How would the RCAF fit into such a split, particularly in relation to its multiple NATO/NORAD/SAR roles? Would it be in the new Department of National Security? International Commitments?
The Ontario government went to a shared services IT model many years ago. It took several years for the service delivery bugs to work out, and many individual ministries and departments with specialized IT needs (sortware, hardware, security, etc.) still had to maintain their own services, but now negotiate or deal with shared services who manage the backbone.