I'll believe it when I see it.
Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending
- Thread starter Maxman1
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 8,292
- Points
- 1,160
"You go to war with the army you have ..."
The big difference is that in WW2 one could crank out a ship pretty quickly compared to today. On the other hand WW2 was over in a short six years. The Cold War is now in its 8th decade and heating up again.
It's the lulls in between - those periods when everyone calls for a peace dividend - that throws everything out of whack.
That and having playboy leaders and their imbecile advisors who haven't a clue as to how the world really functions and only concern themselves with the next election and not what's best for the country's security and prosperity.
IMO, the big difference between war and peace is that the peace time plans almost invariably fail to survive contact with the enemy. The forces a revised course of action and ultimately the new course of action is predicated on killing as many of the enemy as quickly as possible with the materials to hand.
World War II was won in large part by commercial whalers and concrete liberty ships. Pre-war designs were still on the slips on Sept 3 or were available in small numbers.... and were very expensive.
The Air Force went through something similar with the plywood wonder, the Mosquito. The Army lucked out with the Sten when the Thompson was too expensive and difficult to make.
....
The Ukrainians have been devising work-arounds at a high rate of knots seeking to kill as many Russians as possible. They have begged and borrowed as much as they can and have started to build new factories for conventional munitions and vehicles. But at they same time they, and the people that share their geo-political situation, like the Poles, the Turks, the Balts and, to an extent the Swedish led Scandinavians, have been aggressively pursuing "the other thing".
So far they have progressed from making cases of molotov cocktails to stymying the Russian advance, reversing about half of the incursion, chasing the Russian fleet out of Crimea and surviving for the best part of two years.
...
Whatever happens the solution is more likely to look like a whaler or a Mosquito than a cruiser or a Bolton Paul Defiant.
- Reaction score
- 21,915
- Points
- 1,260
I don’t think you are giving technology enough credit.
- Reaction score
- 8,292
- Points
- 1,160
Me? Not giving technology enough credit? You're daft!
I put my faith in technological innovation. I don't have much faith that institutions can innovate technologically or otherwise in a timely fashion.
Institutions demand more of the same. They want a better candle. They don't want a light bulb.
- Reaction score
- 21,915
- Points
- 1,260
The CAF is never going to get enough equipment. That’s been painfully evident for the last 70 years.
The issues is then ensuring that the equipment that is acquired is the best that one can get and works with one’s closes allies.
MilEME09
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,793
- Points
- 1,210
Cut $500 million then put it back and claim you increased spending. Brilliant move that no one saw coming.
globalnews.ca
Blair pushing PMO, Finance for more defence spending ahead of mini budget - National | Globalnews.ca
If Canada were to be embroiled in a major conflict, the military would run out of ammunition within “days,” according to the country's chief of defence staff.
globalnews.ca
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 8,721
- Points
- 1,040
The LPC government pissed away whatever "fiscal freedom of manoeuvre" it might have had remaining (after its initial post-election splurge and then pandemic mitigation) in order to buy NDP support to keep the LPC in government. The cuts being talked about now appear to be on the table in order to buy more NDP support. Actual interests of the country do not seem to have much weight in whatever passes for estimates of the situation.
"Efficiency" and "fraud and waste" tweaking and modest shuffling of money between silos won't do. Unless the federal government starts talking seriously about revenue (tax) increases (that amount to more than the mere virtue signal of introducing new brackets at the top end), and/or policy changes which massively remove constraints on private enterprises, and/or spending cuts which would have to include completely axing or at least delaying some of the new programs introduced in the past 8 years, observers should conclude the government is not serious about turning around the ongoing shrinkage of the CAF and (consequently) the country's capability to make meaningful military commitments to international obligations and other undertakings.
"Efficiency" and "fraud and waste" tweaking and modest shuffling of money between silos won't do. Unless the federal government starts talking seriously about revenue (tax) increases (that amount to more than the mere virtue signal of introducing new brackets at the top end), and/or policy changes which massively remove constraints on private enterprises, and/or spending cuts which would have to include completely axing or at least delaying some of the new programs introduced in the past 8 years, observers should conclude the government is not serious about turning around the ongoing shrinkage of the CAF and (consequently) the country's capability to make meaningful military commitments to international obligations and other undertakings.
Happy Guy
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 601
- Points
- 810
The Liberals' defence policy hits a fiscal wall
In brief: The defence policy will be driven by fiscal constraints vice Global and National Security realities. The LPC have "aspirations" to spend for targeted defence capabilities.
I'm guessing:
- longer project timelines for capital equipment purchases
- hawkish talk but not backed by substance
- even if the LPC are replaced by the CPC, balancing the books will be the priority
- defence capability and capacity will continue to diminish
- aspirations to buy drones, submarines, replenish ammunition stocks, material and equipment donated to Ukraine
There was a revelatory moment on the weekend as Defence Minister Bill Blair attempted to bridge the gap between rhetoric and reality in the Liberal government's spending plans for his department and the Canadian military.
Asked about an anticipated (and long overdue) update to the country's defence policy (supposedly made urgent two years ago by Russia's full-on invasion of Ukraine), Blair acknowledged that the reset is now being viewed through a fiscal lens.
"We said we're going to bring forward a new defence policy update. We've been working through that," Blair told CBC's Rosemary Barton Live on Sunday.
"The current fiscal environment that the country faces itself does require (that) that defence policy update ... recognize (the) fiscal challenges. And so it'll be part of ... our future budget processes."
WATCH: Canada needs to spend its defence dollars on the right things, minister says
Canada needs to spend more on the right things when it comes to defence, minister says
2 days ago
Duration 8:42
Rosemary Barton speaks with Minister of Defence Bill Blair from the Halifax International Security Forum about the preparedness of Canada's Armed Forces amid global conflict and whether he anticipates cuts to the Department of National Defence in the upcoming fall economic statement.
It's an important statement, in light of today's federal fiscal update. It also brings up a question: has the Trudeau government — which billed itself initially as an "evidence-based" government — viewed its existing defence policy through the lens of affordability?
For several weeks now, Blair has been called upon to defend a $1 billion annual reduction in planned defence spending during a time of geopolitical turmoil — part of the federal government's overall spending reduction plan.
After it initially denied it was cutting defence spending, the government's messaging shifted to focus on fiscal prudence and accountability to taxpayers squeezed by the high cost of living.
The release last week of federal budget estimates and supplementary appropriations effectively put a spike in the claim that the defence spending reductions don't amount to a cut. It also raised questions about whether the goals of the original defence policy are even being met.
What the estimates say, what the minister says
In 2017, the Liberal government estimated it would spend $29.8 billion at National Defence in the current budget year.
The supplementary budget estimates, meanwhile, record a total appropriation of $28.9 billion for defence in the current fiscal year — $500 million of which is destined not for the Canadian Armed Forces but for the Ukrainian military.
When you add up the difference, you find the "almost $1 billion" cut that the country's top military commander warned about — or the "$900 million and change" the deputy defence minister described.
And yet, at the Halifax International Security Forum over the weekend, Blair struck a decidedly hawkish tone in front of a hawkish audience.
"Although we are already investing in major new military capabilities in all domains, again, I will reiterate additional investments are needed and they will occur," he said Friday during his opening remarks. "We know that we need resources to put behind our aspirations."
- F-35 fighter jets to cost Canada nearly $74 billion: PBO
- Air force will have to wait even longer to get armed drones, Defence Department says
- High cost of living dragging down Armed Forces morale, chaplain general warns
Later, during a round of media interviews, the minister was a bit more specific.
"We need to spend more on the right things," he told CBC News.
"We need to spend more on munitions. We need to spend more on military platforms, planes, submarines and ships. We need to spend more on the equipment, the resources and the training that the Canadian Armed Forces needs."
The problem with Blair's remarks is how they keep bumping up against reality. Big cash injections to pay for 88 new F-35 fighter jets, new patrol frigates and even MQ-9 Reaper drones are still three to five years down the road.
An American F-35 fighter jet in flight. (Harald Tittel/The Associated Press)
MilEME09
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,793
- Points
- 1,210
Really we could use this as an opportunity to spur the economy, go a bit into the red and do a massive defense infrastructure/procurement push to drive the economy. Build new armouries, training facilities, etc across the whole country, housing for troops, buy more equipment that is built in Canada, like LAV's, logistical vehicles, electronics, expand ammunition facilities etc.
- Reaction score
- 18,721
- Points
- 1,280
Guaranteed that the opposition parties will then complain that the Govt is running deficits rather than balancing the budget. Or that it’s not going to benefit “the average Canadian”.
Happy to be proven wrong, but I have a feeling that I’m not.
- Reaction score
- 27,449
- Points
- 1,090
In a non zero number of locations, the CAF has infra demands that are forcing builders to import tradesmen from other locations.
That said, hoping there's a list of quick hit projects that can be executed next economic downturn...
That said, hoping there's a list of quick hit projects that can be executed next economic downturn...
- Reaction score
- 21,915
- Points
- 1,260
I’d argue Canada doesn’t need anymore LAV’s at least in current versions.
- Reaction score
- 8,292
- Points
- 1,160
Apparently the CAF isn't the only mob affected
Windsor police say they expect 1,600 Koreans to work at EV battery plant
Pierre Poilievre calls on Ottawa to make the contract with Stellantis and South Korean battery maker LG Energy Solution public
www.theglobeandmail.com
I suppose it could be worse. It could have been a Chinese contract.
MilEME09
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,793
- Points
- 1,210
No but other versions sure, AD, mortar carrier come to mind. Heck, push the export market more
- Reaction score
- 21,915
- Points
- 1,260
As we divest older Strykers, the export market will be nonexistent for Canada. Currently we can offer more options and cheaper than Canada can.
GDLS makes other systems though, and there should be some thought put into what else the CAF needs from London that isn’t 8 wheeled..
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 32,162
- Points
- 1,160
I think we have achieved 'Peak Liberal Party' 
The federal Liberal government has run a deficit every year since it was elected. It posted even bigger deficits during the COVID-19 pandemic as it scrambled to shore up an economy on the ropes during an unprecedented health crisis.
Now, with interest rates at a 20-year high, the cost to borrow all that money has spiked from $20.3 billion in 2020-21 to $46.5 billion in this fiscal year. The debt service charges will march even higher in the years ahead. Carrying the debt is expected to cost the federal treasury $60.7 billion in 2028-29, according to the economic statement.
That means debt service charges are now among the most costly line items in the federal budget.
To put that in perspective, Ottawa will spend $28.9 billion on the Canadian Armed Forces this fiscal year — about $18 billion less than what the government will send in payments to the banks and bondholders carrying Canada's debt.
Canada's debt charges are ballooning as Freeland tables a gloomy fall economic statement
Ottawa to spend $20.8B more than expected over the next six years — and post a $40B deficit this year
The federal Liberal government has run a deficit every year since it was elected. It posted even bigger deficits during the COVID-19 pandemic as it scrambled to shore up an economy on the ropes during an unprecedented health crisis.
Now, with interest rates at a 20-year high, the cost to borrow all that money has spiked from $20.3 billion in 2020-21 to $46.5 billion in this fiscal year. The debt service charges will march even higher in the years ahead. Carrying the debt is expected to cost the federal treasury $60.7 billion in 2028-29, according to the economic statement.
That means debt service charges are now among the most costly line items in the federal budget.
To put that in perspective, Ottawa will spend $28.9 billion on the Canadian Armed Forces this fiscal year — about $18 billion less than what the government will send in payments to the banks and bondholders carrying Canada's debt.
- Reaction score
- 17,019
- Points
- 1,010
Like father, like son….
MilEME09
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,793
- Points
- 1,210
You mean like every GoC since 1968?
- Reaction score
- 17,019
- Points
- 1,010
No.
Mulroney had balanced program spending by 1988, IIRC.
Chretien really took a wrecking ball to program spending, handing Martin balanced budgets in early 2000.
Harper largely ran small surpluses.
The Trudeau legacy is “debt”.
Similar threads
- Article
