The Defence Budget [superthread]

[jmt18325]

So. Have you finally learned something about this forum's membership?

I'm here for a reason - I know that people generally know what they're talking about.  There are just some times that I'm going to go with official sources that I can actually see.  I understand that's frustrating to some of you, but I have no way to verify individual things that people say.

 

[jmt18325]

Agreed t142. Why would the minister of finance dump more money into an organization that needs its own bureaucracy to be beaten with mukluks and slapped with seal skins. They can't even buy boots and trucks without frigging it up.  As for all the consultations, that's just another way of saying "we don't know what to do", and then using the budget to make it official.

Lets hope there is some new funding in the fall, or if not new funding, some type of reorganization.  DND needs more money, or to stop being all things to all people.  Regardless of which, it needs to spend the money it has better.

 

[jollyjacktar]

But I apologize for me disbelief before, if it makes you feel any better.

No need to apologize on my behalf.  We all lose.

 

[ballz]

Agreed t142. Why would the minister of finance dump more money into an organization that needs its own bureaucracy to be beaten with mukluks and slapped with seal skins. They can't even buy boots and trucks without frigging it up.  As for all the consultations, that's just another way of saying "we don't know what to do", and then using the budget to make it official.

I made a joke the other day about how, as much as I support having a large military, I don't know if I can support a single cent of funding increases for the CAF. If we increase spending by 1 billion each year, that's another $800 million worth of ammo the troops will have to shoot off in March.

 

[suffolkowner]

I'm afraid as long as the CF continue to make due there will be pressure to reduce cost mostly from O&M. I have seen it to many times in private industry. Lack of catastrophic failure provides all the proof that is needed to continue the current COA

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I know that people generally know what they're talking about. 

Or, we know from the opposite view of yours ( you are outside, looking in thru a window) from certain indicators, trends, historical things, whatever that the money is in a certain state.  A good indicator is things like people saying they can't get uniforms...operational dress, to be specific, boots, postings are on hold or cancelled...there are a variety of things that can make our spider sense tingle; for some of us, its also because we've been around long enough to have 'seen it before'.  We're pretty good at knowing when the official party line in the "news" (using the term loosely, in the form it often is today...) is actually a banana, or a log of shit painted yellow.  :2c:

 

[NavyShooter]

So. Have you finally learned something about this forum's membership?

I honestly doubt he has.

I suspect that he'll carry on with his blather, enlightening us with his wisdom, and most of our wit (and wits) will be lost on him.

*shrug*

I'm not surprised to see what we see in the budget.

What I am happy DID NOT happen with the budget was the potential for the Chretien era pay freeze as a means to control the deficit.  (Or mitigate it a bit.  Hard to mitigate a hemorrhage such as this is looking to be over the next few years.)

NS

 

[jmt18325]

For context, adjusted for economy and inflation, these deficits are actually rather small. 

 

[Jarnhamar]

Another glorious laural for the anyone but conservative crowd eh

 

[Occam]

Another glorious laural for the anyone but conservative crowd eh

Considering the Liberals beat the CPC by 1.3 million votes in the election, the CPC must've ticked off a lot more than ABC, or ABC had a massively larger impact on the vote than anyone is willing to admit.  Since the former is far more likely, why am I still reading comments like yours placing blame on ABC?

I supported ABC, and stand by it.  Harper had to go.  Don't confuse that with condoning the Liberals' performance to date. 

You folks taking potshots at ABC would probably better spend your time figuring out a way ahead with the weak showing of candidates for leadership of the CPC.  ABC didn't put the CPC where they are today, Harper did...and the history books will reflect that. 

Quite frankly, looking at some other sites, I'm a little disturbed at veterans threatening other veterans with physical violence, calling them traitors and the like, simply because they supported ABC.  If that's that the CPC stands for - and some of these groups are outwardly supportive of the CPC - they will never see my vote again. 

Brothers in arms, my ass.

 

[George Wallace]

What I am happy DID NOT happen with the budget was the potential for the Chretien era pay freeze as a means to control the deficit.  (Or mitigate it a bit.  Hard to mitigate a hemorrhage such as this is looking to be over the next few years.)

NS

Not that a pay freeze has more or less been in effect for several years already, due to the bargaining of the various PS Unions.  As I understand it, the last union has come to terms and we will soon see the resulting pay raises, back pay, etc.........As long as the Phoenix System gets fixed so that the members of those unions can enjoy the benefits of their efforts.  [    (CAF is still not on Phoenix, so it matters not to them.)

 

[Occam]

I haven't dug into it to find more accurate figures, but I know that a sizeable portion of PIPSC is at a stalemate and going to binding conciliation.  My own union has a tentative agreement that won't go to ratification until May (though it's a relatively small portion of the entire PS).  We've been told not to expect pay action on the tentative agreement until Christmas.

I don't think as many unions have settled as you indicate.  It may constitute enough for the CF to start looking at numbers, though.  I'll look into it.

 

[George Wallace]

I haven't dug into it to find more accurate figures, but I know that a sizeable portion of PIPSC is at a stalemate and going to binding conciliation. 

Was talking to a member of PIPSC Tuesday night, and it sounded like they had come to terms.  I could ask the wife, but she doesn't follow the bargaining with a fine toothed comb. 

 

[Halifax Tar]

Considering the Liberals beat the CPC by 1.3 million votes in the election, the CPC must've ticked off a lot more than ABC, or ABC had a massively larger impact on the vote than anyone is willing to admit.  Since the former is far more likely, why am I still reading comments like yours placing blame on ABC?

I supported ABC, and stand by it.  Harper had to go.  Don't confuse that with condoning the Liberals' performance to date. 

You folks taking potshots at ABC would probably better spend your time figuring out a way ahead with the weak showing of candidates for leadership of the CPC.  ABC didn't put the CPC where they are today, Harper did...and the history books will reflect that. 

Quite frankly, looking at some other sites, I'm a little disturbed at veterans threatening other veterans with physical violence, calling them traitors and the like, simply because they supported ABC.  If that's that the CPC stands for - and some of these groups are outwardly supportive of the CPC - they will never see my vote again. 

Brothers in arms, my ***.

I dunno.  I wasn't as militant as many ABC folks were but I felt that it was time for Harper to go and I voted accordingly to that.  Now I will openly admit I think I was dupped and that we would have better off with Harper.  That's just me though.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Clearly, DND and the Canadian Forces are not going to see any significant new money, regardless of who forms government. Given that a ceiling of $20 billion seems to be all that Canadians are willing to spend on defence, it seems to me (without prejudging the outcome of the Defence Review later this year) that is past time for us to structure the military along the lines of the capabilities that we can afford, rather than the capabilities we want to have.

Since personnel is by far our largest Departmental expenditure, I would start there- both in terms of the size of the CF (and DND) and the rank composition (higher ranked people cost more). To what extent could we make better use of Reservists? Do we need so many GOFOs and CWOs? Are we better off having civilian employees doing certain functions that will never deploy and save the uniforms for functions that do?

In short- if we are to survive as a fighting force, a lot of rice bowls need to get broken. I am not optimistic.

 

[dapaterson]

If you are interested in historical rank by rank breakdowns of the CAF, there is interesting data from TBS for the period 90-91 to 02-03 at: https://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/report/orp/2007/er-ed/vol2/vol210-eng.asp

Over that time period, the number of CWOs was reduced by about 40%; the number of GOFOs by about 50%; the number of LCols by about 16%; and overall strength by about 30%.

 

[Occam]

Was talking to a member of PIPSC Tuesday night, and it sounded like they had come to terms.  I could ask the wife, but she doesn't follow the bargaining with a fine toothed comb.

There are multiple bargaining groups within PIPSC.  For example, the CS, AVS, RE and SH groups have a tentative agreement or have ratified.  However, the AFS and NR groups have not.  There are more; I just didn't feel like looking any longer.

 

[Scott]

There are multiple bargaining groups within PIPSC.  For example, the CS, AVS, RE and SH groups have a tentative agreement or have ratified.  However, the AFS and NR groups have not.  There are more; I just didn't feel like looking any longer.

Indeed. Outside what you've posted, I know of at least one more that hasn't reached an agreement.

 

[George Wallace]

OK.....A much longer a wait then....... [:'(

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Ladies & Gentlemen,

In March 2015, The Parliamentary Budget Office published a report titled “Fiscal Sustainability of Canada’s National Defence Program”.

Link to document provided:

http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiauoW05uzSAhVMzIMKHUmnAEAQFgg1MAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pbo-dpb.gc.ca%2Ffiles%2Ffiles%2FDefence_Analysis_EN.pdf&usg=AFQjCNHclg1rlehU0cXYrco9lLrlI1pJsg&sig2=QsrC6u_G9xcIbrHzUa99OA

The document highlights, in succinct detail, what exactly the problems are with respect to Canada’s current National Defence Program.  I’ll give you the conclusion of the document to save you some reading:

“As a result of the underinvestment through the 1990s, the model illustrates the cumulative affordability gap that existed until the early 2000s. The model shows that it was only with the significant spending increases seen in the latter half of the 2000s that the affordability gap was closed and capability was able to be maintained and to some extent re-built. However, the recent cuts to the defence budget point to an impending affordability gap beginning in this fiscal year.
The outcomes of a fiscal gap in the defence program are beyond the scope of this paper. However, if program costs and the budget allocation are not brought to equilibrium, there will be a reduction in the capabilities of the current force structure. This means a reduction in the numbers and types of equipment and potentially a reduction in the number of personnel in the Armed Forces42. This would also result in the government falling short of its CFDS commitments.
Ultimately, it is the role of policy makers to decide on the future role of the defence program, the makeup of the force structure to support that role, and the budgetary allocation required to support that force structure.”

I’ve also uploaded a couple of charts which show the current predicament we’re in and also explain how we got there.  If you read the document and look at Fig 3-6 in the document, you’ll note that the only way to afford our military is to revert to a 1997 Force Structure Calibration, which is the historic low point in our Defence Expenditure.

One of two things needs to happen:

1.  We drastically increase the Defence Budget; or
2.  We make significant adjustments to our present Force Structure by cutting personnel, equipment, operations, etc.  No more doing more with less, the future is all about doing less with less.