Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[MilEME09]

The one hang up in see in my world would be PCF driver courses. I can't see the Regs being too keen on using their kit to teach a reserve tpr TAPV or LAV but I suppose they could either a) send them home early or b) give them the qual anyways and now they're investing a cadre of trained troops who will eventually be able to be called in for augmentation.

Skill fade happens regardless reg or reserve. I've had reg force techs posted in from 1 RCHA, after 4 years at a reserve unit doing small arms, get posted back I bet they aren't proficient any more on m777. That's okay but a reserve tech getting the course and using it maybe once a year isn't. Training to the same level means we can shorten the delta on work up training.

 

[PrairieFella]

Added benefit of providing employment for military spouses. I'm sure plenty of them would be happy to take a CR-04/05 position in a Garrison OR, especially in limited job markets like Pet, Shilo or Wainwright. They'd be cheaper too.

 

[PrairieFella]

Skill fade happens regardless reg or reserve. I've had reg force techs posted in from 1 RCHA, after 4 years at a reserve unit doing small arms, get posted back I bet they aren't proficient any more on m777. That's okay but a reserve tech getting the course and using it maybe once a year isn't. Training to the same level means we can shorten the delta on work up training.

I agree wholeheartedly.

 

[MilEME09]

Oh look someone mentioning how broken our reserve system is too

Michel Maisonneuve: Neglected reserves highlight the dire state of our military

Budget cuts have meant reduced equipment and training and more sweeping of hangar floors. Is it any wonder recruitment is a problem?

nationalpost.com

 

[Furniture]

Essentially, yeah.


Or pay them, or get those operational folks to backfill if needed. I do not subscribe to the belief that Cpl Bloggins FSA needs to be posted to CF School X because it might possibly need someone to work extra innings.


Yes.... and? Sounds like Staff Officer 101 to me.


Agreed. Perhaps if our Claims system was not archaic and cumbersome, pers wouldn't be wary of not having an advance. Members could.. you know.... receive their reimbursement after the crisis in a timely manner instead of the latter


So plan for it? Ensure members have kit prior to loading them in a HRU postion?


We very clearly don't because we very clearly need more personnel to fill operational gaps than the "I fucked up my planning" gaps.

I very swiftly will blame our "DND/CAF Defence Team" bullshit mentality in poisoning the well for CAF members believing a garrison/NCR/shore billet is something to aspire to. Perhaps peoe wouldn't burn out so fast in the Bns, Wings, and Fleets if they had sufficient personnel to do a proper managed readiness cycle. Instead, we use Garrison Support as a means to "give Bloggins a rest."

The only reason he needs a rest is because there aren't enough folks on the operational side to ensure Bloggins isn't getting double or triple tapped.

On top of this, we could also go back to the notion that the CAF isn't a career for everyone, and that's perfectly fine. If your family can't support you moving/deploying/sailing as much as we need, you can find employment elsewhere. We'll send you on your way with training, experience, and a smile and a handshake.

 

[PuckChaser]

Stick every single CA tank in Latvia.

Run the Armoured school out of there.

Doesnt survive first contact with the massive L101 TD cuts.

Take PRes Augmentees for 1-3 year class C’s for that as well.

So....basically CT them to the RegF for a VIE of 3 years where they are restricted posted to Latvia? Other than single folks I don't see many biting on that at all.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

On top of this, we could also go back to the notion that the CAF isn't a career for everyone, and that's perfectly fine. If your family can't support you moving/deploying/sailing as much as we need, you can find employment elsewhere. We'll send you on your way with training, experience, and a smile and a handshake.

Within reason, ofcourse.

Fucking the troops about just because you can has been a huge contributing factor to the mess we find ourselves in.

I have absolutely no issues deploying or supporting operations. My family has the support structure it needs here to support me doing that. Posting me geographically every 2 years because "operational reasons/breadth of experience..."
... get the heck outta here with that.

Keep folks operational yes, but .ake sure we enable that success by not actively putting a stick in the wheels for them readiness wise.

 

[KevinB]

Doesnt survive first contact with the massive L101 TD cuts.


So....basically CT them to the RegF for a VIE of 3 years where they are restricted posted to Latvia? Other than single folks I don't see many biting on that at all.

I said 1–3. So some for 1 and some single folks who maybe want the money or adventure (or to pay off a divorce).

 

[Furniture]

Within reason, ofcourse.

Fucking the troops about just because you can has been a huge contributing factor to the mess we find ourselves in.

I have absolutely no issues deploying or supporting operations. My family has the support structure it needs here to support me doing that. Posting me geographically every 2 years because "operational reasons/breadth of experience..."
... get the heck outta here with that.

Keep folks operational yes, but .ake sure we enable that success by not actively putting a stick in the wheels for them readiness wise.

That works for some jobs, but not all. Some trades have small dets spread out across the country, and not moving some means others are forced to pick up the slack/bad postings.

There needs to be reason, but right now we seem to leaning a bit too much into the "but my family", and not enough into "it's your job".

 

[rmc_wannabe]

That works for some jobs, but not all. Some trades have small dets spread out across the country, and not moving some means others are forced to pick up the slack/bad postings.

There needs to be reason, but right now we seem to leaning a bit too much into the "but my family", and not enough into "it's your job".

Oh I agree with you. Balance and all that.

I am part of a Corps that has historically posted 2 folks that swapped places, passing one another on the highway to go on IR, strictly because "well... reasons." Its actually now part of the training for CMs to not do what the RCCS did.

We can definitely have a priority for the needs of the service, without being wasteful/careless with HR and associated cost moves to power flex or punish on our members.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I recall a case with the AESOp CM where one person was posted to a school job “because he was in an operational unit too long”, while the person who wanted to school job was forced to go to the operational unit. Net result: two unhappy people and an immediate release in a stressed trade and tens of thousands of money spent on moves for no gain to the CAF.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

I recall a case with the AESOp CM where one person was posted to a school job “because he was in an operational unit too long”, while the person who wanted to school job was forced to go to the operational unit. Net result: two unhappy people and an immediate release in a stressed trade and tens of thousands of money spent on moves for no gain to the CAF.

This was the SOP for Sigs folks who were "out of the field" too long... or "in Bde too long".... or "at the school too long".... or "in the NCR too long...."

Millions upon millions of dollars spent in IR, Cost Moves, Release postings, and any other number of reasons because someone with no HR skills or training had an opinion on what was "best" for the trade and the member.

 

[Quirky]

I recall a case with the AESOp CM where one person was posted to a school job “because he was in an operational unit too long”, while the person who wanted to school job was forced to go to the operational unit. Net result: two unhappy people and an immediate release in a stressed trade and tens of thousands of money spent on moves for no gain to the CAF.

CAF still doesn’t get it. The stick in bike spokes meme would apply in this situation.

 

[GK .Dundas]

It's an easy out to blame our political leadership for all our problems. Personally I'd say it was 60-40 for our problems with the systems we put in place being major reasons for our problems.

 

[RangerRay]

John Ivison at the G&M isn’t impressed with the Liberals on defence spending.

Opinion: Trudeau’s Liberals are full of promises on everything except Canada’s highest priority: defence

Some of the prime minister’s recent announcements are outside federal jurisdiction and not likely to become a reality before the next election; however, boosting Canada’s defences is of critical importance

www.theglobeandmail.com

OPINION

Trudeau’s Liberals are full of promises on everything except Canada’s highest priority: defence​

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/authors/john-ibbitson/
JOHN IBBITSON
PUBLISHED 6 HOURS AGOUPDATED 2 HOURS AGO
The federal government has become strangely surreal. Each day, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announces new initiatives that are some combination of (a) unnecessary, (b) outside federal jurisdiction and (c) unlikely to be realized before the next federal election.
Meanwhile, the government remains silent on the most pressing issue, and one for which it is 100 per cent responsible: shoring up Canada’s defences in a world growing more dangerous by the day.
Several recent announcements have been about housing. The Liberals are making large sums available to accelerate housing construction, provided provinces and municipalities meet federal requirements to loosen zoning restrictions, accelerate approvals and increase density.


This is an egregious intrusion by Ottawa into an area of provincial jurisdiction, and Ontario and Quebec governments swiftly rejected the proposal. But at least there is some hope for a negotiated agreements. Other announcements have been equally intrusive, but have much less hope of ever becoming real.
As part of a renters’ bill of rights, the Liberals want to make it easier for renters to have their rent payments count toward their credit score. This could involve a great deal of red tape for landlords, and could hurt more than help renters who miss a payment.
How likely is it that such a complex new agreement would be in place before the next election, which polls suggest the Liberals are likely to lose, or that it would survive in a Conservative government under Pierre Poilievre?
Then there was Monday’s announcement of a new national program to provide meals for schoolchildren in need. Negotiating a new federal-provincial-territorial school food program agreement – or, more likely, 13 separate and asymmetrical agreements – by the target date of the 2024-25 school year seems ... ambitious.

Little of what is being announced is likely to see the light of day, or to long remain in it.
Something that should have seen the light of day long ago is the long-promised but still-not-delivered defence review. Not only is defence an area of exclusive federal jurisdiction, it should be the single highest priority of any national government. Instead, Canada’s military is an embarrassment.
All NATO members have committed to spending at least 2 per per cent of GDP on defence, with 20 per cent of that money going to equipment. But while other NATO members have ramped up defence spending in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the Liberals continue to dither and delay. As a result, according to the latest NATO calculations, Canada is the only NATO member that falls below both 2 per cent of GDP in spending and also below 20 per cent in spending on equipment. We have the worst-funded military in the alliance.
This is frightening. It leaves this country vulnerable to incursions by Russia and China in our Arctic territories.


It angers the United States, which expects Canada to contribute its share to the modernization of NORAD’s air and space defence.
It causes European nations to question Canada’s commitment to protecting the security of Europe in the face of an increasingly hostile and aggressive Russia.
And it makes Canada’s efforts to be taken seriously in the Indo-Pacific region a joke.
“Canada is back,” Mr. Trudeau told the world in 2015. The exact opposite is true. Because of the Liberal government’s unwillingness to spend on defence, Canada today has a lower standing in the eyes of both allies and adversaries than at any time since the outbreak of the Second World War.


Finding the money needed for defence won’t be easy. Bringing Canada’s military up to NATO standards would cost about $20-billion annually, paid for through tax increases or cuts to federal transfers for health, education and social services.
Everyone wants meals for schoolchildren who need them. But defence should be the highest priority. In any case, other NATO countries are able to properly fund their military while sustaining social programs. So can we.
Mr. Trudeau needs to release the defence review. The April 16 budget should commit major funds for defence, and show where the money is to come from. Mr. Poilievre should lay out his own plan for meeting Canada’s defence commitments.
A federal renters’ bill of rights is surreal. It’s time for this Liberal government to get real, and focus on defence.

 

[QV]

On top of this, we could also go back to the notion that the CAF isn't a career for everyone, and that's perfectly fine. If your family can't support you moving/deploying/sailing as much as we need, you can find employment elsewhere. We'll send you on your way with training, experience, and a smile and a handshake.

The recruiting strategy would have to change. You know, hire young mobile folks with no baggage.

 

[Kirkhill]

John Ivison at the G&M isn’t impressed with the Liberals on defence spending.

Opinion: Trudeau’s Liberals are full of promises on everything except Canada’s highest priority: defence

Some of the prime minister’s recent announcements are outside federal jurisdiction and not likely to become a reality before the next election; however, boosting Canada’s defences is of critical importance

www.theglobeandmail.com

Even worse when you think that article was written by John Ibbitson, not John Ivison.

 

[JLB50]

John Ivison at the G&M isn’t impressed with the Liberals on defence spending.

Opinion: Trudeau’s Liberals are full of promises on everything except Canada’s highest priority: defence

Some of the prime minister’s recent announcements are outside federal jurisdiction and not likely to become a reality before the next election; however, boosting Canada’s defences is of critical importance

www.theglobeandmail.com

Almost every major newspaper in the country, regardless of their political slant, has reported on the alarming lack of commitment to NATO by our government. Considering how Canada was one of the founders of NATO in the first place, it’s a sad comment on our times. Frankly, I’m disgusted with all the political parties for not having the cajones to push for a significantly stronger defence capability, but especially with Justin’s LPC which seems to almost welcome foreign meddling in our affairs until the meddling becomes public knowledge.

 

[PrairieFella]

Almost every major newspaper in the country, regardless of their political slant, has reported on the alarming lack of commitment to NATO by our government. Considering how Canada was one of the founders of NATO in the first place, it’s a sad comment on our times. Frankly, I’m disgusted with all the political parties for not having the cajones to push for a significantly stronger defence capability, but especially with Justin’s LPC which seems to almost welcome foreign meddling in our affairs until the meddling becomes public knowledge.

I truly believe history will remember Prime Minister Trudeau as our weakest and worst prime minister. Not since the Great Depression has the quality of life gone down for Canadians, but somehow he managed to find a way to steer the country in that direction (that said, the provinces certainly have a slice of that pie as well). Man, we have some terrible leaders across the board.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Essentially, yeah.

I don't have qualms with the rest of your post, because ya planning. With the exception the your CSS folks aren't held responsible when the Ops folks fail, you know the old adage, "your lack of planning does not constitute and emergency on my part". Because right now a good portion of our work load is propping up failed G3 type folks who keep fucking up.

As for your quoted bit, and frankly to be short, No.

The RCN has a requirement to be able to provide a sea to shore ratio for all its people regardless of trade. Those shore billets were establish to rotate people through the levels of readiness. I will advise you're looking at this from an Army/Garrison centric position and that does not fit the requirements of the RCN. To be short again, our tempo is much higher than any field unit and along with RCAF Sqns, like LRP, we need to be able to give people time away from the deck plates or we simply burn through folks; in fact its what's compounding the issue the RCN is in now. We've burned out so many people they have clogged up the rotation and it ends up being circle that is self perpetuating.

Also those individuals, not on ships, and fit, are FGing for various other positions and operations; and filling Base responsibilities such as NERT, BASF, Standing Guard, Base Duties ect ect.