Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Canada Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Canadian and Oz defence spending
DropBear    10/12/2006 12:23:59 AM
Why is it that so much is said about the poorly resourced defence force of Canada? I appreciate the Cold War is over and that the need for Canada to have bases in Europe etc under NATO isn't the same as it once was, but why are there so many issues wrt funding? If it simply a case of the Canadian Gov wanting to spend money on other social issues such as healthcare, education etc, then why does the CAF still seem to be in such dire circumstances? Our two countries have broadly similar populations, area and economic/resource riches, yet Oz seems able to spend on both military and other social programs. It is true that Oz is feeling the pinch with many block obsolescence issues across the ADF, however, our proposed purchases in the coming decades just seems light years ahead of you blokes. Why do you think this is?
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2
BFD15       10/12/2006 7:35:15 AM
 I Would suggest that your information is slightly flawed. The Canadian forces are not what they use to be, but the times are a changing.  In comparison to the Australian military and defence spending I think you will find there is not much difference.  The new govt has just started moving towards a 20 billion dollar budget that includes much of the exact same purchases the Australian govt is making. Canada is building 3 joint support ships that are a hybrid between an oiler and an amphib. buying 4-5 C-17s , 16 c-130-Js,16 chinook helicopters, 2000 support vehicles ,75 Nyala armoured vehicles, 8 Orca training ships, is part of the joint strike fighter program , is testing out an Amphibous Assault ship next month to look at buying 2 and the single class surface combat ship project is still moving ahead to replace the destroyers in the future. 
  As well Canada is maintaining close to 2700 troops on overseas missions that include 2000 troops with armour and main battle tanks in full combat in Afganistan.  I think things are not as bad as you think.
 
Quote    Reply

DropBear    Don't get me wrong...   10/12/2006 10:48:56 AM
 
I don't personally know what state the Canadian Military is in, however, it seems to be something that I hear from Canadians on other forums. There is always talk of how swags of CF-18's are in storage or to be sold and how troops aren't getting equipment blah blah blah. I appreciate the things that you blokes are doing in Afghanistan and the like, but the notion that all isn't well within the Canadian military isn't an isolated issue.
 
Sidenote - Are you blokes worried that JSF won't deliver on time and what fallback plans do you have?
Your Hornets must be as shagged as ours with expensive centre-barrel tub replacements being a priority across the fleet. Are you looking at an interim lease or the like until JSF arrives?
 
 
Quote    Reply

BFD15       10/12/2006 12:36:47 PM
  I am not saying things are as good as they could or use to be, but they are now changing for the better.  There is much work to be done to improve the capabilities of the CF, but I think the present capabilities compare well to other similar countries eg. OZ.  I would guess the majority of posters on this type of forum that you reference have had limited military exposure are base much of their opinion on what the Liberal media spew. For example, the CF-18 fighters that you reference.  Canada has upgraded 80 fighters with the same program as Australia, that leaves about 40 in storage to be sold or otherwise disposed of. Canada has lost several jets over the years due to crashes etc. The scores of jets in storage include over 50 CF-5 fighters and tutor trainers.  If you drive by CFB Trenton, MountainView detachment has these jets lined up on the tarmac during the summer and it probably looks impressive to the uninformed.
  The biggest problem as I see for the CF is numbers of people.  Currently Canada as I mentioned maintains about 2500 troops with armour and artillery assets in a frontline combat theatre.  as far as a mech infantry battle group goes they are considered to be one of the best if not the best equiped contingent in theatre with all soldiers kitted out with all the latest body armour and communication and intelligence kit. They have LAV IIIs, G-wagons, Nyalas, Leo's,spewer UAVs and Coyote recon vehicles in good numbers. the problem being this commitment is slated to last until 2009.  This results in our army of around 20,000 having a high operation tempo.  The goverment has started to increase the size of the military with a goal of 13,000 new regular forces members, as well the CDS is transforming the army by reroleing some trades into the combat arms eg. cooks and clerks into infantry and armour.
  In closing I find that alot of the posters who slag the military are often young people who do not know of what they speak. If you have an interest in the CF I suggest you check out Army.ca and speak to the people doing the job.  This site is mostly current and retired CF personnel and they can answer most of your questions with first hand info.  Sorry for the long post.
 
Quote    Reply

DropBear       10/12/2006 12:41:13 PM
Cheers
 
Quote    Reply

Ehran       10/12/2006 1:08:22 PM
i've heard it said that the us army guys develop a serious case of lust after seeing the coyote recce vehicles capabilities.  must feel good to be the guy with the shiniest toy once in a while given the antiquity of so much of the other gear.
 
Quote    Reply

DropBear       10/12/2006 6:49:51 PM
 
Didn't know what a coyote was until I googled it. Gotta love any form of LAV / ASLAV derivatives.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Griffin       10/15/2006 12:59:34 AM
I would agree with much of what BFD15 has said, except for one important item.   All of the purchasing he refers to have not been finalized and with a minority government, if the Liberals get back in power most of the items he noted as being purchased would be stopped.  Indeed while being promised, (with the exception of JSS and some uparmoured vehicles for Afghanistan), the government has yet to sign on the dotted line.  Even then, the Liberals have shown themselves to be utterly disreputable with more than one having an anti-military side, as evidenced when Chretien killed the EH-101 project signed by the Mulroney Conservatives.  Even when anyone remotely viewing the issue would see that this was a gross breach of contract and would put our military personnel and civilians in peril. That is why so many people want to see a Conservative government if they are concerned about the military being undercut by the neo-Socialist Liberals and other socialists in parliament.  I'm sure if the Conservatives win a respectable majority in the next election, they will likely step up their funding and support for the CF, which is the first significant boost in decades.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

BFD15       10/15/2006 3:22:57 PM
  Everything that Griffin writes is correct regarding the political situation.  As they say, never count your chickens. I think the Conservative government is doing very well and may not just be a protest vote against the Liberals next election but be given a majority mandate based on their own polocies and achievements.  The military in Canada has come out of the shadows due to the ongoing deployment to Afghanistan, and I don't think the Canadian public will allow the military to get the shaft in the future.  I hope!
 
Quote    Reply

Griffin       10/18/2006 10:36:38 PM
BFD15, one of the items that needs to be changed in terms of procurement for the CF, is to undo the damage done by the Liberals under Chretien & Martin, and less than supportive government's before them.  Specifically it would entail ripping apart the flawed and dangerous attitude best exhibited by Jean Chretien when he said DND was just another department!  
 
What is needed, is to remove the interference with procurement work from other departments, which has stripped away huge amounts of money that if used solely for defence purposes would see much more and possibly even better quality product purchases.  As it stands right now Public Works and Treasury have direct access and input as to the vendor being picked - and this is where the $$$ and not the role/mission, political interference as government members try to get a 'cut of the pie, etc. and this and not DND needs become paramount.  There is unnecessary duplication and where everyone else and their dog gets into the mix.  A great example of this was the millions paid to natives in NS regarding the new frigate helo's.  Now what the hell did that have to do with military procurement, but there it was in Paul Martin's S-92 acquisition, and this kind of nonsense, no irresponsible activity, goes on for all procurements.  Every cabinet minister wanting a piece of the action with costs escalating as everyone wants a factory in their riding to get a piece of the action.
 
What has to happen to fix this problem is create a over riding rule, which states that once DND has been given the PM's/Cabinet approval for budgets, procurements, etc., all of the work for said purchases should be done within DND, full stop!  This would also reduce the number of people seeing material that could be of aid to enemy agents and/or sympathizers within government.  For oversight, have security cleared members of the Auditor-General's department seconded to NDHQ for a couple of years at a time, or have auditors from the Treasury Branch do that role, but otherwise get the non-DND people the hell out of the way. 
 
The second thing to get rid of, is the Canada buy first policy when it comes to military hardware, supplies, etc.  Get the best kit, etc. for the best price and lets get on with it for vehicles, planes, etc.  If a Canadian bid is within single digit percentage numbers, maybe make an exception, but only where their quality are on par or better than the competition.  This should go right down the line.  We shouldn't be paying extra dollars for socks, underwear, etc. just so we can say we bought Canadian.  Monies saved could go to buy more quantities and better quality using this rule.  As Jack Granastein suggested in his book 'Who Killed the Canadian Military', and mirrored in Canada Under Attack, the authors stated that if the government continue to want to buy Canadian where the quality was on par or better than foreign manufactures, but higher in price, then the difference should be made up by Industry Canada under their regional economic development programs, and not come out of DND budgets.  That way the politicians can still get credit for procurements in their ridings, but not interfere directly with defence budgets, etc.
 
Put these two items in place and you would reduce what was up to 15-years to procure equipment, and a horrible waste of money that could have seen the CF far better prepared, equipped, etc. and reduce that to procurement period to 5-years or less. 
 
Quote    Reply

southern cross       11/2/2006 6:58:44 PM
I think for years the mindset of Average Joe Canadians has been that they have an army of purely peacekeepers.
 
Previous governments rammed that line down the throats in order to get away with letting the Order of Battle get all soft and mushy.
 
 
Quote    Reply
1 2



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics