I'll believe it when I see it.
Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending
- Thread starter Maxman1
- Start date
There’s long MSE Division precedence for this and similar situations.
During my time on 280s (1996-2011) we usually had one LT(N) AHOD and two SLT Phase 6 MSEO trainees. For the most part, the subbies were fresh out of HMS Sultan’s applications phase and were new to ships. Rank aside, they went through the same qualification process as a brand new S3. That is, starting out as outside roundsman until deemed qualified, then progressing to the AMR then MMR before finally getting time on the console. At all times, they were taking advice and direction from their subordinates and were the better for it. Side ( and most important) benefit….they developed an appreciation for the tasks and working conditions that they expected their departments to face and overcome as HODs.
I assume (and hope) that this is still the case.
- Reaction score
- 18,405
- Points
- 1,280
HMS Sultan?
HMS Sultan (shore establishment) - Wikipedia
Basically, the RN equivalent to engineering training establishments for the marine engineering branch in Halifax and Esquimalt but much more lavishly equipped. RCN engineers have (or were) attended for decades.
markppcli
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 6,086
- Points
- 1,260
I’m honestly a bit perplexed by this - French training usually takes place much later in careers.
- Reaction score
- 27,180
- Points
- 1,090
Second language is one of the pillars of the military college education.
Civilian university, not so much.
- Reaction score
- 21,702
- Points
- 1,260
Much easier to pay a 2LT for SLT than a Captain.
markppcli
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 6,086
- Points
- 1,260
True story. Usually though we only throw people on it when they’ve displayed potential to move forward in their careers mich later on - ie LT Col to Col or WO to MWO. Higher wages but fewer students.
Re the Captain vs LT pay - if we really wanted to address our wage bill I think changing the promotion system to start the Captain countdown from OFP vs date of commission would be the biggest bang for our buck.
- Reaction score
- 18,405
- Points
- 1,280
True, but if they don’t use it afterwards aside from the 5-yearly exams, then it’s all for show.
- Reaction score
- 21,840
- Points
- 1,360
Which is something that many of us don’t have an issue with. Heck, at one point in my past, as a senior officer I took and followed operational direction from a dude that I think (although couldn’t/didn’t feel the need to confirm) was a Cpl.
Didn’t matter what his rank was, he was the designated MFWIC.
FJAG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 13,664
- Points
- 1,160
The others come from civvy universities. I prefer to think that young impressionable officers from the age of 17-21 should be learning their craft in regiments. Send the bright ones destined for higher things to university or some such later.
I agree. IGs need a solid foundation of having experienced quality leadership time on the gun line and several years as a FOO to get in touch with their supported arms - I think both the Combat Team Commanders course and the Army Command and Staff course have been reduced considerably since my day, but both those were, if not prerequisites, then highly useful in preparing for the IG course and the various jobs that follow that.
I remember the day I had some American soldiers on my gun platform. When their Colonel came up and stood to attention and asked me for permission to enter my gun platform. They were blown away.
After their CO left they asked me what rank I was. I responded Master Bombarider and was not an Officer. As their CO never asked for permission.
I explained it was my gun platform and my responsibility, any one entering has to ask for permission before doing so. They were blown away. Then all apologized they did not ask to enter. I laughed and said it's because we invited you. Then they all laughed.
One time I had to ask, then tell a LT Col to leave my gun platform as he was distracting to my Gunners during a Fire Mission. I got my ass chewed over that one. But said he wouldn't shut up and was distracting my Gunners setting fuzes. I had an apology later by the Lt Col and Gun line TSM.
There are times in the Army where a Lower rank has command over higher ranks. A gun platform is one of them.
After their CO left they asked me what rank I was. I responded Master Bombarider and was not an Officer. As their CO never asked for permission.
I explained it was my gun platform and my responsibility, any one entering has to ask for permission before doing so. They were blown away. Then all apologized they did not ask to enter. I laughed and said it's because we invited you. Then they all laughed.
One time I had to ask, then tell a LT Col to leave my gun platform as he was distracting to my Gunners during a Fire Mission. I got my ass chewed over that one. But said he wouldn't shut up and was distracting my Gunners setting fuzes. I had an apology later by the Lt Col and Gun line TSM.
There are times in the Army where a Lower rank has command over higher ranks. A gun platform is one of them.
PrairieFella
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 793
- Points
- 760
Convoy escorts being another. Convoy commander is God, even if escorting VIPs.
- Reaction score
- 21,702
- Points
- 1,260
Not necessarily, depending who is there there may be a Ground Force Commander who should make it known during the briefing if they will take over depending on circumstances.
It’s usually not a good thing at the start of a TIC for LTC XXX the Sabre Squadron Comd to come up on the net during contact to take over from Capt Feeblebrain.
PrairieFella
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 793
- Points
- 760
Sure there's exceptions but generally, the commander is in charge. That was the experience of the joint reg inf Reservist convoys throughout Afghanistan.
- Reaction score
- 6,242
- Points
- 1,040
@Halifax Tar one of my favourite stories along those lines was 'Doctor Roundsman'.
There was once a MSE Ph 6 that had a PhD (and maybe a bit of an ego) in a forward section base that took exception to the SB I/C assigning them as DC roundsman, and said something along the line of 'You can do that, I have a PhD!'.
He was told 'Congratulations, you are now Doctor Roundsman!' and sent out with someone else. That nickname of course stuck, but always thought it was a great dit for ph 6 candidates that maybe weren't approaching the OJT with the right humility.
FWIW Dr. Roundsman never got the OOD qual part of Ph 6 so didn't ever hit OFP, and I think that general attitude was probably why.
There was once a MSE Ph 6 that had a PhD (and maybe a bit of an ego) in a forward section base that took exception to the SB I/C assigning them as DC roundsman, and said something along the line of 'You can do that, I have a PhD!'.
He was told 'Congratulations, you are now Doctor Roundsman!' and sent out with someone else. That nickname of course stuck, but always thought it was a great dit for ph 6 candidates that maybe weren't approaching the OJT with the right humility.
FWIW Dr. Roundsman never got the OOD qual part of Ph 6 so didn't ever hit OFP, and I think that general attitude was probably why.
- Reaction score
- 16,908
- Points
- 1,010
I was always happy to be a roundsman. I specialized in it, since my shoring and casualty power skills are rudimentary…
Oldgateboatdriver
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,229
- Points
- 1,010
Boy! How hard is casualty power? One raised dot gets the wire with one raised ring, two raised dots get the wire with two raised rings, etc. etc. Always work load to source.
You ought to be able to do it in the dark!
You ought to be able to do it in the dark!
- Reaction score
- 5,963
- Points
- 1,260
John Ibbitson, writing in the Globe and Mail, reports on a wide ranging interview by Pierre Poilievre and his wife Anaida. Please take note of the highlighted bit near the end:
Mr. Poilievre rarely grants interviews with the major networks or news publications. But he is open to speaking with other media, including ones aimed at various ethnic communities. The half-hour program on TLN, hosted by Camila Gonzalez, aired Saturday and Sunday evening, and will also be available on YouTube.
The conversation ranged from immigration policy to how the couple get their two children ready for school (According to Ms. Poilievre, they employ a “divide and conquer” approach whenever Mr. Poilievre is home.) Ms. Poilievre spoke in advance of Sunday’s presidential election in Venezuela. She and her family emigrated from there when she was a child
But the heart of the interview was Mr. Poilievre outlining once again his plan to dismantle most of what the Liberal government built over the past nine years.
This goes far beyond scrapping the tax on carbon. It also means lifting caps on oil and gas production and loosening environmental regulations. “I want to sell our natural gas to wean Asia off of dirty coal,” Mr. Poilievre told Ms. Gonzalez. If Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault enacted it, the Conservatives are likely to reverse it.
As most people know, Mr. Poilievre intends to defund the English-language television arm of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. He told viewers that he would scrap Bill C-11, which gave the CRTC the power to regulate the internet, Bill C-63, which requires online platforms to watch for and remove harmful content, and Bill C-18, which requires large tech companies to compensate news organizations when sharing their content.
Mr. Poilievre said he wanted to live in a country where people pay lower taxes and are burdened by fewer rules, but also where they “have freedom of speech, where they’re judged on their merits, not their ethnicity, gender, sexuality, etc., where parents have ultimate authority over what their kids learn about sexuality and gender, where we go after criminals not after hunters and sport shooters, where we rebuild our military to have strong standing in the world.”
The Liberal agenda of promoting diversity within the public service – gone. Protections for gender-diverse youth – gone. Efforts to combat discrimination in the criminal justice system – gone.
Pretty much every major element of the Liberal environmental, social and justice agenda – gone.
The mention of guns and of a strong national defence are both particularly interesting. During election campaigns, Liberals love to bring up the issue of gun control, accusing Conservatives of wanting to put powerful weapons in the hands of criminals.
Mr. Poilievre has no intention of playing that game. He will make protecting gun rights a priority, while toughening bail, parole and sentencing provisions.
The Conservative Leader hasn’t publicly committed to meeting NATO’s minimum target of spending 2 per cent of GDP on defence. Mr. Trudeau has made the commitment but no one believes him. Mr. Poilievre is at least signalling that he intends to take the issue of defence spending seriously.
There is a lot that Mr. Poilievre says that is hard to square with reality. His promise to penalize municipalities that refuse to loosen zoning restrictions will not produce an immediate housing boom. If you can’t afford to make a down payment on a home today, you likely won’t be able to after four years of Conservative government.
Referring to Mr. Trudeau’s “radical socialist agenda” is bosh. And calling his political opponents “wacko” is offensive.
But there is a reason the Conservatives are so far ahead in the polls. Things don’t feel right. Even the most fervent supporter of open immigration (and I am one) is alarmed by the out-of-control flood of people coming into the country. Inflation and high interest rates have lowered the standard of living for millions of people. The regulatory environment has become far too complex. And the Liberals have failed to persuade most of us that they get all this and are working to fix it.
Mr. Poilievre says he knows how to fix it. And a lot of people, including a lot of new Canadians, are listening.
I think Mr Ibbitson is right; a lot of what Mr Poilievre is saying is "bosh," but a lot of Canadians are listening and believing and, most importantly, they, a solid plurality (40%) of Canadian voters, are simply tired of Justin Trudeau and his Liberal Party.
What's not "bosh" is refusing to commit to spending 2% on defence. If Mr Poilievre is serious about dismantling the Trudeau/Freeland/Guiilbeault agenda then he is going to be in a cash crunch for however long his Conservatives hold power. I suspect the "new brooms" who he is likely to install in Finance and Treasury Board and the Privy Council Office are almost all going to be fiscal conservatives who will oppose spending on defence just for the sake of spending meet some arbitrary (aspirational, Stephen Harper called it) target.
Watch for some serious institutional reforms within both DND and the Public Services and Procurement department before defence gets a boost in spending from a CPC administration.
----------
Pierre Poilievre makes his case for dismantling what the Trudeau government has built
TLN aired an interview with Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre and his wife, Anaida, on the weekend. If Prime Minister Justin Trudeau tuned in, it must have ruined his vacation. Should the Conservatives win the next election, little of what Mr. Trudeau’s Liberal government enacted will survive.Mr. Poilievre rarely grants interviews with the major networks or news publications. But he is open to speaking with other media, including ones aimed at various ethnic communities. The half-hour program on TLN, hosted by Camila Gonzalez, aired Saturday and Sunday evening, and will also be available on YouTube.
The conversation ranged from immigration policy to how the couple get their two children ready for school (According to Ms. Poilievre, they employ a “divide and conquer” approach whenever Mr. Poilievre is home.) Ms. Poilievre spoke in advance of Sunday’s presidential election in Venezuela. She and her family emigrated from there when she was a child
But the heart of the interview was Mr. Poilievre outlining once again his plan to dismantle most of what the Liberal government built over the past nine years.
This goes far beyond scrapping the tax on carbon. It also means lifting caps on oil and gas production and loosening environmental regulations. “I want to sell our natural gas to wean Asia off of dirty coal,” Mr. Poilievre told Ms. Gonzalez. If Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault enacted it, the Conservatives are likely to reverse it.
As most people know, Mr. Poilievre intends to defund the English-language television arm of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. He told viewers that he would scrap Bill C-11, which gave the CRTC the power to regulate the internet, Bill C-63, which requires online platforms to watch for and remove harmful content, and Bill C-18, which requires large tech companies to compensate news organizations when sharing their content.
Mr. Poilievre said he wanted to live in a country where people pay lower taxes and are burdened by fewer rules, but also where they “have freedom of speech, where they’re judged on their merits, not their ethnicity, gender, sexuality, etc., where parents have ultimate authority over what their kids learn about sexuality and gender, where we go after criminals not after hunters and sport shooters, where we rebuild our military to have strong standing in the world.”
The Liberal agenda of promoting diversity within the public service – gone. Protections for gender-diverse youth – gone. Efforts to combat discrimination in the criminal justice system – gone.
Pretty much every major element of the Liberal environmental, social and justice agenda – gone.
The mention of guns and of a strong national defence are both particularly interesting. During election campaigns, Liberals love to bring up the issue of gun control, accusing Conservatives of wanting to put powerful weapons in the hands of criminals.
Mr. Poilievre has no intention of playing that game. He will make protecting gun rights a priority, while toughening bail, parole and sentencing provisions.
The Conservative Leader hasn’t publicly committed to meeting NATO’s minimum target of spending 2 per cent of GDP on defence. Mr. Trudeau has made the commitment but no one believes him. Mr. Poilievre is at least signalling that he intends to take the issue of defence spending seriously.
There is a lot that Mr. Poilievre says that is hard to square with reality. His promise to penalize municipalities that refuse to loosen zoning restrictions will not produce an immediate housing boom. If you can’t afford to make a down payment on a home today, you likely won’t be able to after four years of Conservative government.
Referring to Mr. Trudeau’s “radical socialist agenda” is bosh. And calling his political opponents “wacko” is offensive.
But there is a reason the Conservatives are so far ahead in the polls. Things don’t feel right. Even the most fervent supporter of open immigration (and I am one) is alarmed by the out-of-control flood of people coming into the country. Inflation and high interest rates have lowered the standard of living for millions of people. The regulatory environment has become far too complex. And the Liberals have failed to persuade most of us that they get all this and are working to fix it.
Mr. Poilievre says he knows how to fix it. And a lot of people, including a lot of new Canadians, are listening.
----------
I think Mr Ibbitson is right; a lot of what Mr Poilievre is saying is "bosh," but a lot of Canadians are listening and believing and, most importantly, they, a solid plurality (40%) of Canadian voters, are simply tired of Justin Trudeau and his Liberal Party.
What's not "bosh" is refusing to commit to spending 2% on defence. If Mr Poilievre is serious about dismantling the Trudeau/Freeland/Guiilbeault agenda then he is going to be in a cash crunch for however long his Conservatives hold power. I suspect the "new brooms" who he is likely to install in Finance and Treasury Board and the Privy Council Office are almost all going to be fiscal conservatives who will oppose spending on defence just for the sake of spending meet some arbitrary (aspirational, Stephen Harper called it) target.
Watch for some serious institutional reforms within both DND and the Public Services and Procurement department before defence gets a boost in spending from a CPC administration.
- Reaction score
- 5,963
- Points
- 1,260
I suspect that you're right. Many of the policy wonks around Mr Poilievre are, I think, true conservatives who believe that most defence spending has more to do with peripheral issues - including e.g. regional industrial benefits - than with the legitimate needs of the Government of Canada to defend the realm.
My guess:
- First - very early in the mandate Mr Poilievre will let it be known that he will welcome the retirement if many senior public servants, including the Clerk of the Privy Council, John Hannford, and the DM of Finance, Chris Ford and maybe even the newly minted the DM of Defence, Stefanie Beck. they will not be removed for cause, rather as a message to the entire public service that you get with the Conservative programme or you get your pink slip;
- Second - Pri 1 for the new CPC government Weill be to keep some key promises, especially to "axe the tax," and that will make new spending a low priority;
- Third - DM and DND ADM Pol (currently Peter Hammerschmidt) will be required to come up with a new White Paper that puts the emphasis on -
- Defending Canada, proper,
- Defending North America in partnership with the USA,
- Assisting in the defence of democratic allies in Asia and Europe in cooperation with Asia-Pacific allies and as a member of NATO, and
- Supporting veterans in a fair but cost effective manner.
- Fourth - DM PSPC (currently Arianne Reza) will be required to come up with a new White paper soon Government procurement with special emphasis on the "big ticket" defence procurement 'system' is to can be called that.
Similar threads
- Article
