Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[ytz]

So the province of Ontario makes certain decisions about how it will pend those transfers but isn't accountable to the taxpayer in Nova Scotia who contributed to them, and vice versa.

The Canada Health Act literally mandates what services will be covered. Provinces that refuse to fund services required in the Act could lose health transfers. That's how the accountability works.

 

[dimsum]

Probably, not sure. I’m going from memory on what Landymore wrote in Thunder and Sunshine, where he had epic battle with SecNav who actually supported integration of the RCN and positioning Air Command to take over navy flight operations and that budget relieved from RCN control.

I guess the lesson here is that anytime the RCN can offload flight ops (and its budget), it will

 

[ytz]

I guess the lesson here is that anytime the RCN can offload flight ops (and its budget), it will

Except that we are moving away from this model with drones. Air doctrine is even being rewritten to recognize the autonomy our sister services have with these systems. The RCAF will not be exclusively operating all flying vehicles in the future.

 

[FJAG]

You guys can go on and on about how you wish government was structured in Canada. But at the end of the day, it's not a widely shared view among Canadians. And any party that pushed the view you suggest (say dismantling the Canada Health Act completely) would quickly find out what a fringe view that really is. Arguing that people who live in poorer provinces should get shittier healthcare is hardly going to be the way to convince the public that more should be spent on defence. That is a zero sum argument that we will always lose (and historically have a straight record of losing).

You're continue to put words into people's mouths that simply aren't there. No one here is talking about dismantling anything or that we don't understand or agree with democracy.

We're simply saying the Feds should stay in their constitutional lanes and within the boundaries agreed to as between the Feds and provinces and not continue to push initiatives that are solely provincial. At the same time we are arguing that the Feds should concentrate on those matters which are solely within their jurisdiction such as defence.

The defence of the nation is not a popularity contest driven by the majority opinion of a pseudo lumpen proletariat whose vote is based more on the liking of a candidate's socks than an understanding of the fundamental issues. It should be based on a careful weighing of the threat by an informed and concerned representative leadership.

 

[KevinB]

Except that we are moving away from this model with drones. Air doctrine is even being rewritten to recognize the autonomy our sister services have with these systems. The RCAF will not be exclusively operating all flying vehicles in the future.

As long as the RCAF controls Air Safety - they end up with a major vote in how things will work.
Historically the RCN and CA have been misery with support to their supporting flying things.

 

[MacNav63]

Somewhere in the past I read the JAG's history but don't have it now, but I think that whatever powers the Secretary of the RCN had were not the same as the JAG. The RCN, which had been under different legislation and different departments (eventually the Department of Naval Services), than the Militia were combined with the RCAF (then under the Air Board) into a Department of National Defence in 1922.

There had been a JAG with the Militia since 1911. In 1918 steps were taken to create a legal branch of the Department of Militia and Defence. The first JAG responsible for all three services was LCol Reginald Orde (a gunner and Canada's third JAG) from 1920 to 1950 (much of the time by himself with no staff.)

While there was an overarching Department of National Defence, there were also separate Militia, Naval Services and Royal Canadian Air Force Acts until all were combined in the National Defence Act of 1950. This act introduced the concept of a "Canadian Forces" and also created the first common Code of Service Discipline.

I do not doubt that the secretary of the Navy would have had some quasi-legal authority. The MND did until those functions were removed post-Somalia. But they would not equate to the JAG. But, during those early years many of the functions which we now associate with the legal branch were carried out by line officers of the three services.

My bad. I checked my copy of Canada's Military Lawyers and the RCN position was the Judge Advocate of the Fleet, who was also the Assistant Chief of Naval Personnel (Admin). I did find a reference to a Naval Secretariat but it doesn't expand on what the role was.

 

[FJAG]

My bad. I checked my copy of Canada's Military Lawyers and the RCN position was the Judge Advocate of the Fleet, who was also the Assistant Chief of Naval Personnel (Admin). I did find a reference to a Naval Secretariat but it doesn't expand on what the role was.

I've been trying to find my copy of that book for some time. I know its here somewhere.

 

[ytz]

No one here is talking about dismantling anything or that we don't understand or agree with democracy.

But when you say the feds should stay in their jurisdiction, that would be the logical end result. Take healthcare for example. How exactly do you suggest the feds reduce their role from the present set up? The only logical place left is to annull the Canada Health Act and let the provinces offer whatever services they want, ending the universality that the CHA provides. However you want to pitch it, that's the desired end-state. And it's one I doubt most Canadians would want.

If you think I am misrepresenting your views, I am open to some details on how you envision this working.

Also, this goes the other way too. Canada is the only G7 (possibly OECD) country without a national securities regulator, because somehow trading securities was roped into provincial regulation of commerce. We're also a country with 10 different building codes, 10 different education standards, etc. All that bureaucracy for a country with about the same population as Poland. Hardly a recipe for competitiveness.

 

[MacNav63]

The Canada Health Act literally mandates what services will be covered. Provinces that refuse to fund services required in the Act could lose health transfers. That's how the accountability works.

Again, my mistake on that. Equalization payments I believe are unconditional. I still think it wouldn't hurt to look at transferring tax points to the provinces and holding the feds accountable for their clear areas of responsibility.

 

[ytz]

As long as the RCAF controls Air Safety - they end up with a major vote in how things will work.
Historically the RCN and CA have been misery with support to their supporting flying things.

RCAF retains airworthiness responsibilities. But operational and technical authorities can now be held by non-RCAF organizations. Even airworthiness and flight safety responsibilities can be delegated with appropriate training and procedural compliance.

 

[ytz]

Again, my mistake on that. Equalization payments I believe are unconditional. I still think it wouldn't hurt to look at transferring tax points to the provinces and holding the feds accountable for their clear areas of responsibility.

The rub is universality. The whole goal of the federal government holding and disbursing those funds is that it ensures some nominal compliance with a universal standard of service. The minute the Feds stop doing that, the provinces will begin to massively diverge. I am not going to debate whether this is good or bad. But that is what will be the consequence that all of this was set up to avoid. And that's the part that I think is missing in a lot of these discussions.

 

[MacNav63]

I've been trying to find my copy of that book for some time. I know its here somewhere.

I think I may have two...

 

[RangerRay]

Also, this goes the other way too. Canada is the only G7 (possibly OECD) country without a national securities regulator, because somehow trading securities was roped into provincial regulation of commerce. We're also a country with 10 different building codes, 10 different education standards, etc. All that bureaucracy for a country with about the same population as Poland. Hardly a recipe for competitiveness.

I remember when PM Harper tried to fix that. The Supreme Court surprised all the constitutional pointy-heads and said “Nope”.

 

[FJAG]

But when you say the feds should stay in their jurisdiction, that would be the logical end result. Take healthcare for example. How exactly do you suggest the feds reduce their role from the present set up? The only logical place left is to annull the Canada Health Act and let the provinces offer whatever services they want, ending the universality that the CHA provides. However you want to pitch it, that's the desired end-state. And it's one I doubt most Canadians would want.

If you think I am misrepresenting your views, I am open to some details on how you envision this working.

Also, this goes the other way too. Canada is the only G7 (possibly OECD) country without a national securities regulator, because somehow trading securities was roped into provincial regulation of commerce. We're also a country with 10 different building codes, 10 different education standards, etc. All that bureaucracy for a country with about the same population as Poland. Hardly a recipe for competitiveness.

I'll make it easy. I'm not advocating stopping what's already gone on especially if there are agreements between the Feds and the provincial governments. I'm for them not going further with schemes like national dental care and pharmacare or the struct down environmental aspects delt with in the Impact Assessment Act.

And its not just about money. All of these activities take time and effort on the part of cabinet that has taken their eyes off the ball of what should matter to the nation as a whole. It's not just defence that's a mess but so is foreign affairs and, to an extent, national security. And yes, the NDP is much worse than the LOC and the CPC just as bad in trying to run provincial affairs from a national government. What I want is that the Federal cabinet put most of their energy and time into constitutionally mandated Federal issues. In times like we are seeing now much of that time should go into defence, security and relationships with our allies. Cabinet seems to be sleepwalking that.

 

[RangerRay]

I’m convinced the vast majority of our MPs would be better suited to being on a local council to provincial legislature than the federal parliament. I just wish the would figure that out instead of wasting everyone’s bandwidth in Ottawa.

 

[FJAG]

I’m convinced the vast majority of our MPs would be better suited to being on a local council to provincial legislature than the federal parliament. I just wish the would figure that out instead of wasting everyone’s bandwidth in Ottawa.

I know mine is.

 

[SupersonicMax]

Except that we are moving away from this model with drones. Air doctrine is even being rewritten to recognize the autonomy our sister services have with these systems. The RCAF will not be exclusively operating all flying vehicles in the future.

It is already not. SOFCOM operated CE145s and CH146s, and other elements operate a multitude of UAS.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

I do not doubt that the secretary of the Navy would have had some quasi-legal authority. The MND did until those functions were removed post-Somalia. But they would not equate to the JAG. But, during those early years many of the functions which we now associate with the legal branch were carried out by line officers of the three services.

I thought that before unification, the RCN operated under the Articles of War: "and for all infractions not otherwise covered above, punishment according to the traditions of the service"

"Three dozens, Bosun!"

 

[McG]

I do not doubt that the secretary of the Navy would have had some quasi-legal authority.

Claxton also introduced a common military law system during his tenure, so the RCN would not have been operating under its own system in the ‘60s.

 

[Brad Sallows]

We're also a country with 10 different building codes, 10 different education standards, etc. All that bureaucracy for a country with about the same population as Poland. Hardly a recipe for competitiveness.

Having 10 different players trying different things is exactly the recipe for competition, from which competitiveness ultimately derives.