I'll believe it when I see it.
Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending
- Thread starter Maxman1
- Start date
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 31,883
- Points
- 1,160
This article, from 2019, is illuminating and probably reflects the fact that all political parties are more focused on what will get them votes, which means that defence is on the back burner. Even now, with Russia killing Ukrainians on a daily basis, the politicians are using various weasel words to avoid sound too 'martial'.
The problem isn't the politicians IMHO, it's that Canadians don't care about defence.
For example, Roosevelt struggled to get the US involved in WW2 and it wasn't until Pearl Harbour, when the public were galvanized to enter the war against Japan 2 years after the Germans invaded Poland, that he was able to act on public sentiments. And they still had to wait until Germany declared war on the US to enter the fight against Germany.
We might see similar dynamics play out here:
Amid global unrest, Canada's political parties say little about security, defence
In order to know what most of the major parties think about the uncertain state of the world, and Canada's place in it, you have to dig — really dig — to find it.
The ideas, solutions and proposals around security and defence from the Liberals, New Democrats and the Green Party are buried, in some cases, at the very back of their platform documents. The Conservatives released their detailed platform plank on Tuesday.
The relative positioning of the policy pitches — along with the dearth of debate about the turbulence beyond the country's borders — has alarmed defence policy experts who say now is not the time for politics as usual.
"This is the time we need the clearest, most strategic thinking since the end of the Second World War, in terms of how we do Canadian security," said Rob Huebert, a defence expert at the University of Calgary. "It is not an exaggeration to say we are on the cusp of the most dangerous geopolitical environment we've seen in our lifetime."
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 31,883
- Points
- 1,160
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 11,161
- Points
- 1,260
So many issues putting operational kit in a system like Logistics Unicorps. Who by the way is out if stock of just about everything it seems. Good thing it's just buttons and bows.
I'd be interested to know how it runs returns. And draws items back items as entitlement expires.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 31,883
- Points
- 1,160
Kids around the world are ordering similar items from Amazon etc on a daily basis these days, I don't know why we can't make that happen for 'non-weapon' type products.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 11,161
- Points
- 1,260
Mark my words if those goes through its going to be a disaster if it's anything more than combats and NCDs.
I remember a loadmaster ~10 years ago who refused to buy his own knee pads, and couldn’t be issued them because they weren’t on his SOI. So he would stop by supply a couple times a week and trade in the pants that he wore the knees out on during his last flight. I can’t imagine an online system that could keep up with this.
- Reaction score
- 8,211
- Points
- 1,160
Priorities, man! Priorities!
(I still suck at this quoting others bit - meant as response to D&B on Canadian Interest).
- Reaction score
- 18,405
- Points
- 1,280
The person(s) who wrote the SOI for LMs clearly don't know what LMs do. How do you update them, aside from the UCR route?
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 11,161
- Points
- 1,260
Every SOI has an OPI. It's right on the cover page. That's step one. They can take you from there.
Blackadder1916
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 2,748
- Points
- 1,160
A snapshot comparison with selected NATO partners.
The numbers are as provided in this NATO document https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2021/6/pdf/210611-pr-2021-094-en.pdf and I've focused on the members whose defense spending for 2021 (estimated) exceeds $10 billion.
The columns are: defense expenditures in millions (all amounts USD); real GDP in billions and the percentage of def expenditure; the per capita GDP and per capita def expenditure; number of military pers; the last four columns are the percentage of def expenditure for "equipment", "personnel", "infrastructure", and "other" as defined in the linked document - "other" is primarily defined as "O&M".
One item that caught my attention is the percentage allocated to "personnel" and the difference between the UK and USA numbers compared to the others.
The numbers are as provided in this NATO document https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2021/6/pdf/210611-pr-2021-094-en.pdf and I've focused on the members whose defense spending for 2021 (estimated) exceeds $10 billion.
The columns are: defense expenditures in millions (all amounts USD); real GDP in billions and the percentage of def expenditure; the per capita GDP and per capita def expenditure; number of military pers; the last four columns are the percentage of def expenditure for "equipment", "personnel", "infrastructure", and "other" as defined in the linked document - "other" is primarily defined as "O&M".
| Country | Def Exped (millions) | GDP (billions) / % def exp | Per capita GDP / def exp | Pers # | Eqpt % | Pers % | Infstr % | Other % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Canada | 26,523 | 1,697 / 1.39 | 44,100 / 632 | 71.1 | 17.66 | 47.5 | 3.32 | 31.52 |
| France | 58,729 | 2,534 / 2.01 | 37,400 / 751 | 208.0 | 27.8 | 42.53 | 3.02 | 26.65 |
| Germany | 64,785 | 3,521 / 1.53 | 42,200 / 644 | 189.1 | 18.55 | 41.75 | 3.69 | 36.06 |
| Italy | 29,763 | 1,821 / 1.41 | 30,500 / 428 | 174.2 | 28.9 | 60.54 | 1.67 | 8.89 |
| Netherlands | 14,378 | 828 / 1.45 | 47,100 / 685 | 40.8 | 26.2 | 47.26 | 3.26 | 23.28 |
| Poland | 13,369 | 575 / 2.10 | 15,000 / 314 | 121.2 | 26.1 | 47.92 | 4.97 | 21.01 |
| Spain | 14,875 | 1,250 / 1.02 | 26,200 / 267 | 123.9 | 22.75 | 60.12 | 0.73 | 16.41 |
| Turkey | 13,057 | 1,073 / 1.57 | 12,700 / 199 | 445.4 | 29.05 | 52.47 | 1.95 | 16.53 |
| United Kingdom | 72,765 | 3,014 / 2.29 | 44,700 / 1,023 | 156.2 | 24.26 | 32.69 | 1.42 | 41.64 |
| United States | 811,140 | 20,601 / 3.52 | 62,100 / 2,186 | 1351.5 | 29.35 | 37.47 | 1.58 | 31.59 |
One item that caught my attention is the percentage allocated to "personnel" and the difference between the UK and USA numbers compared to the others.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 31,883
- Points
- 1,160
Would an organization that can deliver 4.2 billion packages annually, world wide, be able to keep up?
Amazon now ships more parcels than FedEx
For years, three companies — FedEx, UPS and the U.S. Postal Service — have controlled nearly the entire last-mile delivery market in the U.S. But a new report suggests that Amazon, through its shipping arm Amazon Logistics, is no longer a marginal threat to these companies — it has, in fact, begun shipping more parcels than FedEx, and is nearly at the shipping levels of UPS.
According to data from Pitney Bowes, a technology company focused on shipping and postage, Amazon is now one of the top deliverers of parcel shipments — meaning boxes and packages delivered to people’s homes. In 2020, Amazon Logistics delivered 4.2 billion parcel shipments, up from 1.9 billion in 2019. It now makes up, by volume, 21% of the parcel shipments in the U.S., behind the USPS (38%) and UPS (24%) but ahead of FedEx for the first time (16%).
Amazon now ships more parcels than FedEx
Amazon Logistics has begun shipping more parcels than FedEx, and is nearly at the shipping levels of UPS.
www.modernretail.co
Gunnar
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 490
- Points
- 1,030
Plus, if you subscribe to Amazon Prime, you can get ammo, maintenance and much much more!
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 11,161
- Points
- 1,260
Would an organization that can deliver 4.2 billion packages annually, world wide, be able to keep up?
Amazon now ships more parcels than FedEx
For years, three companies — FedEx, UPS and the U.S. Postal Service — have controlled nearly the entire last-mile delivery market in the U.S. But a new report suggests that Amazon, through its shipping arm Amazon Logistics, is no longer a marginal threat to these companies — it has, in fact, begun shipping more parcels than FedEx, and is nearly at the shipping levels of UPS.
According to data from Pitney Bowes, a technology company focused on shipping and postage, Amazon is now one of the top deliverers of parcel shipments — meaning boxes and packages delivered to people’s homes. In 2020, Amazon Logistics delivered 4.2 billion parcel shipments, up from 1.9 billion in 2019. It now makes up, by volume, 21% of the parcel shipments in the U.S., behind the USPS (38%) and UPS (24%) but ahead of FedEx for the first time (16%).
Amazon now ships more parcels than FedEx
Amazon Logistics has begun shipping more parcels than FedEx, and is nearly at the shipping levels of UPS.
Not what we need. We need vast quantities of stores in the right places gathering dust and waiting to be used.
This, like LUC is great for the niceties like DEUs I'd even say CADPAT and NCDs but for operational kit this is a mistake.
ballz
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 444
- Points
- 910
Way to open up my old wounds. I was writing a big long post in response to this, and then remembered that part of releasing was that I would leave the utter catastrophe that is CAF finance behind me so I just deleted it all. Suffice to say, your first sentence is too generous, and I don't agree with the last sentence.
And then your subsequent posts on RDAOs triggered me. We might as well just get rid of national policies / documents like the FAMs and have Base SOPs, since the CDAO's failure actually supervise RDAOs has just led to having to re-learn every rule every time you are posted to a new RDAO's AO, or a new RDAO is posted in, or a new RDAO staff member is posted in... in other words, try to re-learn everything, every year.
Can't wait to go to work tomorrow and be surrounded by competence.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 31,883
- Points
- 1,160
Until they're obsolete, and we can't get rid of them anyways so they just sit there taking up resources for nothing, right?
- Reaction score
- 5,868
- Points
- 1,090
Here's the rub. We don't need clear thinking at all about defense. We can continue to muddle on with no understanding of geopolitics and have no defense budget because we are likely the only place in the world that only fights in wars because we want too.
Since 1812 there hasn't been a single conflict that we entered that wasn't essentially voluntary. Boer War and WW1 we were roped in because of Empire obligations but really we didn't have to go if we didn't want to. And every single conflict since has been more and more voluntary.
We have no existential threats. We have no enemies. We have no external continental interests which require us to fight a war (aka are so critical to national interests we have to spend treasure and blood to ensure they continue as they are). All that is taken care of by the US. So as long as we don't mind them paying the freight we can sit here fat and happy.
Kitchen table issues drive voters. In Ukraine the kitchen table issue was Russia. The current Canadian equivalent is mask mandates. We are so safe we can afford to be soft on defense. And so parties will say what they need to for the current soundbite and move on to things that really drive voters.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 11,161
- Points
- 1,260
Until they're obsolete, and we can't get rid of them anyways so they just sit there taking up resources for nothing, right?
That's all part of life cycle management. The part once it reaches obsolescence is either disposed according to policies of sold off through CADC.
No argument we can be better, that's exactly what I want.
Step one acknowledge the importance of the Supply chain and man it and fund it to be robust and strong.
- Reaction score
- 27,182
- Points
- 1,090
Sorry - I rewrote and made it unclear - a LCol+ finance officer needs to understand the estimates process and ARLU, since the majority are in NDHQ and engaged in staff processes where those are relevant.
Not necessary knowledge for a Lt fresh from Borden.
(The lack of competence in compensation administration is a whole other topic of discussion)
- Reaction score
- 8,211
- Points
- 1,160
Same table reorganized
| Country | Def Exped | GDP (billions) | Per capita | Pers # | Eqpt % | Pers % | Infstr % | Other % |
| (millions) | / % def exp | GDP / def exp | ||||||
| United States | 811,140 | 20,601 / 3.52 | 62,100 / 2,186 | 1351.5 | 29.35 | 37.47 | 1.58 | 31.59 |
| United Kingdom | 72,765 | 3,014 / 2.29 | 44,700 / 1,023 | 156.2 | 24.26 | 32.69 | 1.42 | 41.64 |
| Germany | 64,785 | 3,521 / 1.53 | 42,200 / 644 | 189.1 | 18.55 | 41.75 | 3.69 | 36.06 |
| France | 58,729 | 2,534 / 2.01 | 37,400 / 751 | 208 | 27.8 | 42.53 | 3.02 | 26.65 |
| Italy | 29,763 | 1,821 / 1.41 | 30,500 / 428 | 174.2 | 28.9 | 60.54 | 1.67 | 8.89 |
| Canada | 26,523 | 1,697 / 1.39 | 44,100 / 632 | 71.1 | 17.66 | 47.5 | 3.32 | 31.52 |
| Spain | 14,875 | 1,250 / 1.02 | 26,200 / 267 | 123.9 | 22.75 | 60.12 | 0.73 | 16.41 |
| Netherlands | 14,378 | 828 / 1.45 | 47,100 / 685 | 40.8 | 26.2 | 47.26 | 3.26 | 23.28 |
| Poland | 13,369 | 575 / 2.10 | 15,000 / 314 | 121.2 | 26.1 | 47.92 | 4.97 | 21.01 |
| Turkey | 13,057 | 1,073 / 1.57 | 12,700 / 199 | 445.4 | 29.05 | 52.47 | 1.95 | 16.53 |
“The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars / But in ourselves," - an appropriate thought as we approach the Ides of March.
I am a big fan of, and major proponent of, increasing our Defence Expenditure to 2% of GDP. I think it would be lovely if we achieved 3.52% of GDP like the US. I would even take the 0.7% of GDP that we are supposed to set aside for foreign aid make it available for humanitarian operations conducted by the Department of National Defence.
But I also agree with those that argue that Cabinet, Treasury Board, Public Services and Procurement Canada, DND and the Canadian Armed Forces wouldn't have a clue how to spend that. Not just on what to spend but the mechanisms necessary to get the money where it needs to be in a timely fashion.
The logistics of money?
The first problem we face is defining the amount of money sent to people, fellow Canadians, that are being hired to wield the tools of defence, and how much is being spent on the tools themselves.
| Country | Active military | Reserve military | Paramilitary | Total | % of Popn | % of Popn |
| (total) | (active) | |||||
| Turkey | 355,200 | 378,700 | 156,800 | 890,700 | 1.08 | 0.43 |
| United States | 1,395,350 | 843,450 | 0 | 2,238,800 | 0.67 | 0.42 |
| France | 203,250 | 41,050 | 100,500 | 344,800 | 0.51 | 0.3 |
| Poland | 114,050 | 0 | 75,400 | 189,450 | 0.5 | 0.3 |
| Italy | 161,550 | 17,900 | 176,350 | 355,800 | 0.57 | 0.26 |
| Spain | 122,850 | 14,900 | 75,800 | 213,550 | 0.45 | 0.26 |
| United Kingdom | 153,200 | 75,450 | 0 | 228,650 | 0.35 | 0.23 |
| Germany | 183,400 | 30,050 | 0 | 213,450 | 0.27 | 0.23 |
| Netherlands | 33,600 | 6,000 | 6,500 | 46,100 | 0.27 | 0.19 |
| Canada | 66,500 | 34,400 | 4,500 | 105,400 | 0.28 | 0.18 |
Before we look at how much we pay ourselves to defend ourselves we should probably take a look at how many of us we hire to do the fighting for us.
We employ 0.18% of our total population of 38,000,000 to defend us. To fight for us.
We hire 66,500 of us to do the fighting for the other 37,933,500 of us.
66,500 of us to operate the tools necessary to keep threats away from us.
| Personnel | ||||
| Country | Active military | % of Budget | Expenditure | Expenditure |
| per active mbr | ||||
| % | (millions) | USD | ||
| Turkey | 355,200 | 52.47 | 6,851 | 19,288 |
| United States | 1,395,350 | 37.47 | 303,934 | 217,819 |
| France | 203,250 | 42.53 | 24,977 | 122,890 |
| Poland | 114,050 | 47.92 | 6,406 | 56,172 |
| Italy | 161,550 | 60.54 | 18,019 | 111,535 |
| Spain | 122,850 | 60.12 | 8,943 | 72,795 |
| United Kingdom | 153,200 | 32.69 | 23,787 | 155,267 |
| Germany | 183,400 | 41.7 | 27,015 | 147,303 |
| Netherlands | 33,600 | 47.26 | 6,795 | 202,233 |
| Canada | 66,500 | 47.5 | 12,598 | 189,450 |
Canada is not stingy when it comes to covering its personnel. It looks pretty good compared the $19,288 per year that Turkey spends on each service person. It compares very favourably to Britain, France, Germany and Italy. The only countries that spend more on their people than Canada are the Netherlands and the US.
We spend a lot on our people.
We don't spend a lot on the tools they need.
| Country | Active military | Equipment | ||
| % of Budget | Expenditure | Expenditure | ||
| per active mbr | ||||
| (millions) | USD | |||
| United States | 1,395,350 | 29.35 | $ 238,070 | $ 170,616 |
| United Kingdom | 153,200 | 24.26 | $ 17,653 | $ 115,227 |
| Netherlands | 33,600 | 26.20 | $ 3,767 | $ 112,114 |
| France | 203,250 | 27.80 | $ 16,327 | $ 80,328 |
| Canada | 66,500 | 17.66 | $ 4,684 | $ 70,436 |
| Germany | 183,400 | 18.55 | $ 12,018 | $ 65,527 |
| Italy | 161,550 | 28.90 | $ 8,602 | $ 53,244 |
| Poland | 114,050 | 26.10 | $ 3,489 | $ 30,595 |
| Spain | 122,850 | 22.75 | $ 3,384 | $ 27,546 |
| Turkey | 355,200 | 29.05 | $ 3,793 | $ 10,679 |
Poland, Spain and Turkey have special economic circumstances that put them in a different category to Canada.
Canada is a G7 country. An position it shares with France, Germany and Italy, as well as the UK and the US.
We can afford to do better. We should do better.
The Netherlands, a strong EU member and not notably a warmonger, is in the same league as the US and the UK spending $112,000 annually to supply the necessary tools for its defence. This compares to the $115,000 the UK spends.
The US spends significantly more, at $170,000 but for the purposes of this exercise I suggest we treat it as an outlier. Just as Poland, Spain and Turkey should be treated at the other end of the spectrum.
Our peers are France, Germany and Italy. We fair fairly well in that division.
But, and this is where opinion matters, I think we should be emulating the Netherlands lead and aspiring to a similar budget.
Raising our $70,436 expenditure to a Netherlands equivalent expenditure of $112,000 would raise the capital budget from $4,684,000,000 to $7,448,000,000. That 60% increase in the capital budget, or $2,764,000,000, would only represent a 10% increase in the total defence budget raising it to $29,287,000,000. That would also be a rise from 1.39% of GDP to 1.7%. Not 2% but getting closer.
Summary to date - keep the size of the force the same and make it more effective by spending the same amount per soldier as the Netherlands on the tools they need to conduct an effective defence.
Raise the Capital Budget by 60% adding $2,764,000,000 annually.
This will still leave us short of the NATO 2% target but 1.7% is better than 1.4%. Half Way there.
More to Follow.
Similar threads
- Article
