Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[FJAG]

Hmmm, why should we encourage the living in unsustainable in inhospitable regions. The ability to move water and introduction of A/C to the desert allowed the cities of Vegas, Phoenix, and LA to flourish. Why should we reward bad behavior by draining rivers and aquafers?

It's this sort of thinking that got us in this pickle in the first place.

Well ... there's financial gain for one.

But, the Earth has limited areas where agriculture can happen naturally without any assistance and our population has, to a large extent, outstripped that. There are still massive regions of arable land where, with a bit of a boost, you can produce crops (which coincidentally create oxygen and burn up carbon dioxide) Moving fresh water to those regions when all it would otherwise do is flow to the sea and turn into salty water is a win-win situation. The same for many fertilizer products which can be produced by mining rather than gas conversion.

I don't think that the people who started up Vegas, Phoenix or even LA ever really envisioned the extent to which these centres would grow. Each has a very different origin and reason why it grew into what it is. The problem (feature?) about humans is that we tend to operate in an unstructured manner. You can only plan for so much. All too often serendipity plays a role. Then you react the best way that you can.

 

[Kirkhill]

Hmmm, why should we encourage the living in unsustainable in inhospitable regions. The ability to move water and introduction of A/C to the desert allowed the cities of Vegas, Phoenix, and LA to flourish. Why should we reward bad behavior by draining rivers and aquafers?

It's this sort of thinking that got us in this pickle in the first place.

Glaciers melt and the rivers they create carry water to the oceans.

We adapt - until the rivers dry up and then we adapt again.

River	m3/sec	Outflow
Mississippi	18,434​	Gulf of Mexico, Atlantic Ocean
Saint Lawrence	16,800​	Gulf of Saint Lawrence, Atlantic Ocean
Mackenzie	10,338​	Beaufort Sea, Arctic Ocean
Columbia	7,504​	Pacific Ocean
Yukon	6,428​	Bering Sea, Pacific Ocean
Fraser	3,475​	Pacific Ocean
Koksoak	2,800​	Ungava Bay, Arctic Ocean
Nelson	2,370​	Hudson Bay, Arctic Ocean

Of those rivers only the MacKenzie and the Yukon have reliable Glacier Systems.

All of the others are heavily reliant on seasonal snow fall and archaic waters like the Great Lakes.

 

[Spencer100]

Hmmm, why should we encourage the living in unsustainable in inhospitable regions. The ability to move water and introduction of A/C to the desert allowed the cities of Vegas, Phoenix, and LA to flourish. Why should we reward bad behavior by draining rivers and aquafers?

It's this sort of thinking that got us in this pickle in the first place.

I say SELL IT! We are really moving away from make anything in this country now so we have to have something to sell. Manufacturing costs have skyrocketed.

And yes people will move where they do. Plus don't forget we buy a ton of that water back. It's call fresh produce in the winter. You would be surprised the amount of water in produce and the amount we buy.

 

[Spencer100]

Before we can figure out what the military needs, there has to be a clear, everyone-on-board vision on what it's supposed to do.

Anyone have a decent summary of any recent government that's come up with such a thing?

And how many such documents have been generated only to become dust collectors when the "new & improved" team comes in?

Yeah, weak DefMins play a role, but usually as part of an overall weak process of defining Canada's goals in a clear, concise and agreed-to way.

I have see that sentiment on these boards for years. And I agree with it. But I am at the point that maybe screw the doctrine, policy, mission statement, the endless papers and studies. Just put it out there we will take anything that min works ok and can be delivered in a shorter time window. I think any kit acquired at this point will be used and used hard. I understand not the proper way but what has that gotten over the last decade? Plus I bet the green world can use anything (little better than RCAF and Navy) New trucks just get something that moves, AA anything better than nothing, Anti Tank etc. I would at this point just tell PSPC anything would be great. Thanks. I know that not how it works. but....

 

[The Bread Guy]

I say SELL IT! We are really moving away from make anything in this country now so we have to have something to sell ...

Ask Canadian lumber manufacturers how well selling to the U.S. is going ...

 

[Spencer100]

Ask Canadian lumber manufacturers how well selling to the U.S. is going ...

At the moment very well. In the past not so well

But the funny part is the problem in the eyes of the Americans is the Gov does not charge enough for stumpage fees. So in their eyes we are giving away our resources....LOL I have always found this to be an interesting case. For the hewn and cry from some corners about selling Canadian resources but then upset because the US is mad we sell too cheap into the US market. Then when the US puts a tariff on the wood they get the revenue. urgh....Everyone in this country wants it both ways.....and then most of time because of that attitude we get nothing.

 

[The Bread Guy]

At the moment very well. In the past not so well

That narrative doesn't fly well in towns that saw sawmills close under previous Team Red & Team Blue governments who couldn't do enough to get REAL "free trade" on lumber.

... the funny part is the problem in the eyes of the Americans is the Gov does not charge enough for stumpage fees. So in their eyes we are giving away our resources....LOL I have always found this to be an interesting case. For the hewn and cry from some corners about selling Canadian resources but then upset because the US is mad we sell too cheap into the US market. Then when the US puts a tariff on the wood they get the revenue. urgh....Everyone in this country wants it both ways.....and then most of time because of that attitude we get nothing.

Bang on re: the dynamic. That said, though, people who say we should be hewers of wood and (in this case, drawers of water) can't also say, "hey, we should sell natural resources to the U.S." while ignoring the U.S. wants it both ways, too. I suspect if the U.S. really wanted to buy Canadian water en masse, they would get away with getting a lot better deal than the sellers - sound familiar? Then again, a big buyer can always hose a (relatively) small supplier, no matter what the thing or service being sold is.

 

[FJAG]

That narrative doesn't fly well in towns that saw sawmills close under previous Team Red & Team Blue governments who couldn't do enough to get REAL "free trade" on lumber.

Bang on re: the dynamic. That said, though, people who say we should be hewers of wood and (in this case, drawers of water) can't also say, "hey, we should sell natural resources to the U.S." while ignoring the U.S. wants it both ways, too. I suspect if the U.S. really wanted to buy Canadian water en masse, they would get away with getting a lot better deal than the sellers - sound familiar? Then again, a big buyer can always hose a (relatively) small supplier, no matter what the thing or service being sold is.

So make deals with individual states and generate some competition. This is a commodity for which demand will grow. Just don't do something stupid like the wind farm power deals.

 

[The Bread Guy]

So make deals with individual states and generate some competition. This is a commodity for which demand will grow. Just don't do something stupid like the wind farm power deals.

Someone should email that idea to Doug Ford - here's what his team had to say earlier this month ....

Ontario Newsroom

news.ontario.ca

... Ontario supports the U.S. Department of Commerce’s recent decision to lower the unfair duty rates on Canadian softwood lumber exports – however, the Ontario government maintains that all duty rates should be removed immediately ... At a time when we are taking action to provide cost-of-living relief, softwood lumber duties punish consumers and businesses on both sides of the border – and impose added hardship on the workers, families and communities that depend on Ontario’s forest sector. As this trade dispute continues, we will continue to seek fair treatment of our forest sector and fair outcomes for the public and industry alike.
Together with provincial governments, the federal government and industry leaders across the country, Ontario stands united in support for the Canadian forest industry and free trade.”

 

[Edward Campbell]

This, from Jack Granatstein, is on point: "And what are the chances of the Canadian military getting this new weaponry—or even replacing its obsolescent equipment that it dispatched to Ukraine? In most countries, replacing donated weapons would be a no-brainer. In this nation, however, the defence procurement system is completely broken, and there is no indication that the government will provide the necessary funds ... [and] ... the military has been stripped even of much of the obsolete gear it had. It is essential that replacements—or preferably more modern weaponry—be acquired. The world is a dangerous place right now with Russia, China, North Korea, and other states making threats. We might hope we can continue to be sheltered by the oceans and protected by the Americans. But we cannot count on that."

 

[MilEME09]

This, from Jack Granatstein, is on point: "And what are the chances of the Canadian military getting this new weaponry—or even replacing its obsolescent equipment that it dispatched to Ukraine? In most countries, replacing donated weapons would be a no-brainer. In this nation, however, the defence procurement system is completely broken, and there is no indication that the government will provide the necessary funds ... [and] ... the military has been stripped even of much of the obsolete gear it had. It is essential that replacements—or preferably more modern weaponry—be acquired. The world is a dangerous place right now with Russia, China, North Korea, and other states making threats. We might hope we can continue to be sheltered by the oceans and protected by the Americans. But we cannot count on that."

I was chatting to a guy the other day and summed up the Canadian and US systems pretty well. Neither the system nor the companies actually want to produce results. Companies are after the massive R&D funding the government provides but spends little on actual output. The government in turn needs to create studies, reviews, and processes for bureaucrats to stay employed. Thus results in a system that is entirely broken. The solution he had? Take a design that we have that belongs to the government (more so for the US) go to the south Koreans and tell them build this. Cause they will do it, and faster then any domestic manufacturers. Which will scare every domestic manufacturer

 

[rmc_wannabe]

This, from Jack Granatstein, is on point: "And what are the chances of the Canadian military getting this new weaponry—or even replacing its obsolescent equipment that it dispatched to Ukraine? In most countries, replacing donated weapons would be a no-brainer. In this nation, however, the defence procurement system is completely broken, and there is no indication that the government will provide the necessary funds ... [and] ... the military has been stripped even of much of the obsolete gear it had. It is essential that replacements—or preferably more modern weaponry—be acquired. The world is a dangerous place right now with Russia, China, North Korea, and other states making threats. We might hope we can continue to be sheltered by the oceans and protected by the Americans. But we cannot count on that."

Granatstein hits the nail on the head.

We have too few strategic thinkers and too many reactionary political thinkers leading our defense and foreign policy; but also mainly our procurement processes.

What's needed is a leader with vision past the next election cycle. I think that might be too big an ask for the current ruling party, but sadly I don't see any other political party in this country stepping up to the plate either.

 

[DBNSG]

Granatstein hits the nail on the head.

We have too few strategic thinkers and too many reactionary political thinkers leading our defense and foreign policy; but also mainly our procurement processes.

What's needed is a leader with vision past the next election cycle. I think that might be too big an ask for the current ruling party, but sadly I don't see any other political party in this country stepping up to the plate either.

The National Shipbuilding program I thought was an attempt to do just that and much to my surprise the Trudeau NDP coalition Government have not killed it. Is it too expensive , yes, taking too long , yes but it IS producing. It is a truly National commitment to build a combined 65-70 Ship National fleet when adding the Navy and Coast Guard. The PSAC owns the Navy and Coast Guard now and I would venture that no Canadian politician will mess with it as the pressure from our Allies is steady and growing and after a 30 minute brief even a Canadian politician could be educated on how big our Coastlines are and how much capability we need.

In Time the program will probably strive for a 90 SHIP combined fleet just to keep the lines going.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

The National Shipbuilding program I thought was an attempt to do just that and much to my surprise the Trudeau NDP coalition Government have not killed it. Is it too expensive , yes, taking too long , yes but it IS producing. It is a truly National commitment to build a combined 65-70 Ship National fleet when adding the Navy and Coast Guard. The PSAC owns the Navy and Coast Guard now and I would venture that no Canadian politician will mess with it as the pressure from our Allies is steady and growing and after a 30 minute brief even a Canadian politician could be educated on how big our Coastlines are and how much capability we need.

In Time the program will probably strive for a 90 SHIP combined fleet just to keep the lines going.

So.... what you're saying is in order to get the AD, ATGM, Tac2IS, and other effects we need for the Army we need to become part of a Public Service union that governments fear pissing off?

Seems like a bit of ass pain, but if that's what it takes....

 

[MilEME09]

The National Shipbuilding program I thought was an attempt to do just that and much to my surprise the Trudeau NDP coalition Government have not killed it. Is it too expensive , yes, taking too long , yes but it IS producing. It is a truly National commitment to build a combined 65-70 Ship National fleet when adding the Navy and Coast Guard. The PSAC owns the Navy and Coast Guard now and I would venture that no Canadian politician will mess with it as the pressure from our Allies is steady and growing and after a 30 minute brief even a Canadian politician could be educated on how big our Coastlines are and how much capability we need.

In Time the program will probably strive for a 90 SHIP combined fleet just to keep the lines going.

And that's great and all, but the canadization of designs and the R&D involved in that is what's killing the budget and time on all these projects. Like I said above companies care more about the R&D more then delivery

 

[Kirkhill]

So.... what you're saying is in order to get the AD, ATGM, Tac2IS, and other effects we need for the Army we need to become part of a Public Service union that governments fear pissing off?

Seems like a bit of ass pain, but if that's what it takes....

Jobs at GDOTSC and Rheinmetall in Quebec, at GDLSC in Ontario, and dare I suggest BAE in Winnipeg, L3Harris and Foremost in Calgary, Viking in BC.

We have a firm skeleton on which to build. What we don't have is a government that is morally assured of the need for violence.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

They'll find out one of two ways:

-Our allies make support in other areas contingent on Canada developing that capability

Or

-They find out the hard way when the first salvos land and we have nothing to counter with.

In either case, it will be on someone else's terms that we rise to the occasion.

 

[suffolkowner]

This, from Jack Granatstein, is on point: "And what are the chances of the Canadian military getting this new weaponry—or even replacing its obsolescent equipment that it dispatched to Ukraine? In most countries, replacing donated weapons would be a no-brainer. In this nation, however, the defence procurement system is completely broken, and there is no indication that the government will provide the necessary funds ... [and] ... the military has been stripped even of much of the obsolete gear it had. It is essential that replacements—or preferably more modern weaponry—be acquired. The world is a dangerous place right now with Russia, China, North Korea, and other states making threats. We might hope we can continue to be sheltered by the oceans and protected by the Americans. But we cannot count on that."

Good to see Jack's still at it. I've always enjoyed his opinions

 

[DBNSG]

So.... what you're saying is in order to get the AD, ATGM, Tac2IS, and other effects we need for the Army we need to become part of a Public Service union that governments fear pissing off?

Seems like a bit of ass pain, but if that's what it takes....

Most governments will see the AD, ATGM and other Army gear as inside Army baseball if you will. They know enough that they DON'T know what any of those acronym's are and would wave their arms at NDHQ and say "what is this ?" Why should I care?".

The Field Army's greatest obstacle is the Office Army in Ottawa. How much relevant modern gear and in what quantities could the Army buy if we had a U.S MARINE CORPS Ratio of Officers to enlisted? But Shhhh that's one of Canada's quiet secrets and the Ottawa Office Army know that the civil service and our politicians are too ignorant to ask that tough question.

There are folks far more educated on those facts than me and I would suspect some share this forum.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Granatstein hits the nail on the head.

We have too few strategic thinkers and too many reactionary political thinkers leading our defense and foreign policy; but also mainly our procurement processes.

What's needed is a leader with vision past the next election cycle. I think that might be too big an ask for the current ruling party, but sadly I don't see any other political party in this country stepping up to the plate either.

I don't see this every coming from politicians; the NSS was a strategic vision from a number of dedicated public servants. Part of the pitch was selling the short term benefits to politicians.

It's not that the politicians didn't get the long term strategic goals, but they needed something in it for them in the short term.

My LL from that is that anytime there is something like IRBs, Indigenous procurement, GBA+ we need to embrace it on the PM side and try and use it to get the project going. Bit of a pain in the ass, but I'd rather work through some extra things with OGDs and deliver a capability than try and fight city hall and get nothing.

Just wish the other departments that are supposed to be supporting that weren't useless; trying to figure out if there are Indigenous companies that actually provide the widget/service that you are looking for is a completely manual process, and we just don't have time to run around looking for it. It would be nice if INAC (or whatever they are called now) was actively working with PSPC on that to push that info out.