I don't need to tell everyone here again of how I am a big fan of the Marines (both British and American) and their mentality on what it means to be a Marine first, tradesmen second. Sure there is infighting and pride among branches in the USMC; I've seen some of it first hand on other boards. However, they all look to the Eagle, Globe, and Anchor as their true calling, putting that over crossed rifles or anything else. I think this is central to the ability of institutions like this to instill the "warrior mindset" within all of its soldiers. I think it would do wonders if the CF adopted the principle of "Soldier First, Tradesmen Second". Everyone comes out of a challenging and demanding basic training course, akin to the RM Commando Course at Lympstone, that works everyone up to platoon live fire and instills into everybody an excellence within the field, which should be required of every soldier. From there, the graduate goes onto a short trades indoc into the trade that he wishes to pursue (General Rifleman, Mech Dismount, Crewman, Mortarman, Assault Pioneer, etc). I would like to see all soldiers to do a Basic Engagement in the one of the combat arms before moving onto a trade role required by his or her regiment; this would further reduce the gulf in skills (and reduce animosity) between frontline grunts and support guys.
Rather than have all mortars go to the Artillery Regiments for the sake of regimental "turf", have the Artillery Corps be responsible for all indirect fire trades (Mortarman, Mud Gunner, Bird Gunner, Rocket Artillery, etc.) and post their fully trained soldiers to regimental duties to any regiment that has a sub-unit that requires them; to a Light Infantry outfit (Mortars), a Mech unit (109), or Brigade Artillery (MLRS?). They would all belong to whatever regiment they were posted to, wearing the cap badge and slip on. They are a soldier in a fighting unit first, an artilleryman with the Artillery Corps second. Do this to all the Arms.
Ideally, I'd like to see four Combat Arms, each with a variety of sub specializations for Ranks within the branch;
Infantry, which will cover dismounted lightfighters in the light/airmobile/para roles. Many of the small unit and unconventional warfare will come under this branch. It is generally recognized that Canada's Light Infantry are among the world's best foot soldiers; we may as well make it doctrine.
Cavalry, an amalgamation of the Mechanized Infantry, Armoured, and Armoured Recce. I think the German's had it right when the put the Grenadiers and the Panzers under one arm, directed by the "Inspector der Panzertruppe" Heinz Guderien. this branch is responsible for the shock (or what we have left of it in our Army) forces. All doctrine related to mounted fighting will be under this arm. Possibility of separating "Crewman" MOC from "Cavalry Dismount". I've seen a proposal for having Officers trained in both mounted and dismounted roles, interesting concept.
Artillery, the traditional branch of Indirect Fire Support. It would handle Mortars, Rockets, Field Artillery, Anti-Aircraft, and the emerging NLOS tech (UAV, etc).
Engineers, the branch of mobility and counter mobility. Handles assault pioneers, construction, bridging, explosives, NBCW and all that other cool jazz that makes the engineers so sexy.
The supporting Branches (Aviation, Administration, Catering, Signals, etc) would all be similar, with trained members of the respective Corps or Branches being sent to fighting Regiments as needed, becoming members of these regiments. The big thing here is that we are removing the association of a trade from the regimental system. As I proposed before, I think it would be advantageous to move the regimental affiliation up to the Brigade level, with all soldiers within the Brigade, regardless of trade, being "Fusiliers" (or whatever) and part of that regimental family.
Anyways, this might be a bit disjointed and confusing, but it has been something I've been playing around with in my head recently. Maybe I'll write a White Paper.