Canadian Forces at a breaking point

[I think not]

The budget for the Canadian Forces needs to be doubled to about $30 billion a year if Canada is to secure the country and its sovereignty, says a new report by the Senate Defence Committee.

"At some point, the elastic snaps. And we think we're at that point right now," Sen. Colin Kenny, the chair of the committee, told a news conference Thursday.

"We are seeing so many things degrading simultaneously that they may not recover."

The report, "Wounded: Canada's Military and the Legacy of Neglect", is the first of three reports that will be released by the committee this fall.

It says the defence budget should be doubled, and the military should enlist thousands more personnel. Equipment also needs to be updated.

The current defence budget earmarked for 2005-2006 is $14.3 billion. The report suggests upping that to between $25 billion to $35 billion.

As well, number of people in uniform should be bumped up to 90,000, from its current strength of 62,000, says the report.

Another challenge facing the Canadian Forces is the length of time it takes to replace aging equipment. Currently, it takes about 15 years. The report suggests reducing that time by buying used gear or purchasing equipment already in production.

Kenny admits that he has seen a change in attitude from top officials, such as Prime Minister Paul Martin, when it comes to Canada's defence policy.

"What was the movie? 'Show me the money'," said Kenny, referring to a popular line from the film Jerry Maguire.

"That's what the military needs -- show them the money."

The report also says that having a stronger military will allow Canada to exercise its sovereignty, rather than relying on the United States for protection. It will also give us a greater presence in the world.

The second report, to be released in about six weeks time, will make recommendations on how to "plug the holes" in The Canadian Forces.

Link

 

[MMMike]

No surprise there. Cuts were made across the board back in the '90s, including to the military. There was NO thought to the long-term consequences... no consideration of equipment replacement cycles etc....

Funding should be upped, and much needed equipment replaced. As for increasing the number of forces, we have enough trouble sustaining the existing forces that we have. We simply cannot afford to make these massive increases.

 

[Colpy]

No surprise there. Cuts were made across the board back in the '90s, including to the military. There was NO thought to the long-term consequences... no consideration of equipment replacement cycles etc....

Funding should be upped, and much needed equipment replaced. As for increasing the number of forces, we have enough trouble sustaining the existing forces that we have. We simply cannot afford to make these massive increases.

Increases should be gradual.....we need to look at our military and decide in what direction we want to take it before we start throwing huge amounts of cash out buying stuff that might not suit our needs. Although I like Harper's ideas so far, this stuff needs to be pulled together into a coherent package.

When we do buy, we should buy off the shelf......quicker and cheaper.

We also need to come up with new ways of recruitment.......Canadians are hesitant to serve. I saw Lewis MacKenzie say a couple of years ago that well over 50% of recruitment came from the Maritimes......with 10% of the population.

As for affording it, my understanding is that doubling our military budget would put us at about the levels spent (compared to GDP) by most western nations, and at about one half what the US pays as a percentage of GDP.

I keep pointing this out. In the late sixties (B.T. - Before Trudeau) we had a military over twice the size we have now, with good equipment and excellent training, and we ran a surplus. That was on a population of 20 million.

Now we have a military one half that size, poorly equiped, on a population base of 35 million.

I think we can afford to radically improve.

 

[the caracal kid]

we had a lot of things in the era before trudeau, colpy.

we can't live in the past though. times change, people change, the country changed.

"We are seeing so many things degrading simultaneously that they may not recover." this degrading began BEFORE Trudeau. However, as canada changes, this degrading of the military may more be a sign of positive changes in how we view ourselves and how we handle ourselves.

 

[bluealberta]

Re: RE: Canadian Forces at a breaking point

we had a lot of things in the era before trudeau, colpy.

we can't live in the past though. times change, people change, the country changed.

"We are seeing so many things degrading simultaneously that they may not recover." this degrading began BEFORE Trudeau. However, as canada changes, this degrading of the military may more be a sign of positive changes in how we view ourselves and how we handle ourselves.

Yes, CK, we had a lot of things back then. Responsible social programs, pride in the country, pride in our armed forces, respect for politicians and the government. Now we have a lot of things we did not have back then: wasteful social programs, a nanny state, more rules and regulations than most dicatorships, intrusion of the federal government into areas of provincial jurisdiction as guaranteed by the constitution, a Charter of Rights that allows an unelected, but partisan appointed panel of nine judges, to write laws for Canadians.

If a degrading military is a positive sign of how we view ourselves, then this country is truly lost.

 

[the caracal kid]

moving beyond the caveman mentality is a positive sign!

there are problems with the charter, such as PET's failure to include quebec, and its inclusion of a mythological creature and the ultimate symbol of entitlement and inequality!

You want "pride", pride is foolishness. If you want it in the military though, talk about how it was the cons that began the path to no military. Don't forget to talk about how it was not from enlightenment that they took such a path, but from the desire to be the patsies of the americans.

You talk of responsible social programs and at the same time support harpie who's agenda would see canada with NO social programs.

 

[doug]

As well, number of people in uniform should be bumped up to 90,000, from its current strength of 62,000, says the report.

I suppose they could always plunk a bunch of Generals into gerneral ranks. There must be 10,000 Generals our inauspicious government is nannying.

Wounded? You bet. But only since Trudeau and Hilliar, Castro and Babs.

 

[Jersay]

Increases should be gradual.....we need to look at our military and decide in what direction we want to take it before we start throwing huge amounts of cash out buying stuff that might not suit our needs. Although I like Harper's ideas so far, this stuff needs to be pulled together into a coherent package.

When we do buy, we should buy off the shelf......quicker and cheaper.

We also need to come up with new ways of recruitment.......Canadians are hesitant to serve. I saw Lewis MacKenzie say a couple of years ago that well over 50% of recruitment came from the Maritimes......with 10% of the population.

As for affording it, my understanding is that doubling our military budget would put us at about the levels spent (compared to GDP) by most western nations, and at about one half what the US pays as a percentage of GDP.

I keep pointing this out. In the late sixties (B.T. - Before Trudeau) we had a military over twice the size we have now, with good equipment and excellent training, and we ran a surplus. That was on a population of 20 million.

Now we have a military one half that size, poorly equiped, on a population base of 35 million.

I think we can afford to radically improve.

Being apart of the Canadian Military, but an NDP supporter, I actually agree with Colpy on the gradual increase of the Canadian Military.

I was interested in what Harper had to say about the Military and I have to admit I got excited. However, doing that at one moment without deciding what that course might be is dangerous and will lead to cuts in social programs.

Therefore I would agree to an increase in military expanse, once we know what the plan is and have incremental steps over a certain long-period of time.

For example,

Yr 1 to Yr 5, train X number of soldiers, airmen and navy.

Also increase purchases of gear and equipment needed. And increase it to the 35 billion or more after a said number of years.

 

[the caracal kid]

i prefer canada have a smaller armed forces, but a larger reserve unit. Having a dynamic size allows for more flexibility in the long term utilization of the forces as a protector of canadian soils. Citizens should serve as necessary, and return to normal life when not called on. Only a very small core of full time forces is necessary.

Canada should extend itself in the development of technologies to enhance life.

 

[FiveParadox]

Military Spending

The cuts to the Military Services in Canada had to be made to prevent this nation's federal debt from spiralling to an unsalvagable amount. We are now in a position where restoring those services is possible, and quite warranted.

I'd like to point out, though, that this information, and the thorough study done to draw the conclusion, is thanks to the Senate of Canada — these people do take care of some very important matters up there, in the Red Chamber.

 

[paulmartin]

quote:Therefore I would agree to an increase in military expanse, once we know what the plan is and have incremental steps over a certain long-period of time.

I agree.

Although the only real plan I've hear as of late is the conservative one.
The NDP seem rather vague on the issue with no concrete plan.
The Greens would have us stay home instead.
The liberals have given the same money out so often the post dated cheques are worn out.

 

[Jersay]

quote:Therefore I would agree to an increase in military expanse, once we know what the plan is and have incremental steps over a certain long-period of time.

I agree.

Although the only real plan I've hear as of late is the conservative one.
The NDP seem rather vague on the issue with no concrete plan.
The Greens would have us stay home instead.
The liberals have given the same money out so often the post dated cheques are worn out.

The NDP haven't released there Defence platform yet. I think it is coming this week or next and that is what I am waiting for.

 

[the caracal kid]

i hope the NDP shows the same understanding to progess they have on other issues.

 

[paulmartin]

The NDP haven't released there Defence platform yet. I think it is coming this week or next and that is what I am waiting for.

I would like to hear it too. I would like real numbers we can crunch. The fact that the conservatives will re-activate the airborne also is a good move, as it shouldn't have been disbanded in the first place IMO.

 

[the caracal kid]

re: the airborne

you would have had to have trained with them to realize what a polarized group of whack-jobs they were. clean-up was necessary and the populace did not get the full picture of what that regiment was like.

 

[Jersay]

To me the ones at the time in the airborne were thugs. However, I do agree they shouldn't have gotten rid of the airborne, just sweep out the trash.

 

[paulmartin]

Yes it had troubles, but a new commander had already cleaned up the unit and everything was fine. But the Liberals and the peaceniks wanted a scapegoat so they killed the airborne regiment. And also killed the Somalia inquiry early and to this day, there has been no good reason for ending the inquiry early.
History Television has shown a hour-long documentary about the Somalia affair and the disbanding of the regiment and the documentary concluded that the disbanding was nothing but a "feel good, do nothing" Liberal move by a prime minister who didn't understand military matters at all.

I remeber the video and everything. Canada still needs good fighting men under the right direction.

 

[the caracal kid]

To me the ones at the time in the airborne were thugs. However, I do agree they shouldn't have gotten rid of the airborne, just sweep out the trash.

the problems were systemic. the unit itself was very polarized because of its "special" stature. Anytime a group and becomes too polarized it looses its ability to behave in a balanced manner. Yes, you could "sweep out" all the enlisted and direct command officers, but without changing the organizational stucture of the forces to remove the "elitism" of the unit, the problems would have returned.

I did part of my officer training (with the reserves) with the airborn well before the Somalia incident and I knew then that the unit was a disaster waiting to happen. (don't ask why a pacifist was in the reserves, it is a long story)

 

[bluealberta]

Re: RE: Canadian Forces at a breaking point

moving beyond the caveman mentality is a positive sign!

there are problems with the charter, such as PET's failure to include quebec, and its inclusion of a mythological creature and the ultimate symbol of entitlement and inequality!

You want "pride", pride is foolishness. If you want it in the military though, talk about how it was the cons that began the path to no military. Don't forget to talk about how it was not from enlightenment that they took such a path, but from the desire to be the patsies of the americans.

You talk of responsible social programs and at the same time support harpie who's agenda would see canada with NO social programs.

First, your history is a little wrong. It was Trudeau and Pearson who started the downgrade to our military. Do you remember getting rid of the different types of uniforms for the different branches of the armed forces? Liberals did that. Check out Trudeaus budgets, military spending was continually degraded.

Secondly, your response about social programs is typical left wing hysteria. You cannot find anything that says the Conservatives will have no social programs. You can, however, find all sorts of information about responsible social programs, with accountability, as opposed to the liberal method of simply throwing money at an issue. Stephen Harper has never said he would at any time cut all social programs, and for you to insinuate this is a falsehood at best. At worst, .................well, you figure it out, you have all the answers

 

[the caracal kid]

ok... do you remember back when canada actually tried to be an innovator in aerospace? do you remember how dief caved to the US and scrapped the aero? THAT was a major step to the diminishing of the canadian military.

Harpsicord and social programs:
you think he is going to fund them? he has not produced numbers. wonder why? perhaps it has to do with his "small government"/"private enterprise" agenda. Harpsicord wants the government out of pretty much everything.

do i have to dig up ALL the anti-quebec, anti-medicare, anti-gay, pro-big-business, pro-american statements he has made? Would you settle for a look at every one of his poilicy statements that is anti-clear-policy?

Harpie could not sell this country to the US fast enough for his liking. I have posted links to harie rhetoric on these forums and not a single con has tried to refute the true harpie. Why is that?