• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

Canada says it will look at increasing its defence spending and tacked on 10 more Russian names to an ever growing sanctions list.

By Tonda MacCharles
Ottawa Bureau
Mon., March 7, 2022

Riga, LATVIA—On the 13th day of the brutal Russian bid to claim Ukraine as its own, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is showing up at the Latvian battle group led by Canadian soldiers, waving the Maple Leaf and a vague hint at more money for the military.

Canada has been waving the NATO flag for nearly seven years in Latvia as a bulwark against Russia’s further incursions in Eastern Europe.

Canada stepped up to lead one of NATO’s four battle groups in 2015 — part of the defensive alliance’s display of strength and solidarity with weaker member states after Russia invaded Ukraine and seized the Crimean peninsula in 2014. Trudeau arrived in the Latvian capital late Monday after meetings in the U.K. with British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Netherlands Prime Minister Mark Rutte.

Earlier Monday, faced with a seemingly unstoppable war in Ukraine, Trudeau said he will look at increasing Canada’s defence spending. Given world events, he said there are “certainly reflections to have.”

And Canada tacked on 10 more Russian names to an ever-growing sanctions list.

The latest round of sanctions includes names Trudeau said were identified by jailed Russian opposition leader and Putin nemesis Alexei Navalny.

However, on a day when Trudeau cited the new sanctions, and Johnson touted new measures meant to expose Russian property owners in his country, Rutte admitted sanctions are not working.

Yet they all called for more concerted international efforts over the long haul, including more economic measures and more humanitarian aid, with Johnson and Rutte divided over how quickly countries need to get off Russian oil and gas.

The 10 latest names on Canada’s target list do not include Roman Abramovich — a Russian billionaire Navalny has been flagging to Canada since at least 2017. Canada appears to have sanctioned about 20 of the 35 names on Navalny’s list.

The Conservative opposition says the Liberal government is not yet exerting maximum pressure on Putin, and should do more to bolster Canadian Forces, including by finally approving the purchase of fighter jets.

Foreign affairs critic Michael Chong said in an interview that Ottawa must still sanction “additional oligarchs close to President Putin who have significant assets in Canada.”

Abramovich owns more than a quarter of the public shares in steelmaking giant Evraz, which has operations in Alberta and Saskatchewan and has supplied most of the steel for the government-owned Trans Mountain pipeline project.

Evraz’s board of directors also includes two more Russians the U.S. government identified as “oligarchs” in 2019 — Aleksandr Abramov and Aleksandr Frolov — and its Canadian operations have received significant support from the federal government.

That includes at least $27 million in emergency wage subsidies during the pandemic, as well as $7 million through a fund meant to help heavy-polluters reduce emissions that cause climate change, according to the company’s most recent annual report.

In addition to upping defence spending, the Conservatives want NORAD’s early warning system upgraded, naval shipbuilding ramped up and Arctic security bolstered.

In London, Johnson sat down with Trudeau and Rutte at the Northolt airbase. Their morning meetings had a rushed feel, with Johnson starting to usher press out before Trudeau spoke. His office said later that the British PM couldn’t squeeze the full meeting in at 10 Downing Street because Johnson’s “diary” was so busy that day. The three leaders held an afternoon news conference at 10 Downing.

But before that Trudeau met with the Queen, saying she was “insightful” and they had a “useful, for me anyway, conversation about global affairs.”

Trudeau meets with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg Tuesday in Latvia.

The prime minister will also meet with three Baltic leaders, the prime ministers of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, in the Latvian capital of Riga.

The Liberals announced they would increase the 500 Canadian Forces in Latvia by another 460 troops. The Canadians are leading a multinational battle group, one of four that are part of NATO’s deployments in the region.

Another 3,400 Canadians could be deployed to the region in the months to come, on standby for NATO orders.

But Canada’s shipments of lethal aid to Ukraine were slow to come in the view of the Conservatives, and the Ukrainian Canadian community.

And suddenly Western allies are eyeing each other’s defence commitments.

At the Downing Street news conference, Rutte noted the Netherlands will increase its defence budget to close to two per cent of GDP. Germany has led the G7, and doubled its defence budget in the face of Putin’s invasion and threats. Johnson said the U.K. defence spending is about 2.4 per cent and declined to comment on Canada’s defence spending which is 1.4 per cent of GDP.

But Johnson didn’t hold back.

“What we can’t do, post the invasion of Ukraine is assume that we go back to a kind of status quo ante, a kind of new normalization in the way that we did after the … seizure of Crimea and the Donbas area,” Johnson said. “We’ve got to recognize that things have changed and that we need a new focus on security and I think that that is kind of increasingly understood by everybody.”

Trudeau stood by his British and Dutch counterparts and pledged Canada would do more.

He defended his government’s record, saying Ottawa is gradually increasing spending over the next decade by 70 per cent. Then Trudeau admitted more might be necessary.

“We also recognize that context is changing rapidly around the world and we need to make sure that women and men have certainty and our forces have all the equipment necessary to be able to stand strongly as we always have. As members of NATO. We will continue to look at what more we can do.”

The three leaders — Johnson, a conservative and Trudeau and Rutte, progressive liberals — in a joint statement said they “will continue to impose severe costs on Russia.”

Arriving for the news conference from Windsor Castle, Trudeau had to detour to enter Downing Street as loud so-called Freedom Convoy protesters bellowed from outside the gate. They carried signs marked “Tuck Frudeau” and “Free Tamara” (Lich).

Protester Jeff Wyatt who said he has no Canadian ties told the Star he came to stand up for Lich and others who were leading a “peaceful protest” worldwide against government “lies” about COVID-19 and what he called Trudeau’s “tyranny.”

Elsewhere in London, outside the Russian embassy, other protesters and passersby reflected on what they said was real tyranny — the Russian attack on Ukraine. “I think we should be as tough as possible to get this stopped, as tough as possible,” said protester Clive Martinez.
 
My experience on both sides of the equation is that many military personnel fail to adequately communicate their skills when applying for PS positions. Jargon, unclear abbreviations... writing in clear, simple declarative English is apparently a lost skill

Maybe it's just my trade but its more common than not for us to slide into PS positions where available upon retirement.
 
MMTs speak the same language as PGs.

Other occs, not always as much.

The process that brought me (a Log O) into the PS also brought a MARS O in.
 
Its extremely easy to transfer from a military Eng position to an Eng 4 position. The experience translates quite well. I don't know for other types of positions.

Clear equivalencies in the technical classifications are pretty solid, I agree.

My experience on both sides of the equation is that many military personnel fail to adequately communicate their skills when applying for PS positions. Jargon, unclear abbreviations... writing in clear, simple declarative English is apparently a lost skill
…but if someone, for instance had two ADMs provided advice and also reviewed the application to the EX-02 position before submission and said the PS’d equivalencies of the past Mil service were well-written and aligned very well with the advertised position, then received a single comm point of ‘thank you for your application’ and nothing else, then find out from a future neighbour (an EX-01 actually working for the previously advertised EX-02 position) that the DG for whom the ExDir position would work was glad that they were able to internally promote one of their team after they received “two other applications to cover us off for policy…” Years later, my neighbour can’t stop telling me how he hates the guy they slid up into the position as well as the DG, and I thank my lucky stars that I didn’t get the job, and moved on to private industry.
 
My experience on both sides of the equation is that many military personnel fail to adequately communicate their skills when applying for PS positions. Jargon, unclear abbreviations... writing in clear, simple declarative English is apparently a lost skill
The application process is a bit strange as well; you really need to directly use the 'mandatory requirements' and just explain how they are met to make sure you get through the electronic screening the GoC has.

There was an Eng 4 pool about 5 years ago with hundreds of applicants, and apparently that screened a lot of people out so they had to manually review a lot of the CVs.

It's almost like replying to an RFP; easiest way is to have a small table, but looks really strange.
 
The application process is a bit strange as well; you really need to directly use the 'mandatory requirements' and just explain how they are met to make sure you get through the electronic screening the GoC has.

There was an Eng 4 pool about 5 years ago with hundreds of applicants, and apparently that screened a lot of people out so they had to manually review a lot of the CVs.

It's almost like replying to an RFP; easiest way is to have a small table, but looks really strange.
It’s more about processes and how you work and less about results at that stage.

I know someone that was screened out for stating he used MS suite (outlook, word, excel) on a daily basis when they specifically asked for dates and to demonstrate how and when he used it.

Military types tend to write like their MPRRs as opposed to what is required in PS competitions.
 
Clear equivalencies in the technical classifications are pretty solid, I agree.


…but if someone, for instance had two ADMs provided advice and also reviewed the application to the EX-02 position before submission and said the PS’d equivalencies of the past Mil service were well-written and aligned very well with the advertised position, then received a single comm point of ‘thank you for your application’ and nothing else, then find out from a future neighbour (an EX-01 actually working for the previously advertised EX-02 position) that the DG for whom the ExDir position would work was glad that they were able to internally promote one of their team after they received “two other applications to cover us off for policy…” Years later, my neighbour can’t stop telling me how he hates the guy they slid up into the position as well as the DG, and I thank my lucky stars that I didn’t get the job, and moved on to private industry.
Had a similar experience about 10 years ago. Screened in,and then wrote the exam. Was told that my submission and exam results were head and shoulders above anyone else’s. Went to the interview, and thought I nailed it. Received an e-mail about a month later stating that “I had failed to demonstrate the requisite experience and comprehension” to be considered for the job. I was at first gobsmacked, and then furious. It was later explained to me that the competition was a sham, only conducted to meet the PS criteria, and that the outcome was pre-ordained to move up a favourite. The successful candidate is now a lousy, and detested EX-02, thankfully no longer with DND.
 
Had a similar experience about 10 years ago. Screened in,and then wrote the exam. Was told that my submission and exam results were head and shoulders above anyone else’s. Went to the interview, and thought I nailed it. Received an e-mail about a month later stating that “I had failed to demonstrate the requisite experience and comprehension” to be considered for the job. I was at first gobsmacked, and then furious. It was later explained to me that the competition was a sham, only conducted to meet the PS criteria, and that the outcome was pre-ordained to move up a favourite. The successful candidate is now a lousy, and detested EX-02, thankfully no longer with DND.
Yup. We’re not the only ones I know that’s happened to, Weinie. I look at it as a sign that a senior minion life in the PS wasn’t for me. Happier, had great experiences in “the real world” and now doing some exciting entrepreneurial stuff that I wouldn’t have even considered as an EX-02 drone trying to ‘Fleet
Up’ to DG…
 
Yup. We’re not the only ones I know that’s happened to, Weinie. I look at it as a sign that a senior minion life in the PS wasn’t for me. Happier, had great experiences in “the real world” and now doing some exciting entrepreneurial stuff that I wouldn’t have even considered as an EX-02 drone trying to ‘Fleet
Up’ to DG…
G2G,

In hindsight you are right, and I have come to accept that this was not the best career path for me. But it was my first (and last) exposure to the shyte that passes for a credible PS HR system. I now look at every appointment with a somewhat jaundiced eye. Just look at my (soon to be former) Branch.
 
Yup. We’re not the only ones I know that’s happened to, Weinie. I look at it as a sign that a senior minion life in the PS wasn’t for me. Happier, had great experiences in “the real world” and now doing some exciting entrepreneurial stuff that I wouldn’t have even considered as an EX-02 drone trying to ‘Fleet
Up’ to DG…
Yup happens here too. Nepotism is rampant.
 
I can’t speak to the EX level. But the competitions I’ve helped run were all transparent and on the up and up. I have seen some though that were definitely and obviously sketchy.
 
Yup. We’re not the only ones I know that’s happened to, Weinie. I look at it as a sign that a senior minion life in the PS wasn’t for me. Happier, had great experiences in “the real world” and now doing some exciting entrepreneurial stuff that I wouldn’t have even considered as an EX-02 drone trying to ‘Fleet
Up’ to DG…

G2G,

In hindsight you are right, and I have come to accept that this was not the best career path for me. But it was my first (and last) exposure to the shyte that passes for a credible PS HR system. I now look at every appointment with a somewhat jaundiced eye. Just look at my (soon to be former) Branch.

I've come to the realization that Public Service/Government is no longer for me. It's not what I want in life and I have other ambitions.

Perhaps 20-25 years from now, I might be drawn back to Politics after something #triggers me enough but I've got other plans in the mean time.
 
Weinie, G2G,

Not sure why they’d go to length for an internal advertised staffing process (and waste many people’s time) when it is entirely possible and acceptable to go the internal unadvertised route?
 
Weinie, G2G,

Not sure why they’d go to length for an internal advertised staffing process (and waste many people’s time) when it is entirely possible and acceptable to go the internal unadvertised route?
Government and wasting time?

Never seen that before 😁
 
Weinie, G2G,

Not sure why they’d go to length for an internal advertised staffing process (and waste many people’s time) when it is entirely possible and acceptable to go the internal unadvertised route?
It is not, if the individual they want to promote internally into the new position hasn’t worked at the new position’s classification level previously. If there isn’t an internally-qualified transfer (in this case laterally from another EX-02 to this one), they have to compete it internally, and by policy, to include CAF members in that internal competition before going to a truly external competitive recruitment.
 
It is not, if the individual they want to promote internally into the new position hasn’t worked at the new position’s classification level previously. If there isn’t an internally-qualified transfer (in this case laterally from another EX-02 to this one), they have to compete it internally, and by policy, to include CAF members in that internal competition before going to a truly external competitive recruitment.


For a few years now, there is a lot more flexibility when it comes to non ads. Some people merely have to qualify in another pool (and not be at level at the time) and can be appointed without a competition as an example. So someone might apply for a pool. Qualify, not necessarily get picked up but another manager could just appoint them from that pool with no competition. It’s annoying because you create a process, put in the work and people apply knowing damn well they will be picked up by someone else in a non ad appointment. The solution is to restrict the pool. I know we’ve started doing that.

At the end of the day, if someone wants a specific person they can make it happen.
 
Back
Top