• 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.
 

I'm listening, go on.

No bitterness, I make more money, have a more important job with a lot responsibility, and enjoy what I do a lot more now. Cutting the strings was the best decision I ever made.

Woody Harrelson Crying GIF


Although, if I ever get the chance to #### someone over who ticked me off, I will 100% exercise that option 🤣

Ok, I'm happy for you.
 
That I would agree with. More 3 - 5 year hitches. Offer things like the GI bill.

Aim for six and twelve; aligned with the existing VAC benefits.

But to do that, the schools need reinforcement for greater intake. Augmentation through CFTPO tasks should be the exception, not the rule. Unfortunately, as with all things intended to sustain the CAF, the CAF likes to cheap out. The RCN would rather a dozen ships all undermanned than ten ships crewed, with a properly resourced training system. (The Army schools are equally bad).

One contributor to the stress on the training system is the peaks and valleys driven by ROTP students; if we do keep RMC & CMR, we should move away from one intake a year to three, spaced out, and schedule education semesters(three annually) in an asymmetric way to help even out demand on the training institutions. Students could do 1,2,3 or 4 academic semesters in a row, followed by 1 or 2 military training semesters, until they complete their degree.
 
That would mean less Career Managers and pointless postings which kill spousal careers and family stability. Moving around the country needlessly for "experience" is what the CAF is all about!
There are Reserve CMs. NAVRES had (has?) them.

Regarding moving, that is an issue with how our squadrons/bases are spread out, which is due to our geographic location and priorities. You want the RCAF to not post most people? Move every base of a fleet, including schools, into one place. All Transport in Trenton. All fighters in Cold Lake. All LRP in Greenwood. All Maritime Helicopters in Shearwater. All Tac Hel in Gagetown.

The fallout is while there are fewer postings east/west, folks still get posted to staff jobs in Ottawa/Winnipeg, and tons more domestic TD. Due to NORAD commitments, the fighter folks would probably still end up spending 6 months a year in Bagotville to fill that out, the LRP folks would have TD deployments to Comox, and the SAR folks would essentially be TD’d to places other than their home base.

So the choice is either moving your family every 3-4 years, or keeping your family in one place but being gone for 6 months a year. What is worse in the long run?
 
There are Reserve CMs. NAVRES had (has?) them.

Regarding moving, that is an issue with how our squadrons/bases are spread out, which is due to our geographic location and priorities. You want the RCAF to not post most people? Move every base of a fleet, including schools, into one place. All Transport in Trenton. All fighters in Cold Lake. All LRP in Greenwood. All Maritime Helicopters in Shearwater. All Tac Hel in Gagetown.

The fallout is while there are fewer postings east/west, folks still get posted to staff jobs in Ottawa/Winnipeg, and tons more domestic TD. Due to NORAD commitments, the fighter folks would probably still end up spending 6 months a year in Bagotville to fill that out, the LRP folks would have TD deployments to Comox, and the SAR folks would essentially be TD’d to places other than their home base.

So the choice is either moving your family every 3-4 years, or keeping your family in one place but being gone for 6 months a year. What is worse in the long run?

Why not just have people spend their careers on one fleet ? Think of it like a Home Port Division like the RCN has.
 
Why not just have people spend their careers on one fleet ? Think of it like a Home Port Division like the RCN has.
The vast majority do. Re-training folks on different airframes takes too long.

The thing is that the fleet is usually spread out between 2 or more locations. Most are “east coast / west coast” like the fighters, Auroras or Maritime Helicopters, but Tac Hel is all over the place (minus Chinooks). Also, folks need to be posted to Winnipeg/Prairies to become basic aircrew instructors for pilots, ACSOs, and AES Ops.
 
Why not just have people spend their careers on one fleet ? Think of it like a Home Port Division like the RCN has.
That's his point, the fleets are spread out.

LRP- Comox and Greenwood
TacHel- Edmonton, Petawawa, Valcartier, and Gagetown with rest Sqns in Borden and St-Hubert
Fighters- Cold Lake and Bagotville
SAR- Comox, Winnipeg, Trenton, and Greenwood
Transport- Yellowknife, Winnipeg, and Trenton

Then throw in the fact that someone has to do the HQ jobs in places like Winnipeg, North Bay, and Ottawa, and there are a lot of moves.
 
They do. The worlds economy runs on ships at sea. Our (NATOs) ability fight any conflict will depend on ruling the North Atlantic, just like WW2. Any fight in Asia with China will be a Naval and Air war and any ground forces will depend on secure sea lanes to fight.

You can stick your head in the sand all you want, but Canada could provide more by being a bigger player at sea than anything we could do on land.

I also really like getting Army guys all wound up.
I’m an army guy and I actually agree with you.
 
So the choice is either moving your family every 3-4 years, or keeping your family in one place but being gone for 6 months a year. What is worse in the long run?

People tired of both and leaving the CAF, which is the current situation.
 
People tired of both and leaving the CAF, which is the current situation.
I'm guessing people would have far less of an issue with both of those things if the CAF handled them better.

I still haven't been told where I'm posted this summer... I know I'm posted, I just don't know where. When I was a 21 year old Pte it wasn't so annoying, as a 41 year old PO 1 it's infuriating. I mean, I know where I'm 90% likely to go, but I haven't been told that by anyone in the CoC, I just pieced it together because it's a combination of where I least want to go, and the easiest option for the CAF.

Canada isn't going to become physically smaller, so the CAF/GoC should be doing everything in their power to make moving people around the country less shitty. They have taken the opposite approach though, and seem to try to make it worse every year.

Before people chime in with "don't move people at all", that might work in some occupations, but it doesn't for many support occupations. If you have small sections on many bases, you have move people around.
 
People tired of both and leaving the CAF, which is the current situation.
OK, so what is the 3rd COA?

We can’t magically make Canada smaller, and assuming that Canadians want SAR capability within 20 days of the call, we can’t move everyone into one place and then not send them out on TDs.
 
I’m going to sound like I’m beating a dead horse. Create real incentives and bonuses to go places and be posted.
Also, create consequences for taking those incentivized postings then not doing your job upon arrival.

Lots of people in my occupation wanted Esquimalt for the location, then magically became unfit sea as soon as they arrived... So two to four people would do all the work, and the rest would collect PLD and enjoy the February cherry blossoms.
 
People tired of both and leaving the CAF, which is the current situation.
from an outsiders point of view: There are lots of civilians living in all the towns and cities associated with the military that like living in those cities so it isn't the location. It also isn't the job per se. It pays reasonably well, has good benefits in comparison to many positions elsewhere, and has the potential for actually feeling good about what you do. But when your employer nickel and dimes you, treats you as a second-class citizen, takes you away from your family for months on end and then goes cheap on things like child-care and ensuring families are able to get together on a regular basis when you are posted out, provides you with second-rate or obsolete tools and then expects you to accomplish miracles there is no reason to give him any more time than is absolutely necessary to gain the skills needed to move back out of uniform. Treat your people with respect, give them the tools that they need and most importantly, work on keeping families together and maybe your attrition rate will go back down
 
But when your employer nickel and dimes you, treats you as a second-class citizen, takes you away from your family for months on end and then goes cheap on things like child-care and ensuring families are able to get together on a regular basis when you are posted out, provides you with second-rate or obsolete tools and then expects you to accomplish miracles there is no reason to give him any more time than is absolutely necessary to gain the skills needed to move back out of uniform. Treat your people with respect, give them the tools that they need and most importantly, work on keeping families together and maybe your attrition rate will go back down

The CAF won't be a preferred employer, for a number of reasons, without the all-in support and buy in from the government. Things like bonuses and posting incentives are nice, however you can't just get a cheque cut from the OR.
Also, create consequences for taking those incentivized postings then not doing your job upon arrival.

There are no consequences period, for not doing your job. The CAF really needs to make it easier to can people, not offer them another trade, but fire them.
 
There are no consequences period, for not doing your job. The CAF really needs to make it easier to can people, not offer them another trade, but fire them.

In the case of some allowances, intended to incentivize behaviours, failed "leaders" refuse to enforce the policies and permit members to be paid money they are not entitled to.

Perhaps it's time to eliminate SDA, LDA and the rest, and move exclusively to paying them for time at sea / time in the field... no more bonus money based on an annotation to a position.
 
from an outsiders point of view: There are lots of civilians living in all the towns and cities associated with the military that like living in those cities so it isn't the location.
Big difference between growing up in Cold Lake vs being moved there.


Fundamentally the CAF, and specifically the CA, is not effecient. We need to integrate the reserves, cut down our HQs, trim admin processes, and reorganize our training system to stop wasting both time and money. The amount of man hours we waste in PAT and BTL is frankly absurd. I won’t ever get past the girl I know from my old Rugby Club who’s presently waiting four months in Meaford for DP1. On an initial 3 year contract we’ll spend 11 percent of her wages on precisely fuck all output. To say nothing of the cost of moving the member from Edmonton -> Montreal -> Meaford -> Posting. This happens to hundreds of our new members annually, and frankly we can’t afford it.
 
Why not just have people spend their careers on one fleet ? Think of it like a Home Port Division like the RCN has.
Why even have two separate fleets? There is zero reason administratively for this, especially for a Navy with such little capability.
Big difference between growing up in Cold Lake vs being moved there.


Fundamentally the CAF, and specifically the CA, is not effecient. We need to integrate the reserves, cut down our HQs, trim admin processes, and reorganize our training system to stop wasting both time and money. The amount of man hours we waste in PAT and BTL is frankly absurd. I won’t ever get past the girl I know from my old Rugby Club who’s presently waiting four months in Meaford for DP1. On an initial 3 year contract we’ll spend 11 percent of her wages on precisely fuck all output. To say nothing of the cost of moving the member from Edmonton -> Montreal -> Meaford -> Posting. This happens to hundreds of our new members annually, and frankly we can’t afford it.
So you like my idea of deep cuts 😉
 
Why even have two separate fleets? There is zero reason administratively for this, especially for a Navy with such little capability.
I have a few facetious answers, but I would like to know how the cost breakdown for transiting and semi-permanently stationing a ship to the Indo-Pacific AOR would compare with having folks/ships permanently based there.
 
Back
Top