Defining Foreign and Defence Policy (and hence our Military Force)

[K-Nato87]

I'm hearing that the training is going to be shortened in this policy. will this effect my BMQ, Land Course and Course Training ??


I hope I am being misinformed on this. I apologize if this question is in the wrong place.

Thanks 

 

[GnyHwy]

Also didn't see anything about increasing the civilians that it will take to integrate all this stuff, particularly the C2.

Have to read thoroughly tomorrow.

 

[George Wallace]

I'm hearing that the training is going to be shortened in this policy. will this effect my BMQ, Land Course and Course Training ??


I hope I am being misinformed on this. I apologize if this question is in the wrong place.

Thanks

I can not see any reason that this announcement would affect your training in any way. 

Perhaps you should check out the credibility of your source of information.

If it is something like F 6; then totally disregard it.  (F6 is not even on the scale.  [ )

 

[Old EO Tech]

Gov't graphic via twitter:
https://twitter.com/TimmyC62/status/872516511692279808
Mark
Ottawa

Well like many here, I'll believe the numbers when I see contracts being signed.  As someone already stated, projects already exist for much of this, it would just take money for LVM, ERC, ACSV projects to put out RFP this year and assess bids in 18....

Jon

 

[jmt18325]

Also didn't see anything about increasing the civilians that it will take to integrate all this stuff, particularly the C2.

Have to read thoroughly tomorrow.

There will be 1150 new civilian positions.

 

[MilEME09]

There will be 1150 new civilian positions.

oh just what we need more civilian contractors, I can see the tail getting fatter already

 

[jmt18325]

oh just what we need more civilian contractors, I can see the tail getting fatter already

Based on some of the comments, I'm thinking (hoping?) that the positions will relate mostly to procurement.  They hope to shorten procurement time, and they plan to bring all contracts under $5M in house to DND.

 

[Kirkhill]

This caught my eye on pg 73 ...

I think you are talking about something like this

A Reaper with a 50 kg Hellfire/Brimstone with a 10 km or so range as opposed to something like this

a 1000 kg JASSM-ER  with a 1000 km range

Or even one of these

700 kg, 200 km Harpoon

Or these

Small Diameter Bombs - 100 kg / 100 km

 

[McG]

oh just what we need more civilian contractors, I can see the tail getting fatter already

No.  Not contractors.  Public Servants.  There is a difference.

We need them to staff the procurement project teams to start buying equipment ... and maybe displace a few military PYs for reinvestment into operational roles.

They also could make a good workforce for cyber if much of that capability becomes static, permanently conducting operations from a hub in Canada.

 

[Brad Sallows]

CBC reports "The Liberal government's new defence policy lays out a plan to increase the defence budget by 70 per cent over the next decade to $32.7 billion."

The 2016 Fiscal Reference Tables report National Defence Direct Program Expenses as $28.5 billion.  At a 1.5% inflation rate, that would have to hit $33 billion in 10 years just to account for inflation (North of $400 million per year).

 

[jmt18325]

The 2016 Fiscal Reference Tables report National Defence Direct Program Expenses as $28.5 billion.

I think you should probably check that again.  Canada spends nowhere close to that on defence. 

http://dgpaapp.forces.gc.ca/en/canada-defence-policy/news/stable-predictable-realistic-funding.asp

This year's budget is just over $20B (I've been forgetting all day what fiscal year we're in).

 

[Kirkhill]

https://www.fin.gc.ca/frt-trf/2016/frt-trf-1603-eng.asp#tbl12

Thanks for suggesting the check JMT

Table 12, Column 4, Last Row - 28,519 "millions of dollars"

Now - the apples and oranges debate might be useful here - but I'm thinking that the government will be dragging every existing dollar that is related to defence but uncounted into the discussion and thus will be doing its best to display more without spending more.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Some more cynical than me might say if ceasefire.ca/the Rideau Disarmament Institute (the "Disarmament" is silent) is unhappy, pro-militarites should be happy  >

Canada does Trump’s bidding with massive new defence spending.

Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan released Canada’s new defence policy today and here are the highlights:

-          A 70% increase in defence spending over the next 10 years

-          A staggering 62 billion dollar increase over the next 20 years

-          An increase in the number of fighter jets to be purchased from 65 (under Harper) to 88

-          An increase in personnel in both the regular and reserve forces

The Trudeau Liberals did not campaign on, and have no mandate for, significant increases in the defence budget. There has been no change in the international security environment since their election to justify such astronomical increases. The only change has been the election of Donald Trump.

While there are positive elements of the new policy – particularly Canada’s engagement in support of UN peace operations – the new funding envelope is nothing short of a total capitulation to the American bully, President Trump.

Next, let the road show begin!

• "Parliamentary Secretary DeCourcey to Speak on Canada’s New Defence Policy (in Gagetown)"
• "Minister Hehr to Speak on Canada’s New Defence Policy (@ NDHQ)"
• "Parliamentary Secretary Romanado to Speak on Canada’s New Defence Policy (@ Edmonton MFRC)"
• "Minister Sajjan to Speak on Canada’s New Defence Policy (@ Trenton)"

 

[GnyHwy]

No.  Not contractors.  Public Servants.  There is a difference.

We need them to staff the procurement project teams to start buying equipment ... and maybe displace a few military PYs for reinvestment into operational roles.

That is good news. Hopefully we can herd the cats.

 

[GnyHwy]

Some more cynical than me might say if ceasefire.ca/the Rideau Disarmament Institute (the "Disarmament" is silent) is unhappy, pro-militarites should be happy  >
Next, let the road show begin!

That is quite the rag! Read this article too. It's a couple years old, but I doubt they have changed their mind since then. There are a few doozies in there.

"A Canadian Defence and Security Policy for the 21st Century"
http://www.ceasefire.ca/?p=20741

 

[Half Full]

What gets me is actually most of this stuff is already having project offices and such, GBAD? 2019 is suppose to be RFP, replacing support vehicles I read as replace the LSVW and HL, well thats in the 2019-2021 time frame if funding allows. it's all already in the books, and if they wanted to, they could allocate the funds and get these projects going now, and we'd be signing contracts in time for 2019.

The difference now is that all these mentioned programs will now be in our Investment Plan whereas until yesterday they weren't.

 

[Lightguns]

Sounds like lots of work for class B staff captains for a the next few years........

 

[Haggis]

Sounds like lots of work for class B staff captains for a the next few years........

Three years, at least.

 

[jmt18325]

https://www.fin.gc.ca/frt-trf/2016/frt-trf-1603-eng.asp#tbl12

Thanks for suggesting the check JMT

Table 12, Column 4, Last Row - 28,519 "millions of dollars"

If we actually spent that much money on defence, no one would be complaining.  I'm not an accountant, so I can't explain it.

 

[dapaterson]

Accrual vs cash based accounting.