Welcome to DefenceTalk.com Forum!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

CANADA / NATO and 2% of GDP Budget

Discussion in 'Geostrategic Issues' started by Novascotiaboy, Nov 9, 2016.

Share This Page

  1. John Fedup

    John Fedup Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    3,941
    Likes Received:
    275
    Location:
    Vancouver and Toronto
    Hi John, yes mostly smoke and mirrors. This plan will probably won't survive by the next election call. Junior can't balance a budget (remember his campaign comment " the budget will balance itself") and now he plans to add billions to defence. Bottom line, show me the money! Second line up from the bottom, will opposition parties be on board, not bloody likely, this Canada after all.
     
  2. vldbzh

    vldbzh New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2016
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Australia
    "...remember his campaign comment " the budget will balance itself"..." - interesting things are happening in Canada :cool:
    Btw, here, in Australia, that document was downloaded for ~1 min, maybe the government site was too busy that time...
     
  3. John Fedup

    John Fedup Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    3,941
    Likes Received:
    275
    Location:
    Vancouver and Toronto
    Yes, my first attempt was when it was first put up. A later attempt took about a minute as well. Junior probably ordered a speed reduction on the site for this first few hours knowing the truly interested and his critics would be there at the start.:D
     
  4. John Fedup

    John Fedup Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    3,941
    Likes Received:
    275
    Location:
    Vancouver and Toronto
    Yet another article on Canada's plan to increase defence spending. Utter bovine fecal matter as the last sentence in the article confirms by using the word "soon" in reference to Canada's fighter replacement. I won't bother posting the link about it taking three years from now to fund the Canadian army for small arms replacement.

    Canada Pledges to Increase Defense Spending
     
  5. USAF77

    USAF77 Banned Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    0
    You'll never see most NATO countries reach 2% of their GNP spent towards defense. The exceptions will be England and France which will stay right around 2% and probably only because they have such large investments in defense related Industry. Germany will never spend 2%.

    Turkey?? So much is given somehow to Turkey its hard to tell what they are spending and what they aren't. Besides they will continue to be a most unreliable partner in NATO.

    The reason for this is two fold. Fist off they have become so reliant on the American tax payer paying for their defense, as has the American taxpayer. Secondly they will continue to have socialist Govt.'s that consider defense secondary to any and all social programs. Even the ones with fairly robust economies like Germany, the Scandinavian countries...ect Its "bread before bullets" for them and now made even worse by their reckless immigration policy's.

    Canada's the same, only they also have the excuse of being far removed physically. They all hover around 1% of GNP and I dont expect much increase. When America's pressures for so long to no effect what does that tell you?

    In Asia the only ones coming close to pulling their weight are the Aussie's and the SK's. The SK's cause they have to. The Aussie's are at 2% and the SK's are at 2.6%. Japan and NZ are at 1% or lower.
     
  6. John Fedup

    John Fedup Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    3,941
    Likes Received:
    275
    Location:
    Vancouver and Toronto
    I think Japan and NZ will do more for obvious reasons. Don't forget Singapore, they don't shortchange defence.

    Concerning Canada, geography is no excuse for our pi$$poor defence expenditures. We have the longest coastline in the world and have a navy that realistically is now a coastal force due to our AOR situation. Blue water activities are only possible when our allies accompany our frigates. Canada no no longer offer reliable icebreaking capabilities due to the limited fleet of ancient heavy icebreakers. HADR capabilities are pretty much non-existent even for Canadian coastal areas. The same applies to SAR. The RCAF is in better shape relative to the other two branches of our military ( new CH-147 Chinooks, C-130Js and C-177s) but new fighters are years away (if ever).
     
  7. t68

    t68 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2006
    Messages:
    3,364
    Likes Received:
    84
    Location:
    NSW

    I personally don't think people should get too hung up on percentage of GDP, for instance 1% of both NZ and JPN is vastly different to each other and there stratgic situation and commitments has a bearing on defence capabilty, but also in saying that there are country that have means of doing more than they currently are. Defence spending is influence by the leaders of the time after all it was not that long ago we in Australia was down closer to 1% whist dueing the coldest it would hover at around 2-2.5%
     
  8. ngatimozart

    ngatimozart Super Moderator Staff Member Verified Defense Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2010
    Messages:
    6,151
    Likes Received:
    980
    Location:
    In the rum store
  9. John Fedup

    John Fedup Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    3,941
    Likes Received:
    275
    Location:
    Vancouver and Toronto
    Interesting, haven't paid much attention to planned drone acquisitions lately. I thought medium altitude drones like Reapers or perhaps Avengers were the direction we are on. It would seem significant upgrading would be required for this German cast off. I vaguely recall the USAF wanting to ditch their block 30 Global Hawks will the arrival of block 40 versions. Perhaps a few of these are under consideration and the German unit would be for parts. A bargain give away used US GHs is reminiscent of the 9 VH-71s for 164 million. Maybe it will turn out to be brilliant. Tritons might be a better investment as we are unlikely to get P-8s.
     
  10. John Fedup

    John Fedup Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    3,941
    Likes Received:
    275
    Location:
    Vancouver and Toronto
    Apparently DND is not the interested Canadian department, it is Transport Canada. Can't see this happening unless the Germans are willing to literally give it away as it seems an additional large investment will be needed to get it operational which would put pressure on Transport Canada's already limited budget.

    Transport Canada looking at used German drone to patrol Arctic | CBC News
     
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2018
  11. John Fedup

    John Fedup Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    3,941
    Likes Received:
    275
    Location:
    Vancouver and Toronto
  12. t68

    t68 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2006
    Messages:
    3,364
    Likes Received:
    84
    Location:
    NSW

    In the end that takes money from hardware or manpower, I don't believe cyber should just be defined to defence its a whole of government problem.
     
  13. John Fedup

    John Fedup Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    3,941
    Likes Received:
    275
    Location:
    Vancouver and Toronto
  14. John Fedup

    John Fedup Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    3,941
    Likes Received:
    275
    Location:
    Vancouver and Toronto
  15. StingrayOZ

    StingrayOZ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    Messages:
    3,192
    Likes Received:
    236
    Location:
    Sydney
    Increasing defence spending isn't as easy as some believe it is, and gaining tangible capability (or keeping current capability) without strong planning and sufficient commitment is also not easy. The natural state is for things to atrophy away. To increase capability is actually very difficult and takes years to turn around a decline to build upwards.
     
    ngatimozart likes this.
  16. vonnoobie

    vonnoobie Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2015
    Messages:
    950
    Likes Received:
    41
    Location:
    Melbourne
    If Canada truly wants to turn things around then they need a bipartisan approach with long term planning. At this stage jumping the budget to 2% wouldn't accomplish anything but have excess money sitting in the bank or having them waste it on poor rushed decisions. There needs to be a serious in depth discussion on what they want the Canadian forces to be able to accomplish both as part of a coalition and independently. Playing the long game is the only way to fix the military with out wasting vital funds or putting said waste in a position for some future politician to use as an excuse for cutting the budget again.

    Decide what they want, What they are willing to spend then speak to your allies and friends to get advice and assistance on how best to get there.
     
  17. John Fedup

    John Fedup Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    3,941
    Likes Received:
    275
    Location:
    Vancouver and Toronto
    Pollies working across party lines to formulate a decent long term defence plan together with our electorate......we are talking about Canada. NFW that will ever happen here and we have a 60 year track record to prove this pathetic fact.