Reconstitution

[dimsum]

Why you gotta attack me like that!?

 

[Halifax Tar]

Why you gotta attack me like that!?

And that is why I go to bed at 10! And I now have the nick name girl scout at the camp ground lol

Hangovers at 44 are not fun.

Side note, my 73 year old father in law can drink beer and scotch until 0530, have some bacon and eggs and then hunt deer and bear for 8 hours. I don't know how people do it.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

And that is why I go to bed at 10! And I now have the nick name girl scout at the camp ground lol

Hangovers at 44 are not fun.

Side note, my 73 year old father in law can drink beer and scotch until 0530, have some bacon and eggs and then hunt deer and bear for 8 hours. I don't know how people do it.

You gotta wake up while you still have a buzz

Crush a Caesar and you're GTG!

 

[Remius]

Because its easier to turn the Div H&A position, example, into a class B than force someone out of their home and uproot their family. And leave a unit, that actually had work to do day to day, with out that experience. And Ottawa/Kingston has a butt load of those low pri but necessary positions.

You are proving my point. “Because it’s easier” The regular force is addicted to class Bs in those places. And not just there. Most of the school in St Jean, and even Gagetown is full of class B types. It’s a decades old drug problem. And when I was in recruiting it was PRI 1 positions. Still 80% filled by reservists. Don’t get me wrong. You could cancel some and not even bat an eye but sa good chunk of the CAF would collapse if you had to either cancel or actually post to those positions

The reserves have the tools to fix this. @FJAG has expressed this many times. If the ARes wont use its own regulations to fix what ails it, it shouldn't be the RegF that has to bac stop that.

You obviously cherry picked a lot of what FJAG said. Despite his solutions proposed the main roadblock as he posted is an unwilling regular force that is standing in the way. They control the decisions and they control the money. Full stop.

What you fail to understand is that the Reg Force MCpl Sup Tech has a job too. Its where their posted too.

Yes. Being posted out is a regular force thing is it not?

@FJAG has shown us, the tools are there.

Yeah except the reg force has the tool box and they put a lock on it. And stored it in a room no one can get to.

The ARES don’t make that call. They have no control over budget. No control over the real structural changes needed. The Army does. Until the army unf**ks itself no amount of window dressing is going to fix the ARES. The ARES issues stem from a larger issue with the CAF a as a whole. I’ve said it before. Define what the CAF a does and specifically what the army does, fund it and equip it.


I have troops that have never touched a pistol. I have troops that go on basic with no boots. Some can’t get mukluks. We have to fight for ammo because DIV won’t release it just in case it might be needed for a a maple resolve that may or may not happen. Oh I’d love to have more DWAN stations but no, DIMEUS won’t play. Because apparently the formula for DWAN stations set in the 90s means we have enough. We have troops who take time away from their lives to go on tour but get told last minute after making all the arrangements that they aren’t going because the organisation can’t get its shyte together.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Earth to everyone, the Reg Force is about 20k pers short atm (actual numbers are probably higher).

Class Bs are basically the following:

It's either Class B or position goes unfilled.

 

[WLSC]

@Halifax Tar

1-Free up all those tens of Mcpl - WO ARes at CFLRS for the summer so they can train ARes instead of RegF Sure.
2-It's also part of the RegF job to train the reserve. (Remember what I told you earlier, ARes can do a bit but not everything. The RegF can't even train itself) So if we cant even get our own people pumped though the system, why would we take on the ARes ?
3- Sir, you really want me to tell all my working sgt to drop their job for the summer? Service before self, or so I am told.

Those white tower of me pissing farther then you as killed us. I haven't got a sweet clue what this is about, or what you're trying to say.


The point of all this is simple, everyone is pulling the sheet on them. I have no issue what so ever for ARes to help train Reg F. It is just good for corporate knowledge.

My beef is the the RegF because they are so low on numbers as completely forgotten/is unable to fulfill their role of training the ARes. It is at a point of us vs them (that’s the white tower pissing contest part).

You are supply right? It’s all about sustainment and maintenance of the reserve stock. Same principale. No, I do not compare us to bolts, maybe some more complex item that need to be maintained even while in stores.

During operations, everyone bleed red. We are so broken that we forgot that for a long time.

 

[Halifax Tar]

My beef is the the RegF because they are so low on numbers as completely forgotten/is unable to fulfill their role of training the ARes. It is at a point of us vs them (that’s the white tower pissing contest part).

You are supply right? It’s all about sustainment and maintenance of the reserve stock. Same principale. No, I do not compare us to bolts, maybe some more complex item that need to be maintained even while in stores.

During operations, everyone bleed red. We are so broken that we forgot that for a long time.

When you get low on something, in this case people, and you have continuing obligations you have to cut things that are of less importance than the obligations. Its called prioritization. Or maybe in this case triage would be more accurate.

Unfortunately the full time obligations will always trump the part time commitments.

As for bleeding on operations, that's why we take reservists and spend upwards of a year working them up before deploying them.

Trying being 36 CBG. You're a CBG in a distant out station province that is completely dominated by the RCN and RCAF. I've been very frank with my commanders here, we are not the priority. Perhaps there is a lesson for the whole of the ARes there.
___

I'm adding this in for clarification, if you've been following me you will see that I am head over heels for the ARes, yes even in its current state. I am really impressed how positive and upbeat the folks are, its truly impressive and refreshing. Maybe it has to do with the Volunteer vs Voluntold aspect.

I want to see this CBG stand on its own two feet, because I think it can.

 

[daftandbarmy]

You are proving my point. “Because it’s easier” The regular force is addicted to class Bs in those places. And not just there. Most of the school in St Jean, and even Gagetown is full of class B types. It’s a decades old drug problem. And when I was in recruiting it was PRI 1 positions. Still 80% filled by reservists. Don’t get me wrong. You could cancel some and not even bat an eye but sa good chunk of the CAF would collapse if you had to either cancel or actually post to those positions

Glass half full: 90% of the people I saw leave ARes units for Class B jobs were not people we'd want at the units in the longer term anyways.

I saw it as Karma style payback for the junk RSSOs we were sent by the Reg F on a regular basis

 

[Rifleman62]

Do the Cbt Arms, i.e. Inf Bn. Arty etc lose a lot of people to postings, or are they pretty stable? I would think stable.

A friend of mine, his grandson is on continuous Cl B conducting BMT to the Navy Reserve.

 

[FJAG]

So I'm going to go out on a limb here--nothing new--and suggest that the problem with the RegF that the Class Bs are being used to paper over might be solved by having two classes of RegF personnel. For the Fun of it lets call them Y and Z. It's based a bit on the posting and promotion system in the RCMP.

One of the problems with the Army RegF is that postings are into places where spouses have a hard time finding and maintaining a career. Maybe we need a class of RegF service where the member can turn down a posting or promotion if it is tied to a posting.

So let's create a 30/70 battalion in Toronto (well call Toronto a "Zone" hence Class Z) and make those 30% positions Class Z RegF. A Class Z RegF member is guaranteed to stay in Toronto as long as he wants (with the exception of operational tours). He can turn down career courses without it effecting his current job. He can turn down a posting offer outside of Toronto without it effecting his current job. He can turn down a promotion offer if it is outside of Toronto without it effecting his current job. If a vacancy is created within Toronto, he is in competition with all members of the CF for that promotion.

Meanwhile, the Class X member is subject to postings regardless of whether they lead to a promotion or not. He is credited with additional points (like a second language capability) for his willingness to be moved. This translates into giving him a leg up in any competition for career courses, posting choices and, of course, promotion. Perhaps we add some additional incentives to make being a Class X desirable. Limit the number of "Zones" and Class Z positions but make it easy to change from one class to another where vacancies exist.

Essentially you have two streams of people, those who value family stability (including staying near parents, siblings and childhood friends) over career advancement and those who value career advancement over geographic/family stability. I would think that many of those individuals who are currently part of the Class B crowd would be prepared to move into the Class Z RegF field. It would be a way of growing the RegF in large urban centres where the only defence to poverty is a stable two earner family.

Remember that the fundamental legal difference between a regular and a reservist is that one signs up for "continuing, full-time service" and the other for "other than continuing, full-time" service. In effect, the Class B's we are talking about here who have many years of full-time jobs, are in many ways already Class Zs. What makes the Class Z better is that they can be deployed on tours during peacetime, and be moved around within their "posting zone" and will probably stay for a full career because the bulk of their family needs are met.

That then leaves the Class A, B and C reservists to get back to using those classes of service for what they were meant to be: standby parading; training on courses or "temporary" attachments; and operational tours or in a RegF position or attachment.

Just spitballin'

 

[Eaglelord17]

What you fail to understand is that the Reg Force MCpl Sup Tech has a job too. Its where their posted too.

I get it, there is more positions than there is people right now, but not training people doesn’t solve that.

Simple example from my civvy side career. I’m a machinist. In my shop we never trained anyone for several decades (last batch of apprentices was in the late 80s). This was fine until all those boomers started to retire, then panick sets in because we don’t have enough people (particularly skilled people) to do the work. So instead of going lets do a good training program, pass on what knowledge and skill we can, and ensuring the apprentices end up extremely capable they just threw us at machines without training to try and make up the shortfall in production in the short term.

The results was a lot of damaged equipment, poor quality work, inefficient work, dangerous work, and at the end of it lots of long term pain. The good news for my shop is eventually most rose to the occasion, but there was hard lessons along the way. Still lots of damage being done by some who never learned/cared to learn on their own how to do things better.

If we had stopped what was going on in the first place before we hit crisis mode and trained properly we would have avoided all of that and been substantially better off.

I see the CAF at a similar crisis. If we can find the people to train in WWII when we had much higher training requirements in terms of amount of people needing training, a clear threat, and a host of commitments, we should be able to make it work in peacetime.

The fact our training system isn’t working tells me we need some serious reform or to reprioritize what actually matters because again, its short term pain for long term gain. The only way out of manning shortage is to train more people.

Those two MCpls I am sure had important/needed jobs where they were. But today about 7 year later would have resulted likely in at least 5 more reg supply techs, a bunch of completed class B work, deployments done (again lessening the burden on the Regs), a few new MCpls trained who can then help with the training system, etc.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I get it, there is more positions than there is people right now, but not training people doesn’t solve that.

Simple example from my civvy side career. I’m a machinist. In my shop we never trained anyone for several decades (last batch of apprentices was in the late 80s). This was fine until all those boomers started to retire, then panick sets in because we don’t have enough people (particularly skilled people) to do the work. So instead of going lets do a good training program, pass on what knowledge and skill we can, and ensuring the apprentices end up extremely capable they just threw us at machines without training to try and make up the shortfall in production in the short term.

The results was a lot of damaged equipment, poor quality work, inefficient work, dangerous work, and at the end of it lots of long term pain. The good news for my shop is eventually most rose to the occasion, but there was hard lessons along the way. Still lots of damage being done by some who never learned/cared to learn on their own how to do things better.

If we had stopped what was going on in the first place before we hit crisis mode and trained properly we would have avoided all of that and been substantially better off.

I see the CAF at a similar crisis. If we can find the people to train in WWII when we had much higher training requirements in terms of amount of people needing training, a clear threat, and a host of commitments, we should be able to make it work in peacetime.

The fact our training system isn’t working tells me we need some serious reform or to reprioritize what actually matters because again, its short term pain for long term gain. The only way out of manning shortage is to train more people.

Those two MCpls I am sure had important/needed jobs where they were. But today about 7 year later would have resulted likely in at least 5 more reg supply techs, a bunch of completed class B work, deployments done (again lessening the burden on the Regs), a few new MCpls trained who can then help with the training system, etc.

2 Points:

1) We do this now in surges. Pre-deployment training.

2) WW2 is a bad example. We have over a million people in uniform. Reasons to make things happen.

 

[Halifax Tar]

So I'm going to go out on a limb here--nothing new--and suggest that the problem with the RegF that the Class Bs are being used to paper over might be solved by having two classes of RegF personnel. For the Fun of it lets call them Y and Z. It's based a bit on the posting and promotion system in the RCMP.

One of the problems with the Army RegF is that postings are into places where spouses have a hard time finding and maintaining a career. Maybe we need a class of RegF service where the member can turn down a posting or promotion if it is tied to a posting.

So let's create a 30/70 battalion in Toronto (well call Toronto a "Zone" hence Class Z) and make those 30% positions Class Z RegF. A Class Z RegF member is guaranteed to stay in Toronto as long as he wants (with the exception of operational tours). He can turn down career courses without it effecting his current job. He can turn down a posting offer outside of Toronto without it effecting his current job. He can turn down a promotion offer if it is outside of Toronto without it effecting his current job. If a vacancy is created within Toronto, he is in competition with all members of the CF for that promotion.

Meanwhile, the Class X member is subject to postings regardless of whether they lead to a promotion or not. He is credited with additional points (like a second language capability) for his willingness to be moved. This translates into giving him a leg up in any competition for career courses, posting choices and, of course, promotion. Perhaps we add some additional incentives to make being a Class X desirable. Limit the number of "Zones" and Class Z positions but make it easy to change from one class to another where vacancies exist.

Essentially you have two streams of people, those who value family stability (including staying near parents, siblings and childhood friends) over career advancement and those who value career advancement over geographic/family stability. I would think that many of those individuals who are currently part of the Class B crowd would be prepared to move into the Class Z RegF field. It would be a way of growing the RegF in large urban centres where the only defence to poverty is a stable two earner family.

Remember that the fundamental legal difference between a regular and a reservist is that one signs up for "continuing, full-time service" and the other for "other than continuing, full-time" service. In effect, the Class B's we are talking about here who have many years of full-time jobs, are in many ways already Class Zs. What makes the Class Z better is that they can be deployed on tours during peacetime, and be moved around within their "posting zone" and will probably stay for a full career because the bulk of their family needs are met.

That then leaves the Class A, B and C reservists to get back to using those classes of service for what they were meant to be: standby parading; training on courses or "temporary" attachments; and operational tours or in a RegF position or attachment.

Just spitballin'

We are/were looking at this its called the journey program.

The CAF Journey philosophy–Six Pillars of Support for Canada’s Military Members

If you have been a Canadian Armed Forces’ member for more than five years, you will have likely heard about The CAF Journey

www.canada.ca

I think we would be better off getting rid of Class B and C. You're either working part time or full time. And all full time employment has the same contingencies, expectations, benefits and pay. Part time could stay as is.

 

[Furniture]

So I'm going to go out on a limb here--nothing new--and suggest that the problem with the RegF that the Class Bs are being used to paper over might be solved by having two classes of RegF personnel. For the Fun of it lets call them Y and Z. It's based a bit on the posting and promotion system in the RCMP.

One of the problems with the Army RegF is that postings are into places where spouses have a hard time finding and maintaining a career. Maybe we need a class of RegF service where the member can turn down a posting or promotion if it is tied to a posting.

So let's create a 30/70 battalion in Toronto (well call Toronto a "Zone" hence Class Z) and make those 30% positions Class Z RegF. A Class Z RegF member is guaranteed to stay in Toronto as long as he wants (with the exception of operational tours). He can turn down career courses without it effecting his current job. He can turn down a posting offer outside of Toronto without it effecting his current job. He can turn down a promotion offer if it is outside of Toronto without it effecting his current job. If a vacancy is created within Toronto, he is in competition with all members of the CF for that promotion.

Meanwhile, the Class X member is subject to postings regardless of whether they lead to a promotion or not. He is credited with additional points (like a second language capability) for his willingness to be moved. This translates into giving him a leg up in any competition for career courses, posting choices and, of course, promotion. Perhaps we add some additional incentives to make being a Class X desirable. Limit the number of "Zones" and Class Z positions but make it easy to change from one class to another where vacancies exist.

Essentially you have two streams of people, those who value family stability (including staying near parents, siblings and childhood friends) over career advancement and those who value career advancement over geographic/family stability. I would think that many of those individuals who are currently part of the Class B crowd would be prepared to move into the Class Z RegF field. It would be a way of growing the RegF in large urban centres where the only defence to poverty is a stable two earner family.

Remember that the fundamental legal difference between a regular and a reservist is that one signs up for "continuing, full-time service" and the other for "other than continuing, full-time" service. In effect, the Class B's we are talking about here who have many years of full-time jobs, are in many ways already Class Zs. What makes the Class Z better is that they can be deployed on tours during peacetime, and be moved around within their "posting zone" and will probably stay for a full career because the bulk of their family needs are met.

That then leaves the Class A, B and C reservists to get back to using those classes of service for what they were meant to be: standby parading; training on courses or "temporary" attachments; and operational tours or in a RegF position or attachment.

Just spitballin'

The CAF was supposed to be heading in that direction with "The Journey"... I think once they started looking past the combat arms they realized it wouldn't work. At least it wouldn't work without breaking things in new and exciting ways.

Those two MCpls I am sure had important/needed jobs where they were. But today about 7 year later would have resulted likely in at least 5 more reg supply techs, a bunch of completed class B work, deployments done (again lessening the burden on the Regs), a few new MCpls trained who can then help with the training system, etc.

It might have resulted in 5 more MMTs, but it also might have lead to the releases of a few people who got tired of doing the work of two or three people for no extra money. It might have resulted in a non-PLQ Cpl having to fill in in a job they aren't trained for, resulting in extra stress, and potential problems for the subordinates.

The Coulda/Shoulda/Woulda game doesn't lead anywhere, as for every positive outcome there is also at least one potential negative outcome.

 

[childs56]

You are proving my point. “Because it’s easier” The regular force is addicted to class Bs in those places. And not just there. Most of the school in St Jean, and even Gagetown is full of class B types. It’s a decades old drug problem. And when I was in recruiting it was PRI 1 positions. Still 80% filled by reservists. Don’t get me wrong. You could cancel some and not even bat an eye but sa good chunk of the CAF would collapse if you had to either cancel or actually post to those positions

You obviously cherry picked a lot of what FJAG said. Despite his solutions proposed the main roadblock as he posted is an unwilling regular force that is standing in the way. They control the decisions and they control the money. Full stop.

Yes. Being posted out is a regular force thing is it not?

Yeah except the reg force has the tool box and they put a lock on it. And stored it in a room no one can get to.

The ARES don’t make that call. They have no control over budget. No control over the real structural changes needed. The Army does. Until the army unf**ks itself no amount of window dressing is going to fix the ARES. The ARES issues stem from a larger issue with the CAF a as a whole. I’ve said it before. Define what the CAF a does and specifically what the army does, fund it and equip it.

I have troops that have never touched a pistol. I have troops that go on basic with no boots. Some can’t get mukluks. We have to fight for ammo because DIV won’t release it just in case it might be needed for a a maple resolve that may or may not happen. Oh I’d love to have more DWAN stations but no, DIMEUS won’t play. Because apparently the formula for DWAN stations set in the 90s means we have enough. We have troops who take time away from their lives to go on tour but get told last minute after making all the arrangements that they aren’t going because the organisation can’t get its shyte together.

Your whole statement is the major issue why the Army Reserves is in such a state. The orange highlight happens all the time time with training and courses. Until they fix the basic issues they will continue to fail until someone has the balls higher up to speak up, put their foot down and fix the problem. I tried during my time in to voice this opinion. A Reserve Master Bombardier telling the Brigade Commander to un screw himself does not work very well. Especially when all the butt lickers are waiting with their tongs out.
I had a ton of support from two RSS Regular Force Sgts from another unit who had my back, but that only fixed a few local concerns. Again to many bag lickers to fix the problem.

 

[WLSC]

Trying being 36 CBG. You're a CBG in a distant out station province that is completely dominated by the RCN and RCAF. I've been very frank with my commanders here, we are not the priority. Perhaps there is a lesson for the whole of the ARes there.
___

I'm adding this in for clarification, if you've been following me you will see that I am head over heels for the ARes, yes even in its current state. I am really impressed how positive and upbeat the folks are, its truly impressive and refreshing. Maybe it has to do with the Volunteer vs Voluntold aspect.

I want to see this CBG stand on its own two feet, because I think it can.

I was lucky because 34 and 35 CBG are so closed. We're not spread over 3 provinces. 34 CBG have 1 sub-unit at 8 hrs drive, all the other are at 90 min. Lot of things are easier for 34 CBG.

I know, dont worry. We mainly differ on the how. I still get a few peints with you

 

[daftandbarmy]

I think we would be better off getting rid of Class B and C. You're either working part time or full time. And all full time employment has the same contingencies, expectations, benefits and pay. Part time could stay as is.

Now you're just being mean.... who will speak for the rights and privileges of the Double Dippers?

 

[Halifax Tar]

Now you're just being mean.... who will speak for the rights and privileges of the Double Dippers?

Oh I'm sure they'd be vocal enough

 

[daftandbarmy]

I'm not sure if this is Re-Constitution or De-Constitution, but is Operation BOHICA just around the corner?

Battle looms between Canadian defence officials, decision-makers after federal budget​

A battle is brewing between Canadian defence officials and federal decision-makers as the Trudeau government looks for ways to save billions of dollars over the next few years.

Experts say last week's budget and the delays in a planned update to the defence policy are signs of this pending conflict, with ramifications for Canada's military and its international reputation.

The budget contains virtually no new defence funding, but does include several cost-cutting measures, notably an order for departments and agencies to identify ways to cut spending by three per cent over the next few years.

And while the government says the Canadian Armed Forces will be excluded from such cuts, it remains unclear the degree to which the exemption will extend to the Department of National Defence, which controls the military's budget.

"Regarding the reduction in eligible spending by departments and agencies, as indicated in Budget 2023, the reduction will not impact the Canadian Armed Forces," Finance Department spokeswoman Marie-France Faucher said in an email.

"This includes DND spending that is related to the Canadian Armed Forces."

That has left experts confused, given how intertwined the two organizations are, with much of the work of the Defence Department directly impacting military management, operations and procurement.

"I'm trying to think of what DND spending would be unrelated to the CAF," said David Perry, president of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute think tank and one of Canada's foremost authorities on military spending.

That confusion has been magnified by uncertainty around the Liberal government's plan to upgrade its defence policy, which was first released in 2017 and promised tens of billions in new funding for the military.

The Liberals announced the update in last year's budget and observers expected it by the fall, but it remains in limbo. Defence Minister Anita Anand recently announcing the launch of public consultations through April 30 to inform the update.

Officials across Ottawa have also been ordered to spend less on contractors, which Perry said will hit the Defence Department hard since it is one of the largest users of outside firms for the provision of engineering, logistical and management services.

That includes helping with the procurement of new military equipment.

All of this comes at a time when the government is facing pressure to put more money into other priorities, including health and dental care, clean energy and social programs for Canadians who are struggling -- while trying to keep spending under control.

Defence and military officials might be crossing their fingers that they will be saved from having to cut, said Canadian Forces College professor emeritus Craig Stone, another national authority on defence spending.

"But I cannot see the town agreeing to everyone else having to come up with three per cent and DND not," he said. "Just when you think about it, it's the largest discretionary spending bit for government."

The Defence Department's roughly $27-billion budget is not the largest in the federal government, but most of the others are required to spend the money on services and benefits to Canadians and other levels of government.

That doesn't mean defence spending is set to fall overall, as the government has promised to spend billions of additional dollars over the next few years on new fighter jets, warships, radar systems and other high-priced equipment.

Experts say it simply won't increase as much as previously expected, even though Canada's allies are pushing for the opposite.

The budget document says spending by the Defence Department will reach nearly $40 billion by 2026-27 as a result of those additional investments, but the government is not saying what that means as a share of Canada's gross domestic product.

Officials last year said the provisions in the 2022 federal budget would leave spending at 1.5 per cent of GDP by 2027.

That represents an increase over the 1.29 per cent last year, but will leave Canada far short of the two per cent target established by NATO allies -- and potentially heading the other way, depending on the cuts to the Defence Department.

Retired lieutenant-general Guy Thibault, head of the Conference of Defence Associations Institute think tank, said it suggests the Liberal government has different priorities -- and a willingness to accept the risks of not doing more for the military.

"It is obvious in the aftermath of (U.S. President Joe Biden's) visit and the messaging in this budget that the prime minister, deputy prime minister or cabinet are not convinced that more investments in defence will result in greater influence with the U.S. or allies," he said.

"And obviously they do not truly believe in the threats we are facing. This is simply a continuation of historical government practice of accepting the risk and spending the least amount on defence as they can possibly get away with."

Battle looms between Canadian defence officials, decision-makers after federal budget

A battle is brewing between Canadian defence officials and federal decision-makers as the Trudeau government looks for ways to save billions of dollars over the next few years.

www.ctvnews.ca

 

[Halifax Tar]

I'm not sure if this is Re-Constitution or De-Constitution, but is Operation BOHICA just around the corner?

Battle looms between Canadian defence officials, decision-makers after federal budget​

A battle is brewing between Canadian defence officials and federal decision-makers as the Trudeau government looks for ways to save billions of dollars over the next few years.

Experts say last week's budget and the delays in a planned update to the defence policy are signs of this pending conflict, with ramifications for Canada's military and its international reputation.

The budget contains virtually no new defence funding, but does include several cost-cutting measures, notably an order for departments and agencies to identify ways to cut spending by three per cent over the next few years.

And while the government says the Canadian Armed Forces will be excluded from such cuts, it remains unclear the degree to which the exemption will extend to the Department of National Defence, which controls the military's budget.

"Regarding the reduction in eligible spending by departments and agencies, as indicated in Budget 2023, the reduction will not impact the Canadian Armed Forces," Finance Department spokeswoman Marie-France Faucher said in an email.

"This includes DND spending that is related to the Canadian Armed Forces."

That has left experts confused, given how intertwined the two organizations are, with much of the work of the Defence Department directly impacting military management, operations and procurement.

"I'm trying to think of what DND spending would be unrelated to the CAF," said David Perry, president of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute think tank and one of Canada's foremost authorities on military spending.

That confusion has been magnified by uncertainty around the Liberal government's plan to upgrade its defence policy, which was first released in 2017 and promised tens of billions in new funding for the military.

The Liberals announced the update in last year's budget and observers expected it by the fall, but it remains in limbo. Defence Minister Anita Anand recently announcing the launch of public consultations through April 30 to inform the update.

Officials across Ottawa have also been ordered to spend less on contractors, which Perry said will hit the Defence Department hard since it is one of the largest users of outside firms for the provision of engineering, logistical and management services.

That includes helping with the procurement of new military equipment.

All of this comes at a time when the government is facing pressure to put more money into other priorities, including health and dental care, clean energy and social programs for Canadians who are struggling -- while trying to keep spending under control.

Defence and military officials might be crossing their fingers that they will be saved from having to cut, said Canadian Forces College professor emeritus Craig Stone, another national authority on defence spending.

"But I cannot see the town agreeing to everyone else having to come up with three per cent and DND not," he said. "Just when you think about it, it's the largest discretionary spending bit for government."

The Defence Department's roughly $27-billion budget is not the largest in the federal government, but most of the others are required to spend the money on services and benefits to Canadians and other levels of government.

That doesn't mean defence spending is set to fall overall, as the government has promised to spend billions of additional dollars over the next few years on new fighter jets, warships, radar systems and other high-priced equipment.

Experts say it simply won't increase as much as previously expected, even though Canada's allies are pushing for the opposite.

The budget document says spending by the Defence Department will reach nearly $40 billion by 2026-27 as a result of those additional investments, but the government is not saying what that means as a share of Canada's gross domestic product.

Officials last year said the provisions in the 2022 federal budget would leave spending at 1.5 per cent of GDP by 2027.

That represents an increase over the 1.29 per cent last year, but will leave Canada far short of the two per cent target established by NATO allies -- and potentially heading the other way, depending on the cuts to the Defence Department.

Retired lieutenant-general Guy Thibault, head of the Conference of Defence Associations Institute think tank, said it suggests the Liberal government has different priorities -- and a willingness to accept the risks of not doing more for the military.

"It is obvious in the aftermath of (U.S. President Joe Biden's) visit and the messaging in this budget that the prime minister, deputy prime minister or cabinet are not convinced that more investments in defence will result in greater influence with the U.S. or allies," he said.

"And obviously they do not truly believe in the threats we are facing. This is simply a continuation of historical government practice of accepting the risk and spending the least amount on defence as they can possibly get away with."

Battle looms between Canadian defence officials, decision-makers after federal budget

A battle is brewing between Canadian defence officials and federal decision-makers as the Trudeau government looks for ways to save billions of dollars over the next few years.

www.ctvnews.ca

Well, one step would be to cease all foreign aid.