Military defies orders to increase size of militia.

[Scotty]

It has the air of truth to it. I've heard the promises by various defense ministers for many years now with no action being taken.

So if we presume it is true, what's to be done about it? Further, what's to be done about the mini empires in Ottawa, and the fact they've grown so much while the number of actual soldiers has remained constant? Can we rely on the very people who have frustrated all other attempts to cut back on the bureaucracy, or do we need an outsider to go in there with a chain saw?

Canada’s bloated military bureaucracy has consistently defied explicit orders from government ministers and failed to increase the size of the army militia as directed.

National Post

[Smallc]

Further, what's to be done about the mini empires in Ottawa, and the fact they've grown so much while the number of actual soldiers has remained constant?

Well, that's not completely true. The regular forces have grown, but the reserves have actually shrunk.

[Scotty]

Well, that's not completely true. The regular forces have grown, but the reserves have actually shrunk.

Almost all the growth in the regular forces has been in headquarters staff. Actual soldiers have not grown much at all, if any. The number of navy personnel, those not in headquarters, has actually shrunk. Human Resources staff, on the other hand, have grown by about 30%

[Guest Derek L]

The author of this piece is out to lunch……increase numbers to 45k and create new militia units? Where and How? Does he/she plan to bring in conscription? Also, unlike the regular army that can post it’s members to a handful of bases across Canada, how do you propose more than doubling the number of the militia across the country? Have the current militias been turning people away? Are you going to create units in towns with only a few dozen members?

On top of it, they claim that NDHQ is the one to blame for keeping numbers down? Huh? What’s their motive? They’ve been fighting a war for the last ten years with a lot of the members that would normally be carrying out the training of new recruits are also deploying…….There’s been reported backlogs of Reg force members waiting for courses due to the lack of trainers………How do they expect to do the Militia?

If the government wants the numbers, they have to provide the money and allotted time for those to do the training without an ongoing deployment……….

[Army Guy]

Scotty:

Almost all the growth in the regular forces has been in headquarters staff. Actual soldiers have not grown much at all, if any.

Not true, Combat arms is actually flush with soldiers, in fact the Infantry is actually overbourne, by as much as 2000 soldiers and is now in the process of sending a good chunk to other trades...

The number of navy personnel, those not in headquarters, has actually shrunk. Human Resources staff, on the other hand, have grown by about 30%

Things in the navy are not going well, as funding has been directed at getting the Army in order, that includes recruits as well.

The fight for funding continues in all the elements the Army has been living high on the hog compare to say the navy which has been feed scraps up until recently....the Reserves fall beneath them in Pri...And while the Army has been force feed a good chunck of funding it is still not enough to Arm or equip all it's units with peace time To&E, perfect example of that is the LAV III only 750 were purchased when 1200 were required, most Inf units that are classified Mechanized only have one coy worth of LAV's out of 3....

DND has for years wanted to recreate a 4 th Mech brigade group, to share in the deployment relief,and New missions , giving perhaps a larger deployable force...but it simply can not afford it...

With these kinds of shortages one could ask How we we equip the reserves, where would the funding come from to build new infra structure. I think Dereck hit the nail on the head, DND needs to be properly funded to accomplish these tasks.

[Smallc]

tWhat you're seeing is a backlog, from previous underfunding. As new systems come on line, it will become easier to support. There are thousands more vehicles on the way, and the navy is about to get its largest ever building project underway. I'll forever have a very hard time considering a military which has a budget in the top 15 underfunded, specially given that as a percentage of GDP, funding has went from about 1.1% to about 1.5%.

[Tilter]

Almost all the growth in the regular forces has been in headquarters staff. Actual soldiers have not grown much at all, if any. The number of navy personnel, those not in headquarters, has actually shrunk. Human Resources staff, on the other hand, have grown by about 30%

Either you are wrong or the Afghanistan conflict was fought by the upper echelon of the armed forces. I've never seen a senior staff member with the rank of Private or Cpl so I assume that the deaths of the privates & noncom were either fictional or the Canadian Armed forces staffing has increased to include new members. Remember--- soldiers start with a low rank and with few exceptions, the casualties in Afghanistan were rank & file members of the forces & most of them were not seasoned soldiers but rather newly recruited.

[Guest Derek L]

tWhat you're seeing is a backlog, from previous underfunding. As new systems come on line, it will become easier to support. There are thousands more vehicles on the way, and the navy is about to get its largest ever building project underway. I'll forever have a very hard time considering a military which has a budget in the top 15 underfunded, specially given that as a percentage of GDP, funding has went from about 1.1% to about 1.5%.

And for the most part, any increase in funding to the forces, aside from fighting the War in Afghanistan, that went towards new military equipment is replacing what we already have (And at reduced numbers). There’s no really money for additional capabilities unless the government provides more…

And Army Guy is right, the Navy has been getting the dregs of the funding, but wait until the 280/330 replacement programs starts…………You think you heard complaining about the JSF price tag………

Well the idea of an increased Militia is not necessarily a bad one, other priorities need to be addressed first, and than a realistic “expansion” of the Reserves. Realistically, you probably wouldn’t get the numbers that much higher, I’d suggest instead focus on the level of training on the ones we do have, to allow an almost integration with the reg force

[Army Guy]

tWhat you're seeing is a backlog, from previous underfunding. As new systems come on line, it will become easier to support. There are thousands more vehicles on the way, and the navy is about to get its largest ever building project underway. I'll forever have a very hard time considering a military which has a budget in the top 15 underfunded, specially given that as a percentage of GDP, funding has went from about 1.1% to about 1.5%.

Yes there is hundrds of new vehs in route, the TAPV is to replace the Coyote Recce Lav and act as a prime troop mover for some Bn's and the CV90 is to give us a tracked IFV orginal for the Heavy mech unit, in Edmonton, now it's being looked at having one coys worth in a few other Bns.... not all Bn's will get these vehs, there is nothing in the works for the LAV III our prime Inf Fighting veh except a rebuild, Veh Cas from Afghan have left a severe shortage of these vehs....The fleet in Afghan right now will come back, severely used and abused.... So much for the new system...The Army has been told our time at the trough is over,after the projects they have on the boards are completed it will be the Navies turn as it should be, but the Army is far from being 100 % fit and ready for battle...

Amazing how numbers can reflect what ever you want, you'll also remember a speach given by hillier at the start of his tenor, For the forces to grow and continue it's equipment replacement it would require a Ann budget of over 30 bils....And that is for our current size of 63,000 pers...their goal was to set our numbers to 75,000 which was later reduced to 70 k....

You also forget that most of these countries in the top 15 are not going through a major refit of almost every platform from every element...

[Guest Derek L]

Yes there is hundrds of new vehs in route, the TAPV is to replace the Coyote Recce Lav and act as a prime troop mover for some Bn's and the CV90 is to give us a tracked IFV orginal for the Heavy mech unit, in Edmonton, now it's being looked at having one coys worth in a few other Bns.... not all Bn's will get these vehs, there is nothing in the works for the LAV III our prime Inf Fighting veh except a rebuild, Veh Cas from Afghan have left a severe shortage of these vehs....The fleet in Afghan right now will come back, severely used and abused.... So much for the new system...The Army has been told our time at the trough is over,after the projects they have on the boards are completed it will be the Navies turn as it should be, but the Army is far from being 100 % fit and ready for battle...

Amazing how numbers can reflect what ever you want, you'll also remember a speach given by hillier at the start of his tenor, For the forces to grow and continue it's equipment replacement it would require a Ann budget of over 30 bils....And that is for our current size of 63,000 pers...their goal was to set our numbers to 75,000 which was later reduced to 70 k....

You also forget that most of these countries in the top 15 are not going through a major refit of almost every platform from every element...

Indeed, hopefully in the future, a more gradual approach to replacements will take place…….instead of the current boom and bust cycle once rust out has occurred……..a lot cheaper that way

[Rick]

It has the air of truth to it. I've heard the promises by various defense ministers for many years now with no action being taken.

So if we presume it is true, what's to be done about it? Further, what's to be done about the mini empires in Ottawa, and the fact they've grown so much while the number of actual soldiers has remained constant? Can we rely on the very people who have frustrated all other attempts to cut back on the bureaucracy, or do we need an outsider to go in there with a chain saw?

Canada’s bloated military bureaucracy has consistently defied explicit orders from government ministers and failed to increase the size of the army militia as directed.

National Post

A bloated military?

No shock there, it simply matches most of their heads.

What is surprising though is to see the right wing rag's pro-military mouthpiece admitting to it.

Maybe if Peter has time he could investigate it...in between his use of military flights to go fishing with his pals using tax payer's money of course.

Can't have the Conservative Jet Set lowering themselves to be seen travelling or mingling with commoners...

Edited September 26, 2011 by Rick

[Scotty]

Scotty:

Not true, Combat arms is actually flush with soldiers, in fact the Infantry is actually overbourne, by as much as 2000 soldiers and is now in the process of sending a good chunk to other trades...

I find that to be utterly absurd, to be honest. We have too much tail to tooth as it is. Why would they remove soldiers from the combat arms? So we can have more clerks?

Has there been any discussion of the report authored by Lieutenant General Leslie?

Bloated Military Staffing

[Scotty]

The author of this piece is out to lunch……increase numbers to 45k and create new militia units? Where and How? Does he/she plan to bring in conscription? Also, unlike the regular army that can post it’s members to a handful of bases across Canada, how do you propose more than doubling the number of the militia across the country?

I think the point was the government ordered a more modest increase, just 2,000 extra militia, and they've been ordering it for about 20 years now without the military doing a thing about it. In fact, the ranks of the reserves have shrunk instead.

[Smallc]

Yes there is hundrds of new vehs in route, the TAPV is to replace the Coyote Recce Lav and act as a prime troop mover for some Bn's and the CV90 is to give us a tracked IFV orginal for the Heavy mech unit, in Edmonton, now it's being looked at having one coys worth in a few other Bns.... not all Bn's will get these vehs, there is nothing in the works for the LAV III our prime Inf Fighting veh except a rebuild, Veh Cas from Afghan have left a severe shortage of these vehs....The fleet in Afghan right now will come back, severely used and abused...

Some of that is false, first of all, and second, there is a large unannounced vehicle project on the near horizon. The reality is though, we have one of the largest military budgets in the world, and you aren't going to be getting anymore - and that's that. There are hundreds of other priorities.

I mean, if anyone tries to tell me that we don't have more capability than 10 years ago, they are, quite frankly, making things up. Both of you talk about smaller numbers of equipment - yeah, okay, but all of that equipment is more effective, and even more importantly, has to be paid for. There is only so much money.

Edited September 26, 2011 by Smallc

[Guest Derek L]

I think the point was the government ordered a more modest increase, just 2,000 extra militia, and they've been ordering it for about 20 years now without the military doing a thing about it. In fact, the ranks of the reserves have shrunk instead.

Sure they may have ordered amore modest increase, but they’ve also committed to extensive deployments since the early 90s (FRY, Somalia, Afghanistan) on top of numerous smaller ones (Timor & Haiti)…….all the well, during the 90s and into the early 2000s, they’ve on average cut budgets (roughly 25%) and axed the CAR……..The Army’s focus (and rightfully so) has been on the deployable forces first

[Guest Derek L]

Some of that is false, first of all, and second, there is a large unannounced vehicle project on the near horizon. The reality is though, we have one of the largest military budgets in the world, and you aren't going to be getting anymore - and that's that. There are hundreds of other priorities.

Which of those projects are false? The CCV & TAPV as well as the LAV rebuild are all ongoing projects.

I mean, if anyone tries to tell me that we don't have more capability than 10 years ago, they are, quite frankly, making things up. Both of you talk about smaller numbers of equipment - yeah, okay, but all of that equipment is more effective, and even more importantly, has to be paid for. There is only so much money.

It depends how you adjust the goal posts……..As Army Guy stated, the Army has seen some improvements in terms of equipment being replaced (LEO II, MRAP & M777) during the war, but in the most part, small numbers and it has now been well worn……..

That’s not the case with the RCN and the RCAF though……….The AORs and 280s are near done (And both fleets decreased by one a piece), the 330s are passed mid life and their upgrade won’t be fully funded…….The Kingston’s won’t be rebuilt and a large percent aren’t fully manned…….and the Victoria’s….well no point going there………

The Hornets will be near 40 years old when replaced…….Same with the CP-140s (if replaced)……..The Herc fleet has been near cut in half, Granted the CC-17s help………Fixed Wing SAR……..The Sea King Saga……..And we’ll have to wait and see what happens to the Griffon fleet numbers, once the new Chinooks enter service…etc

Having smaller numbers off good equipment doesn’t really help in the long run……It can’t be in two places at once and it will wear out faster…….

[Smallc]

Which of those projects are false? The CCV & TAPV as well as the LAV rebuild are all ongoing projects.

Yes they are, but the CCV is new capability, and the LAV III isn't simply a rebuild. It isn't as extensive as some would like, but it isn't just a rebuild. Also, the TAPV numbers are more than LAV II + APC, and I've heard rumours that the numbers will be even higher.

It depends how you adjust the goal posts……..As Army Guy stated, the Army has seen some improvements in terms of equipment being replaced (LEO II, MRAP & M777) during the war, but in the most part, small numbers and it has now been well worn……..

And will all be repaired and refitted. The LAV III, for example, will have a 20 year service life after the upgrade, and there is a massive truck replacement project (two actually) in the pipeline. People always are in this mentality of the sky falling, and it usually isn't.

That’s not the case with the RCN and the RCAF though……….The AORs and 280s are near done (And both fleets decreased by one a piece), the 330s are passed mid life and their upgrade won’t be fully funded…….The Kingston’s won’t be rebuilt and a large percent aren’t fully manned…….and the Victoria’s….well no point going there………

The 280s and the AORs definitely need to be replaced, and finally will be (late). FELEX isn't fully funded? It's already under way. Some things were dropped, but it wasn't all because of cost. The Kingstons shouldn't be rebuilt, and are being replaced by a more capable platform and even in smaller numbers, won't really be a decrease in capability. The subs depend on who you ask.

The Hornets will be near 40 years old when replaced…….Same with the CP-140s (if replaced)……..The Herc fleet has been near cut in half, Granted the CC-17s help………Fixed Wing SAR……..The Sea King Saga……..And we’ll have to wait and see what happens to the Griffon fleet numbers, once the new Chinooks enter service…etc

The CC-130 fleet hasn't been cut in half recently. The H and J models will still be flying, and the SAR duty will eventually be taken over by something else, now that the ducks are finally lining up for that project. Oh, and some Griffons were actually mothballed at one point because we didn't need all of them. If we need fewer, so be it.

Having smaller numbers off good equipment doesn’t really help in the long run……It can’t be in two places at once and it will wear out faster…….

We can't be everything to everyone, not should we pretend that we can. There is a reality that has to be acknowledged. The military is not above a budget, nor should they be. They've already gotten the biggest increase of any department.

Edited September 27, 2011 by Smallc

[Guest Derek L]

Yes they are, but the CCV is new capability, and the LAV III isn't simply a rebuild. It isn't as extensive as some would like, but it isn't just a rebuild.

The CCV will be a new capability, in that it will be a true IFV, but being tracked for greater mobility is an extension on the M113.……..The LAV III are being rebuilt, since it’s cost probative to replace the entire fleet with the CCV.

The 280s and the AORs definitely need to be replaced, and finally will be. FELEX isn't fully funded? It's already under way. Some things were dropped, but it wasn't all because of coast. The Kingstons shouldn't be rebuilt, and are being replaced by a more capable platform and even in smaller numbers, won't really be a decrease in capability. The subs depend on who you ask.

The 330s were suppose to be fitted with a Phased Array under FELEX (The main focus of the project) to help counter new threats, but when the planned APAR was found to be too large, the requirement was dropped……….They could have installed a more modern (and costly) set like HERAKLES……………Or invest further to counter the top heaviness created by APAR…..Or better yet, accepted that the 330s would be limited in the threats that they could defend themselves from, and retire and replace them earlier.

The Kingstons, warts and all where numbers.......if fully crewed, 12 ships can cover more coast line than 6-8.........now they're going to patrol a third ocean, with two thirds the ships.....thats a reduction

As for the Subs, diving limitations and near lack of a functioning fire control suite don’t seem like a problem to you?

As for the 280 and AOR replacement......they've been being "replaced" for the last twenty years......no steel cut yet.....seeing is believing

The CC-130 fleet hasn't been cut in half recently. The H and J models will still be flying, and the SAR duty will eventually be taken over by something else, now that the ducks are finally lining up in a row. Oh, and some Griffons were actually mothballed at one point because we didn't need all of them. If we need fewer, so be it.

How many H’s are left? They’re on borrowed time…….FWSAR has been happing for over a decade, and no real progress has been made yet…….It’s shouldn’t be this complicated……..The Griffons were mothballed because we had nobody to fly them once we bought the handful of used Chinooks…….What do think will happen once the new Chinooks arrive?

We can't be everything to everyone, not should we pretend that we can. There is a reality that has to be acknowledged. The military is not above a budget, nor should they be. They've already gotten the biggest increase of any department.

Fair enough, but don't expect the military to expand capabilities when they need to replace and retool what they have.

Edited September 27, 2011 by Derek L

[Smallc]

Fair enough, but don't expect the military to expand capabilities when they need to replace and retool what they have.

Almost all new equipment results in expanded capabilities. It's simply a matter of degree. The Canadian Forces is far more capable that it was 10 years ago.

[Army Guy]

Some of that is false, first of all, and second, there is a large unannounced vehicle project on the near horizon. The reality is though, we have one of the largest military budgets in the world, and you aren't going to be getting anymore - and that's that. There are hundreds of other priorities.

I mean, if anyone tries to tell me that we don't have more capability than 10 years ago, they are, quite frankly, making things up. Both of you talk about smaller numbers of equipment - yeah, okay, but all of that equipment is more effective, and even more importantly, has to be paid for. There is only so much money.

Which of it is false ? We are talking about prime movers on the battlefield are we not, of which there is 3 projects TAPV, which is a small truck on steroids, built to withstand IED's not much good on a high intensity battlefield....It's going to replace the Coyote recce veh, a LAV with 25mm cannon....there is the CCV project they are looking at serveral vehs the prime one is a CV90 which will give us a major boast in capabilities, on all modes of the battlefield, but we are not buying enough of them, to outfit entire Bn's...No contracts have been let for either project todate...The Last project is up rebuild the LAV III, once again it's a rebuild Alot of these vehs have been on the battlefield and driven like they were stolen..there are old and tired and a rebuild will just delay their much needed replacement....The LAV design is now upto a LAV V or LAV H light years ahead of the LAV III...which is our primary Battle taxi within the forces, it's still a fine veh, however the enemy has already found ways to comprise it's armour, while the new LAV 5 are larger and better armoured...

We have one of the top 20 military budgets in the world....and yet a news release today says by 2015 over 70 % of that budget will be used to pay DND pers...threatening all projects on the books today....

Yes the vehs we have today are more effective, than yester year...but what you don't understand is an Inf bn CONSISTS OF 3 RIFLE COMPANIES....and in most Inf Bn's they only have enough LAV's for one...you can not take a Bn size objective with one Company of men, and you can not shuttle them into combat......so while the veh is more effective , there is not enough of them to carry out the job....so its a big Fail....introducing the TAPV will change that some what providing our next mission is Afghan type....the CCV will not plug all the holes...

As far as more Capabilty, most of which has yet to hit the ground yet....with the exception of the C-17, and one C-130J so your statement while true is a bit misleading....

[Smallc]

The Last project is up rebuild the LAV III, once again it's a rebuild

Once again, that isn't all that it is.

We have one of the top 20 military budgets in the world....and yet a news release today says by 2015 over 70 % of that budget will be used to pay DND pers...threatening all projects on the books today....

top 15, and that is typical for top countries. European countries are paying far more for personnel as a percentage right now.

Yes the vehs we have today are more effective, than yester year...but what you don't understand is an Inf bn CONSISTS OF 3 RIFLE COMPANIES....and in most Inf Bn's they only have enough LAV's for one...you can not take a Bn size objective with one Company of men, and you can not shuttle them into combat......so while the veh is more effective , there is not enough of them to carry out the job....so its a big Fail....introducing the TAPV will change that some what providing our next mission is Afghan type....the CCV will not plug all the holes...

The CCV isn't intended to plug all of the holes. Again, there are other projects in the offing. The sky isn't falling.

As far as more Capabilty, most of which has yet to hit the ground yet....with the exception of the C-17, and one C-130J so your statement while true is a bit misleading....

Really? The Leopard II? And so what if it hasn't hit the ground, it will. This government has displayed a commitment, within a budget, and there's no reason for all of the skepticism.

[Army Guy]

Yes they are, but the CCV is new capability, and the LAV III isn't simply a rebuild. It isn't as extensive as some would like, but it isn't just a rebuild. Also, the TAPV numbers are more than LAV II + APC, and I've heard rumours that the numbers will be even higher.

CCV is not a new Capbility, but rather the extension of the M-113, with a turrent which is standard on most IFV today...it's orginal purpose was to outfit the InF Bn's outwest so they could keep up with the new Leo's...it was later decided to give some of this capbility to other Inf Bn.s....depleting the numbers required to out fit the only Heavy Mech Brig in Canada....

LAV III is a rebuild like it or not, and while extending it's life for another 20 years providing there is no more missions...the LAV III is alraedy 3 versions behind in tech and protection...Lets keep in mind that most of our cas were from IED's...so more protection should take pri...but we are talking money here not lives....so we will get a re build with some upgrades...and in the next 20 years we will be 6 versions behind....

TAPV is another Money bsavings buy, could not afford more CCV's, nor LAV 5 so we compromised and decided to fill the holes with trucks on steriods....this idea will fail a 4 wheel drive veh is not going to keep up with an 8 wheel drive one...just like an 8 wheel one will not keep up with a tracked one...see a patern here 20 years for now we will be driving motocross bikes into battle because it was cheaper....

And will all be repaired and refitted. The LAV III, for example, will have a 20 year service life after the upgrade, and there is a massive truck replacement project (two actually) in the pipeline. People always are in this mentality of the sky falling, and it usually isn't.

You can't transport troops on a battlefield in trucks...the truck projects are for logistics...The sky is not falling because you don't have to live in my world, and while it's not falling it's come close....

The subs depend on who you ask.

The SUB's.... try and find a navy guy that will admit to being a submariner, a once proud group reduce to operate shit we bought in a fire sale... , lets look at the facts How many days in total does all 3 subs have on active duty....and how many days have they spent in Maint....

[Army Guy]

Once again, that isn't all that it is.

It does when the end product does not surpass the LAV 4 specifactions...Yes it will be an upgrade from the old LAV III but it's a rebuild...some addtional armour new power pact, upgraded suspension....but remember we cancelled our purchase of LAV V ....which was designed based on Canadian experiences in AFGHAN it was built and designed for the CF....and the purchase was for 1200 vehs...enough to outfit all reg force units...plus have spares for deployment...but this post is about our reserve brothers which need equipment as well, how can we do that if we can't outfit ourselfs...after all we are only talking about 3 Brigade Groups...that can barely send out one Battlegroup and sustain it....

top 15, and that is typical for top countries. European countries are paying far more for personnel as a percentage right now.

Not so at all the US ,UK , France barely pass the 50 % mark....look at the others and see , Canada is one of the best paid militarys in the world...and i'll be the first to say i'd take a pay decrease if it meant we could get decent equipment in the numbers we need...DND has already stated that in 2015 it will pay out more than 70% in wages and it's new forecast will mean reduction in numbers or the cutting of equipment projects....

Really? The Leopard II? And so what if it hasn't hit the ground, it will. This government has displayed a commitment, within a budget, and there's no reason for all of the skepticism.

Then it does not increase our capbility does it, it needs to be on the ground , troops trained in it's use, and issued to operational units before it is considered a new capability....Alot of governments have made commitment in the past, the military has learned you can't fight anything with promises or commitments....this country is facing some tough finicial times, and it is common practice to cut promises and commitments....

[Smallc]

You're right, everything is straight shit. Forget what any analysts say. Our military has been called one of the best small army's, with the most capability in the world. Our equipment is generally top notch, even if there isn't always as much as you want. The military is just another government department, and it must be treated that way. You guys can play your cold war games, but governments have to live in reality.

Oh, and the subs are the best diesel electric subs in the world. The navy has written many times in support of them, and has said to wait until 2012 - 2013 before people judge them. They took too long to become operational, but they're pretty much there now, and the navy seems to think that they were the right ships, and still at the right price.

Edited September 27, 2011 by Smallc

[Smallc]

I mean really, what do people expect the government to do? The military already had a huge increase in spending, even accounting for inflation, and the three largest economies in the world are going into the crap hole. It isn't realistic to expect larger budgets. All we can do, is go by the published material, and that material says different things to different people.