“You can promise the moon and the stars. If you can not get the money out the door, then it has no value,” said Andrew Leslie, a former Liberal MP and retired general. In an excerpt on Saturday, Leslie told The CBC House that the Liberal government under Prime Minister Justin Trindade had failed to provide the leadership needed to break down bureaucratic hurdles and push for significant revitalization. . The federal government is due to unveil its budget on April 7. A key question will be what changes it will make to military spending, especially in light of the war in Ukraine. LISTEN Military experts discuss Canada’s future defense needs: 8:29 The call for two percent Senior producer Jennifer Chevalier talks to defense experts Dave Perry, Andrea Charron, Kim Richard Nossal and retired lieutenant general. Andrew Leslie to hear their shopping list for the Canadian military ahead of next week’s federal budget. 8:29
Canada spends $ 23.3 billion on the Department of Defense, but Leslie said the department has a chronic problem with the actual use of funds. “For the last seven years, the Armed Forces have allocated about this amount, but they have not been able to spend it all. And the prime minister and the finance minister are clearly responsible for that,” he said. Leslie, who was hired in 2015 as a star candidate to write for the Liberals’s defense and foreign policy platform, is now frustrated with the state procurement skills. The Armed Forces also face difficulties in recruiting and retaining personnel – one of the issues on which Senior General Wayne Eyre said the forces will focus – and Leslie said $ 1 billion a year could be spent on salaries alone. staff shortages. According to Kim Richard Nossal, procurement expert at Queen’s University, the military is also having difficulty developing and retaining know-how in procurement negotiations. “One of the difficulties Canada has faced is that we tend to buy military equipment in a kind of cycle of prosperity and collapse,” he said. “And the difficulty of this approach to purchasing equipment for our armed forces means that the people in the Department of National Defense who specialize in procurement are simply not there.” Leslie said the failure to spend the money to bring the Forces into the taboo was crucial to Canadian security. “So, honestly, if the prime minister and the finance minister can not solve this stalemate in defense spending, then maybe it’s time for another team to replace him,” he said.

Focus on the mainland defense

Leslie provided a lengthy “shopping list” of equipment needed by the Armed Forces to procure, including anti-tank and anti-aircraft systems, drones, submarines and aircraft. But when it comes to orienting the way money is spent, the government needs to address a more fundamental question, according to the president of the Canadian Institute of Global Affairs. “The first question would be, what does the government really want us to do?” said Dave Perry, chairman of the Independent Foreign Policy and Defense Thinking Group, which has occasionally sponsored events by defense contractors. Perry said the image of the army was one that focused on maintaining peace, but the direction the Forces were supposed to take is less clear now. After that, Perry said the first step “would be for the government to really make a decision about whether spending money is a priority or not. “I do not think there is much evidence to suggest that it was for this government.” The HMCS Brandon is pictured off Juno, Alaska, as the ship supports divers from the Fleet Diving Unit Pacific while conducting mine countermeasures to the ocean floor in March. (Submitted by Captain Sailor Dan Bard, Canadian Armed Forces)
Continental defense should be the government’s main concern, according to Andrea Charron, director of the Center for Defense and Security Studies at the University of Manitoba. “Russia is a persistent and imminent threat to North America. And we know that China has growing potential and ambitions. I do not think the status quo will keep us safe,” he said. Charron said the modernization of the NORAD air defense partnership was key to this approach, including investment in surveillance, cyber capabilities and recruitment. Not to lean towards the end of the NORAD partnership from Canada meant that the country would disappoint not only the US, but also the rest of NATO, he said. “It means we have a responsibility to our allies and partners in Europe, and it also means we will fight to be able to advance North American power in the world if we stay away from here,” Charron said. Charron assumed that in a situation where Russian President Vladimir Putin erupts in the Arctic, “the last thing we want is for NATO allies in Europe to have to turn around, come and help Canada and the US at a time when they are focused. in what is happening on their eastern border with Ukraine “. Overall, he said, the military is now being asked to carry out multiple different types of missions, reducing its resources as external threats increase in the form of Russia and China. “We’re off our feet,” Charron said. “The Canadian Armed Forces are being asked to change the tires of a car that is still moving and is very messy.”