Federal Budget turns a blind eye to Canada's military needs

By David Krayden, National Post 

Opinion: Were the Liberals ever serious about their big defence plan? They cut defence spending in 2018 and are ignoring it in 2019

Last week’s federal budget offered relatively modest spending with targeted funding after years of spending from a government that seemed to believe the deficit will solve itself. Unfortunately, the Canadian Armed Forces again escaped the finance minister’s gaze and for the second consecutive year, national defence is conspicuous by its absence from the budget.

A Canadian soldier provides security as medics assist German troops during a medical evacuation demonstration on the United Nations base in Gao, Mali, on Dec. 22, 2018.Adrian Wyld/CP

You might recall the fanfare when Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan released the Liberals’ defence policy review in 2017: “Strong, Secure, Engaged.” It was already more than six months overdue and there was a feeling among defence analysts and most journalists that the Liberals had to deliver a document that suggested serious resolve.

HMCS Windsor, one of Canada’s Victoria-class long range patrol submarines, returns to port in Halifax on June 20, 2018. Andrew Vaughan/CP

Sajjan promised a whopping 70-per-cent increase in defence spending, pledging to drive funding up to $32.7 billion from $18.9 billion. Naval ships, combat-support vehicles and 88 fighter jets would be replaced through “an open and transparent competition.”

But there was one large disclaimer. All of this would happen over the next decade, assuming the realities of 2017 would remain constant during that period. How well would any government have done predicting the military needs of 1942 based on the geopolitics of 1932?

In any case, we’ve yet to see any indication that the Liberals were serious about the plan. They cut defence spending in 2018 and have ignored it in 2019.

A Canadian soldier prepares to leave base in Gao, Mali, on Aug. 1, 2018, to take part in an operation as part of the United Nations mission in that country. AFP/Getty Images

Was there an alternative motive to the 2017 defence review? Canada was still in the midst of NAFTA negotiations with an American president who was increasingly critical of our defence contribution, especially as it pertained to NATO. Donald Trump had repeatedly cited Canada as one of the deadbeat members of NATO that refuses to fund its military at two per cent of its GDP — despite having promised to do so and notwithstanding that we have done so in the past. With Budget 2019, Canada is no closer to meeting that pledge, spending 1.23 per cent of its GDP on national defence.

A photograph taken out the window of a Canadian Forces CC-150 Polaris tanker shows a CF-18 Hornet fighter jet being refuelled in the air over Vancouver on Feb. 18, 2010. Master Corporal Andrew Collins, 14 Wing Imaging

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s desultory approach to defence capital acquisition may well be defined by the fighter jet fiasco that grows more bizarre with every twist and turn of the story. It was the Liberal government of Jean Chrétien that joined the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter development program. It was Stephen Harper’s Conservative government that dithered on procuring the aircraft. It is the current Trudeau government that decided to start the whole process again. In the meantime, the Liberals considered buying some interim Super Hornets from Boeing before ultimately deciding to pick up some used Australian F-18s — just as the Royal Australian Air Force took delivery of its first F-35s.A

Perhaps the best speech of this year’s just-concluded Manning Networking Conference in Ottawa was delivered by former chief of defence staff Gen. Rick Hillier. Hillier, whose career was defined by integrity and a politics-be-damned leadership style, told the conservative gathering that if Canada “buys a fighter aircraft that is anything but the F-35, we will have lost our minds.”

The last prime minister who consistently funded the Canadian military was Louis St-Laurent. All successive administrations — Liberal and Conservative — have to varying degrees played the shell game with defence spending. While lauding a capital acquisition project here, they will starve another project over there to pay for it. While promising consistent funding, they will squeeze the military at the first opportunity when a fiscal need emerges elsewhere.


They will squeeze the military at the first opportunity

With defence procurement being so hamstrung by petty politics and policy inertia, no amount of government funding can guarantee a combat-capable military if those dollars are not efficiently and effectively spent. As Hillier said, “Our acquisition process in Canada, in particular for the Department of National Defence, is abhorrent. It is pointless to give the Department of National Defence increased spending if you then tie them in a Gordian knot where they can’t actually spend the money.”

Sadly, that’s exactly what we’re doing.

— David Krayden is a former Royal Canadian Air Force public affairs officer and legislative assistant on Parliament Hill. He has worked in print, radio and television journalism and is currently the Ottawa bureau chief for The Daily Caller, a Washington-based media outlet.

Canada's Defence Spending Questioned at NATO Meeting

The Canadian Press 

The deputy minister of national defence has told a NATO meeting in Halifax that Canada is satisfied it is spending what it requires to meet its alliance and other military commitments.

Jody Thomas held fast to the government's stance on defence spending on Saturday, despite some pointed questioning about Canada's commitment following her presentation before NATO's defence and security committee, part of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly in Halifax.

U.S. Republican Rep. Michael Turner, the committee's acting chairman, asked whether Canada intends to table a plan for meeting the two per cent of GDP standard for defence spending that was agreed to by alliance members at a summit in Wales in 2014.

"Many of the nations that are here are either meeting their two per cent or have in place a plan to reach the two per cent," said Turner. "Canada is one of those countries who has not yet put forward a commitment to reach the two per cent although that is a commitment that Canada joined in making at Wales."

Thomas stuck to the Liberal government's line, saying Canada intends to increase its defence budget by 1.46 per cent by the end of 2024.

"Canada's defence budget is growing by 70 per cent as a result of Strong, Secure, Engaged (Canada's defence policy)," said Thomas. "We also on the ground are leading a significant number of operations, and we have never not participated in a NATO commitment or operation."

She also reiterated that Canada believes it contributes to the alliance in a "qualitative" way through an active participation in the alliance.

"The defence budget is a significant increase in funding for national defence and our prime minister is very satisfied with that contribution," Thomas said.
'It's not enough'

But Bob Stewart, a member of the United Kingdom delegation, reminded Thomas that Canada agreed to the commitment, adding that it's "crucial" it be honoured.

Stewart, a Conservative MP, then questioned Canada's current defence spending commitment.

"It's something like 1.12 per cent at the moment and honestly, it's not enough," said Stewart. "There are many nations that are not doing enough and I include my own nation ... we have all got to contribute more and help the United States that bears the burden."

Thomas shot back that Canada's funding includes its commitment to North American Air Defence (NORAD) and she stated that there are "inconsistencies" in the way the military budgets of member countries are assessed.

"The fact is that who counts what differs from country to country," she said.
Canadian contributions

Later in the day, Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan said budget numbers don't necessarily reflect a country's actual contributions to NATO.

"The NATO Parliamentary Association may not be fully briefed about what is actually discussed at NATO," he said in an interview with The Canadian Press.

"All of this is useless if you don't make contributions," he said, citing a list of Canadian contributions that include leading a battle group in Latvia, providing air policing over Romania, leading a NATO training mission in Iraq and building a new fleet of Canadian warships.

A report released by NATO ahead of last July's alliance summit in Brussels predicted Canada would spend 1.23 per cent of its GDP on defence this year — less than last year's level of 1.36 per cent. That leaves Canada ranked 18th out of the alliance's 29 members.

The decline is largely attributed to two one-time expenses last year:
a retroactive pay increase for service members that was included in the government's defence policy, and;
a $1.8-billion payment into the account that provides pensions for Forces members and their dependents.

In an interview with The Canadian Press, British Air Chief Marshal Stuart Peach, who is chairman of the NATO Military Committee, praised Canada for its "very strong support for the alliance."

Peach pointed to ongoing naval exercises and Canada's support for NATO's forward deployment in the Baltic states along with its support for the training mission in Iraq.

With regards to the two per cent target he remained diplomatic, saying that NATO officials have maintained there are three elements to the overall funding conversation.

"There is defence spending which is about the money, there's then a description and important modernization adaptation of NATO's capabilities of which Canada plays an important role," Peach said.

"And then there's the question of contributions and I've already set out how pleased we are with the range of Canada's contributions."