[Navy141]

I see on the news, that reports and studies have been done saying that the military needs more money, surveys say that the Canadian public wants more taxpayer dollars spent on military spending and yet we are still scaping rock bottom.

What needs to be done? I might be biased and want to know what a cross section of the Canadian public thinks. I think that Canada needs to make a larger imact on the world scene in peacekeeping and peace-making. The only way this can be done is by strengthening our forces. What do you think?

If you think we should what percentage should it be increased to?

[Newfie Scott]

It would be nice to see military spending up around 1.7-2% of the GDP, however, at the same time, we need to make the department more fiscally responsible to curb wasteful spending. If we can get both, we'd have it made, if the Minister is able to fulfill his plan to make the department more fiscally responsible, we'll still be in better shape.

[Malice]

Yes, we do need to spend more money.

We don't need many more troops, just get enough to be able to have a nice rotation so that the same guys aren't over seas at all times. Plus, get them equiped properly. That is my main beef. Our jets were so outdated that they weren't wanted over in Iraq. The funny thing is they were some of the best in Desert Storm. I just shows how we haven't been keeping up with the times.

I think in order to do this though we really have to set some strict guidelines for anyone bidding on our military contracts. If you bid, you are allowed to overrun costs by 2% then that is it. Anymore and it is out of your own pocket. The Canadian tax payers shouldn't have to foot the bill for poor management/workmanship of private companies. This would eliminate millions of frivilous spending, and leave more money for use elsewhere.

My thoughts.

[electricbuford]

Makes sense to me .

[Newfie Scott]

Back on my thought about being more fiscally wise: as long as it doesn't come at the expense of the CF's performance, we should become more fiscally wise, and we should not lower requirements for equipment simply to get the "best" deal, not necessarily the best equipment. read today in teh Globe that the MHP requirements have been lowered so the S92 and NH90 could participate in the bid, since with the original requirements, only the Cormorant's would have met the requirements. Once again, with this project, we're seeing government interference so that they can save themselves the embarassment of buying the EH101 which they cancelled.

Bad enough for their "image" that they bought the EH101 for SAR duties (which would have been covered by the 1993 contract), but god forbid that the government actually buy the same helicopter for shipborne purposes thus making them look like idiots for waiting 10 years to buy helicopters that were already on order.

I've heard that Team Cormorant has offered to drop the price by $500 million if they win (we get our cancellation fee back basically).