Climate disasters will be part of defence update as strains grow, minister says

[dapaterson]

Bill Blair has a vested interest in having his ministry help Toronto, which includes his riding, to deal with this. Chow knows this and also knows that Blair won't turn her down.

And with a $1B cut to Defence, there won't be much Reserve unit parading going on, I'll bet, unless you're tasking is as a caretaker for the homeless.

Interesting but false allegation that Defence reductions might target the Res F.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Slowly dawned on them?

When your a Zealot it takes time to accept the consequences of your choices.

 

[MilEME09]

Interesting but false allegation that Defence reductions might target the Res F.

Really what hurts us more is ammunition shortages, though I know solutions are bring worked.

 

[childs56]

So Canada is back errr well sort of with all the budget cuts maybe not. At least for the UN we are are not back.
Chinook Fire fighting helicopters, lets say 30 with removable water drop system.
A few new C130's with aerial water suppression units, removable of course.
100 new Tanks with river fording kits. For crossing dangerous rivers during flood season and delivering sand bags. ( the weight of the tank keeps it from washing down stream)
8 new Heavy Lift transport aircraft with quick change water drop system along with removable fuel bladders to assist in fuel delivery and personal transport.
A whole mix of Mack Defence Dump trucks, PLS and scooper trucks.
New (water) drop tanks for the CF18s, they can practice dropping water bombs.
A whole fleet of excavators, front end loaders, backhoes, dozers and sandbagging machines.
A fleet of shiny new Triaxle planetary gear heavy haul trucks with proper scissors neck, lowboy, jeeps and booster to haul all the new equipment from coast to coast. (they will pre position equipment) then surge extra gear as required. In the off season we can haul our tanks to the training grounds.
A few more ships that can multitask as disaster command posts, and provide a floating evac point and pick up those washed down the flooding river.
500 8-12 inch portable water pumps. and aux equipment, and new pickup trucks with slip tanks to tow them around.

 

[childs56]

Really what hurts us more is ammunition shortages, though I know solutions are bring worked.

There should never ever be an ammo shortage, we manufacture the stuff domestically. I remember the Ammo Tech at Rocky Point asking if we had 155 Howitzers, when I asked why he stated they would give us ammo to fire if we did. Cheaper then disposing of it.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Interesting but false allegation that Defence reductions might target the Res F.

Based on recent observations, the A Res is a 'self-reducing' entity anyways

 

[WLSC]

So Canada is back errr well sort of with all the budget cuts maybe not. At least for the UN we are are not back.
Chinook Fire fighting helicopters, lets say 30 with removable water drop system.
A few new C130's with aerial water suppression units, removable of course.
100 new Tanks with river fording kits. For crossing dangerous rivers during flood season and delivering sand bags. ( the weight of the tank keeps it from washing down stream)
8 new Heavy Lift transport aircraft with quick change water drop system along with removable fuel bladders to assist in fuel delivery and personal transport.
A whole mix of Mack Defence Dump trucks, PLS and scooper trucks.
New (water) drop tanks for the CF18s, they can practice dropping water bombs.
A whole fleet of excavators, front end loaders, backhoes, dozers and sandbagging machines.
A fleet of shiny new Triaxle planetary gear heavy haul trucks with proper scissors neck, lowboy, jeeps and booster to haul all the new equipment from coast to coast. (they will pre position equipment) then surge extra gear as required. In the off season we can haul our tanks to the training grounds.
A few more ships that can multitask as disaster command posts, and provide a floating evac point and pick up those washed down the flooding river.
500 8-12 inch portable water pumps. and aux equipment, and new pickup trucks with slip tanks to tow them around.

If I was in their shoes, this is how I would sell it. ''Instead of having two fleet of dump/scoop/etc trucks, the CAF will by only MILPAT truck. No yellow, only green truck. With the economies we might even be able to have some materiel in depot''. I know, it wont happend like that.

 

[Kirkhill]

WRT construction equipment

CANADA CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT MARKET SCOPE​

REPORT ATTRIBUTE	DETAILS
MARKET SIZE (REVENUE)	USD 4.85 Billion (2027)
MARKET SIZE (UNIT SHIPMENT)	39,484 units (2027)
CAGR (VOLUME)	4.45% (2021-2027)
HISTORIC YEAR	2018-2019
BASE YEAR	2020
FORECAST YEAR	2021-2027
TYPE	Earth Moving Equipment (Excavator, Backhoe Loader, Motor Grader, and Other Earth Moving Equipment), Road Construction Equipment (Asphalt Paver and Road Roller), and Material Handling Equipment (Crane, Forklift and Telescopic Handler, Arial Platforms (Articulated Boom Lifts, Telescopic Boom Lifts, Scissor Lifts, etc))
APPLICATION	Construction, Manufacturing, Mining, and Others
KEY VENDORS	Caterpillar, Komatsu, Hitachi Construction Machinery, Kobelco, Volvo Construction Equipment, Kubota Group, Sumitomo Heavy Industries, Liebherr, SANY Group

Canada Construction Equipment Market | 2021-27 | Size, Share, Industry Growth & Analysis

Canada's construction equipment market was valued at USD 3.8 billion and is forecasted will reach USD 4.85 billion by 2027, growing at a CAGR of 4.45% during 2021-2027. Canada's earthmoving equipment market is projected to witness robust growth during the forecasted period

www.arizton.com

This seems to be confirmed by other sources.

Canada Construction Equipment Market Size & Share Analysis - Industry Research Report - Growth Trends

The Canada Construction Equipment Market is growing at a CAGR of 7.3% over the next 5 years. Caterpillar Inc., Liebherr Group, Komatsu Ltd., AB Volvo, J C Bamford Excavators Ltd are the major companies operating in Canada Construction Equipment Market.

www.mordorintelligence.com

That number seems to be a 5 BUSD annually, or about 7 BCAD, spent on the earth moving equipment that would be associated with managing the mitigation efforts associated with climate impacts on the environment. That number does not include the amount spent on dump trucks, specialist trucks and utility vehicles.

I can see the Government of Canada needing an engineering capability to support its Territories where that type of plant and expertise is in short supply but I think the civilians have pretty much got the Provinces covered. BC's response to the floods and slides is all civilian.

The army and the air force need some engineering capability that they can take along with them on deployments but that is another thing entirely.

 

[markppcli]

Everyone here is talking about equipment being the issue. We should be talking about people. Going from high readiness training, to fighting fires all summer, back onto an exercise, then deploying is a brutal schedule to try and keep up for a year, let alone two. But that’s what we are dealing with.

 

[Remius]

Everyone here is talking about equipment being the issue. We should be talking about people. Going from high readiness training, to fighting fires all summer, back onto an exercise, then deploying is a brutal schedule to try and keep up for a year, let alone two. But that’s what we are dealing with.

I think it needs to be about a myriad of things. Which is probably why we are where we are. If you’ll excuse the comparison, the CAF is, more than most organisations, an ecosystem like thing. One thing gets cut or neglected it can create a host of related issues throughout.

People and equipment are probably the most vital part of that ecosystem.

Why the CAF has not properly addressed retention is beyond me. They need incentives and retention bonuses for mid career types we need to keep. What some don’t get is, that sort of thing IS actually a recruiting incentive.

Promotions are not the incentive that used to be and I think a lot of people are forgetting or ignoring that.

And to your point. If they want to do more they need more. Doing more with less should not be an aspirational goal or a vision statement. Accepting that as the status quo is a failure.

 

[CountDC]

oh great, they finally fixed MPA after all the destruction from last time it was used as a shelter and now it gets to be destroyed again. Hopefully this time everyone got the message and didn't leave anything in the lockers or areas they will have access to. Good though for any Cl A PRes looking to pick up some extra cash working local as they play security in the building.

 

[OldSolduer]

Everyone here is talking about equipment being the issue. We should be talking about people. Going from high readiness training, to fighting fires all summer, back onto an exercise, then deploying is a brutal schedule to try and keep up for a year, let alone two. But that’s what we are dealing with.

I said years ago that all the fancy planes, tanks and associated infrastructure aren't worth spit unless you have the RIGHT people in the right quantity to crew them.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Why the CAF has not properly addressed retention is beyond me. They need incentives and retention bonuses for mid career types we need to keep. What some don’t get is, that sort of thing IS actually a recruiting incentive.

Good leadership contributes to better retention... I wonder if the CAF has noticed that yet?

The Role of Leadership in Influencing Employee Retention​

Leadership plays an undeniably significant role in employee retention. Today's business leaders must understand that, more than high Pay, employees are more drawn to stay in an organization where they are challenged to grow, and their interests are prioritized. Therefore, by implementing the strategies outlined above, leaders can create a positive work environment where employees are engaged, motivated, and encouraged to stay longer with the company.

The Role of Leadership in Influencing Employee Retention

The bulk of employee engagement and retention lies in the strength of leadership. It’s becoming clearer to organizations, in today’s fast-paced world, that employees want more than high pay or recognition given to them based on their performance.

www.linkedin.com

 

[Fishbone Jones]

This is what happens when you try virtue signalling that you're a Sanctuary City. Its all well and good, buying you accolades from the champagne socialists. Eventually though someone like trudeau, a true marxist, is going to take advantage of it and flood your city with refugees and illegal aliens. There is empty warehouses galore in Toronto. If you can commandeer 4 star hotels to turn into high rise ghettos, you can do the same with warehousing. Which fits nicely because that's what you're doing with the people. Warehousing them.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Promotions are not the incentive that used to be and I think a lot of people are forgetting or ignoring that.

I know this is a big thing for a lot of people; the pay increases with promotion are minimal, and the type of work can change significantly.

I would happily put in a PAR exemption if I didn't think I'd get a punishment posting and a shunning. If pay or additional responsibility are a motivator, I'd be transitioning out of the CAF already. Which weirdly might be to a subcontractor job providing advice to the CAF on a portion of the work that is already under my full time job, as there is a lot more work then we have capacity to do and not many people with the niche specialized expertise to do it.

Essentially the institution is doing the opposite of encouraging retention, and a big motivator to stay in uniform is to basically try and protect the people in the institution from the institution that is keeping me in. That seems somewhat backwards in several respects, but sometimes can actually do something from inside the machine to positively influence things.

Lots of people in comparable positions, especially on the Martech side and that's a non-renewable motivator. Outside the CAF people are taking lateral job upgrades moving to different companies because it's a way to increase pay while keeping doing similar jobs. Our lateral changes only really go one way for the most part, as I can count on one hand the number of folks I know that released and got back in later. Generally the grass really is greener (or at least you can live with the differences).

 

[dapaterson]

I know several Captains who were being actively managed who said "Thanks" and walked out into the public sector. One remained in the Reserves, but has said "There's no way I could go back to permanent full time" (he's deployed twice as a reservist - in the Reg F, career managers (official and unofficial) were more interested in getting his boxes checked).

That our system often seems to incentivize the motivated individuals to leave is suggestive of some problems.

 

[Kirkhill]

I know several Captains who were being actively managed who said "Thanks" and walked out into the public sector. One remained in the Reserves, but has said "There's no way I could go back to permanent full time" (he's deployed twice as a reservist - in the Reg F, career managers (official and unofficial) were more interested in getting his boxes checked).

That our system often seems to incentivize the motivated individuals to leave is suggestive of some problems.

So as reservist you gey to choose your gig while as a reg you must follow the master's voice.

 

[daftandbarmy]

So as reservist you gey to choose your gig while as a reg you must follow the master's voice.

Well, you still need to do what you're told.

Unless you're smarter than some of them are, and do the right thing instead

 

[Halifax Tar]

Well, you still need to do what you're told.

Only when on the Kings dime, no ? If a reservist is not on duty they are not held to the CSD, correct ?

Standing by to be corrected.

 

[dapaterson]

Only when on the Kings dime, no ? If a reservist is not on duty they are not held to the CSD, correct ?

Standing by to be corrected.

Not quite:

Persons subject to Code of Service Discipline

• 60 (1) The following persons are subject to the Code of Service Discipline:
  • (a) an officer or non-commissioned member of the regular force;
  • (b) an officer or non-commissioned member of the special force;
  • (c) an officer or non-commissioned member of the reserve force when the officer or non-commissioned member is
    
    • (i) undergoing drill or training, whether in uniform or not,
    • (ii) in uniform,
    • (iii) on duty,
    • (iv) [Repealed, 1998, c. 35, s. 19]
    • (v) called out under Part VI in aid of the civil power,
    • (vi) called out on service,
    • (vii) placed on active service,
    • (viii) in or on any vessel, vehicle or aircraft of the Canadian Forces or in or on any defence establishment or work for defence,
    • (ix) serving with any unit or other element of the regular force or the special force, or
    • (x) present, whether in uniform or not, at any drill or training of a unit or other element of the Canadian Forces.

National Defence Act

Federal laws of Canada

laws-lois.justice.gc.ca