In late August, Treasury Board president Anita Anand instructed cabinet ministers to identify $15.4 billion in budget cuts over five years.
While the budget pledged that these cuts would not “impact” the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF), Bill Blair, who replaced Anand as defence minister in July, told a parliamentary committee on September 28 that the Department of National Defence was identifying “proposals for spending reductions” of $900-million annually over four years.
Blair has said the cuts will not reduce defence spending but will merely reduce the rate at which spending is increased in the coming years. He has also said that he expects to find a large portion of the needed cuts by eliminating travel and consulting fees.
However, experts are critical of the Department of National Defence (DND) being included in the government’s cost-cutting exercise at a time when Canada has committed to increasing military spending. And they are sceptical that the cuts won’t affect the CAF’s recruitment efforts, capabilities and standing abroad.
“There’s no way that you can take almost a billion dollars out of the defence budget and not have an impact,” Chief of Defence Staff General Wayne Donald Eyre told the parliamentary committee.
“They’re not going to get to $900 million by cutting travel and consulting services,” agrees Jack Cunningham, a professor of international relations at the University of Toronto. “I think it’s a little disingenuous of Minister Blair to imply that economies of that sort can get him to that target.”
“The number of times that I’ve heard travel and consultants will be cut in order to free up money… I don’t have enough fingers,” says Chris Kilford, a former commanding officer in the CAF.
‘Mixed messaging’
Kilford is critical of the “mixed messaging” signalled by these cuts.
“On the one hand, [the government] says they’re going to head towards the two per cent spending as a minimum. And then you have the government saying we’re looking to cut $900 million.”
According to NATO, Canada spent US$26.9 billion — or 1.29 per cent of GDP — on defence in 2022. At these levels, Canada ranks as the 14th highest defence spender globally, according to Statista, an online data platform. The United States, the world’s top spender, spent $877 billion.
At a NATO meeting in Lithuania in early July, Trudeau and then-defence minister Anand reaffirmed Canada’s pledge to meet NATO’s spending target of two per cent of GDP.
But a leaked Pentagon assessment, reported by The Washington Post, said Trudeau privately told NATO that Canada would never reach the military alliance’s spending target.
The document also said NATO allies have serious concerns about deficiencies within the CAF. “Widespread defence shortfalls hinder Canadian capabilities… [meanwhile it is] straining partner relationships and alliance contributions,” the document says.
“I think [Trudeau] was speaking candidly, as politicians tend to do in private rather than when the press is around,” says Cunningham. “I think the government has no serious intention of reaching that two per cent benchmark.”
“From the early 1950s through the early 1960s, we routinely spent 10 per cent of GDP on defence,” Cunningham said. “The current 1.3 per cent is ridiculous and indicates a fundamental lack of seriousness about defence on the part of governments of both parties.”
“There’s a reason that despite considering ourselves a naval nation and a pacific nation that we were not invited into AUKUS to help contain Chinese influence in the Asia-Pacific,” he adds, referring to the Australian-British-American defence alliance. “We’re just not taken seriously, and it’s increasingly unlikely that we will be if these cuts go ahead.”
Kilford agrees that successive governments, both Liberal and Conservative, have consistently underinvested in Canada’s military.
“We’re able to make cuts because we live in a very safe part of the world,” he said. “And the folks in Ottawa, no matter what government is in power, understand that.”
Cunningham worries about the impact of Canada and other NATO members failing to meet the NATO target. He said it “plays into the hands of American isolationists” like former president Donald Trump when countries don’t take this commitment seriously.
‘Tone deaf’
Cunningham believes the cuts will also undermine the military’s efforts to address a major personnel shortage.
“[The cuts] are likely to exacerbate the recruitment problem,” he said. “These are absolutely terrible messages to be sending to those who are already in the Forces, and those thinking of joining.”
Kilford thinks the shortage, which he estimates to be 16,000 people, actually lessens the impact of cuts because there’s “approximately a billion dollars in unspent salary pay” that can be “handed back” to the government.
But Kilford agrees that the CAF’s personnel shortage is a problem because the military is “stretched so thin.”
According to Genevieve Tellier, a University of Ottawa professor in the school of political studies, “there are a few pieces missing in this [cost-cutting] exercise.”
“It’s one thing to say to a minister: ‘Find cuts.’ It’s another thing to say, ‘Well I’m serious about that, and I will give you guidelines to attain that.’ Those guidelines are missing.”
She believes defence cuts are not particularly damaging to the Liberals because “those [who] receive the services of National Defence are outside the country” and because “it plays well with some Canadians who think we are spending too much on defence.”
Kilford also believes any political fallout is most likely to be felt internationally, because the defence cuts make Canada “look tone deaf” to its allies.
A grander strategy
Canada has contributed $8 billion to Ukraine since Russia’s invasion in February 2022, including $1.8 billion in military assistance.
“You can arm yourself at home all you want and shake your fist at the Russians, but what we’re actually doing right now is sending money to the Ukrainians who are killing Russian soldiers every single day… we’re achieving a grander strategy by other means,” said Kilford.
“The money that you’re spending to support the Ukrainian Armed Forces should be counted as part of the overall defence budget of Canada,” argues Kilford.
While it all comes from the “same pot,” the investments in Ukraine’s defence are distributed across multiple departments, including DND and Public Services and Procurement Canada.
But General Eyre says that the lack of investment in the CAF is reaching critical levels. If Canada were to need to fire artillery at the same rate Ukrainians are now, Canada’s stockpile would last only a few days, he told the parliamentary committee.
Given the deteriorating security situation around the world, the general said, “I had a very difficult session this afternoon with the commanders of the various services as we attempted to explain [the cuts] to our people.”
Editor’s Note: This piece has been updated to indicate that the anticipated cuts are $900-million annually over four years.
Great article with which I agree.