Isn’t defence spending up $88.5 billion/5 as well?

CAF is facing large retention and recruitment issues. Many skilled trades (mechanics, pilots) leave for higher salaries. The goal would be to stymie the flow to the private sector which pays better

How did they not put defence in this segment? NATO 2 percent? NORAD?

I look at major capital investments on the horizon : CSC is domestic, subs will be non US, lots of SK options for land capabilities. I agree with your proposal of mixed fleet for the fighter.

I’d suggest looking domestically, non US ally/partner, US to manage fp risks for upcoming procurements

How come the focus is on US vs. domestic capacity? Can’t we look for additional partners (Europe, Asia)?

Proposal: Manage risk with the US, diversify partnerships, build industrial capacity

lol perfect ending - Mathew’s blowing his assignment to lose

Not far off!

Fuck off

Let’s go drizzy

Adding up the till here and I think you’re missing a couple

Article is unclear - says he breaks from team Canada approach but then quotes him saying he is not breaking from team Canada approach.

Appears he is stating the obvious, that we would like to avoid tariffs

Agreed. I’m a free trade guy so I see the major costs of decoupling from US markets - it will hit Canada hard.

But according to 2019 IMF working paper elimination of trade barriers would add 4 percent to gdp per capita www.imf.org/-/media/File...

The tariffs will emphasize the need to further focus on productivity growth in Canada. A new government will need to prioritize industry competitiveness, focusing on workforce skills development, eliminating interprovincial trade barriers, and innovation of second line manufacturing

Nice to see an evidence based party being formed