Defence Strategy or Deficit Strategy?

This week, the Liberal government announced what it calls the “Defence Industrial Strategy,” which they claim will “strengthen security, create prosperity, and reinforce strategic autonomy.”
 
Like most Liberal programs, this one is an extremely expensive proposal. According to the government’s own numbers, they are proposing “$180 billion in defence procurement opportunities and $290 billion in defence-related capital investment opportunities in Canada over the next 10 years.” They also claim this spending will create “125,000 high-paying careers and increase our defence exports by 50%.”
 
All of this raises the obvious question: Will all this spending actually deliver the results being promised?
 
As the official opposition, it is our job to ask questions that probe past the headlines or talking points. As Canadian taxpayers, you should expect value for money, especially when a government makes such lofty promises with next to no details on how they will actually be achieved.
 
I am reminded of when former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau promised in 2019 to plant two billion trees, backed by a $3 billion commitment, yet offered no actual plan for execution. I recall hearing from local constituents with expertise in this area who were clear that the promise was all “hot air” and would fail. It turns out they were completely correct; the Liberal government failed on that promise, as they have on so many others.
 
The Liberals now say they want to procure more military hardware domestically. They hope the money that is pushed into our domestic industry will result in military hardware and technology that other countries will want to buy. But will it work?
 
Every government tries to prioritize “Made in Canada” solutions. However, in some cases, a domestic solution simply doesn’t exist, or a foreign-made option is significantly more cost-effective. A glaring example of this is the current government’s decision to finance made-in-China BC Ferries. This $1 billion loan through the Canada Infrastructure Bank proceeded despite the clear calls from our domestic industry and Canadian workers to do the work here at home. Meanwhile, the Liberals are also looking to award submarine contracts to South Korea or Germany, and their F-35 fighter replacements are made in the USA. I mention this because the Liberals are already spending billions on procurement that is not made in Canada, despite what they are promising today.
 
There is also the question of expertise: Can companies without a sustained history in defence manufacturing suddenly compete against proven global leaders? Most nations prefer to buy domestically; the Liberals are essentially hoping other countries will abandon their own industries to buy from us.
 
We all want to see more done in Canada and support strides that help secure our sovereignty and meet our international commitments. However, I am also mindful of what Canadian Armed Forces personnel say when the subject of military procurement inevitably comes up, they consistently stress that the priority must be getting reliable equipment to fill operational gaps—over any political or economic targets.
 
Ultimately, every government program should be successful, or it becomes a waste of scarce tax dollars. Despite the massive costs of this strategy, the Liberals have not explained where the money will come from, which is a serious concern given that Prime Minister Carney’s last budget created record-setting deficits.
 
My question this week: What are your views on this new “Defence Industrial Strategy”?
 
Please join the discussion online at my Facebook Page, or reach me directly at Dan.Albas@parl.gc.ca or toll-free at 1-800-665-8711.