It looks like defence analysts are beginning to catch up with blogosphere chatter on what the Liberal budget really promised them.
You can't really blame them for the initial euphoria. The Liberals have been draining money from the armed forces for so many years, simply getting nothing must have felt like a windfall.
The initial exultation over military spending promises in last month's federal budget is giving way to sober second thought by some in the defence community.Upon closer scrutiny, the government's promise of $12.8 billion in new spending over five years may not be all it's cracked up to be, say observers.
For at least the next three years, spending - adjusted for inflation - will still be well below peak levels in the late 1980s and early 1990s.
And lest we forget - the military is to come up with $640 million in cost savings.
One-time increases in defence spending over the next two years have been pegged at $500 million and $600 million, most of which is targeted specifically for infrastructure upgrades.But figures adjusted for inflation indicate this and next year's budgets are only equivalent to or less than adjusted spending last year, when planes were grounded and ships tied up for lack of resources to operate them.
A look at defence spending from 1986 to the present suggests the military is still far below the peak 1988-89 level of $16.1 billion adjusted to 2005 dollars.
Keith MacDonald, a retired fighter pilot, told the Conference of Defence Associations recent annual meeting that the budget was "smoke and mirrors."
Why not try $640 mil in cost savings from the gun registry, or welfare services,before attempting to seek efficiencies from the armed forces?
how about the taxes from beer and fags