I'm with those who propose just two sets of uniforms, a formal dress uniform for office and formal occasions, and a battle dress for work, in and out of the field. The Canadians have also gone through a number of just plain wasteful uniform issues and changes. First was in 1968, whent he Army, Navy, and Air Force were officially abolished by act of Parliament, and replaced by a single service, the Canadian Armed Forces. Everyone got a Rifle Green dress uniform, and most had a combat dress uniform, but not all; the Canadian Army actually refused to issue a real battle dress uniform until well into the 1960's, the issue WWII-battle dress being used mostly for work out of the field as well as formal occasions, while troops bought US-surplus to wear in the field.

Then the 60's came along and Canadian troops finally got an issue combat uniform (made partly out of nylon, caught fire and melted real well, and you stank real quick in the field) - but never enough were procured, and as recently as the '90s some recruits were issued black mechanic's coveralls instead. Strange but true. So somebody in the late '80s got the idea of "economizing" on combat uniforms by issuing "Garrison Dress", complete with tan "work" pants and shirt, brass, faux-Corcoran jump boots, camouflage duck-hunt smock, and black leather gloves, also a faux-London Fog black overcoat. Well, by the mid-90's that exercise in waste and futility bought the biscuit, and troops were still short of combat uniforms. At least in the 80's "Distinctive Environmental Uniforms" DEU's with "Army" greens and tans, Navy blues and whites, and Air Force light blues replaced the single Rifle Greens, still cheap, but at least it was helf a step forward.

The old No.2 Blue's that some other Commonwealth Armies still have are very easy on the eyes, and would go rather nicely with proper battle dress uniforms - I always liked the Brit DPMs (not the cheap Canadian knock-offs that were only issued to SSF units (especially 1RCR and the Airborne Regiment), and only for showing off all the badges and tabs that one had earned).

I think that having troops wear their dress uniforms in public might help remind the civilianry that yes, the Military still exists, and yes, it is still in their midst. That said, as other posters have stated, putting gaggles (or even odd individuals) of frumpy, out-of-shape, and not-so-well-disciplined troops out in public is just looking for trouble. That, however, is a leadership, training, and personnel issue, and if those three factors are taken care of properly, then the citizenry will be treated to the occasional sight of professional-looking troops appearing now and then in public. An alternative to this is to have the public rely on TV ads and shows, movies, and popular media in general to maintain the relationship between the Military and Society.