There’s no obligation in terms of ‘what’ or ‘how much’. ACTO 11 categorises / prioritises activities. Shooting (except clay target shooting, but including clay target courses for CFAVs) is ‘essential core activity’, as is fieldcraft. The level of activity a cadet can expect is also detailed within (albeit very broadly).
However, it creates no obligation for a particular ‘level’ of the organisation to deliver.
My expectation is effectively the same as @bob1 stated: Sqns do what they can, Wg plugs the gaps it can, Rgn plugs gaps left by Wg, and HQ RAFAC makes up for the rest.
My panacea would be to have a cascading delivery plan for all essential core activities: HQ RAFAC plans the delivery of ‘X’, the highest level, most complex, or greatest scale, ie things which generally cannot be achieved by the levels ‘below’* due to expertise, resources, numbers, etc. Then, Rgns can plan the next level ‘down’*, then Wgs and so on. This does not preclude a Sqn, for eg, from planning the most complex activity there is if they’re capable but it ensures the training need is met.
Bottom line: all levels should work together to meet the training need, without hindrance of vertical or horizontal borders.
*I use ‘below’, ‘down’ a level, etc, only in terms of our organisational hierarchy and not to infer that air rifle LFMT on a Sqn is any less important or beneficial to cadets than is ISCRM or CISSAM.