The Defence Budget [superthread]
- Thread starter Edward Campbell
- Start date
Good2Golf said:Interesting. Do you have an open source reference to support your assertion?
op:
Regards
G2G
The federal government sat on close to $9.5 billion in approved expenditures last fiscal year, including $2 billion in unspent funding for the Department of National Defence, as it tried to balance the books during an election year.
http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/tories-left-9-5-billion-in-approved-funds-untouched-to-avoid-deficit-during-election-year
A ) there was never really a balanced budget
B ) DND has returned $11.7B to the federal treasury since 2007; most of it unspent capital money.
Before last year's return:
National Defence has lapsed $9.7 billion since 2007.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/defence-csis-rcmp-unable-to-spend-11-billion-of-their-budgets-since-2007-1.2964507
B ) DND has returned $11.7B to the federal treasury since 2007; most of it unspent capital money.
Before last year's return:
National Defence has lapsed $9.7 billion since 2007.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/defence-csis-rcmp-unable-to-spend-11-billion-of-their-budgets-since-2007-1.2964507
- Reaction score
- 22,025
- Points
- 1,360
jmt18325 said:
Interesting. I was thinking more like "official open source data", not "because someone (press notwithstanding) said."
Not sure where Messieurs Fekete and Berthaume got their figures, but I see $1.4B...$1.406.162.546.00 to be exact.
FY2014/2015 Vote 5 Capital Expenditures Main Estimate - DND: $4,722,631,021. ( http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/hgw-cgf/finances/pgs-pdg/gepme-pdgbpd/20152016/me-bpd02-eng.asp#toc7-76 )
FY2014/2015 Vote 5 Capital Expenditures Main Estimate - DND: $3,316,468,475. ( http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/hgw-cgf/finances/pgs-pdg/gepme-pdgbpd/20162017/me-bpd02-eng.asp#toc7-76 )
$4,722,631,021 - $3,316,468,475 = $1,406,162,546.
Perhaps the media uses different math? ???
Regards
G2G
- Reaction score
- 4,705
- Points
- 1,160
Moving the money just admits they can't fix the procurement system. We could use it now if they had an idea of how to fix the system.
- Reaction score
- 4,261
- Points
- 1,260
In case anyone's interested, here's a link to the full Budget 2016 document (PDF) - enjoy!
PuckChaser said:
I'd say it takes more than 5 months to properly fix a system. That said, what are they going to use the money for? We're supposed to be buying Canadian Surface Combatants and F-35s right now. Those buys are 5 - 10 years off. They money needs to be moved.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 360
jmt18325 said:
True, but a portion of that moved to O&M, construction, etc, would greatly improve the ability to train and improve base infrastructure in the near term. Sort of like the infrastructure money meant to fix current structures- the bases could use tons of this (plus less bases, but that's another thread)
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 360
jmt18325 said:
Who cares what the conservatives did? Sunshine and lollipops literally ran on infrastructure development as a cure to a minor rececssion based on a slump in the price of oil. The bases need lots of infrastructure development and had extra money, so it seems like a no-brainer. At some point the 'the conservatives did it" thing has to stop- the PMO has went out of their way to say that everything the conservatives did was wrong (which is anti-intellectual) so they can't then say "well the conservatives did it".
- Reaction score
- 8,295
- Points
- 1,160
I think this might be the gold standard for this discussion:
http://policyschool.ucalgary.ca/sites/default/files/research/canadian-defence-budgeting-perry.pdf
Perry, 2015 on the accrual system and the pluses and minuses. And Perry verifies the 1.4 BCAD number - and a consistent pattern of returning anywhere from 8% to 28% of the capital budget due to the inability of the "system" to provide invoices in a timely manner. There just aren't enough opportunities to write checks because the procedures in place don't allow for approvals to be generated fast enough.
Personally, unless I totally misunderstood the accrual system, I was of the opinion that the accrual system implied that funds allocated, but not spent would be rolled forwards and essentially held in escrow with the Government of the Day acting as the bank.
Perry seems to imply the same conclusion, while noting that the accrual system means putting the capital budget at the head of the financing parade, with its own line item, rather than its historical position at the bottom of the list, an after-thought to be managed with whatever funds are available after statutory, personnel, operations and maintenance bills had all been paid.
Have DND and the public purchasing manager successfully come to terms with the reprioritizing of the capital budget?
http://policyschool.ucalgary.ca/sites/default/files/research/canadian-defence-budgeting-perry.pdf
Perry, 2015 on the accrual system and the pluses and minuses. And Perry verifies the 1.4 BCAD number - and a consistent pattern of returning anywhere from 8% to 28% of the capital budget due to the inability of the "system" to provide invoices in a timely manner. There just aren't enough opportunities to write checks because the procedures in place don't allow for approvals to be generated fast enough.
Personally, unless I totally misunderstood the accrual system, I was of the opinion that the accrual system implied that funds allocated, but not spent would be rolled forwards and essentially held in escrow with the Government of the Day acting as the bank.
Perry seems to imply the same conclusion, while noting that the accrual system means putting the capital budget at the head of the financing parade, with its own line item, rather than its historical position at the bottom of the list, an after-thought to be managed with whatever funds are available after statutory, personnel, operations and maintenance bills had all been paid.
Have DND and the public purchasing manager successfully come to terms with the reprioritizing of the capital budget?
- Reaction score
- 8,295
- Points
- 1,160
jmt18325 said:
Your pardon? It is difficult to find anybody that voted LPC that would admit to the CPC having done anything correct while in power. Certainly the government is doing its best to create that impression, an attitude which is not inclined to create any sort of love from the 31.9% of the voting population that supported Prime Minister Harper throughout his time in power and in 2015. Prime Minister Trudeau may have convinced a million NDPers to become LPC members for the vote, and 3 million youngsters to turn out, all of whom were inclined to accept the Scary Harper meme, but can he hold them, and the natives, while at the same time holding the Manley's and, increasingly, the Catholic Liberals?
I apologize for the digression. That is better on the Politics 2016 discussion. But the surprise is honest. It is easier to have an honest conversation if one can accept that honourable people act according to their beliefs and with the best of intentions.
And the same thing is true for the LPC. I have difficulty accepting Prime Minister Trudeau as the best candidate the LPC could have put forward. I personally would have preferred any of a number of other candidates. Having said that, I will be giving him the benefit of the doubt and ascribing his actions to youthful enthusiasms that are unmoderated by the experience (cynicism) that comes with age.
I appreciate your acknowledgement that some elements of the preceding government were not entirely at odds with your perception of a liberal democracy.
Regards.
- Reaction score
- 4,705
- Points
- 1,160
You don't get to say "but these guys did it" when you run a campaign on "real change" and pledging to be totally different.jmt18325 said:
- Reaction score
- 8,295
- Points
- 1,160
PuckChaser said:
Actually, you do.
"Real change" - whatever that may mean - doesn't have to mean "All change". And the conservative in me would be grateful for any stability that I can find. We need it these days.
- Reaction score
- 4,261
- Points
- 1,260
Or vice versa ...Chris Pook said:
FTFY -- well put!Chris Pook said:
Similar threads
