- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
(from the Ottawa Citizen - any comments?)
'Culture of secrecy' blankets DND spending
Canadians kept in dark over state of military, auditor general says
Mike Blanchfield
The Ottawa Citizen
The Chretien Liberals are fostering a "culture of secrecy" by keeping Parliament in the dark about the capability and budgetary requirements of the Canadian Armed Forces, say top officials with the federal auditor general's office.
"Parliament has not been provided with a full appraisal of the capability of the Canadian Forces," said yesterday's report card on the Defence Department by Auditor General Denis Desautels.
The report makes particular note of the fact that the House of Commons public accounts committee recommended that Defence provide Parliament with a detailed assessment of the military's capability and whether it had the means to buy expensive new equipment to meet its goals.
However, the government rejected the recommendation as impractical.
A senior auditor general official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that decision is indicative of the growing political trend in Ottawa by the Chretien Liberals to control the flow of, and access to, information that could be politically damaging to them.
The lack of a detailed assessment of the forces is depriving the public of information necessary for an informed debate on whether military spending is adequate, the official said.
"The government is not providing the public with essential information to be able to discuss the highest level of defence management issues: Is the budget big enough?" said the official said. "I think there is a culture of secrecy."
The official drew a direct parallel to Monday's scathing report by Information Commissioner John Reid, who lambasted Prime Minister Jean Chretien's top staff for undermining the Access To Information law by intimidating his investigators when they tried to uncover hidden documents.
"Our recent political culture (says) why give the opposition and critics information that would be used to criticize you," the official said. "Nobody in our political culture wants to step up to the line and say, 'here's an objective portrait of where our department should be.' "
The auditor general noted the Defence department annually lacks about $750 million to buy equipment and maintain a level of readiness.
The Liberal government cut defence spending by 23 per cent between 1994 and 1998. Although it has given the military a modest spending increase, including a four-year, $1.9-billion increase in last year's budget, the Chief of Defence Staff, Gen. Maurice Baril, recently warned that he would have to cut as many as 3,000 troops to balance his books.
Gen. Baril needs to pay for new hardware, such as maritime helicopters and high-tech upgrades for existing equipment so Canada can remain compatible with its NATO allies.
"According to departmental business plans, the department would require $11 billion in capital funds over the next five years, but would receive only $6.5 billion, resulting in a $4.5-billion shortage," the audit states.
As they have tried to find ways to do more with less, forces brass have been "hampered by a lack of adequate policy guidance, clear priorities and performance information. ... We also found that other countries were doing better at linking capital spending to policy objectives and were providing more information to their legislatures."
However, unlike the practice of other countries, the Liberals rejected giving Parliament a "comprehensive defence review and assessment," saying it was impractical or "already addressed by various public documents."
The auditor general said the other public documents on which the Liberals chose to rely were filled with platitudes with little useful information.
"Only vaguely worded statements are provided, such as 'we have exceeded expectations,' 'the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces are working hard to meet the challenges they are currently facing' ..."
"The chief of Defence staff's annual report on the state of the Canadian Forces does not assess the overall state of equipment and provides only a list of new equipment received."
Meanwhile, a separate audit uncovered major shortcoming in how the military managed major equipment purchase projects. "Only one project out of six met our expectations for risk management," the audit says.
The audit cited one case in which a $750,000 vehicle-launched grenade had to be scrapped because it proved "potentially lethal to the troops using it."
- 30 -
'Culture of secrecy' blankets DND spending
Canadians kept in dark over state of military, auditor general says
Mike Blanchfield
The Ottawa Citizen
The Chretien Liberals are fostering a "culture of secrecy" by keeping Parliament in the dark about the capability and budgetary requirements of the Canadian Armed Forces, say top officials with the federal auditor general's office.
"Parliament has not been provided with a full appraisal of the capability of the Canadian Forces," said yesterday's report card on the Defence Department by Auditor General Denis Desautels.
The report makes particular note of the fact that the House of Commons public accounts committee recommended that Defence provide Parliament with a detailed assessment of the military's capability and whether it had the means to buy expensive new equipment to meet its goals.
However, the government rejected the recommendation as impractical.
A senior auditor general official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that decision is indicative of the growing political trend in Ottawa by the Chretien Liberals to control the flow of, and access to, information that could be politically damaging to them.
The lack of a detailed assessment of the forces is depriving the public of information necessary for an informed debate on whether military spending is adequate, the official said.
"The government is not providing the public with essential information to be able to discuss the highest level of defence management issues: Is the budget big enough?" said the official said. "I think there is a culture of secrecy."
The official drew a direct parallel to Monday's scathing report by Information Commissioner John Reid, who lambasted Prime Minister Jean Chretien's top staff for undermining the Access To Information law by intimidating his investigators when they tried to uncover hidden documents.
"Our recent political culture (says) why give the opposition and critics information that would be used to criticize you," the official said. "Nobody in our political culture wants to step up to the line and say, 'here's an objective portrait of where our department should be.' "
The auditor general noted the Defence department annually lacks about $750 million to buy equipment and maintain a level of readiness.
The Liberal government cut defence spending by 23 per cent between 1994 and 1998. Although it has given the military a modest spending increase, including a four-year, $1.9-billion increase in last year's budget, the Chief of Defence Staff, Gen. Maurice Baril, recently warned that he would have to cut as many as 3,000 troops to balance his books.
Gen. Baril needs to pay for new hardware, such as maritime helicopters and high-tech upgrades for existing equipment so Canada can remain compatible with its NATO allies.
"According to departmental business plans, the department would require $11 billion in capital funds over the next five years, but would receive only $6.5 billion, resulting in a $4.5-billion shortage," the audit states.
As they have tried to find ways to do more with less, forces brass have been "hampered by a lack of adequate policy guidance, clear priorities and performance information. ... We also found that other countries were doing better at linking capital spending to policy objectives and were providing more information to their legislatures."
However, unlike the practice of other countries, the Liberals rejected giving Parliament a "comprehensive defence review and assessment," saying it was impractical or "already addressed by various public documents."
The auditor general said the other public documents on which the Liberals chose to rely were filled with platitudes with little useful information.
"Only vaguely worded statements are provided, such as 'we have exceeded expectations,' 'the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces are working hard to meet the challenges they are currently facing' ..."
"The chief of Defence staff's annual report on the state of the Canadian Forces does not assess the overall state of equipment and provides only a list of new equipment received."
Meanwhile, a separate audit uncovered major shortcoming in how the military managed major equipment purchase projects. "Only one project out of six met our expectations for risk management," the audit says.
The audit cited one case in which a $750,000 vehicle-launched grenade had to be scrapped because it proved "potentially lethal to the troops using it."
- 30 -