CF Funding Discussion - A Merged Thread

[Edward Campbell]

... The unfortunate reality in alot of these cases is that if we dont spend the money this year, we wont get it next year ...

Actually, it doesn’t work that way.

“Next year’s” budget was sent to parliament 18 months ago. The budget is ”grossed up” at each level – it is very, very had to figure out who spent too much or too little.

But, March madness procurement does occur – because enough people believe, incorrectly, that spending 100% of the budget matters. I was in the room, in NDHQ, (back circa 1985) when one leader -  a Navy two star – put a stop to it by the simple expedient of telling four one stars and me that our PERs depended, in some respect, on being good, sound managers of the taxpayers’ money. Each quarter, on the admiral’s behalf, I coordinated a spending projection review between four staff divisions and arranged for “transfers” between them so that we spent as much money as we productively and responsibly could in that year. What could not be spent well was, at the end of the third quarter of the FY, offered to other parts of the HQ and to the field force. What could still not be spent was “turned in” which meant that, after the fact, the good folks in the Comptroller’s branch used our surpluses to offset overspending in other parts of the CF.

But old myths die hard.

 

[aesop081]

Actually, it doesn’t work that way.

Fair enough, i have never had the chance to manage things at the same level as you have E.R.

All i know is that when i was responsible for spending in one of my former units, if i didnt use it all by March 31st, i got my peepee slapped and then got the coresponding amount reduced the following year.

Thanks for clearing things up. One more myth busted.

 

[GAP]

Having worked in school boards, municipal governments, provincial colleges, and minor lower management rolls of the Federal Government.....if a category was not entirely spent, even though a budget is nothing more than a guess about the future year, the amount of that category was reduced by the amount that was not spent, unless you could justify a status quo for the forthcoming year....in only two cases I encountered were we allowed an increase, and that was because a capital project was coming on line...

 

[2 Cdo]

Fair enough, i have never had the chance to manage things at the same level as you have E.R.

All i know is that when i was responsible for spending in one of my former units, if i didnt use it all by March 31st, i got my peepee slapped and then got the coresponding amount reduced the following year.

Thanks for clearing things up. One more myth busted.

I had the same thing occur as a storeman in battalion. The mantra was, and still is, "Spend it or lose it".

 

[The Bread Guy]

Thanks for the bird's eye view of $, E.R. - I, too, have witnessed the "spend it or lose it" syndrome at the lowly levels I've inhabited.

We could learn alot from Toyota when it comes to continual improvement e.g., get away from flavour of the month , hero driven approaches and adopt a long term process of incremental change - that involves everyone in the process - to get the results we need to survive into an uncertain future...

This would be the ideal solution, but it's stymied by the fact that the political masters/mistresses look ahead only in terms of terms (no more than 4 years) instead of decades needed.  Another political factor is the desire for a "new, improved shiny thing" to be shown off, as opposed to "we're continuing the same thing that's been happening for x years because it's the right thing to do".

 

[retiredgrunt45]

I think that some senior people at the political centre in Ottawa (PCO, Finance and TB) are sympathetic to DND’s position that its inability to manage its own affairs is because it cannot predict or control its operational assignments and it is not allowed (by the Govt of Canada’s system) to guesstimate and request contingency funding. There is also, I hear, some suggestion that requiring the government of the day to pay for each and every military adventure operation will impose some much needed policy discipline on working politicians and their back-room strategists.

If such a plan were to be implemented then the Canada First Defence Strategy would make more sense. 

Now if only we could get the people that matter, to listen to this today, we would be in much better shape for tomorrow.

How many times have I heard when I was attached to my old reserve unit, "Sorry we have to cancel training for the next few months because we have to money, but hey lets go out and buy some new toys for the office to get rid of that exes cash". This forced units to spend money on frivolous junk, instead of being allowed to use for future training. This whole system has to be changed and until it is, we're going to be marking time and getting nowhere.  This starts with the Privy council and Senior bureaucrat Kevin Lynch, who is no big fan of the military and his distrust for our so called inability to handle our own affairs.

In my view, heres one of the problems: http://www.pco-bcp.gc.ca/index.asp?lang=eng&page=information&sub=publications&doc=Role/role2007_e.htm#8

 

[Edward Campbell]

...
All i know is that when i was responsible for spending in one of my former units, if i didnt use it all by March 31st, i got my peepee slapped and then got the coresponding amount reduced the following year.
...

I understand, and so that good admiral for whom I worked; it infuriated him but he (we) played the hand he was dealt and we tried to tidy up our little corner while we occupied it.

All it really takes to stop this nonsense is a few good, harsh words from a few very annoyed very, very senior officers, but they all seem to be too busy with transformation, etc.

 

[Edward Campbell]

...
This starts with the Privy council and Senior bureaucrat Kevin Lynch, who is no big fan of the military and his distrust for our so called inability to handle our own affairs.
...

Indeed, and see this. But the problem of the centre mistrusting DND's (mis)management predates Mr. Lynch. In fact, if there is any truth in the rumours I have heard over the past wee while, the PCO is sympathetic to DND's planning/funding dilemma and is casting about for a 'work around.'

Time will tell but, honestly, I cannot see any alternative (at least none as simple, tidy and, well, elegant) that will avoid disarmament by stealth - which the PCO has consistently and vigorously opposed since 1969.