News

Canada's mission in Afghanistan has cost billions more than what the federal government has reported to the public and it will amount to between $14-billion and $18-billion by the time the troops leave the country in 2011, parliamentary budget officer Kevin Page reported Thursday.

The costs – which will run about $200-million a month for the next four years and, by 2011, add up to $1,500 for every household in the country – sparked a new round of debate on Afghanistan in the closing days of the election campaign.

Mr. Page said the extra costs will not push Canada into deficit this year. But his report concluded there could be unexpected bills for the mission in coming years, and because the Conservatives have budgeted for slim surpluses and the economy appears to be souring, “uncovering” those costs is “critical.”

Opposition leaders accused Conservative Leader Stephen Harper of misleading Canadians about the true costs of the war. “Stephen Harper again failed to be transparent and accountable to Canadians,” Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion said.

NDP Leader Jack Layton said it's money Canadians could use better.

“Let's be clear here, there's upwards of $5-billion that otherwise could have been used in other ways.”

peaking to reporters in Sudbury, Mr. Layton added: “I just simply think it's wrong that a government would not be truthful about the costs of a war.”

Mr. Harper, however, insisted that no one should be surprised at big price tags for Afghanistan. He said Canadians are not going to begrudge the money that helps protect Canadian soldiers fighting to rebuild Afghanistan.

“The costs here are not unknown. We all know the costs of this mission were very high,” he told reporters during a campaign stop in Richmond, B.C.

Mr. Page's report, however, indicates that the government's estimates did not tally up all the costs of the war.

The government had previously estimated that the Afghanistan military mission had cost $8.1-billion to date, including things like soldiers' salaries that would have been paid anyway. And it had estimated that it spent $3.8-billion in “incremental” costs – extra money that was spent because of the Afghanistan mission alone, over and above what would have normally been spent on the military.

Mr. Page's report concluded that those incremental costs for the military mission have so far been billions higher than Ottawa's $3.8-billion figure – somewhere between $5.85-billion and $7.45-billion.

And when other costs, such as future veterans' benefits and foreign aid, are added in, the extra costs of Canada's involvement in Afghanistan have been about $7.7-billion to $10.5-billion.

By 2011, Mr. Page's office concluded, that total cost will be between $13.9-billion and $18.1-billion.

He did not accuse the government of deliberately cooking the books, but his estimate of military costs included significant sums left out by Ottawa, such as the extra wear and tear on military equipment in Afghanistan.

His broader estimate for costs also included up to $2-billion in veterans benefits that will have to be paid out in future, and $1-billion in aid.

Of the total costs, about three-quarters was spent on military operations, between 11 and 20 per cent on veterans benefits, and between 9 and 12 per cent on aid. Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe said the figures showed that not enough emphasis had been placed on development aid and reconstruction.

And Mr. Page's report indicates that federal government accounting on Afghanistan is a mess; he told reporters it “has not met any appropriate standard.

“There's a lack of transparency and also some inconsistencies in the numbers,” he said.

In addition, Mr. Page said the Defence Department did not give him information – even figures like the numbers of troops in Afghanistan or what equipment is there – that he needed for a more precise estimate.

The report found that while MPs vote on spending for Afghanistan, the real costs might eventually come in higher than what they have approved.

With a report from Steve Chase in Richmond, B.C.