Psst! The Conservatives say the Afghan mission will cost $11.3 billion

I know the government has nothing to do with the order in which news clippings appear in my inbox, but the order of these three clippings does seem fittingly apropos:


Now which of these stories do you think the government wants to downplay? If you guessed the one sandwiched between the two big-ticket spending announcements, then you would get a gold watch if we hadn't had our budget cut, so you'll have to settle for a kudos instead.

Because hey, what better time to release your first full accounting of the cost of the Afghan war, and that you were $3.3 billion off on your earlier estimate, then a day you're also announcing flashy new anti-crime legislation in GangLand(TM) BC, investing millions in Vancouver-area rapid transit, and creating an emergency $3 billion fund for stimulus?

Here's the story they'd rather you not read above the fold on the front page tomorrow, or hear about in the first segment of the news tonight:

Ottawa pegs direct cost of Afghan mission at $11.3 billion
(Afghan-Cda-Cost)
Source: The Canadian Press
Feb 26, 2009 13:33

------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------

PANJWAII DISTRICT, Afghanistan _ The federal government has quietly revealed the direct cost of Canada's 10-year involvement in Afghanistan _ an estimated $11.3 billion.

It's the first complete fiscal accounting of the mission, which Prime Minister Stephen Harper had previously suggested would cost about $8 billion by the time it ends in 2011.

The figures include estimates for the involvement of the Department of Foreign Affairs, the Canadian International Development Agency, Corrections Canada and the RCMP.

The incremental cost estimate does not include post-2011 disability and health care costs for soldiers wounded in battle or diagnosed with post-traumatic stress.

The forecast runs considerably less than the $13.9 billion to $18.3 billion estimate the parliamentary budget officer came up with last October at the height of the federal election campaign.

The new federal numbers suggest almost 80 per cent of the price tag _ $9 billion _ will be for military operations and hardware.

Oh, and perhaps the defence committee (or public accounts?) could summon Peter MacKay and Kevin Page and ask them about this:

The forecast runs considerably less than the $13.9 billion to $18.3 billion estimate the parliamentary budget officer came up with last October at the height of the federal election campaign.

You'll recall, of course, that was a report the Conservatives would much rather you hadn't seen during the campaign.

So why is the Conservatives' estimate so much lower than the estimate prepared by the independent parliamentary budget officer, a position they themselves created?

Inquiring minds, etc.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers