I've already mentioned some of those causes. The causality was due in some part to procurements that did not proceed on time through circumstances that I would describe as being beyond the control of the Department of National Defence.
However, just to put it in perspective, this is an aberration, because in the last fiscal year, 2009-10, the residual lapse was $123.5 million, which was well within the carry-over that is permitted under the Treasury Board guidelines.
Sir, the restrictions placed upon the Department of National Defence are quite unlike those of any other department of government, in that--and Mr. McCallum would be aware--the carry-over permitted at the Department of National Defence is 2%. With a budget now in excess of $21 billion, it is a large challenge, to say the least, to ensure that your annual spending is within that 2% for carry-over.
Every other department of government is at 5%, and the Department of National Defence actually just went to 2.5% in the last fiscal year, I believe. Someone with much more fiscal acumen than I have described this as the equivalent of trying to land a 747 on an aircraft carrier. It is a very challenging undertaking to budget your amount for the fiscal year within that 2%--now 2.5%--carry-over.
Our accounting officers, our deputy minister, and certainly Mr. Lindsey are working very hard within those parameters, and they're working hard to ensure that the Auditor General and others we have brought in to look at this situation, including independent auditors from Deloitte and Touche...to see that we are transparent, that we are open, and that we are complying with the Treasury Board guidelines.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.