What we have on slide 4 is what's in supplementary estimates (C) itself, voted items of $1.5 billion. We have a decrease of $0.1 billion for a total of $1.4 billion.
I will take this opportunity to remind members of the distinction between budgetary and non-budgetary items. Budgetary items are items that affect the bottom line of the government. Non-budgetary items are things like loans, investment advances, where if all goes as planned, we would not end up incurring expense. We can talk later about Canada student loan writeoffs if that's of use, because that's a really good example on this front.
Statutory items in supplementary estimates (C) are not voted on by parliamentarians. They are here for information. We have a variety of changes in the estimates on that front, but it's worth paying a bit of attention to as we go through this deck.
Slide 5 is if you're curious about what the estimates total looks like. I always warn people about comparing supplementary estimates (A) for one year versus (A) for the previous year, because there are timing differences, but when you get to the end of the cycle, it is worth the time to step back and see what the picture looks like this year versus last year. If you compare 2012-13 versus 2011-12, you will see that we have voted $98.6 billion in 2012-13 versus $99.9 billion in the previous year. On the statutory front, you'll see a slight increase. We are at $160.4 billion versus $159.7 billion the previous year. Overall for the total, $259 billion in authorities including supplementary estimates (C) versus $259.6 billion in the previous year. It's worth understanding the difference between voted and statutory here.
Where I would spend most of my time is on slide 6, Mr. Chair. Those are the major voted items you'll see in these supplementary estimates (C). As I mentioned, on the previous slide in the $1.5 billion in voted, there are some really major items that make up that amount. I'll just walk through those one by one, if that's of use to the committee.
Under National Defence, for the Canadian Forces service income security insurance plan, there's the amount of $726 million. That's a payment that's going to Manulife as a result of an agreed-upon settlement. There was an agreement to pay back some amounts where we had offset veterans disability amounts versus the Canadian Forces disability amount. They're now being kept whole so that agreement's been reached. Manulife had advanced the payments to the members receiving them so we're now topping up Manulife for that amount.
There is the amount of $438 million, again for National Defence. There are two items in there. You'll be familiar with part of it. We have spoken to this committee before about the elimination of severance benefits as part of the collective agreements. National Defence is part of that process as well, so in that $438 million there is roughly $200 million for severance. The balance of that relates to the Canada First defence strategy.
There is the HRSDC writeoff of unrecoverable student loans of $231 million. This is a great example of budgetary versus non-budgetary. When these loans are issued, they are non-budgetary because we expect to recover them. When we get to a point where we are writing them off because the six-year statute of limitations has expired, they now become budgetary because we're taking an expense for the writeoff of the amounts. There's $231 million for that. I'm happy to speak more about that if it's of interest.
There's the amount of $144 million, for National Defence again, for the training mission. It relates to a NATO mission. It's for training for both the Afghan National Army as well as the police force.
On Foreign Affairs, the amount of $108 million for the London high commission is an interesting one. In that case, they're co-locating or combining two buildings into one. Currently we occupy two buildings in London. Some space adjacent to one of the buildings is being bought so they can be housed in one location. This amount is really flow-through financing. When we sell the second building, we will recover this amount, but we're using this amount to buy the adjacent property and get going on the consolidation there.
On the Copenhagen Accord, I think you may have seen before that there are some amounts for CIDA, Environment Canada, and Parks Canada related to that agreement.
On CIDA, I should mention the $100 million for child protection, maternal and newborn health. This is not new money. CIDA is moving their funding mechanism. We're going from a contribution to a grant, but because of that we have to go to Parliament to get approval to increase the grant ceiling. So it's not new money here, but we're moving from contribution to grant.
Last, we have Public Works for $85 million. I understand that Public Works is scheduled to appear shortly after us, so I'll let them explain their bit here.
On the statutory front, slide 7, again just for information purposes, Human Resources enhanced employment insurance benefits relates to budget 2009. The intent there is to hold the EI account harmless for the additional benefits. Initially $2.9 billion was set aside, if I recall, so this is to top that up to cover off all the expenses there.
For Human Resources again, on guaranteed income supplements, we're increasing the forecast by $143 million. You can split that into two things. One is an increase in the number of recipients by about 13,000. The balance of $74 million relates to an increase in the actual benefit payment per recipient. So there are two pieces to that.
On the disability savings grant program, again from Human Resources, we have $115 million. The issue there is they've changed the criteria to allow carry back. It's much like you would have if you think about income tax and the carry forward, carry back of losses. They basically expanded it to allow carry back, which is going to increase the amounts paid out. There's $115 million there.
For Human Resources again, on old age security, it's $105 million. You can split that again between an increase in the number of recipients by about 6,000 as well as an increase in the actual entitlement.
Finally, there's a decrease in the forecast related to unmatured debt—so that's interest—of $762 million, which relates to interest rates.
On slide 8, we have the horizontal items. Just to remind you, the horizontal items are items where we have more than one department receiving funding. We dedicate some paper up front in the supplementary estimates (C) document to go through horizontal items so members and parliamentarians can see which departments are receiving money. We do have the list of those who are receiving funds through supplementary estimates (C).
The Copenhagen Accord I've already touched on.
On the international crisis response for $60 million, that's a change in the way we're actually funding that. That is supposed to be and is always intended for things like earthquakes and food emergencies around the world. With the process we had in place before, it was very time consuming for CIDA and other organizations to get their money. Given that it's a crisis response, we thought it would be better to actually put the money in the reference levels. In case there is a crisis, the department can actually take whatever required action they need to on a faster basis.
The other ones I'll flag for you here.
The modernization of the pay administration is for Public Works, in the amount of $26 million. They, as well as Shared Services Canada, are coming up next so you may want to have questions about that.
Finally, government advertising programs, I know, get some attention so I'll mention it. There's $1 million in here for advertising. That's totally related to Canada Revenue Agency around advertising for tax credits, deductions, and rules.
On slide 9, I did want to talk again about the budget 2012 spending review. We have spoken about this before, but you will see in the supplementary estimates (C) a line that says, “Less: Funds available within the Vote”. You may recall last year when we tabled the main estimates it was in advance of the budget and we did not have the budget 2012 reductions. As departments come in for new spending, if we have moneys that were in their main estimates that they no longer have access to spend, we do a netting of the two. That's happened again here, and we've highlighted for you where we've netted off those amounts. In supplementary estimates (B) we had a netting of $483 million. In supplementary estimates (C) we have another $58 million. If a department does not come in for additional funds, we simply freeze the money centrally and put the controls in place that way. Basically, there's no point giving a department access to new money if they can't spend what they already have, and that's what this netting is all about.
Finally, on slide 10, before I pass it over to the chief financial officer for Treasury Board Secretariat, there is $1.5 billion in voted expenditures. I did highlight some of the major changes to statutory forecasts for you. Not all departments are in here. We have 49 departments and agencies here. Again, if you're not looking for additional funds, there's no need to be in this document, so there are only 49 departments in here. If you're looking for a certain department and you don't see it, it's because they've not come forward with additional spending requirements.
As a final reminder, at the end of the supplementary estimates (C) is the draft of the appropriation bill. It is the appropriation bill itself that Parliament approves. These estimates documents are simply to help support your study of that, but you should spend some time looking at the appropriation bill itself because that is what Parliament approves.
With that, I'll turn it over to Christine Walker to speak quickly about Treasury Board Secretariat itself.
