Mr. Chair, if I may, I would like to read these few short paragraphs to make sure that everyone is on the same page. I hope that the members of the Conservative Party will cooperate so that we can delve further into the matter and stop claiming that there are no outstanding issues. I think this will shed light on many things. I am not convinced that we have gotten all the answers. The letter reads as follows:
Dear Mr. Volpe: This letter is further to the Public Accounts Committee hearing held on 7 December 2010 regarding Chapter 6 of my fall 2010 report, Acquisition of Military Helicopters. I am concerned that there were a few areas of testimony provided by officials from the Department of National Defence (DND) that could lead the committee to conclude that the Department was disagreeing with the facts as presented in our report. I provide the following information for further clarification. Chinook Helicopter Cost Increases During the hearing, DND officials stated that the increase in cost between the submissions to the Treasury Board in 2006 and 2009 was about 10%. On the other hand, our report indicated that "Canadian-required modifications increased the cost of each aircraft by 70% more than initially quoted by Boeing in early 2006".
That is in paragraph 6.62.
I will now skip to the next paragraph in the letter to speed things up.
Impact on Training and Operations During the meeting, DND officials indicated that they do not anticipate cost overruns to have any effect on operations or training. However, our chapter noted that the Department has observed that it may have to take measures to reduce the pressure on the maintenance budget because it had not sought additional funding for in-service support for the Cyclone. These measures include reducing the number of anticipated flying hours (paragraph 6.39). This observation was based on DND's own assessment. Minutes of Program Management Board meetings mentioned on a number of occasions that training and operational flying hours may have to be reduced given that the costs for personnel, operations, and maintenance for the new Cyclone would be $1.1 billion more than those for the Sea King helicopter.
I will stop there, Mr. Chair. From these few paragraphs, it is perfectly clear that some things may not have been correctly explained by certain individuals. Perhaps the information was not presented properly, or perhaps certain individuals should justify the information they gave us on December 7, 2010. We heard that that would be a pointless use of resources, yet we are talking about costs that are already in the billions. Furthermore, there may be a need to reduce the operations budget and flying hours. I think we have reason to further question the officials for clarification regarding their statements and those of the Auditor General, and in relation to the letter we received further to the committee's December 7, 2010 meeting.
I think that is pretty clear, and the government members should just accept that we need to pursue this and spend another meeting looking at these issues. Let's not forget what I said in the beginning, Mr. Chair. I was assured that, if necessary, the committee would hold more meetings in connection with this file, which involves billions of dollars. And today, I am just as convinced as I was before that it is indeed necessary.
Thank you.