Madam Speaker, every day, Canada and our allies count on the Canadian Armed Forces to safeguard our citizens and uphold the rules-based international order that underpins global security and prosperity. As parliamentarians, we need to ensure that the talented professionals of our defence team have the resources they need to keep pace in an increasingly complex threat environment.
Here at home and across the globe, we are seeing the results of a great power competition; the effects of the pandemic on the recruitment, retention and readiness of the CAF members; and the role that climate change plays on defence and security, including in our Arctic region. We need to account for these issues and make sure that we are staying one step ahead if we are to remain strong at home, secure in North America and engaged in the world. Therefore, it is for good reason the Department of National Defence has one of the largest operating and capital budgets in government.
Budget 2022 contains a variety of new investments for our military. We have added $8 billion in new funding on top of funding already forecasted in the departmental plan and in Canada's defence policy, which, as members know, we will be updating to better reflect the evolving security environment.
The hon. member referenced in her original question a recent analysis the Parliamentary Budget Officer released in budget 2022. In the analysis, the PBO commented on the difference between the forecast of the defence spending in a graph in budget 2022 and the forecast in National Defence's most recent departmental plan. However, the budget and the departmental plan are separate documents with two different ways of presenting future spending. This approach is consistent across all departments as part of the expenditure reporting cycle to Parliament. In fact, the $15-billion difference suggested by the member opposite is not a discrepancy at all.
Federal budget 2022 outlined forecasted spending and the departmental plans outline what has been approved at any given time by the Treasury Board and Parliament. As a result, the National Defence departmental plan reflects only capital spending that has been fully approved through the Treasury Board's submission process at the time the report is prepared. The budget, on the other hand, contains future spending not yet approved by Treasury Board, hence the difference in the estimated numbers.
For large departments like DND, this difference appears exaggerated because we only access the money when we need it. In this particular case, the difference is mainly composed of forecasted capital spending and expenses related to military operations. More precisely, the largest difference between the estimated DND planned spending in the budget graph versus the departmental plan is the major SSE capital projects for which DND has not yet sought Treasury Board or parliamentary approvals for the associated supply, which means the associated funding is not in DND's reference levels.
As for CAF operations, the associated incremental funding is only assessed in-year and thus not reflected as planned spending in DND's departmental plan. That would include Operation Impact, Operation Reassurance, Operation Unifier, Operation Artemis and peace support operations.
Canadians can rest assured that the department is committed to responsible stewardship and transparent spending as we work to keep Canadians safe here at home and protect and promote Canadian interests around the world.