Botched military procurement is hardly unique to Canada. Delays and cost overruns when buying fighting ships, aircraft and other big-ticket tools of war seem to be the norm around the world rather than the exception. But even so, Canada’s record of drawn-out deals and procurement snafus is extraordinary.

Consider this country’s disgraceful failure to replace its decrepit Sea King helicopters. Brian Mulroney first commissioned new choppers in 1990, only to have the purchase scuttled by Jean Chrétien. Paul Martin set out in 2004 to buy Sikorsky Cyclone helicopters but that effort was crippled by delay. Today, after decades of effort and millions of wasted dollars, Canada still flies Sea Kings that are now more than a half-century old.

Then there’s the folly of buying four bargain-basement submarines from Britain (complete with leaks, rust and cracked valves); Ottawa’s problem-riddled plan to purchase new F-35 jets from the United States; and a host of other costly blunders.

If military procurement were a battlefield, this country’s effort would be the equivalent of Custer’s Last Stand — irrational, discredited and utterly hopeless.

A new report from two highly respected institutes helps to explain what’s gone wrong, particularly since 2007. It offers solid recommendations for change. And it should be essential reading for all in Ottawa who are responsible for equipping Canada’s fighting men and women.

While smart procurement was always a challenge, this new study by the Macdonald-Laurier Institute and the Conference of Defence Associations Institute warns that problems are growing worse as Ottawa ramps up military spending. Fewer bureaucrats now process procurements, and they’re not as expert as they once were. Yet the need for their service has soared.

Study author Dave Perry, a senior defence analyst, noted that the material acquisition group in the Department of National Defence numbered roughly 9,000 people in the 1980s. That’s been cut in half. And there’s a growing knowledge gap.

Senior people departed, especially while the Liberals were in power, leaving “the current workforce with limited experience in complex procurements,” wrote Perry. The knowledge-base for shipbuilding, in particular, has disappeared.

Yet the need for smart procurement has never been greater with the Conservative government embarking on an aggressive acquisition program. It’s not being delivered. According to Perry, the military has failed to spend, as intended, about 23 per cent of $7.2 billion allocated by Parliament since 2007-08. The historical average for this leftover category is just 2 per cent.

It’s troubling because each delay in acquiring necessary gear erodes the military’s purchasing power. Inflation eats up money that should go toward equipment, leaving those on the front line with less of what they need.

It doesn’t help that, to enhance accountability, reporting requirements for capital projects increased by 50 per cent over the last five years alone, loading more work on staff. It’s all too much. The bureaucracy that remains simply can’t handle the huge challenge of managing multiple, large and complex procurements, Perry wrote. “It is simply unreasonable to expect that fewer people can cope with a significant expansion in workload.”

In an effort to improve Canada’s dismal record on military acquisition, the federal government announced a new Defence Procurement Strategy last February. That remains a work in progress, wrote Perry, adding an effective workforce is essential to handle purchases in good time and in good order. His recommendations include boosting the number of people doing this work, improved training opportunities and creation of a special career path within Canada’s military for procurement specialists.

It’s important to get this right. Costly delays are shortchanging those standing on guard for this country. They risk their lives. The least the rest of us can do is see that they’re properly equipped.