OTTAWA -- The Treasury Board says that the cost of Canada’s military mission in Afghanistan for the next two years will be $1.35-billion higher than projected a year ago by the Defence Department.

Those revised estimates of the incremental costs of the Canadian Forces mission in Afghanistan are posted on the Treasury Board website.

The Defence Department, citing national security provisions, censored an Access to Information request by the federal NDP that asked for those figures three weeks ago.

The Treasury Board says the military mission will cost $822-million in the fiscal year 2009-10 and $943-million in 2010-11. It also estimates that the mission will cost $178-million in fiscal 2011-12, when Canadian troops are expected to pull out of combat roles in Afghanistan. It’s the first time figures for that year have been made available.

“The left hand and the right hand seem to have different strategies here. It’s time they came clean and let the public know what was going on,” said NDP defence critic Jack Harris.

“It’s pretty strange. You’ve got secret numbers for national security reasons, then they put them on their website.”

These latest estimates by Treasury Board are far larger than the Defence Department predicted in April 2008 when it released information to the NDP that showed a $261-million price tag for 2009-10 and $150 million for 2010-11.

When the NDP asked for those figures again this year, they were rebuffed under Section 15 of the Access to Information Act which allows an exemption in “the defence of Canada or any state allied” in the withholding information.

Mr. Harris said it is also curious that the Treasury Board figures show for the first time an estimate for the fiscal year 2011-12 when the combat mission is due to end.

He said that suggests the military has a plan for operations in Afghanistan after the planned withdrawal date.

“They’ve got those plans in place. Let’s put on the table what they’re spending that for and have a real debate and discussion [about] what we’re going to be doing there after the troops come back,” he said.

“The whole point of asking for these numbers is to get the facts out there so we can have a discussion and debate about that. They apparently didn’t want that.”

The fact that the projections have shot up sharply since last year also raises questions about the military’s ability to plan its future spending, said Mr. Harris.

“The auditor general has already criticized the government for bad financial management in terms of their ability to actually project numbers and put them forward,” he said. “Now we’re in a situation where there’s inconsistent numbers being offered to the public, and it’s time to come clean.”

During last fall’s federal election campaign, Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page released a report that suggested the full cost of the mission could reach $18.1- billion by 2011. Mr. Page’s study took into account the long-term costs of caring for physically and emotionally damaged soldiers.

The NDP has filed a complaint with the information commissioner to force the release of the figures for 2009-10, as well as for 2010-11 and 2011-12.

The military defines the incremental cost as “the cost for personnel that would not have been incurred if there was no CF operation. Specifically, incremental costs include the additional cost to deploy troops and equipment, provide ongoing maintenance and support during the applicable operation and any operation specific training required for the operation.”