Canadian Armed Forces Recruitment and Retention—National Defence

Opening Statement to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts

Canadian Armed Forces Recruitment and Retention—National Defence

(Chapter 5—2016 Fall Reports of the Auditor General of Canada)

3 May 2017

Michael Ferguson, CPA, CA
FCA (New Brunswick)
Auditor General of Canada

Mr. Chair, thank you for this opportunity to discuss our 2016 fall report on Canadian Armed Forces recruitment and retention. Joining me today is Gordon Stock, the Principal responsible for the audit.

In our audit, we examined how National Defence had recruited, trained, and retained the Regular Force members it needed. Overall, we found that the Regular Forces had about 4,200 fewer fully trained members than they needed.

Although the Regular Force had determined the number of recruits it needed, its recruiting plans and targets were reduced to fit National Defence’s capacity to process applications and train new members. National Defence met its overall reduced recruiting target in 2016; however, it accomplished this by exceeding enrollment targets for some occupations while leaving other occupations short-handed.

We also found that the Canadian Armed Forces had set 25 percent as its target for women in its ranks, but that its recruiting efforts only maintained the representation of women at 14 percent. Furthermore, about half of the women in the Regular Force were concentrated in six occupations.

In a number of instances, we found that the Canadian Armed Forces' recruiting process did not fit the needs of applicants and caused delays. Examples included delays for medical screening and delays for assessing whether applicants’ previous education could reduce their training requirements. In some cases, National Defence closed files and lost qualified candidates who were still interested in enrolling.

Retaining qualified and effective personnel reduces the demand for, and costs of, recruiting and training new members. In the 2015–16 fiscal year, almost one quarter of occupations had attrition rates higher than 10 percent. National Defence had developed a retention strategy in 2009 but never fully implemented it. At the time of our audit, the Canadian Armed Forces planned to develop a revised retention strategy by June 2018.

In our 2002 and 2006 audits, we found similar problems. These included setting recruiting targets lower than the needs and having no comprehensive plan to attract more applicants, especially for chronically understaffed occupations. We believe that without significant changes to recruiting, the Canadian Armed Forces will not have the members it needs in the future.

We made seven recommendations in our audit report. National Defence has responded that it agrees with each of the recommendations and is in the process of addressing a number of them.

Mr. Chair, this concludes my opening remarks. We would be pleased to answer any questions the Committee may have. Thank you.