Roughly 60 billion has been pledged to be spent in 2025-2026 for canadian defence, of this 60 billion what has been spent

1. What the “roughly CAD 60 billion” figure refers to — headline versus budget authorities

What became shorthand in coverage — figures like CAD 62.7 billion for 2025–26 — combines previously planned defence spending plus a June 9th announcement adding about CAD 9 billion in budgetary authorities and additional defence‑related amounts across other departments, producing a new total in the low‑to‑mid‑60s for 2025–26 ^{[1] [2]}. Journalists and analysts then folded that into a larger, five‑year CAD 81.8‑billion pledge in Budget 2025, which includes the June top‑up but is presented as a multi‑year envelope rather than a single fiscal‑year execution plan ^{[3] [4]}.

2. Authorities vs. actual cash spent — PBO flags the information gap

The PBO’s analyses emphasize a crucial distinction: authorities Parliament must approve (the Supplementary Estimates) provide legal spending permission, but authorities do not equal cash disbursed, nor do they reveal whether timelines were accelerated or new projects created ^[1]. The PBO is actively seeking detail from the government to map planned authorities to projects and to confirm whether the 2% NATO target for 2025–26 will be met in practice ^[1].

3. Government accounting and public reporting remain fragmented

Government releases describe a cash increase of “over $9 billion” announced in June and list planned departmental allocations for 2025–26, but they do not provide clear, audited run‑rates of cash actually paid out by March 31, 2026 in the open reporting cited here ^{[6] [1]}. Budget 2025 itself bundles large defence commitments into lump sums across years and explicitly lacks a detailed year‑by‑year breakdown for the five‑year horizon in the materials journalists were able to access ^{[4] [3]}.

4. Independent analysts see plausible totals but warn on details

Think tanks and defence commentators repeat the headline CAD 62.7‑billion figure for 2025–26 and note it would bring Canada to NATO’s 2% benchmark for that fiscal year, but several sources caution the “how” matters: whether spending is newly funded, rephased, or transferred from other accounts will shape actual delivery and equipment acquisition timelines ^{[2] [5]}. The PBO’s capital‑spending update shows an expanded long‑term capital plan but also documents historical shortfalls between planned and actual capital outlays, underlining the execution risk ^[5].

5. What the media coverage adds — large envelopes, few line items

CBC, POLITICO, JANES and other outlets note that Budget 2025 presents a significant increase in defence commitments (CAD 81.8 billion over five years) but that the budget text and government briefings are “light on specifics” and often use lump sums rather than project‑level schedules — a reporting gap that constrains public scrutiny of what has actually been spent versus what is merely authorized ^{[4] [7] [8]}.

6. How to interpret “what has been spent” given available documents

Available sources document new authorities and announced increases (the June CAD 9 billion top‑up and the broader CAD 81.8 billion five‑year package), but they do not publish a reconciled, audited figure for cash disbursements out of the 2025–26 pledge as of any cut‑off date; PBO and budget notes explicitly call for more granular mapping to confirm actual spending and timing ^{[1] [4] [5]}. Therefore, a precise “spent so far” number for the CAD ~60 billion pledge is not present in current reporting — authorities exist, execution data is not fully disclosed in the cited sources ^{[1] [4]}.

7. Competing interpretations and the implicit agenda

Government messaging frames the increase as necessary to meet NATO commitments and to grow Canadian defence industry capacity, an argument that foregrounds sovereignty and industrial policy ^{[6] [3]}. Critics and independent analysts stress execution risk and the need for project‑level transparency to ensure money turns into capability rather than commitments on paper — an accountability tension central to the debate ^{[5] [1]}.

Conclusion — available next steps for verification

To move from announced authorities to an accountable “spent” figure, request from the Department of National Defence and the Treasury Board: ^[9] a reconciliation of Supplementary Estimates authorities to actual cash outlays in 2025–26, ^[10] project‑level spending by quarter for major equipment programs, and ^[11] PBO’s follow‑up mapping once the government provides requested details ^{[1] [5]}. Current public sources document the announcements and authorities but do not publish a definitive, audited tally of cash spent from the 2025–26 pledge ^{[1] [4]}.