Arctic Offshore Patrol Ships: Tory Plan Should Be Sunk, Senator Says

Arctic Offshore Patrol Ships

First Posted: 03/15/2012 4:04 am Updated: 03/16/2012 9:28 am

OTTAWA - At least $1.4 billion is expected to be carved out of spending at National Defence in the coming fiscal year, but a longtime critic says some politically-motivated programs should not survive Finance Minister Jim Flaherty's budget axe.

The coming March 29 budget is expected to see $19.8 billion set aside for the military, a seven per cent decrease compared with last year's defence spending plan, according to preliminary federal estimates.

And those forecasts do not reflect the five or 10 per cent reductions the Conservatives have asked all federal departments to deliver.

Liberal Senator Colin Kenny, the former chair of the senate defence and security committee, said if the Harper government wants to make appropriate defence cuts it would look at its pet project of Arctic Offshore Patrol Ships.

The $4.3 billion program was established to build between six and eight light naval icebreakers — slated to be the first military vessels constructed in Halifax under the recently announced national shipbuilding plan.

Expected to be in the range of 6,000 tonnes each, the ships when completed around 2014-15 will operate in the Arctic for up to eight months a year.

"They're just a dumb idea," said Kenny. "They don't break ice and they go 16 knots and that's slower than a fishing boat."

The Arctic ships are the compromise result of the 2006 Conservative election promise to build military icebreakers to enforce Canada's Arctic sovereignty. Initially, the plan was to build three heavily-armed ships capable of cutting through multi-year ice.

A series of budget and design adjustments turned the project into lightly-armed ships that break through only one-year-old ice, a fact which has prompted critics to label them "slush breakers."

Kenny said, with budget reductions underway, the money would be better spent fast-tracking the replacement of the country's nearly 40-year-old flagship command destroyers, as the Navy intended to do before the government saddled it with the Arctic ships.

A spokesman for Defence Minister Peter MacKay declined to comment on the senator's arguments Wednesday.

A spokesman for Julian Fantino, the associate defence minister, said the patrol ships are a key element of not only the government's Arctic strategy, but for the economy.

"Our strategy will result in the creation of thousands of new jobs and billions in economic growth in cities and communities across Canada," said Chris McCluskey in an emailed response.

"This job-creating investment will improve the stability of Canada’s shipbuilding industry, and provide vital equipment for our men and women in uniform."

The commander of the Royal Canadian Navy said in a recent interview the flagship destroyers will operate as long as they are needed, but documents released under access to information laws show the Navy is facing a crunch in the availability of ships in the coming years.

Not replacing the Iroquois class warships soon imperils the Navy's ability to put Canadian task forces to sea, meaning the country's naval contingents would have to be commanded by other nations.

Finding crews for the Arctic ships is also straining already thin ranks.

"The Navy has reduced in size," said the Navy's 2010 strategic assessment, which was released late last year. "There is now a steadily increasing strategic risk to both our operational output in the coming years as well as the Navy's institutional capabilities.

"In the next five years, the personnel demands associated with the introduction and sustainment of (Arctic Offshore Patrol Ships), the Orca class and modest Maritime Security requirements necessitate an increase in the Navy's overall establishment."

Kenny says there is a need to show the flag in the Arctic.

"The government could get the same political bang by putting money into a (coast guard) icebreaker or two, and that would actually be something useful for sovereignty," he said.

Research done by Kenny's office shows that the coast guard could get between three and four heavy icebreakers for the amount of money being put into the patrol ships.

Testifying before the all-party House of Commons defence committee earlier this week, MacKay acknowledged that the end of the war in Afghanistan means an era of "belt tightening" has arrived in his department.

"We also recognize our responsibility to carefully manage public funds and to contribute to the overall fiscal health of the entire government and to be responsible to taxpayers," he said.

"We are taking the opportunity to examine our structure and our processes, and to integrate that which we have learned in Afghanistan to streamline operations, to make the Canadian Forces more efficient and effective, and so we get the greatest overall effort from Canada and the greatest benefits for Canadian taxpayers."

The budget estimate does give the military an operating bump of $333 million, but that increase is offset by reductions in other expenses.

Note to readers: This is a corrected story. A previous version wrongly identified the associate defence minister's spokesman

Loading Slideshow...
  • Highlights Of The 2011 Census

    Here are some highlights from the 2011 Canadian Census. With files from <em>The Canadian Press</em>. (AFP/Getty Images)

  • 33,476,688 People

    As of May 2011, 33,476,688 people were enumerated in Canada, nearly twice as many as in 1961 and 10 times the number in 1861. (Alamy)

  • Population Growth Speeds Up

    Canada's population grew by 5.9 per cent between 2006 and 2011, up slightly from 5.4 per cent during the previous five years. (<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/jtbradford/" target="_hplink">Flickr: jtbradford</a>)

  • Go West

    For the first time, more people in Canada live west of Ontario (30.7 per cent) than in Quebec and Atlantic Canada combined (30.6 per cent). (Flickr: <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/derekgavey/" target="_hplink">derekGavey</a>)

  • We're Number One

    Canada's population growth between 2006 and 2011 was the highest among G8 countries. (<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/33498942@N04/" target="_hplink">Flickr: WarmSleepy</a>)

  • Exceptions To The Rule

    Every province and most territories saw their population increase between 2006 and 2011; the rate of growth increased everywhere except in Ontario, the Northwest Territories and Nunavut. (AP)

  • Ontario Falters

    The growth rate in Ontario declined to 5.7 per cent, its lowest level since the early 1980s. (Alamy)

  • Saskatchewan Out Of The Red

    Population growth in Saskatchewan hit 6.7 per cent, compared with a negative growth rate of 1.1 per cent between 2001 and 2006; the province welcomed more than 28,000 immigrants during the latest census period, nearly three times the number of the previous five-year period. (<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/justaprairieboy/" target="_hplink">Flickr: Just a Prairie Boy</a>)

  • Yukon And Manitoba Take Off

    The rate of growth in both Yukon (11.6 per cent) and Manitoba (5.2 per cent) has doubled since 2006. (<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/us_mission_canada/" target="_hplink">Flickr: US Mission Canada</a>)

  • The East Is Growing Too

    The rate of growth in Prince Edward Island (3.2 per cent), New Brunswick (2.9 per cent) and Newfoundland and Labrador (1.8 per cent) has increased substantially between 2006 and 2011. (<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/jw1697/" target="_hplink">Flickr JaimeW</a>)

  • Cities Rule..

    Nearly seven of every 10 Canadians lived in one of Canada's 33 main urban centres in 2011. (<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/markwoodbury" target="_hplink">Flickr mark.woodbury</a>)

  • .. Except Not In Ontario..

    The rate of population growth in almost all census metropolitan areas located in Ontario slowed between 2006 and 2011. (<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/husseinabdallah/" target="_hplink">Flickr abdallahh</a>)

  • Maybe Because Everyone Moved To Alberta

    Of the 15 Canadian communities with the highest rates of growth, 10 were located in Alberta. (AFP/Getty Images)

FOLLOW HUFFPOST CANADA POLITICS

OTTAWA - At least $1.4 billion is expected to be carved out of spending at National Defence in the coming fiscal year, but a longtime critic says some politically-motivated programs should not survive...
OTTAWA - At least $1.4 billion is expected to be carved out of spending at National Defence in the coming fiscal year, but a longtime critic says some politically-motivated programs should not survive...
Filed by Jacqueline Delange  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 53
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
01:56 PM on 03/18/2012
Harper has at least set it up so the ship building industry in Canada has years of work ahead of it. In BC we had the Fast Cat fiasco where we spent $450,000,000 building 3 of them. Once loaded up and put to work they never worked for several reasons within our area. NDP had them built and the Gordon Campbell Liberals auctioned them away for $21,000,000. The company that bought the ferries? The same american company that initially built the ferries in BC.

BC Ferries have a lot of ferries are now purchasing from Germany. So the governments of two BC parties have failed at providing local shipbuilding.

By the late past records in Canada at ship building and the negativity I read on this article should it be understood that Canada does not know what they are doing and should have the ships built overseas?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Whistlejackett
Hey stop doing that
12:47 PM on 03/15/2012
Harper should be jailed. removed from office, put in a labour camp, flogged daily,
12:41 PM on 03/15/2012
while i'm no fan of the harper government, it looks like ships that can only break through first year ice is all they're gonna need. in twenty years won't need icebreakers at al
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:46 AM on 03/15/2012
we buy used submarines that don't work and planes that can't fly why not buy ice-breakers that don't break ice.

after all, it's not like we have the largest arctic archipelago or something
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TwoZeroOZ
10:37 AM on 03/15/2012
"Our strategy will result in the creation of thousands of new jobs and billions in economic growth in cities and communities across Canada,"
This actually pretty socialist. Effectively, it means taking an amount of taxes from every person in Canada and giving it to workers in a single industry.
photo
Blodo
Time to build a better world
10:17 AM on 03/15/2012
"A series of budget and design adjustments turned the project into lightly-armed ships that break through only one-year-old ice, a fact which has prompted critics to label them "slush breakers."

A further adjustment has been proposed that would see the ships' capabilities downgraded to plowing through falling snow. Shipboard armaments would consist of ten part-time Newfoundland sealers armed with baseball bats.
02:18 PM on 03/15/2012
Some say, there is a rumor going around. BCA also known as Badminton Armaments of Canada is preparing an intitial public offering. And that a future revision of your vision, the Newfoundland part time sealers will be replaced by smaller, more cost effective Labradors, dog Labradors. The possibilities are endless.
10:11 AM on 03/15/2012
better to build oil tankers ------at least they PAY FOR THEMSELVES --------but iam not a conservative so what do i know???
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rob Vann
Hope for the best,Plan for the worst,Take what cms
10:27 AM on 03/15/2012
OIl tankers in the arctic ..just what we need.
10:37 AM on 03/15/2012
someones tankers are going to take the tarsands oil to china --why cede that profit -
01:29 PM on 03/15/2012
Look up SS Mannhattan, an oil tanker has been there already. it only carried a single barrel of (symbolic) oil. That was back in 1969.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SeanMartin
Everything in moderation.
09:58 AM on 03/15/2012
I gather "it's good for the economy!" is now the one-size-fits-all raison d'etre for everything out of Ottawa these days.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
robertmiller252
09:16 AM on 03/15/2012
Now this is absolutely hilarious. It was only last week tat the left was crying its eyes out that Canada didn't have adequate protection in the Arctic. What is it lefties. Yes or no!
Seamus OMalley
My micro-bio is no longer empty.
09:44 AM on 03/15/2012
Even with these ships there would still be inadequate protection in the Arctic.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
robertmiller252
10:10 AM on 03/15/2012
And your point being that no presence is much better than some presence.
10:12 AM on 03/15/2012
did you just make up the crying the eyes out part ----and did you read the objection or just the headline
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RavenHawk
09:09 AM on 03/15/2012
Sub would be better suited for the job of patroling the arctic...but again this almost sounds like white noise, a distraction while c-11 is being passed and we are all gonna 5 years in jail because we downloaded an old 70`s tv series. Kick Harper Out! Now!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Warren Yuill
Jesus Built My Hot-Rod
08:51 AM on 03/15/2012
Here's a grain of salt for your consideration.
The ships havn't even been designed yet.
Mr Kenny is being critical of performance specifications for ships that don't exist.
Mr Harper was in Halifax mid January 2012 fielding questions about using Canadian firms to design the new Icebreaker/patrol ships and surface combatants.
No designs/plans have been submitted to the navy for consideration as of yet.
Period.
So...makes you wonder WTF Mr Kenny is talking about.
But when you consider he was on the senate standing committe for security and national defense when we bought four junk submarines from our pals the Brits,some of his comments make sense.
photo
Liz Wilson 2
“a small group can change the world
08:32 AM on 03/15/2012
why is the demand for electoral investigation fading into the backround?

this government should not be allowed to conduct business until they have proven they have a majority.... otherwise it is a coup
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Warren Yuill
Jesus Built My Hot-Rod
09:01 AM on 03/15/2012
Its fading cause everyone has 'blood' on their hands.
The longer this story runs the dirtier our whole process looks.
They want it to die before their individual positions becomes untenable for lack of confidence.
photo
Liz Wilson 2
“a small group can change the world
10:06 AM on 03/15/2012
all the more reason for the public to keep up the pressure. T
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
robertmiller252
09:19 AM on 03/15/2012
They don't have to prove any more than the Liberals or NDP have to prove. Cause the Conservatives have not been charged or found guilty of anything yet. Meanwhile Liberals have had to make two admissions of guilt. Is the fire getting too hot for the Libs yet?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gx5000
Life's too short, be happy..
09:47 AM on 03/15/2012
Harper is guilty of a federal charge of contempt of Parliament....or have you forgotten ?
http://presscore.ca/2011/?p=1980
photo
Liz Wilson 2
“a small group can change the world
10:08 AM on 03/15/2012
the conservatives are the only party charged with electoral fraud and if this is allowed to happen then all future elections are lost to fraud as well. That is how serious this is.
08:11 AM on 03/15/2012
"They're just a dumb idea," said Kenny.

What do you expect from dummies. Look at MacKay's biography - pretty sheltered political life with little if any real world experience. One of our hereditary elites. Maybe he's getting a kickback from the steel company he worked for in his short non-political career (he probably only got that job by making promises for the future). I expect he will be a senator for life pretty soon.
photo
Spanky McFarlane
ILLEGITIMUS NON CARBORUNDUM.
08:07 AM on 03/15/2012
The Navy needs ships that can do disaster relief, & be able to do it in our north. Sending 'frigates & Destroyers' to Haiti, was costly & produced little if compared to what a real SUPPLY ship could have provided.
The Liberal Senator is right, if these ships can only do 16 knots, don't bother.
07:57 AM on 03/15/2012
Face palm
We need the icebreakers because if we cannot maintain a presence in the arctic and patrol our coastline, we loose the rights to the arctic.
Yes, we need icebreakers that can break more than fresh ice, yes they should go faster than 16 knots [I served on the minesweepers - their top speed is 16 and its sooo slow], and yes, we do need to replace the Tribal Class ships, but to conveniently leave out WHY we need the icebreakers is quite misleading.
Remember that article about how we're wasting tax dollars on our submarine fleet?
Again, the authorr/politician protesting against them failed to mention that by not having at least one active submarine would see Canada's expulsion from NATO.
These issues are a little more far reaching than people seem to understand.
Please take everything the media/politicians say about the military with a grain of salt, because they often have no idea what they're talking about themselves.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
robertmiller252
09:20 AM on 03/15/2012
Like you my father was a CPO Artificer in minesweepers in the Royal Navy during the last war.