It’s too soon to start panicking about the shipbuilding strategy

Its_too_soon_to_start_panicking_about__Montages.jpg

OP-ED

by Tom Ring

iPolitics
March 30, 2016

How did the National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy end up where it is?

Much has been written recently about the NSPS — not much of it favourable. Readers tend to come away with the impression that Canada embarked on a $35-$50 billion endeavour that is doomed to fail. Behind schedule … already. Over-budget … already.

To be sure, any initiative that has the goals and ambitions of a program such as NSPS ought to be subject to considerable scrutiny. Healthy debate on matters of important public policy is vital to any democracy. But with several observers and pundits clamouring for the initiative to be completely scrapped, we should take the time now to examine where we are and whether the program really is failing to meet its objectives.

A detailed analysis recently published by the Canadian Global Affairs Institute tries to do just that. Of course, the NSPS faces considerable challenges — as you’d expect with a program of this size and scope. Criticisms of the program tend to fall into three categories: that nothing has been delivered; that project budgets are exploding and; that the partnership agreement with the two chosen shipyards is a badly-flawed deal for Canada.

Let’s start with the first criticism. No ships yet, it’s true — but construction is well underway (in fact, Seaspan started work today on the second Offshore Fishery Science Vessel for the Canadian Coast Guard at Vancouver Shipyards).

However, the first objective of NSPS was the revitalization of the shipbuilding industry in Canada. With almost $600 million invested in two shipyards, at no cost to taxpayers, Canada now has state-of-the-art shipbuilding facilities on either coast that will provide careers for thousands of workers for decades.

Second criticism: We can build the ships cheaper offshore. This assertion has the benefit of being possibly true — but in the absence of a mature vessel design, it’s absolutely unprovable. Given the size of the program, taxpayers should expect that any vessels we build are built with value-for-money in mind — while keeping the investment in Canada. That, by the way, is what virtually every other country would do. True, project budgets have grown, as we should expect with the passage of a decade or more since project conception. But construction estimates are independently verified, as are the shipyards themselves, to assess their efficiency against a world standard.

Third criticism: The partnership agreement is flawed. Many such criticisms may have an element of self-interest behind them. When the auditor general examined the program in 2013, after the Strategic Partnership Agreements were signed, he found no such fatal flaw. The agreements must, however, be carefully managed continually over the life of the program to ensure that there is equal sharing of both risk and reward. Public debate — and even criticism — should be welcomed, as it helps us find the appropriate balance.

The NSPS is a 25-plus-year undertaking that aims to rebuild both Canada’s shipbuilding capacity and Canada’s Navy and Coast Guard, in a way that delivers maximum economic benefits to Canada for the money being spent. Any objective assessment of the program will conclude that it’s far too soon to listen to the doomsayer conclusions offered by those with an interest in doing things a different way.

One final thought. In its recently released Defence White Paper, the Australian government announced a shipbuilding strategy that, for all the world, looks just like the NSPS.

Tom Ring is a Senior Fellow at the University of Ottawa’s Graduate School of Public and International Affairs and the former assistant deputy minister, acquisitions, at Public Works and Government Services Canada.

Photo Credit: iPolitics

Be the first to comment

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTERS
 
SEARCH
PODCAST

An Update on the NAFTA Renegotiations

May 21, 2018


On today's Global Exchange Podcast, we touch base with CGAI's North American trade experts in light of a busy week on the NAFTA file in Washington. After months of hard-pressed negotiations, and 6 weeks of 'perpetual' discussions in Washington, the deal has reached its next turning point, with Congressional leadership signalling that they'd need a new deal by May 17th in order to have it passed before U.S. mid-term elections in the Fall. With no deal in sight, and the Congressional deadline now in the rear-view mirror, we sit down with Sarah Goldfeder, Laura Dawson, and Eric Miller to ask where we go from here.


IN THE MEDIA

AUDIO: No U.S.-Korea Summit

with Danielle Smith (feat. James Trottier), Global News Radio, May 24, 2018

VIDEO: La France Désavoue Michaëlle Jean

with Anne-Marie Dussault (feat. Jocelyn Coulon), Radio-Canada 24/60, May 23, 2018


LATEST TWEETS

HEAD OFFICE
Canadian Global Affairs Institute
Suite 1800, 421-7th Avenue SW
Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2P 4K9

 

OTTAWA OFFICE
Canadian Global Affairs Institute
8 York Street, 2nd Floor
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1N 5S6

 

Phone: (613) 288-2529
Email: contact@cgai.ca
Web: cgai.ca

 

Making sense of our complex world.
Déchiffrer la complexité de notre monde.

 

© 2002-2018 Canadian Global Affairs Institute
Charitable Registration No. 87982 7913 RR0001

 


Sign in with Facebook | Sign in with Twitter | Sign in with Email