Procrustes, 4 February 2021
All of a sudden, the Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC) is back in the news and there is chatter about the mounting costs of the proposed warship and what trade-offs might be made to deal with these costs.
Why all the fuss now? The long-awaited cost update by Canada’s Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO) is due this month (it was delayed when the Trudeau government prorogued Parliament in the fall of 2020, ostensibly to deal with the Covid-19 crisis).
People in the know, like retired Rear-Admiral Ian Mack who was long associated with bringing the CSC project to fruition, and former Vice-Admiral Mark Norman who was the first to announce years ago that the costs of the CSC were higher than hitherto revealed by Ottawa, are acknowledging that the forthcoming PBO report will cause serious ‘sticker shock,’ and are suggesting that the country should prepare for a long overdue debate about the possible quantity versus quality options available to rein these costs in.
Both Mack and Norman suggest that Ottawa’s reluctance to provide timely updates about costs and delivery schedules is partly to blame for the expected adverse reaction that will likely greet the PBO’s cost projections. A quick foray through both the Navy’s and Public Services and Procurement Canada’s websites shows no signs of the latest CSC development, the delay of the scheduled delivery of the first CSC warship until the early 2030s (the websites are still indicating delivery in the mid-2020s), nor have there been any official statements about the expected costs of the warships other than the re-affirmation that the overall project will remain within the $60 billion budget set several years ago. However, this latter claim does not indicate how many of the 15 planned warships will ultimately be approved.
Mark Norman clearly prefers quality over quantity, and argues that any less-capable warship would “not meet Canada’s stringent combat requirements for a multi-mission ship to execute a full range of stressing missions and ensure the safety of the crew in a potential conflict.” [1] This, quite properly, is the perspective of a former serving naval officer and it is to commended as fairly representing the views of those in the service. However, Norman’s comments beg the question: do our elected politicians really know – or care – about the types of missions the navy is planning? My bet is that they have very little appreciation of what our military does, but they do care when more money for the military means less money for their own pet projects. Do they know, for example, how closely the navy plans to be integrated into US-led maritime missions possibly against the People’s Republic of China or Russia? Would they approve the extra warship costs if the CSC is to used for ballistic missile defence, a prospect which our extant defence policy says is a no-go?
Senior navy planners take the answers to questions as a given, partly because this is what they think makes sense from a military standpoint and hence they expect the appropriate equipment to do the job. But at root these are matters of high policy and should be in the forefront of government thinking when it settles down to make a decision to proceed with the CSC. You and I will find little public discussion about such issues, partly because we rely heavily of the very few journalists actually concerned with Canadian defence, and partly because our other recourse to such information – the Access to Information process – is closely guarded by the very same civil servants whose actions led to the current state of woeful public understanding of what is actually going on with the CSC project.
A sad state of affairs in a purported liberal democracy, but the chickens are coming home to roost!
Notes
[1] Lee Berthiaume, “Navy needs to prepare for tough talks over warship delays, cost increases: Norman”, CTV News (3 February 2021). Found at: https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/navy-needs-to-prepare-for-tough-talks-over-warship-delays-cost-increases-norman-1.5293499.
3 thoughts on “CSC: The Canadian Public and Politicians Don’t Know – Period!”
Hello Procrustes.
Thank You, Thank You Thank You!!! Someone is finally telling it like it should be told. The Canadian people have been lied to for far too long by the Canadian government about the CSC Frigate program. There is blame to spread from the top down for this fiasco. The only department that seems to be telling the truth (from the information the government has given them) is the PBO office. They at least have been up front with the Canadian public. If the government had faithfully provided timely updates on the CSC Frigate program (whether good or bad) like they have with COVID-19 and the vaccine updates, then we would at least know where we stood WRT this program. Never lie to the Canadian people. They can always tell and they never forget! If the project is getting out of hand, then tell us and give the Canadian people some options. Either decrease the CSC ship fleet size, decrease the quality of the ship design, cut some other defence projects, buy from the US (Think Constellation class) or tank the project altogether (Think AVRO Arrow) and start all over. The government websites are not saying anything at this point, and that is almost criminal. Both Rear-Admiral Mack and Vice-Admiral Norman are also “sounding the alarm” and we all should heed their concerns. The government knows but it just does not care about the military and they have no appreciation for military missions in the 21st century or they would approve the extra costs no matter what, as they have with COVID-19. The CSC Type 26 Frigate is shaping up to be one of the best military vessels in the world, will be an awesome asset for the next couple of generations and will make all Canadians proud. These discussions must start now, even before the PBO report is made public. There is no point closely guarding government secrets once “the cat has been let out of the bag”. Hopefully Procrustes, your CNR article will inspire lots of conversation from all Forum Members and perhaps some “intelligent” alternatives to get us out of this quagmire, and soon, as this project is slipping far to the right, when perhaps it didn’t have to be.
Hello,
A hypothesis. Our Canadian political and defense leadership is rational. While we are bound as auxiliary units to the USA’s expeditionary forces, it is irrational to go to war against Russia and China, as our forces’ survival near those countries’ territorial borders would be measured in minutes in the face of numerous salvos of long range, very fast, very maneuverable anti-shipping missiles. So, while we are bound to participate in said war, our rational leaders would seek to avoid catastrophic loss of life in such a conflict, by fielding only a few small but very expensive ships. We nominally fulfill our obligation by spending the requisite amount on the sacrificial assets, but limit the loss of life. Face is saved all around. Furthermore, we take as long as possible building and delivering said ships in working order, thereby postponing participation in such a war.
Then again, are they rational?
Curious Civilian. You can be as hypothetical as you like, but hypothetical will not get us out of this gigantic problem of CSC cost overruns caused mainly by government inaction. When a Canadian CSC ship joins any task force (USN or otherwise), we do that knowing we will be an integral part of that TF. This CSC ship, if it ever gets off the ground will be an integral part of any fleet. The US are very envious already of the CSC Frigate program and would love to have a CSC as part of their Carrier TGs … any time. This is a very capable high-end military asset. The state-of-the art weapon systems along with the CMS 330 Combat System employed on the CSC Frigates will be capable enough to handle any in-coming threat thrown at them. We have waited long enough to build these ships. One thing Canada cannot do is wait any longer to build with the rapidly rising costs annually. If we do, then we will lose our ability to defend this country and more than likely our Navy in the process. Perhaps this is what the irrational Canadian government wants anyway.