• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Feds eye shipbuilding as economic stimulus

Bass ackwards

Full Member
Donor
Inactive
Reaction score
3
Points
210
From the Canadian Press via CNEWS, with the usual disclaimers:

Feds eye shipbuilding as economic stimulus

By Murray Brewster, THE CANADIAN PRESS

OTTAWA - Part of the Conservative government's stimulus for the stumbling Canadian economy will be drawn from funds already earmarked for the construction of navy supply ships, patrol boats and icebreakers.

But the plan hinges on the country's shipbuilders and trade unions setting aside their differences and sharing the billions of dollars worth of work, says Defence Minister Peter MacKay.

"There is enough work for the Canadian shipyards on both coasts and in Quebec to keep people employed, and to keep that sector of the economy going full-tilt," MacKay said in an interview with The Canadian Press.

"I see this as being in keeping with economic stimulus and getting people to work. And there's enough work in these projects to get all of these shipyards humming again."

Early in the new year, the federal government plans to convene a shipbuilding summit, involving National Defence, Industry Canada and Public Works and Government Services Canada, he said.

MacKay was asked whether the aim was to come up a continuous shipbuilding program, something the industry and unions have sought for decades.

"It would be something like that," he replied.

Getting away from the cyclical boom and bust cycle would benefit the Canadian economy, and even without a formal continuous build program the federal government can "roll out these projects in a way that is it staggered" and predictable, said the minister.

Unlike the $3.3 billion lifeline being thrown to the country's troubled auto industry, the money for shipbuilding would come from already planned purchases in line with Finance Minister Jim Flaherty's suggestion that economic help from the federal treasury would be limited.

But a retired commander of the Canadian navy said neither Ottawa nor the industry will be able to make the plan work without injecting some new money.

Much of the complex expertise required to build warships has withered away since the last patrol frigate rolled off the skids and into the water in the mid-1990s, said former vice-admiral Bruce McLean.

"The handful of shipbuilding companies that remain in the country have found other niches to keep themselves profitable," he said.

On the West Coast shipyards are building cruise liners, while in the East, the industry has turned its attention to servicing the offshore oil and natural gas tenders.

"To put the (naval) building capability back together again is going to require resources from the industry, resources from the government, and it definitely needs some sort of long-term strategic plan," McLean said.

Public Works, the federal government's tendering arm, scuttled the $2.9 billion replacement process for the navy's supply ships last summer because the bids exceeded the Conservatives' budget envelope.

A $340 million proposal to build 12 inshore patrol boats for the coast guard also went down with the Joint Support Ship program for the same reasons.

Officials pledged last fall to relaunch the initiatives as early as this winter, but gave no definitive schedule.

It is more expensive to build ships here than it is overseas in such places as Korea and Europe, and MacKay said cost will be a factor in the talks next month.

"That's something that will be on the table when we have this discussion with shipbuilders. Their representatives and the unions will be involved in the discussion," he said.

He hinted that the government has done its homework, examining how ships are built in industry-leading countries such as Norway.

The Conservatives have promised to build as many as eight Arctic offshore supply boats for the navy, replace the country's 12 patrol frigates, as well as modernize the fleet of medium and heavy icebreakers.

McLean estimated the price tag for all of the ship construction that needs to be done over the next 25 years could run as high as $40 billion.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2008/12/14/7748116-cp.html

 
That would be cool.I'm a boilermaker local 359 ,this would give me a lot of work.
 
Great idea. Unfortunately, it will only help certain areas of the country and not vote rich CAW Ontario. The idea will not live past end Jan.
 
Well there are the Port Weller drydocks in St Catharine's. There are smaller shipyards in Goderich, Thunder Bay, Collingwood (I think the latter is still open in some capacity). I'm not sure exactly how many there are still in operation, but there should be enough around the (Ontario part of) the great lakes, to form a decent bribe if it comes to that.
(I am admittedly out of my -er..shipping- lane here)
 
Bass ackwards said:
The Conservatives have promised to build as many as eight Arctic offshore supply boats for the navy, replace the country's 12 patrol frigates, as well as modernize the fleet of medium and heavy icebreakers.

Arctic supply boats? I think someone just rolled the AOPV and JSS into a single platform.  :o And what about the 280s? I was under the impression that due to FELEX the FFHs would be good for another 15-20 years.
 
Bass ackwards said:
... McLean estimated the price tag for all of the ship construction that needs to be done over the next 25 years could run as high as $40 billion.  http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2008/12/14/7748116-cp.html

- Forty billion over 25 years is peanuts. 
 
To get ships built, you need naval architects & the engineering staff behind them.
We've pi$$ed away whatever expertise we ever had over the years & no longer have any real capacity to do the job.

Short of buying the expertise (designs) from a foreign power & forcing foreign shipyards to go into partnership with some of what we have left, we're just lining ourselves up for another boondoggle.
 
- Well, one thing we can build is railcars.  High speed rail would at least be a boondoggle most people could live with.  Calgary to Fort Mac, Windsor to Quebec City, Montreal to Albany.  Lots of talk on all of the above, but no action.

- Concurrent to that, lets see a proper autobahn from Halifax to Vancouver.  No lights.  No Stop signs. No need to change lanes. No mixing of local with regional with transcontinental traffic.
 
A post at The Torch:

Let's stimulate the economy with those "Arctic offshore supply boats"
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2008/12/lets-build-those-arctic-offshore-supply.html

Mark
Ottawa
 
The Chinese threat? Come on, Peter (I really mean whoever did the briefing note):
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/todays-paper/Tories+shipshape+Arctic/1080291/story.html

The Conservative government's high-profile plan to buy $10 billion worth of new navy ships -- including a fleet of Arctic icebreakers -- needs to get "back on track," Defence Minister Peter MacKay says.

The matter is considered to be of growing urgency as Arctic ice is melting at a faster rate than expected, opening new polar sea routes that will test Canada's sovereignty aspirations in the Far North.

Mr. MacKay singled out possible naval encroachments from Russia and China, saying, "We have to be diligent."..

The government hopes to solicit bids by June 2009 and begin delivery by 2013.

2013? Sure, Peter. And a note to the reporter: the Arctic Offshore Patrol Ships are not real icebreakers:
http://www.marinelog.com/DOCS/NEWSMMVII/2007jul00101.html

...
They will...be capable of operating in ice up to one meter thick, and each vessel will also be equipped with a helicopter landing pad. They will be able to patrol the length of the Northwest Passage during the summer navigable season and its approaches year-round, and will also be capable of full operations on the East and West Coasts throughout the year. ...

Mark
Ottawa

 
cheeky_monkey said:
Arctic supply boats? I think someone just rolled the AOPV and JSS into a single platform.  :o And what about the 280s? I was under the impression that due to FELEX the FFHs would be good for another 15-20 years.

Even with FELEX, by the time we get the replacement program up and running (single class to replace the TRUMPs and the FFHs) the production rate for new vessels will take us up to the end of the FFH useful life.
 
Back
Top