The biggest problem with Canada's failed submarine program is that neither the military nor government acknowledge that there is a problem.
The again, once more for serious deficiencies. The Canadian Victoria-class submarines are in the news. Press reports that HMCS Windsor will be limited to shallower dives because it would have been too expensive to do thorough repairs to rust patches on its hull. Instead, the navy opted for a "protect and monitor" option, grinding away rust on 10 areas of the hull and painting over them. To ensure safety, the submarine's diving depth was restricted as a result.
The report also offered a reminder of the more fundamental problems with the four used submarines purchased from the British navy by the former Liberal government in 1998.
The Windsor is in Halifax, being repaired and refitted. The submarine entered the shipyard in 2007, with a commitment that it would be back at sea in 2009. Two years -- and millions of dollars later -- the Windsor remains tied up and work continues.
Since the submarine was handed over by the British 10 years ago this week, it has operated at sea for just 332 days. Less than one month per year, in total.
That's not an aberration. HMCS Victoria has spent virtually all its time being repaired. The submarine has been in service for 115 days -- less than one for every month it has spent in drydock. A fire on HMCS Chicoutimi killed a sailor as it was being sailed to Canada in 2004; it has been in drydock ever since.
The work is complicated, the navy says. There were unexpected problems. The submarines are still a good long-term investment. Everything is fine.
But it looks much like Canada bought lemons, accepting another country's unwanted castoffs.
That was not the promise from the navy and the federal government. The Defence Department lobbied heavily for the purchase and launched a public campaign to win support for the deal. The submarines were a bargain, in great shape and the navy would quickly ready them for service, the department claimed. Canada would spend $610 million for the mothballed ships, another $140 million to get them ready and within two years they would be refitted and ready to go.
None of that has proved true. The submarines actually cost $890 million, repair costs have soared and -- as noted -- the submarines have been of little practical use over the past decade. The navy's estimates of repair time have consistently been wrong by a matter of years. The costs of fixing submarines that have rarely been used have been astronomical.
Big purchases can often go wrong, but Canada's record on military purchases is particularly troubling. Former auditor general Sheila Fraser criticized cost overruns and mismanagement in the purchase of two sets of helicopters. The projected $5.5-billion cost had doubled, she noted. The CH-148 Cyclones project was seven years behind schedule; the CH-147 Chinook program five years behind schedule.
The government plans billions in purchases for the military over the next decade -- $29 billion for 65 jet fighters alone.
The submarine purchase -- and the continued defence of a project gone seriously wrong -- should make all Canadians nervous.
Related Stories
