The NSS Paradox: Sovereignty at the Cost of Maritime Efficiency
The National Shipbuilding Strategy (NSS) was sold to Canadians as a monumental commitment: one that would revitalize our shipyards, secure domestic jobs, and ensure our Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) and Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) fleets could protect our sovereignty. It sounds good on paper, but I’m here to tell you that the true cost of this strategy is far greater than the dollars spent—it’s measured in obsolescence and operational risk.
I need us to ask a crucial, fact-based question: Are we achieving “sovereignty” simply by building ships at home, even if they are technologically inferior and fiscally disastrous? The evidence suggests the NSS structure, by its very design, prioritizes industrial policy and political expediency over the technological superiority and efficiency that our sailors and officers deserve.
The Private vs. Public Efficiency Divide: A Structural Flaw
The most significant flaw in the NSS is the absence of the rigorous profit motive that drives global commercial shipbuilding. This difference fundamentally warps the entire procurement process.
Think about our own West Coast operator, BC Ferries. When they decide to invest, every penny is tied to a clear Return on Investment (ROI). They’ve invested in Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) conversions and advanced battery-hybrid power for their new vessels. Why? Because the upfront cost for these technologies, while expensive, delivers massive long-term savings in fuel, maintenance, and reduced exposure to volatile global diesel prices. Efficiency is their lifeline; innovation is rewarded.
In the public sector NSS, the logic is reversed. The project boards are judged primarily on the initial contract cost and fulfilling Industrial and Technological Benefits (ITB) quotas—meaning jobs for Canadians. When a global technology like an Integrated Electric Drive (IED) system, which can cut naval vessel fuel consumption by as much as 25%, is considered, the public board struggles to justify the initial multi-billion-dollar price tag. Why? Because their budget is guaranteed by you, the taxpayer. There is no urgency to cut fuel bills when you are underwriting the operational losses.
This means Canada is building for the lowest immediate contract price, not the lowest Total Cost of Ownership (TCO), ensuring we pay far more in long-term fuel, maintenance, and delayed readiness.
I want to know what you think: If the government is going to spend over $100 billion, shouldn't a portion of the shipyard's profit be tied directly to a ship's long-term fuel efficiency? Let me know in the comments!
The Efficiency Gap: Outdated Tech on Day One
This structural flaw has resulted in a paradoxical and frankly unacceptable situation: our new public fleet is being launched with technology that is already lagging behind its global peers and even Canada's own private sector.
Naval and Coast Guard fleets globally are rapidly integrating cutting-edge solutions for operational efficiency:
Integrated Electric Drive (IED): Widely adopted internationally, these systems are proven to provide up to a 25% reduction in fuel consumption and better tactical performance.
Biofuel Adaptability: While our CCG has proven that trials using 100% biodiesel are feasible, the initial shipbuilding contracts often rely on older power plants that were not designed for easy hybrid integration or future fuel types, essentially locking the fleet into decades of high-emission, high-cost operations.
How can we possibly lock in a 30-to-40-year life cycle on vessels that are designed to be expensive and polluting to operate from the moment they are launched?
The True Cost of Sovereignty: Delays, Dollars, and Disregard
If you need proof of this failure, look no further than the official, fact-checkable cost and schedule overruns plaguing the NSS, as documented by the Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO) and the Auditor General:
The Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC): This is the RCN’s flagship program, and its cost has seen unprecedented escalation. The estimated cost for this project has skyrocketed from the initial government target of $60 billion to a PBO extrapolated figure of over $100 billion. Furthermore, the delivery of the first ship has slipped by nearly a decade, now anticipated in the early 2030s. This delay means the RCN will be forced to stretch the life of its aging frigates, putting our personnel in outdated vessels for longer.
The Joint Support Ship (JSS): Designed to replace our supply vessels, the JSS program has also seen its cost climb by nearly $1 billion, now estimated at $3.4 billion for two ships.
Auditor General’s Findings: The official 2021 Auditor General's report confirms that the federal fleet renewal experienced many delays. Of the four ships scheduled for delivery by early 2020, only two were delivered, and both were late. The report warned explicitly that these delays risk the retirement of vessels before new ones are even operational.
When we can justify giving billions in aid or funding social programs, but we can’t get life-saving, efficient, and technologically superior equipment approved for our Coast Guard and Navy without a multi-billion dollar fight, the priority is clear: political optics over the lives of our service members.
My last name is Dushko, and my family roots (grandfathers side - Peter Dushko) are in Kyiv, Ukraine. Even I am asking why we continue to funnel massive dollars internationally when we can't properly equip our own Coast Guard to protect our people at home. What does that say about our national commitment? When it's easier for the government to approve millions for gender-affirming care than it is to approve life-saving equipment for a Coast Guard vessel, it forces a discussion on what our government truly values.
When our personnel are consistently sent out on vessels that are either dangerously old or newly-built but already inefficient, the NSS is failing its most important test. The massive industrial investment must translate into a modern, efficient, and operationally superior fleet that honors our commitment to the men and women who serve.
