New warships to cost more than $100-billion

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
New warships to cost more than $100-billion

The cradle-to-grave cost to Canadian taxpayers to acquire new warships will exceed $100-billion, the federal government says – tens of billions of dollars more than Ottawa has previously disclosed.

It is the first time the federal government has gone public with its best guess on the full life-cycle cost of up to 15 surface combat vessels.

The political demand for transparency has changed in Ottawa since a controversy over the true cost of a plan to buy F-35 fighter jets, and the Harper government feels pressure to open the books.

The purchase price of the military ships remains $26.2-billion, but a new estimate of “approximately $64-billion” for 30 years of maintenance, operating and personnel costs brings the total bill to “in the vicinity of $90-billion,” according to a status update released by the Department of Public Works this week. It cautions the “through-life costs” will need to be refined over time.

New warships to cost more than $100-billion, Ottawa estimates - The Globe and Mail

That's at least 2 billion dollars per year in additional costs. For some perspective, the annual cost of this would completely wipe out the projected surplus the Tories believe they will have next year.

This is even worse than that stupid jet pipe dream.
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
48,400
1,667
113



Canadian aircraft carrier

 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,337
113
Vancouver Island
New warships to cost more than $100-billion

The cradle-to-grave cost to Canadian taxpayers to acquire new warships will exceed $100-billion, the federal government says – tens of billions of dollars more than Ottawa has previously disclosed.

It is the first time the federal government has gone public with its best guess on the full life-cycle cost of up to 15 surface combat vessels.

The political demand for transparency has changed in Ottawa since a controversy over the true cost of a plan to buy F-35 fighter jets, and the Harper government feels pressure to open the books.

The purchase price of the military ships remains $26.2-billion, but a new estimate of “approximately $64-billion” for 30 years of maintenance, operating and personnel costs brings the total bill to “in the vicinity of $90-billion,” according to a status update released by the Department of Public Works this week. It cautions the “through-life costs” will need to be refined over time.

New warships to cost more than $100-billion, Ottawa estimates - The Globe and Mail

That's at least 2 billion dollars per year in additional costs. For some perspective, the annual cost of this would completely wipe out the projected surplus the Tories believe they will have next year.

This is even worse than that stupid jet pipe dream.

WHat an incredibly stupid way to price things. With that kind of faulty logic we might as well just abandon our armed forces.Oh wait that is exactly what decades of Liberal governments did, putting us in this position.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Fiscal conservatism, but only for the things I want.

You guys are worse than the nimby's.
 

Sons of Liberty

Walks on Water
Aug 24, 2010
1,284
0
36
Evil Empire
Canada needs military to protect its northern areas, nobody is going to do it for you and when an opportunity arises, someone is going to snatch from you.
 

Retired_Can_Soldier

The End of the Dog is Coming!
Mar 19, 2006
11,346
557
113
59
Alberta
Fiscal conservatism, but only for the things I want.

You guys are worse than the nimby's.

Maybe you should hop on a Sea King Helicopter and ride on a leaky submarine before shooting your uneducated mouth off. The Canadian Navy does a hell of a lot for this Country above and beyond protecting its waters. I know the concept of giving them equipment to meet their needs is hard for some snot nosed GTA Lefty to process, but give it a shot some time.
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
95
48
USA
New warships to cost more than $100-billion

The cradle-to-grave cost to Canadian taxpayers to acquire new warships will exceed $100-billion, the federal government says – tens of billions of dollars more than Ottawa has previously disclosed.

It is the first time the federal government has gone public with its best guess on the full life-cycle cost of up to 15 surface combat vessels.

The political demand for transparency has changed in Ottawa since a controversy over the true cost of a plan to buy F-35 fighter jets, and the Harper government feels pressure to open the books.

The purchase price of the military ships remains $26.2-billion, but a new estimate of “approximately $64-billion” for 30 years of maintenance, operating and personnel costs brings the total bill to “in the vicinity of $90-billion,” according to a status update released by the Department of Public Works this week. It cautions the “through-life costs” will need to be refined over time.

New warships to cost more than $100-billion, Ottawa estimates - The Globe and Mail

That's at least 2 billion dollars per year in additional costs. For some perspective, the annual cost of this would completely wipe out the projected surplus the Tories believe they will have next year.

This is even worse than that stupid jet pipe dream.

Do you plan on defended your country at all?
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,303
11,386
113
Low Earth Orbit
Canadian city class frigates run in US carrier battle groups regularly. The defense of North America was integrated ages ago.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
When did I say we shouldn't have a military?

You guys really think it's reasonable to spend over 2 Billion a year?
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
48,400
1,667
113
When did I say we shouldn't have a military?

You guys really think it's reasonable to spend over 2 Billion a year?

Two billion a year is nothing.

Britain - the world's fourth biggest defence spender after the US, China and Russia - spends almost the equivalent of US$61 billion a year.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Two billion a year is nothing.

Britain - the world's fourth biggest defence spender after the US, China and Russia - spends almost the equivalent of US$61 billion a year.

What are the respective populations of taxpayers in those countries?
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
95
48
USA
When did I say we shouldn't have a military?

You just don't want to pay for it or modernize it.

What are the respective populations of taxpayers in those countries?

Populations are a factor? How about Canada sitting on half a continent full of resources. If you don't feel that your country is worth defending adequately then hey... there it is.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
WHat an incredibly stupid way to price things. With that kind of faulty logic we might as well just abandon our armed forces.Oh wait that is exactly what decades of Liberal governments did, putting us in this position.

What position? A deficit-free one?

Here's a simple question: did we get invaded?

Two billion a year is nothing.

Britain - the world's fourth biggest defence spender after the US, China and Russia - spends almost the equivalent of US$61 billion a year.

Thus your national debt.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
You just don't want to pay for it or modernize it.



Populations are a factor? How about Canada sitting on half a continent full of resources. If you don't feel that your country is worth defending adequately then hey... there it is.

This is rubbish (as Blackleaf might put it)

How is a population roughly one tenth of the others supposed to afford what you are suggesting?
 

coldstream

on dbl secret probation
Oct 19, 2005
5,160
27
48
Chillliwack, BC
The British subs debacle shows what happens when you try to do a Navy on the cheap. As far as i know most of them have never left the dry dock... and are likely unfit for Arctic service.

Even so $100B for 15 ships sounds a little steep at over $6B per ship. The most advanced class of U.S. Missile Destroyers go for about $3B. Which indicates a realistic price is about $50B.. and on going maintenance shouldn't included since this is an operating rather than capital expenditure.

But we need a maritime country like ours needs a Navy.. or other nations will move in on our resources.. especially in the North.

We also need a shipbuilding industry, which in on the ropes by way of Free Trade.
 

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
There are a dozen or so of these, and they are armed with Harpoon missiles. That ship is the Frigate,
Halifax. There are destroyers as well, and other coastal patrol ships.

 
Last edited: