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.
