Canada-class submarine

The Canada-class nuclear attack submarine was a proposed class of 10 nuclear-powered attack submarines for the Royal Canadian Navy, with an option for two more. Proposed in 1987, none were ever built.

Proposal
In June 1987, the Canadian White Paper on Defence recommended the building of 10 to 12 SSNs, to be stationed on patrol routes in the Northeast Pacific, Arctic and Northwest Atlantic Oceans. Due to their greater speed, range, and ability to operate underneath the Arctic Ice, nuclear submarines were preferred over expanding the RCN's fleet of Diesel submarines (made up of former Royal Navy Oberon class submarines). The goal was to build up a three-ocean navy, assert Canadian sovereignty over Arctic waters, and enhance contributions to NATO operations. The intent was to build the SSNs in Canada to an existing NATO design. By 1988 the RCN was looking at purchasing the design of either the French Rubis class submarine or the British Trafalgar-class submarine. The first of the SSNs would be expected to enter service in 1996.

Opposition at home
The proposed nuclear attack submarines were not received well by some members of the Canadian public. The announcement came slightly more than a year after the Chernobyl disaster, prompting fears of similar nuclear incidents even though no submarine accidents involving reactors had occurred in the then 3 decades of NATO nuclear submarine use. Members of the opposition focused on the estimated $8 Billion cost of the project, pointing out the steadily increasing size of the federal deficit and debt.

American opposition
The United States objected to the RCN having SSNs as part of its fleet, fearing a significant impact to its own submarine operations in North American waters and possible conflict over access to the Northwest Passage. In order to prevent this, the United States exercised its rights under two previously signed treaties. Under the 1958 US–UK Mutual Defence Agreement, the USA had the right to block the sale of submarine nuclear reactors by the United Kingdom to any third party (i.e. Canada), and under a 1959 agreement between the USA and Canada the USA had the right to block the purchase of submarine nuclear reactors by Canada from any third party (i.e. the United Kingdom or France). Attempts to negotiate with the United States were initially unsuccessful, as Canadian Defense Minister Perrin Beatty was "told in no uncertain terms by the U.S. Defence Department and submarine service officials that a Canadian nuclear submarine program was unnecessary and even unwelcome."

Cancellation
Due to American opposition and a rising federal debt, and with the lessening of tensions between NATO and the Warsaw Pact, the submarines were officially cancelled as part of the federal budget released in April 1989.

Naming
Construction of the proposed SSN submarines was never authorized, and as a result no official names or hull numbers were ever assigned to individual submarines. Government documents refer to the submarines as only either 'nuclear powered submarines' or 'SSNs'. The RCN's Ships' Names Committee proposed that the submarines be named after the provinces (and possibly territories) of Canada, and be named in the order that they joined Canada or were created.

However a class name based on the lead ship's name does not exist as several provinces became part of Canada simultaneously, (Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick in 1867) and so a 'first province' would have to be chosen. Because of this the Ships' Names Committee proposed the name 'Canada-class,' but this name violated existing procedures for ship class names. Because of the ambiguity of the class name, these subs are sometimes referred to as 'Province-class' submarines, based on the proposed names (cf. the RCN's Halifax-class frigate originally referred to as City-class, before final names were assigned). At the time of the proposal two RCN ships were in service with such names, HMCS Saskatchewan and HMCS Yukon (named not after the provinces, but after the Saskatchewan and Yukon rivers), but were to be retired before the scheduled commissioning of the first of the submarines.