The Irving empire just landed an $8B payday—for warships no one asked for

The Liberal government has handed $8 billion to one of Canada’s wealthiest families—and they’re counting on Canadians not to notice.

The deal awards Irving Shipbuilding, owned by the notorious Irving dynasty, a six-year contract to start building three new destroyers for the Canadian navy. Even military insiders have slammed it as wildly overpriced.

And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. By the government’s own estimates, the ships won’t be finished until 2039—and by then, the total cost will have ballooned to at least $22 billion.

The government boasted the deal will help protect Canada’s sovereignty and create jobs. But at a time when Canadians are struggling with the cost of living, a crumbling healthcare system, and a planetary crisis, it’s clear what this really is: a massive corporate handout in disguise. 

It’s no wonder the government tried to slip the news under the radar. 

The announcement came quietly on Trudeau’s last weekend as prime minister, while the Liberal leadership race dominated headlines.

‘Biggest corporate welfare bums’

That Irving Shipbuilding could score such a sweetheart deal is no surprise. The Irving empire is no stranger to getting its way.

The fourth-richest family in Canada, they have ruled over New Brunswick for more than a century, holding a near-monopoly in everything from forestry and oil to retail, real estate, media, construction, and shipbuilding. In the process, they have worsened poverty in the province and silenced critics of their political and economic power. 

For decades, they’ve also used that power to bully the government into giving them tax breaks and handouts too many times to count—earning them the title of Canada’s “biggest corporate welfare bums.”

Now, they’ve convinced the government to fork over billions for a shipbuilding contract.

In just the past year, Irving Shipbuilding CEO James Irving and expert lobbyist Greg MacNeil collectively lobbied federal officials 76 times. That’s more than once a week.

Scott Taylor, a former infantryman in the Canadian Military and award-winning military correspondent, calls the contract they secured “obscenely excessive.” 

He compares it to the UK’s recent investment of $12 billion (CAD) in two 80,000-tonne aircraft carriers—$6 billion per aircraft carrier. Canada’s warships, a tenth of the size, are projected to ring in at over $7 billion each. 

Neither Irving Shipbuilding nor the Department of National Defense responded to The Breach’s requests for comment on the contract’s enormous price tag or the influence that corporate lobbying had on the deal. 

A self-defeating defence strategy

In announcing the deal, National Defence Minister Bill Blair claimed the ships would ensure “Canada’s important contributions to peace and security at home, and abroad”—but critics say the investment will achieve neither. 

Tamara Lorincz, a global governance expert who first started protesting Irving Shipbuilding’s warship construction in 2012, calls it a self-defeating strategy. 

“There literally is no reason for us to have destroyers,” she told The Breach.

“Russia is not going to attack us. China is not going to attack us,” she said, adding that there already exists a legal architecture for dealing with maritime disputes diplomatically.

The Arctic Council and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea are in place for exactly that reason, she said. 

The River-class destroyer project is the largest shipbuilding initiative in Canada since WWII—and the core of our commitment to revitalize our marine industry.

These modern warships will enable the @RoyalCanNavy to meet our defence and security commitments at home and abroad. https://t.co/IfyyXZivDg pic.twitter.com/1z2VIpDoud

— Bill Blair (@BillBlair) March 8, 2025

Peace repeatedly proves itself a more productive foreign policy than violence, Lorincz says—even considering Trump’s repeated threats to Canada’s national security.

“If we were funding things like peace-building and trying to resolve conflict peacefully, then we would have a greater likelihood of resolving conflict with the United States,” she told The Breach.  

To Lorincz, the Irving deal reflects Canada’s ongoing military alliance with the United States—specifically, the U.S. drive to militarize the Arctic, with Canada building the ships to enable it. 

There’s also the environmental impact the vessels will have. At a time when the government should be considering the security issues that climate change will present in the not-so-far future, it’s choosing instead to invest in diesel-powered ships. 

Militarizing the Arctic, an ecologically delicate area, will also bring fuel and sonar emissions that will be devastating for the polar bears, narwhals, and countless other species that call the Arctic home. 

A boon for Irving, a disaster for workers

The Liberals have boasted that the contract will grow the economy and create good jobs, estimating it will lead to 5,250 new jobs and contribute $719.3 million to the country’s GDP over the next 14 years.

But Irving Shipbuilding’s record with workers tells a darker story. 

In the past decade, two company employees have died on the job, and several others have suffered serious injuries. 

In 2019, the lid blew off a pressurized sandblaster, striking the man operating it and knocking him off the equipment. He died shortly after. In 2024, a worker was struck by snow removal equipment and pronounced dead at the scene.  

Workers at Irving Oil have previously exercised their right to refuse unsafe work and walked off the job after a colleague allegedly committed suicide following company bullying. Some have ended up in the hospital. In 2014, a cable snapped off a ship, fracturing a worker’s skull as it swung out. The man suffered severe head injuries. 

Perhaps the next time the government boasts about job creation by Irving Shipbuilding, it can heed the voices of the workers themselves. Tamara Lorincz recalls how, during her weekly protests against Irving back in 2012, the head of the union told her the employees would rather be building something else.

“We gave a report to Irving saying that we wanted to build fast ferries and high speed rail,” Lorincz recalls him saying. “We don’t want to be building warships.”

More money for billionaires?

Back in 2019, David Pugliese, a prominent military journalist, wrote to two government departments asking about safety issues with Irving Shipbuilding’s welding practices.

Just 90 minutes later, he received a call from the president of Irving Shipbuilding—followed by an email from their lawyer threatening to sue.

The move raised damning questions about just how closely this company and the federal government are working together, Pugliese said at the time. 

Irving is used to bullying critics. It’s used to mistreating workers. And it’s used to getting its way with the government to steamroll the public interest.

Canadians didn’t get a say in whether or not we want these warships or this contract. There was no public consultation. No vote. Just backdoor deals with powerful corporate lobbyists. 

If asked to make a decision based on the facts, most Canadians would likely oppose funneling billions of dollars in public money to a billionaire dynasty with a stranglehold on power.  

“What would happen if Canadians were really presented with a choice,” Lorincz says. “Do you want your money spent on peacekeeping, poverty elimination, sustainable development, climate action, healthcare, and education instead of building warships? Canadians would prioritize that.”