Honour the tradition of warships’ names

Re: Ditching ship names the wrong move, Oct. 2.

The decision to name a warship, or to rename her, is a decision of government. The selection of a name for a warship is surely carefully considered, as the ship and her company, whether making a foreign port visit or conducting operations off someone’s coast, represent Canada.

A warship’s name becomes known wherever she sails, and people get to know our country by that ship. So it is important that the name is one to which Canadians can relate.

For the sailors on board, a warship’s name is a connection to the accomplishments of those who sailed before in ships of the same name. As one who sailed in HMCS Preserver, second of that name, when she deployed overseas right after 9/11, I am proud that the ship’s honour board now reads “Arabian Sea.” That board will be carried by the next Preserver.

With all respect to the author of a letter on the topic, the perpetuation of the names Protecteur and Preserver is the right decision for the Navy’s new replenishment oilers being built by the Joint Support Ship project. Yes, the Battles of Queenston and Chateauguay are significant events in the pre-Confederation history of Canada, and they should be commemorated, but it would be more appropriate if that commemoration were done by naming training or other facilities at bases, particularly army garrisons, of the Canadian Armed Forces.

The Royal Canadian Navy is more than a century old, and there are hundreds of Canadian warships whose service to this country need to be remembered. Colin Darlington, Royal United Services Institute of Nova Scotia, Halifax