How underinvestment created Canada's replacement bow wave

What if the Royal Canadian Navy had received stronger investment over the previous two decades?

Sustained investment could have preserved parallel frigate and destroyer programmes instead of forcing Canada to replace several roles with one enlarged Type 26-derived class.

Canada's current procurement problem grew out of deferred replacement cycles. A steadier programme could have renewed frigates and destroyers separately, preserving more design and force-structure options. Several needs have now converged on one large Type 26-derived combatant. Canada may call it a destroyer because of its length and flexible armament, while other navies can still recognise the frigate lineage.