Stuart Robert (Fadden, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Defence Science, Technology and Personnel) Share this | Hansard source

I thank the minister for his commitment to keeping the parliament informed, which he dutifully did on no fewer than six occasions last year and continues doing this year in the same way. I will address my brief response to the minister in terms of the ISAF leaders' summit, the issue of detainee management, and some questions on capability for future operations in Afghanistan. I look forward to the minister's response from his recent round of discussions and meetings in Brussels with the Prime Minister and of course from the leaders' summit in Chicago, and the minister has indicated he will provide an update to the House following the Chicago round of talks about where combat operations are going in Afghanistan.

The coalition is particularly interested in the withdrawal timetable, noting the minister and the government's pledge that this will be a metrics based, commanders' judgment driven exercise. I think that it is fair to say that there remains some ambiguity on the timelines in terms of Australian withdrawal. The Prime Minister's comments on 16 April that Afghan President Hamid Karzai would announce within the next few months plans to transition Oruzgan to Afghan troop control and that it would take from 12 to 18 months is a clear statement as the Prime Minister has indicated that the bulk of the Mentoring Task Force and the enablers that attach with it would cease their training activities by literally Christmas 2013. The PM further stated at the time:

We will no longer be conducting routine frontline operations with the Afghan National Security Forces. The Australian-led Provincial Reconstruction Team will have completed its work and the majority of our troops will have returned home. We will no longer be conducting routine front-line operations with the Afghan National Security Force. The Australian led Provincial Reconstruction Team will have completed its work.

I think she actually meant the Mentoring Task Force because, if we are pulling the Provincial Reconstruction Team out, we will be doing no reconstruction at all. Having suggested that she is talking about the MTF and all our troops coming home, it is a fair statement that the Prime Minister is anticipating the cessation of all mentoring and task force related activities within our forward operating bases by the end of 2013.

The coalition looks forward to seeing the metrics that support that decision and of course our routine discussions yearly with Commander JTF 633 and Commander CTU to fully understand the basis of that decision. There is no indication that what the PM has said is not correct or that she has not been fully informed by the military hierarchy and those in command. We also note that the US withdrawal and their timeline is driving much of the timeline and much of the tone.

It is important to note that we will continue to offer the strongest bipartisan support for combat operations in Afghanistan. We reiterate, as we have done with every ministerial response, that it is not a blank cheque. Decisions must be made in the national interest and our men and women must return home from a successful fight. We will come home when the job is done—nothing more, nothing less.

I thank the minister for his update on detainee management. It is pleasing to see the primary interrogation capability now in Afghanistan and it is pleasing to see it is now an operational capability with full oversight. I am pleased that the minister has taken the media to actually see the facility and has shown them around, I am sure, with as much access as they require. It is good to note the protocols surrounding a primary interrogation capability in terms of CCTV and that full medical and psychological support are indeed in place and also, within the wider ISAF contingent, that a senior Australian officer is providing oversight for it.

The minister, though, gave no indication of the average time held by detainees within our system, noting that, as the primary interrogation capability was deployed into Afghanistan last year, the maximum time for holding detainees was also extended in line with our ISAF partners. It would be good to understand exactly how many people have now been detained for that longer time period that our ISAF partners have been enjoying for some years.

I note the level of complaints and the numbers that the minister has highlighted and I note that none of the complaints have been found to be substantiated even though the number of complainants is high. That would seem to indicate that those we have detained have misjudged their environment, misjudged the manner in which they were detained or, frankly, are struggling to tell the truth. Noting that most combatants caught on the battlefield will try anything to secure their release, perhaps it is understandable. The important thing to note from the minister's statement is that we are better than this as a nation. As a nation we take complaints seriously. They are investigated under law with all due and proper process, as they should be, and they are publicly reported, as they should be, to the minister's credit.

I note the issue of the ADFIS investigation with respect to the administration irregularities in detainee management. The minister has stated quite publicly that there was no issue in terms of maltreatment of detainees. It was simply an issue, in simple terms, of 'paperwork'. Notwithstanding that, these issues have been investigated and we accept the fact that some degree of administrative law is being dealt out.

We also note the current investigation from 2010-11 into the earlier years of detainee management in terms of tactical questioning and whether that tactical questioning may have inadvertently crossed over into very low levels of interrogation in its technique, and we look forward to being providing with an update as that investigation proceeds. We note, though, that the allegations seem to be limited to the use of some particularly nasty words as opposed to going to any particular physical maltreatment of detainees. I will conclude my response in terms of capability for Afghanistan by saying that, regardless of the drawdown and the timeline of the MTF withdrawal, the Provincial Reconstruction Team, in both civilian and perhaps military guise, will remain in theatre for some time, as will the kinetic activity within the Special Operations Task Group as well as some enablers and some trainers, especially within the artillery training school and, if the minister sees fit to join the British forces with 'Sandhurst in the sand,' then, Minister, I think we should rename that 'Duntroon in the desert'. Cognisant of that extended capability, we may find ourselves with boots on the ground in Afghanistan for many, many, many years to come—albeit with numbers small and specialised in terms of what they do. I note that, with the budget being handed down two days ago, the minister has stated that operational capability will not be impacted. I agree that it would appear that no uniformed personnel numbers have been cut and no units have been cut from the order of battle. But to suggest that operational capability for the future has not been impacted does not, I believe, stand true.

$5.45 billion has been stripped from the budget over the forward estimates. The defence budget as a percentage of GDP is now around 1.6 per cent—the lowest since 1938 when it was 1.55 per cent. We are in the Asia-Pacific century and our Asian-Pacific neighbours, many of them to the north, have defence spending well above 2.5 per cent of GDP. This puts us currently at something like 80th highest in the world in terms of defence spending. They are the biggest cuts since the Korean War finished. Since 2008 this brings the total to $18 billion in cuts. This will have a capability impact in the future. The 2009 white paper, barely a few years old, would seem—by the government's own admission, with their announcement of a new one just last week—to be now discredited and Force 2030 perhaps a pipedream.

In terms of procurement: procurement next financial year is 18 per cent reduced from this financial year. That level stays the same to 2013-14 and then, in the final two out-years, procurement is set to rise a staggering 38 per cent. I do not believe industry—or, frankly, DMO—can cope with a 38 per cent increase in procurement in two years. This will impact future capability. It may well impact future operations despite the best endeavours of Defence and its senior staff.

Considering that we will remain a substantial and lethal kinetic force in the Middle East, as well as a training and oversight force, it is imperative that we provide our men and women with the highest possible training, resources, equipment and capability for them to do their job. I implore the minister, as the days and weeks and months go on, to do everything he can to realise greater efficiency and put more dollars and cents into our fighting force.

See this speech in context