Stuart Robert (Fadden, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Defence) Share this | Hansard source

I think the shadow minister for his question. We are all aware, of course, that LAND 400 will deliver a land combat vehicle system of capable of close mounted combat operations with a deployed force. If we think back to our combat operations post-Vietnam there are only two where we have not sent an armoured fighting vehicle of some sort. That, of course, is Op Bel Isi in Bougainville and RAMSI in the Solomon Islands. Every other operational deployment we have done we have sent either cav or infantry-fighting vehicle support. LAND 400 will deliver that close vehicle system. It will include a wheeled-reconnaissance vehicle to replace the ASLAV. It will include a tracked light infantry vehicle to replace the current 1113, albeit, upgraded but still of Vietnam vintage. That, of course, will be able to lift a combat element of a battalion. It will have a track manoeuvre support vehicle that enables battlefield groups to cross obstacles—bridging, mine clearing—and of course an integrated training system. The shadow minister is right: it is a substantial project, the biggest one Army will actually deliver, of some $10 billion. It will go to first pass this year. From first pass, we will ensure that over the coming years the capability is procured. So that, when the ASLAV reaches its end of life—the ASLAV is our first infantry fighting vehicle—we will have the new vehicle, and there will be no operational gaps.

As we know, the 113 upgrade program only finished in the last few years, and its extended life will go through for many years yet. It is a substantial project. We are looking for industry to deliver as many innovative solutions as they possibly can.

Industry of course has been briefed, most notably by me, on various occasions—the LAND Environmental Working Group in Canberra on 11 November; in Geelong on 7 March; and recently in Adelaide, South Australia, on 29 April. Each time I have made it very clear that when the rubber hits the road, in terms of the tender, we are looking for industry to provide innovative solutions to deliver a fifth generation combat vehicle type. It must be a vehicle in manoeuvre forces with a First World army right now. We are not going to design a new vehicle. It will be military off-the-shelf in design. We will need to reach out and touch it. It does not mean we cannot develop it in Australia in terms of build, but we need to be able to reach out and touch and see that vehicle. We will need to be able to see how the battle management system is integrated the current battle management system under LAND 75 as part of that.

Industry needs to be innovative in its approach. It needs to give the government half a chance to maximise the work that we do in Australia. But it is going to come down to Australian industry to ensure they put forward bids that maximise their opportunity. It is going to require some innovation. I have already had discussions with local councils, with state governments and with a range of primes to ensure that message of taking an innovative approach is well and truly there.

Can I conclude by looking at a bit of history of vehicles, because it is a little instructive? LAND 121 phase 4 is currently looking at the option of manufacture and support in Australia from Thales, which is the Hawkei vehicle. I remember being here on the other side of the chamber asking the then minister: 'Why did you give $40 million to the joint light tactical vehicle—JLTV—US program to develop LAND 121 phase 4, but you gave nothing to local industry? Why were you prejudiced against local industry?' Of course he had no answer. We pushed them, and in the end they gave an amount—I think it was around $19 million; I might be off by one or two—to local industry. And where are we now? That $40 million to fund the vehicle variants under JLTV are no longer being looked at by the US; none of them are. The money we pushed the then government to use was then used in part by Thales to produce Hawkei, which is now the manufactured and supported in Australia option.

See this speech in context