Andrew Hastie (Canning, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

It has been a long afternoon and, true to form, those opposite have come at us with red herrings. We have heard about unicorns and John Curtin—who, by the way, I think did a pretty good job during World War II. We have had quotations from Dr Johnson, obfuscation and distraction. I thought this MPI was about education, but, seeing as they have raised same-sex education and defence, I will continue and go for the free-for-all like those opposite.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. As the Prime Minister noted in question time, not one question was asked about the 2016 Defence white paper, which is a very sound document that has left this government well placed to deal with the challenges of the 21st century. As you know, innovation is at the heart of the defence white paper. I suggest there are two types of innovation. One is intellectual innovation as expressed in our strategic and defence outlook. This government is positioned to continue to build the US alliance, maintaining peace and order in the Indo-Pacific region. We are also well positioned to continue our fight against Daesh, or Islamic State, in the Middle East. We are going to continue to disrupt, degrade and defeat Islamic State.

Contrast that with Labor's six years in government. I will take your minds back to 2011, when the then Minister for Defence, the member for Perth, midway through the war decided to launch a book called An Unwinnable War: Australia in Afghanistan. In the middle of a war, that was the extent of his intellectual innovation when it came to policy for Afghanistan.

We are also innovating in industry—our defence industry particularly. The government has announced $1.6 billion towards innovation over 10 years. We have a centre for industry capability which is being funded to the tune of $230 million, we have a next-generation technology fund for $730 million and we have a new virtual defence innovation hub for $640 million.

The government has, of course, allocated funding for all of this, unlike Labor, which is yet to fund any of their promises. We are looking at $29.9 billion over 10 years, amounting to a total expenditure of $447 billion, which takes Defence spending back up to two per cent of GDP. My colleagues have reminded everyone today, but I will do so again, that under Labor Defence spending was taken to its lowest point since 1938—pre-World War II expenditure, which is unacceptable.

Another important element when it comes to defence strategy is having the right leadership in place. Under the Prime Minister, we have a sensible, measured, considered, calm, clear-eyed leader—someone used to making decisions, managing risk and balancing priorities; and someone who, incidentally, is also engaged with the history of the region and strategic policy. The question the Australian people will have to ask this year is: who do they want at the helm guiding this country? I suggest that the Prime Minister is the man for that job.

Contrast that with the current Leader of the Opposition, who, on 20 January 2016, could not make up his mind whether or not to support freedom of navigation in the South China Sea. In fact, he refused to back his own defence spokesman. When asked whether he would like to see a unilateral exercise by Australia, the Leader of the Opposition said he was not going to start running the Navy. 'I'll leave that question to the Navy,' he said. Rather than quibbling, Australians prefer a bit of leadership. It appears the Leader of the Opposition could not even make up his mind on that subject, but, more importantly, it hints at a deeper problem, which is that it is the role of political leaders to make decisions on behalf of the Australian people and the Defence Force. In fact, it is absolutely critical—it is part of your job. I say to those opposite: welcome to the big league. This is where the decisions are made about the defence of our country. If the Leader of the Opposition cannot man up, I hope that the election is called sooner rather than later so that we can just get on with governing this country. I should remind him of a book worth reading, Supreme Command, by Eliot Cohen, which goes into detail about this. One of you opposite should buy it for him. It will help him out.

Finally, from the point of view of the state of Western Australia, I am proud to see that there is going to be a lot of investment—significant investment, in fact—including a $200 million redevelopment of Campbell Barracks. In addition to that, we are going to see HMAS Stirling invested in and an upgrade of the wharf facilities, which will make it a better fit to receive US ships.

See this speech in context