Phillip Thompson (Herbert, Liberal National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Defence) Share this | Hansard source

I want to pick up on what the member for Bruce said. The Fuel Security Act 2021 provides a legislative framework for a government to establish a national fuel reserve through an industry minimum stockholding obligation, and it's something that we funded for the bill. I'd like to also make note that whilst a lot of my questions were meant to be going to the Minister for Defence, he's not here today. He's sent in the B-team—not even a cabinet minister—on his behalf to come here and answer questions. I'm not expecting much from this new government, and neither can anyone in defence.

We are in some of the most uncertain circumstances since World War II. We need to be constantly looking to improve our capability and invest in our people so we're ready for whatever's around the corner. That's why the former coalition government took the important decision to ensure our soldiers on the front line have the right kit, and to ensure the men and women who put on the uniform every day, with the Australian flag on their shoulder, have the tools they need to do their job. We must be completely satisfied that they have everything they need to do their duty and that is to fight and win our wars.

Those important decisions have now been cast under a cloud of uncertainty after the recent change of government. Projects that are meant to have been announced have stalled or been put on hold. That's not surprising after the minister announced the Defence Strategic Review would be led by a former Labor defence minister who presided over the biggest cuts to Defence since 1938. We're not against reviews. We need to just ensure that this isn't a disguise for more cuts. The defence minister consistently used the review as a stalling tactic when questioned on ongoing projects and procurements.

Today I'd like to encourage the defence minister, who's not here today, so the Minister for Veterans Affairs who's here on his behalf, to tell the Australian people and to tell the brave men and women who serve our nation, that there is certainty for certain projects like Land 400 Phase 3 and the Black Hawks. The minister is well aware of the issues that have been plaguing the MRH-90 Taipans. There have been nine instances where the helicopters have been unable to fly in the last year, and $37 million has been spent by Defence to hire civilian helicopters to maintain capability while they were grounded. They have not been fit for purpose for some time. And while we could debate the decision on why they were purchased in the first place, this issue has become urgent. That's why the former defence minister listened to the people who use the aircraft, the people who fly in it, the soldiers who use it and the pilots, and that's why we decided to acquire the tried and tested Black Hawk.

The wheels were set in motion to acquire Black Hawks and negotiations started with the US. But on the same day the US government approved 40 new Black Hawks for the Australian Defence Force, the minister hinted that the decision was under review as part of the Defence Strategic Review. I was CASEVACed from Afghanistan in a Black Hawk. Many of my friends were airlifted out in a Black Hawk. It is tried and proven. So my questions to the minister are: Why has there been a delay in purchasing the Black Hawks since the US approval was provided? When will the decision be made? And is the decision under review as part of the DSR? I note that no decision is a decision.

Land 400 Phase 3 is a decision that should already have been made. Land 400 Phase 3 is to acquire 450 infantry fighting vehicles to replace the current M113 armoured personnel carriers, which date from the 1960s. I have ADF members in my electorate who are still operating these relics, which are from the middle of the last century. Tenders had been shortlisted. The decision was due to be made in September, which was two months ago, but there's been nothing except references to the Defence Strategic Review and ongoing processes. Only the other day we saw media reports that the DSR is hinting at IFVs are not to play an important role in our future capabilities.

I ask the minister: What is the future of 400 phase 3? What is the reason for the delay and has the delay created a capability gap? Is the delay because of the DSR, is it just awaiting a cabinet decision or is it just another example of Labor using the DSR as a disguise for cuts to Defence? No decision is a decision. I'm happy that the Minister for Defence Industry has graced us with his presence, albeit somewhat late. Since some of these pertain to your portfolio, I'd like the minister to explain what's happening with Land 400 Phase 3. I think the people of Australia need to know what's happening. We need a capability that can protect our people on operations, and throughout the country.

See this speech in context