Andrew Hastie (Canning, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Defence) Share this | Hansard source

History is for historians; we are people of action in this House. The question is: what we do now? The coalition knows there is a defence strategic review underway and it will report in March. We look forward to the results. As I said, the situation is dire for our country. The invasion of the Ukraine by Russia has potentially changed China's calculus for the reunification of China, potentially taking Taiwan by force. If you think I'm exaggerating, I point to the remarks of the US admiral Philip Davidson, who in his valedictory remarks to the US Senate Committee on Armed Services last year said China may well try to move on Taiwan in the next six years. This has been supported by a US Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, and also by the US Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Mike Gilday, in October. Just this week Kevin Rudd, the former Prime Minister said:

If we fail to navigate the next five years carefully, there is a grave risk that by the late 20s and the early 30s, we could well find ourselves on the cusp of armed conflict.

So my question today for this government is: what is the government strategy to create a deterrent hedge if we can't get key capability by 2027? This will be answered in the DSR, but I want to note that today. The Minister for Defence acknowledged in a speech last week the need for impactful projection, and I've got to say that that is one of the dullest expressions ever penned by a public servant in this country. Impactful projection—what does that actually mean? The real question is: what progress is being made to acquire missiles and strike capabilities that will meaningfully deter any adversary out past the archipelago to the north. We've been calling for the need for long-range strike capability for missiles and how we project lethal deterrents including B-21 bombers. The question I have today is: are B-21 bombers being considered by the government? I note what the Prime Minister said recently in an interview with Greg Sheridan in the Australian, where he indicated preparedness to spend what is necessary to restructure the ADF and acquire new assets, including missiles, drones and cyberwarfare capabilities. Just last week former Labor minister Kim Beazley, someone who is rising above the partisan politics of the day, said we must raise defence spending to a significant number, well above two per cent and hinting at three per cent, which I agree with. Does this government agree with Kim Beazley on that point? What are they going to do about it? The other question I have is: has the government commenced work on implementing the PM's stated intentions to increase the defence budget and do what is necessary to achieve defence outcomes?

I will close by finishing where I began and say we will work constructively with this government because I know what it's like to serve under a government that is adrift strategically, adrift economically and creates bad policy— (Time expired)

See this speech in context