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

I rise to note the work of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade in their Review of the Defence Annual Report 2010-11 and put on record my thanks to the committee secretariat for all their work and assistance, including the Defence adviser, Wing Commander Ashworth.

It is interesting that this discussion of the Defence annual report is being held in the shadow of the fact that, this morning, the fourth Secretary to the Department of Defence in four years announced his resignation. At least it complements, I suppose, having a third Minister for Defence in four years and 15 ministerial reshuffles in the Defence portfolio in four years, considering in the early days of the Department of Defence, over the last 100 years, secretaries stayed on average seven or eight years. Their terms are five years, but in the last four years rather than the one secretary staying for the five years we have had four in four years.

But the government said that there is nothing to worry about here. There is nothing wrong here. There is no way that you can look at four secretaries in four years and say that there is anything other than a significant egregious problem in the Defence Force precipitated by the minister's action and the minister's interrelationship with the Defence Force. It is not hard to see how and why this has built to this point.

Whilst the annual report covers it in detail, in the last four years $25 billion have been stripped from the Defence budget. Twenty-two thousand single soldiers, sailors and airmen and women had their return trip home cancelled—a condition of service dispensed with. If it were not for the coalition's disallowance motion, about which the government rolled over and caved into last Thursday, that entitlement to fly home for Christmas would not have been re-established. If it were not for the coalition's disallowance motion, 22,000 of our finest would have a condition of service taken away from them.

The cut of $25 billion includes $5.5 billion over this year and the three-year forward estimates, a 10 per cent cut in the Defence budget this year. The Defence budget as a proportion of GDP is the lowest since 1937 and next year it is purported to be lower again. This year it is 1.56 per cent of GDP, when it should be up towards two per cent. That is the expectation of NATO partners and NATO countries.

The Defence annual report speaks glowingly about Plan Beersheba and the closeness between regular and reserve forces in terms of the fourth generation cycle being introduced. Yet these budget cuts produce cuts of 35 per cent to the reserves and something like 30 per cent to cadets. We have 11,000 cadets. The cadet leaders were paid 48 days a year to train those cadets; it is now being cut to 33.5 days. So the work in the forward projections from the Defence annual report 2010-11 are now meaningless because of these substantial budgets cuts. In a fourth-generation cycle where a battalion task force sized group is required to rotate around with a regular brigade, with 35 per cent cuts in reserves it will be difficult to see how a reserve unit will force generate that task group.

The Defence Capability Plan, which is the plan that outlines the equipment procurement and purchases, has been cut because of this budget, with 46 per cent of projects having been impacted, either deferred or cancelled. The electronic warfare aircraft Growler—the additions to the F/A18 Super Hornet—has been announced but not budgeted. It is $1½ billion, and no-one can yet articulate where that money is coming from. The answer is the DCP must be cut again because there are no other funds for the government to pay for it from. The future submarine, $214 billion worth, is an announcement four years too late and puts our submarine force replacement in a perilous situation. Land 121 phase 3, which was announced as Rheinmetall MAN trucks as the preferred vehicle at the end of last year, has had no announcement from the government that that contract is complete. Ten months to do a contract to buy trucks? Is there any greater example that this government is making it up as it goes along?

A new white paper was announced because apparently the security situation in our region has changed. The changes since 2009 would seem to be linear and not egregious. The issue is that the government has cut the budget, so with a reduced budget the 2009 white paper is now universally considered to be irrelevant and deserves its place in the wastepaper bin. The new white paper is now being rushed through, which is odd, with the secretary's departure today having an unknown impact on the white paper. The coalition will simply scrap the 2013 white paper if elected. You cannot rush through a white paper. You cannot situate a strategic appreciation based on the paucity of funds that you are prepared to allocate and say that this is a sound, holistic, well-thought-through defence strategy. It is simply farcical.

There is no industry policy to speak of—certainly not one that will actually survive contact with the Labor Party. The $5½ billion worth of cuts include a 30 per cent cut to expenditure for industry this year. Companies will go to the wall. Hundreds, if not thousands of employees will lose their jobs. R&D in the Defence space will suffer. Whatever industry policy the government said they had for Defence is now worthless. The priorities of industry capabilities and strategic industry capabilities are now universally considered to have no funding attached to them and no relevance with them.

The question is what the government's response is. It is great that the member for Moreton is here on the other side of the table. He did a press conference this morning. Reading through the transcript I see that he was asked about the Defence cuts and what impact they were having. And what did the member for Moreton give us? He gave us an introduction to Australia's commitment to the Boer War at the time of Federation. He then spoke of changes in the last 20 and 30 years and then tried to weasel his way out of it. He could not explain succinctly the reason for the cuts. He could not outline the national security implications of the cuts. He could not outline the effect on the Queensland economy, especially in his electorate, because of the cuts. All he could give us was an expose on the Boer War, and apparently Campbell Newman is responsible for that as well! It was an appalling justification from a member of parliament trying to explain the Defence cuts.

Mr Perrett interjecting—

Then I will table your press conference transcript tomorrow, sir, because it is frankly one of the most appalling press conferences I have seen. A member of parliament could not even articulate the reason why the government has cut the guts out of the military. It was more embarrassing than anything else.

So, as we discuss the Defence annual report, as we look forward to the future, I say that the future is incredibly bleak in terms of this government's cuts to defence. The future of our fighting men and women is not a strong future. It is not a future of capability development. It is not a future of capability investment. It is the same old Labor future of cuts, cuts and cuts, robbing 'Fighting' Peter to pay 'Social Welfare' Paul. In the words of the Treasurer, you seriously should be condemned for it.

Jane Prentice (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade's review of the Defence annual report 2010-11. I thank the member for Fadden for his solid commitment to the defence and veterans community in Australia in his role as shadow minister for Defence Science, Technology and Personnel, and for being the coalition's go-to representative for the defence and veterans community in this House.

As the annual report notes, the 2010-11 period was an incredibly busy time for the Department of Defence and the Australian Defence Force. There are ongoing operations in Afghanistan, East Timor and Solomon Islands, and the ADF provided support to communities affected by natural disasters in Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria as well as in Pakistan, New Zealand and Japan. Defence also contributed strongly to border protection and other smaller operations. These operations and contributions were during a time of significant cost reductions, and the concurrent execution of the Strategic Reform Plan was one of Defence's highest priorities. In 2010-11, Defence noted that they reached their target of just over $1 billion.

With regard to Afghanistan, as I have noted previously in the House, the review for 2010-11 includes comments from Defence indicating the strong relationship between Australian and coalition forces and the people of Afghanistan, and notes the important role Australia plays in transitioning the operations from the International Security Assistance Force to the Afghan National Security Forces.

The committee also considered the very important role that Defence played during the natural disasters in 2010 and 2011, including the floods across Queensland in early 2011. Defence indicated that approximately 1,976 personnel assisted in some way. I know that the people of Ryan—in Bellbowrie, Indooroopilly, Fig Tree Pocket, St Lucia, Taringa, Auchenflower and Rosalie—strongly appreciated their efforts in the immediate aftermath and during the reconstruction process, as I know the member for Moreton's constituents did as well.

It is important to consider this review in the wider context of defence funding. As a result of the Gillard Labor government's economic incompetence and unwillingness to support Defence, they have most recently torn a $5.5 billion hole in the defence budget, with a total cut of $25 billion over the last five years. Clearly, Labor have been treating—and will continue to treat—the defence community with contempt.

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Deputy Speaker D'Ath, on a point of order: I find that term offensive, and I would ask the member to withdraw.

Yvette D'Ath (Petrie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Ryan?

Jane Prentice (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw. Clearly, Labor has been treating—and will continue to treat—the defence community with a lack of concern that they do not deserve.

The member for Fadden and the shadow minister for Defence, Senator the Hon. David Johnstone, had a big win recently, forcing the government to abandon its shameful cuts to the Australian Defence Force personnel travel entitlements. This stunning backdown is recognition of the poor policy development on the part of this incompetent Labor government. The backflip will now mean that more than 22,000 ADF personnel over the age of 21—personnel who are prepared to put their lives on the line for our country—will now be able to travel home to see their families. The member for Fadden worked diligently with the defence community and people such as Paul Murray at 2UE to introduce a disallowance motion into the House on Monday, 25 June 2012 which would have blocked the travel entitlement cuts. The Gillard Labor government did not allow that disallowance to go to a vote. Instead, Minister Smith simply rolled over—and he has been very quiet about why it took so long to actually listen and do the right thing.

Many ADF members from Gallipoli Barracks at Enoggera, in the Ryan electorate, and indeed from the wider defence community have communicated privately to me their displeasure and expressed their concerns about this Labor government and their now strained relationship with it, which commenced immediately with the former Prime Minister, the member for Griffith. Owing to the sensitive nature of their jobs and depending on their rank, it can be difficult for our troops to raise publicly many issues about which they are concerned.

The consequences of this Labor government's failure are clearly evident when you consider that Australia has had three defence ministers in five years, 15 reshuffles in the portfolio and four defence secretaries in four years. This week, Mr Duncan Lewis clearly had had enough and, after a strong and positive contribution to the ADF, resigned one year into a five-year term.

Unfortunately, it is not just those members on the opposite side of the House who have failed the ADF; it is also their partners in crime. The member for Lyne is very good at coming into the House and introducing motions about fair indexation for DFRB and DFRDB and feigning his support for the defence and veterans community. But, when it comes to an actual vote, the member for Lyne simply abstains from having to make what should not be a difficult decision. The member for Lyne showed his true colours again last week, as I understand that, regarding the cuts to ADF members' travel entitlements, the coalition had the support of the member for New England, the member for Denison and the member for Kennedy, and, yes, even the member for Melbourne and the Greens—but not the member for Lyne. He did not even support the veterans community when it came to the member for Fadden's amendments to the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment Bill. Nor did he support the coalition's ultimately successful move to reinstate travel funding for 22,000 of our troops.

The defence and veterans community expects the coalition to honour its commitments and promises should we win government, and I look forward to the opportunity to work with the defence and veterans community at Gallipoli Barracks, Enoggera and throughout Ryan and continuing to represent their concerns and wishes in parliament. Only the coalition is committed to properly resourcing defence. Only the coalition is committed to supporting our defence personnel. And only the coalition is committed to properly respecting the contribution of our veterans.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The 2012-13 federal budget announced reduced defence funding as a share of gross domestic product, reducing it to its lowest level in Australia in 74 years. Defence funding had not been lower than 1.6 per cent of GDP since—wait for it—the year 1938. We all know what happened in 1939. And with our service men and women still fighting the good fight in Afghanistan and maintaining other important peacekeeping missions elsewhere, now is not the time for the Australian government to be taking the axe to defence spending.

I present this speech on the report of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade's review of the Defence annual report 2010-11 as the member from a triservice city. Wagga Wagga is the home of the soldier: the Australian Army Recruit Training Centre puts the polish on all recruits, and Forest Hill on the eastern outskirts of the city has important strategic bases for the Royal Australian Air Force and Royal Australian Navy.

The coalition has always and will continue to support in a bipartisan way our operations in the field. Our support is a given, and that is the way it should be. But the impulsive and superficially expedient nature of Labor's enormous cuts in defence has left this nation without a credible strategic plan or defence administration. The opposition cannot be party to such poor policy.

With the release of the 2009 defence white paper titled Defending Australia in the Asia Pacific century: force 2030, Labor pledged to modernise and reform our defence forces. A funding commitment of three per cent real growth, sustaining defence funding at close to 1.8 per cent GDP, was given. It also outlined a strategic reform program delivering $20 billion over 10 years, with those savings being returned, as they ought to be, to defence for funding acquisitions. Despite being afforded virtually no detail as to funding—nothing unusual there; that is the Labor way—the opposition gave the plan bipartisan support. Since then, the reality of a totally disingenuous government has kicked in. Labor has taken the portfolio in precisely the opposite direction. A total of $17 billion worth of defence funding has either been cut, indefinitely deferred, cancelled or delayed. Then, four days out from the 8 May 2012 federal budget, Labor announced $5.5 billion in cuts to the Defence portfolio, with no strategic or defence policy justification, in what was clearly about the last-minute politics of a wafer-thin surplus we all now know was never going to and will not materialise. The only glib reference to defence in the Treasurer's budget was this:

Of $33.6 billion of savings, about half are reductions in spending … deferring some defence expenditure while prioritising support for current overseas operations …

It is nothing to do with defence reform or national security.

If Labor had not been so wasteful and so reckless with the public purse, cuts in the order of what defence and so many front-line services are now being forced to endure would not be being made. Labor is guilty of unacceptable public maladministration. Australia has not been in this position—

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I do not like the term 'maladministration' and I would ask that it be withdrawn. It is a serious—

Geoff Lyons (Bass, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Could the member for Riverina assist the chair.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

To suit the chair and to suit the House, I withdraw.

Geoff Lyons (Bass, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Labor is guilty of unacceptable public waste of taxpayers' money. Australia has not been in this position previously, especially at a time where we have men and women in combat. What a disgrace! The local defence industry is reeling from the cuts, with projects and work at an all-time low. What, might I ask, has the government been doing for the past three years with respect to the much-vaunted new submarines? The only action Labor has consistently and rather effectively delivered in defence is capability gaps. The defence minister has even conceded that nothing will even start until after the next election. Meantime, the cost of owning the Collins class sub has hit $900 million a year for virtually no capability. Repackaging the announcement of the 12 new submarines at a media conference three years after it was actually announced in the white paper is no substitute for providing real capability and strategic direction in defence. As usual, it is all talk and no action from this inept Labor government, which is more interested in spin than substance and more interested in diatribe than actual defence delivery.

Labor has also ignored its own defence capability plan by acquiring HMAS Choules and the Skandi Bergen, which are not outlined in the DCP but are needed because the minister failed with respect to amphibious lift capability and we had none; deferring the Joint Strike Fighter because that is what the US had done, which is remarkable given that the United States of America has more than 2,000 air-combat-capable aircraft including 190 F22s; and announcing the purchase of battlefield airlifters without having even the foggiest idea to what the nation was being committed. The C27 aircraft announced had been mothballed by the US because they lack the required capabilities to be effective, yet here we were, jumping into this billion-dollar-plus purchase investment. All the justifications the minister has put forward for this acquisition are highly contestable at best and just plain wrong at worst. There was no competition and we will be paying twice what we should—$700 million more, to be exact. The budget decision to bypass the LAND 17 project for self-propelled howitzers has damaged the centrepiece of the Army's high-firepower, low-manning modernisation. The consequences of the decisions of delaying the Joint Strike Fighter and cancelling altogether the self-propelled howitzers will mean that once again the defence department has made major internal savings which are returned to consolidated revenue, with no benefit to the defence of our nation, while breaking several election promises along the way. None of these cuts were specifically discussed and affirmed with departmental officials, who were completely ambushed by the press conference with the Prime Minister and the defence minister. The superficially expedient nature of these huge cuts means that Australia is being left without a credible defence administrative or strategic plan, and we simply cannot be part of that.

Locally, the $5½ billion from defence in the budget is a big blow to Wagga Wagga in my electorate of the Riverina, and it is going to have a great impact not just now but going forward. Twenty Army major capital facility projects have been delayed by as much as three years. This includes the construction of Kapooka's working accommodation. I understand that general running expenses at the Army Recruit Training Centre at Kapooka, at Blamey Barracks, have been reduced by a quarter as a result of the cutbacks. Last year 4,000 recruits went through the base—2,300 regular soldiers and 1,700 Army Reserve soldiers. This year 2,500 Regular Army soldiers will be going through Kapooka. It is an important strategic military base for the Army and for the nation. The cutbacks will mean such things as the commandant, who, instead of travelling to other bases for important face-to-face talks with other colonels and military heads will now be forced to do that by telephone. Is this satisfactory for a base which is so important to our defence capabilities? I think not.

Furthermore, we heard earlier this year that after the Anzac Day ceremonies there were a number of catafalque parties from our Defence bases who were not able to go out to the various towns and cities within the electorate and elsewhere to actually put on an Anzac Day ceremony for those towns and cities. When I inquired about this I was told that it was due to defence cutbacks. Happily, I am informed that this will not be the case next year and that these people will be able to go out to the bases but that the towns will need to get in early and book those important commemorations around Anzac Day so that they get the proper representation.

In the budget Labor drained $5½ billion out of defence. As I say, it reduced our spending back to 1938 levels and we all know that, in 1939, World War II broke out. We do not want to go down that budgetary path, particularly at this difficult time of trouble in the world, with ongoing commitments in Afghanistan—while we have an exit strategy, there are still important defence capabilities that we need there—and particularly when we have so many deployments overseas.

On the battlefield the military pledges to leave no soldiers behind. When our veterans return home, we should not be leaving them behind but, unfortunately, with the lack of Defence retirement indexation, we as a nation are doing that. It is a disgrace. I hear so many complaints from veterans whose pensions, superannuation and life savings are not being properly indexed, as they ought to be. These people are forced to endure rising cost-of-living pressures, as we all are, but their pensions et cetera are not keeping pace with the funds that they need to have a decent living. These people put their lives on the line for our nation, our parliament and our people. We should not be leaving them behind. On the battlefield, as I say, the military pledges not to leave anyone behind, yet we as a nation are leaving our veterans behind and this must stop.

I am glad that the government did a backflip on the home travel, because it is very important. It was a benefit taken away from them in the defence cuts but, thankfully, in recent days we have seen the government backflip. I welcome that backflip by the government, because it is important.

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Hear, hear!

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I hear 'Hear, hear' from the member for Moreton and he knows, as well as we do on this side, how important it is for those young people to be able to go home to their relatives and families. They go to far-away military bases to do their training, their deployments and they deserve the opportunity to go home, to refresh and regroup so that they can then continue their wonderful service to this nation.

According to the member for Fadden, the cost of reinstating the flights is just $15 million a year. That is money that would be well spent by this nation on behalf of those people who serve this nation so well. I am ashamed to say, though, that the military cutbacks of $5½ billion have cut such a huge swathe out of our nation's defence portfolio. It is a very important portfolio.

Another thing that I think the Labor government ought to urgently reconsider—we have heard disingenuous motions; we have seen people who have made a lot of noise by getting all hairy-chested about it but, when it comes to actually laying their cards on the table, they have not done one thing about it—and that is the fair indexation for our veterans, our veterans who gave this country so much, who put their lives on the line in the defence of the nation, who now deserve priority, fairness, justice and equity. They are not after anything that they were not entitled to. They are not after anything more than what they signed up for, but they do need to be properly and fairly indexed. I speak regularly to my good friend the former deputy commandant at Kapooka, Bert Hoebee, who writes me almost daily emails about this subject. I feel for Bert and I feel for his veteran colleagues, because I know how much they are hurting and I know how much they feel that this is unfair. It is unfair. It needs to be fixed, and if it will not be fixed by Labor then it certainly should be by an incoming coalition government—and let that be soon. I am hoping that we see justice, reason and equity to fix it on behalf of these veterans who gave this country so much.

Debate adjourned.