Peter Hendy (Eden-Monaro, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am rising today to make some brief comments on the issue of maritime defence capability, in particular the forward program in terms of the submarine fleet. I know, Madam Speaker, this is a topic of interest to you as a former Minister for Defence Science and Personnel.

Earlier in my career, I was the chief of staff for the Minister for Defence. In that position I was heavily involved in work to ensure that the Collins class submarine program remained on track and provided the best possible maritime defence capability that was humanly possible.

It involved many hours of frustrating work. It was one of the most difficult policy and administrative issues I have dealt with in my career, which has spanned senior levels in both the public and private sectors. Ensuring the Collins class submarines operated at their maximum efficiency, were actually in the water doing their job and were properly integrated in terms of combat, command and control systems was the task at hand. It appeared to be a particularly fraught issue.

Unfortunately, at the time—and here I am talking about 2001—the minister was being bombarded with contrary opinions from the Department of Defence and the uniformed experts. It got to such a stage that the minister requested me to convene a special meeting in his office of all the relevant internal stakeholders. I did so and all the relevant top brass, the department secretary and the deputy secretaries were present—in fact, seven people were present.

Unfortunately, as the meeting, chaired by the minister, proceeded it was apparent that there were some seven different and conflicting views on how to deal with the issues at hand. Worse than that: it was apparent that the individuals would not be reconciled. This was the end result of years of bad decisions. It became very hard to extract ourselves from the vested interests.

I do not wish to see a similar result occurring in terms of the submarine program when we get to the replacement for the Collins class. It is not hard to find credible commentators that believe that the original sin in the case of the Collins class was the former Labor government's guarantee to build the subs in Adelaide. That was a decision more based on regional policy than military strategy. I would like to think that 10 years ago the Howard government saved the Collins class, and its remediation policies have meant the submarines have been able to largely fulfil their assigned role.

The coalition promised at the last election that the new submarine project will be centred on Adelaide. Any more specific commitment than that would have been grossly irresponsible in defence strategy terms. We need to ensure that the best capability is purchased, not simply have an industry policy propping up one region of Australia. I think that whatever decision is made there will be plenty of contracts and jobs for South Australia. This can be done without jeopardising the overriding priority of good defence policy.

I note that the Leader of the Opposition did the exact opposite in his recent speech on the topic. His speech, promising amongst other things that, under Labor, the submarines would be built in Adelaide without first doing the proper due diligence harked back to the protectionist, xenophobic unionism that we all thought had been relegated to the past—obviously, not.

And to add insult—literally, in this case to our Japanese allies —to injury, the Leader of the Opposition was a senior member of the last government that failed to advance the replacement submarine decision. They were happy to say in the Defence White Paper 2009 that they would buy 12 new submarines, but never explained where the money was coming from or any details on this important acquisition project.

Now the coalition government must fill a capability gap that will be created when the Collins class is retired.

Of course we will need to rely heavily on foreign technology to build the submarines. That is the case with the planes the RAAF fly and the tanks that the army operate, let alone much of the other equipment. To do otherwise would negligently endanger Australia's defence posture.

Having had some personal involvement in this issue a number of years ago, I am particularly heartened by the Prime Minister's statements in terms of the sensible priorities on this issue. I also want to congratulate Senator David Johnston on doing a very good job in an incredibly demanding portfolio. I hope that they stay the course and make the correct decisions on the future submarines for the good of all Australians.