Senate debates
Tuesday, 18 November 2014
Questions without Notice: Take Note of Answers
Defence Procurement
3:02 pm
Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source
I move:
I wanted to take note of the future of our submarines because it is too important for this government to cut corners when it comes to our naval capabilities. The government has the power under Defence procurement guidelines to ensure a funded project definition study is undertaken for our future submarines. This is what the government should do. It is deeply troubling that Senator Abetz refuses to match Senator Johnston's refusal to commit to this simple recommendation made by the Senate committee report. In fact, it would be a national scandal if the government did not undertake a competitive tender including a funded project definition study for this multibillion-dollar acquisition.
We have heard all the excuses so far. The latest is that going through a proper process may lead to a capability gap. This is just absolute nonsense and rubbish and was demonstrated to be so by expert witness after expert witness at the Senate committee hearings into this issue. These experts testified that there remains sufficient time to conduct a competitive tender including a project definition study for the future submarines while avoiding the capability gap. These were experts like retired Commodore Paul Greenfield, who said:
… there does not have to be a capability gap if we get on with it now.
The government should listen to the experts and get on with this vital project.
To give you an example of the sheer incompetence of this government, last week the Minister for Defence announced that he was ruling out a military off-the-shelf option for a new submarine fleet, but this was a decision that we took 18 months ago. So it has taken this government nearly 15 months to make the same decision that we took 18 months ago. So congratulations; you've had the foot to the floor, you're on top of your brief! Eighteen months ago the previous government took this decision. The minister went on to say at the Submarine Institute speech last week that Australia's next submarine will have a longer range and endurance than any diesel electric submarine currently available off the shelf. Twelve months wasted. Twelve months pursuing another thought bubble of the current Prime Minister, who went off to Japan, had a bit of a chat with the new Prime Minister up in Japan, came back, ordered Defence, overruled the minister, ordered DMO: start looking at buying Japanese submarines; they are pretty good, and we should grab hold of them. Twelve months later—12 months of wasted time—what we see now is the minister ruling out the option of buying existing Japanese submarines.
Under the Defence procurement guidelines, the minister could put in place a funded project definition study and he could do it immediately to ensure there is no capability gap. But just like when it came to the Prime Minister telling Defence he wanted jump jets—or STOVLs, as they are known—to be used on our LHDs, and Defence said, 'Oh, my goodness!', we have seen in this morning's paper that they are going to be a waste of money. (Time expired)
No comments