David Fawcett (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to support this motion by Senator Van and, in doing so, will talk about the importance of the production of defence capability by Australian industry as being a critical enabler not only to our military capability in times of war but also as a deterrent factor to dissuade potential adversaries from taking action because they know we have both the capability and the will to respond. In that context, it's important to realise that we're not talking in abstracts here. The Defence strategic update 2020, the Defence strategic review 2023, both highlighted that Australia no longer has the 10-year warning time to major conflict in our region that for decades government have worked to. In fact, alliance partners and others in the region have highlighted that they believe the peak threat in our region is indeed around the 2028-29 time frame, and there are calls from both Europeans and North Americans to be ready in that time frame.

When it comes to supporting defence industry, though, we need to move beyond the rhetoric, and when we see the Albanese government's defence industry development strategy, it is full of rhetoric which is not matched by the contractual commitments that will allow Australian companies to continue to invest in their people, in their facilities and in their productive capacity. Those contracts are important. If we go to the recent NATO meeting in Washington, where Jens Stoltenberg and other heads of governments from Europe and North America came together, they were calling for an increase in the production capacity of industry in Europe and the States. I was struck by the comment of the defence minister from Estonia. What he highlighted was that what industry was saying to him was that, unlike Russia, where President Putin can turn any factory into a defence factory at the will of government, in a democracy, industry needs contracts if it is to take the decisions to invest in people and equipment and IP to actually produce the things that a nation needs.

One of my concerns with the defence industry strategy that we see from the Albanese government is that, when it comes to defence industry development, they again largely default to grant programs, so you can have a look at where they offer grants as opposed to contracts for actual equipment. I contrast that, for example, with a Queensland company called SEATRANSPORT, who have developed a stern-loading vessel which they sell into the civilian market. The US Marine Corps, when they look at it, go, 'That could suit our purpose. We will give you a contract. We will lease one for three years so we can trial and see if will fit our need to equip a fleet with it.' So they find ways of actually giving contracts to companies, in this case even an Australian company, where so often the Australian government prefers to look overseas as opposed to dealing directly with Australian companies for critical capability.

We see that the Defence Strategic Review by the Albanese government has not only brought in a two-year delay to the development of some of our critical capabilities but their concept of 'no configuration change and minimum viable capability' means that even where Australian industry has developed world-leading capabilities—and I think here of the antiship missile defence capability that is delivered by the Australian CEAFAR radar, by the CEA company, and the 9LV combat system by the Adelaide based Saab—that is better than anything, for example, that the Americans can deliver, it will not be on our future fleet of general-purpose frigates.

So despite the Australian taxpayer helping to fund these capabilities, what we see is the Albanese government deciding to purchase offshore and ignoring the long-term investment that has built up these capabilities. Companies will not survive without contract and they won't invest in new capability without contracts. So when we look at things like lessons of Ukraine, the fact we need multiple platforms that are affordable, to some extent expendable and armed, I am appalled by the announcements recently that the MQ-28 Loyal Wingman, which was envisaged to have communications, ISAR and weapons, the defence industry minister said, 'Yes, weapons will come down the track.' If we believe the strategic circumstances are real, arm the Loyal Wingman Ghost Bat now.