David Johnston (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Foreign Affairs (Senator Bob Carr) to a question without notice asked by Senator Macdonald today relating to Australian Defence Force funding.

In so doing I want to say that the parliament should be very concerned. We have had reports of cuts in Defence, but a new low has been reached in the last 24 hours with respect to the support and supply of ammunition to Reserve soldiers, and I am told it is in North Queensland. A common metric for the measure of how well things are going in Defence over many years has been the supply of ammunition. Apparently it is one of the first things that begins to show up as being depleted in supply when funds are tight.

We heard yesterday and again today of men running around in training, being without blank ammunition in exercises and being asked to shout out the words, 'Bang! Bang!' Can I say that the first time I ever saw this was on Dad's Army. Captain Mainwaring and all of those guys on Dad's Army as I was growing up, with their picket rifles that were made out of wood, were told to shout, 'Bang! Bang!' It is embarrassing. It is morale sapping that highly trained people who are prepared to commit their lives to this country are asked to do that in training. That is the low ebb that this level of government incompetence has taken us to.

It is things like the rising sun badge on the Australian uniform being apparently under threat and no longer supplied and 51 FNQR, a unit with 33 per cent Indigenous Australian soldiers, having their operations substantially reduced because of cuts. I actually heard that one of our submarines is sitting on the hard at ASC in Adelaide and a committee was informed by people at ASC that the Defence department had said, 'Don't start doing the maintenance for at least six months because we haven't got the money.' We have not got the money and we are one month into the new financial year. How can you not have the money in August? In two words, Defence is an 'unsustainable mess'.

Dr Mark Thomson, one of the lead analysts in the government's own Australian Strategic Policy Institute has categorised defence finance as an unsustainable mess delivered to us by this minister and his representative minister here, who is probably the most cavalier, disrespectful minister in the government. He just waves away these allegations that people do not have money. He is not even concerned that people are training by saying, 'Bang! Bang!' He just says, 'No, not true'. He does not say, 'I am concerned about that; I did go and ask about that. I had a report on my desk first thing this morning when I heard about it because it is very serious allegation.' No, there is none of that. This unsustainable mess is met with cavalier disregard. Army training reserve days—usually 100 days per year for people who are committed to train to protect us—have been reduced from the 100 I mentioned down to 20 to 21. Most of them will not even turn up. It is not even worth putting on the uniform for that.

Richard Armitage is a very, very respected United States strategic adviser and public official. For him to chat us about the level of spending on defence is one of the lowest ebbs I have ever seen. It is a disgrace and this minister should be ashamed that someone of his standing has had to chat us. He should be more ashamed, because he is no orphan. There are Peter Leahy, former Chief of Army; Major General Jim Molan, who was in charge in Iraq; and John Cantwell, a very decorated, brave soldier who led us in Afghanistan. He says that this budget is a shocker. Also, of course, there is the well-renowned and respected Peter Cosgrove. He says that this government has lost the plot on defence.

No other portfolio had to stump up for this crazy budget surplus. Why was it only Defence that had to find the $5.5 billion? This is a complex, expensive and difficult portfolio, way beyond the expertise of these incompetent ministers. Why did they only go to Defence and treat it like an ATM? It is because they hate Defence. They hate Defence and they hate what Defence stands for—the strength to oppose aggression of our country. (Time expired)

Ursula Stephens (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is interesting to have to follow Senator Johnston and what can only be described as the most bizarre claims. We know we have shared a view in Australia that we support our defence forces, and our defence industries as well which is something that he just mentioned. The notion that a government would look to undermine defence spending and that we would be starting our conversation in question time today around the issue of blank rounds during exercises for reservists and the issue of the rising sun badge just goes to show that really the thing that the opposition does not want people to know is the extent of the current investment in the defence portfolio. I will give two examples of that if I could. The first is the redevelopment of Holsworthy Army Base. The redevelopment of that base will receive $870 million—for specialist equipment for our special air commando training facilities, parachute training and diver training, and for a six-metre deep pool. This is state-of-the-art investment to make sure that our defence personnel have the training facilities they need to maintain cutting edge skills. The idea that we have abandoned defence in the way that Senator Johnston has suggested really is an insult. And there is $179 million for the royal military school of engineering project, which is all about ensuring that we can rebuild the skills base that has dissipated out of the defence services over the last decade or so. It is an issue that we have all been dealing very closely with on the Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade, so I find it quite insulting that that would be Senator Johnston's attack today.

Let us go to this nonsense issue that was raised, the question asked of Senator Carr about using blank rounds. Senator Macdonald asked that question, suggesting that it was due to budget cuts. Quite frankly, let us get this story properly on the record. First of all, the Army advised quite clearly in Senate estimates that there is no shortage of blank or live ammunition and that ammunition has not been impacted by budget reductions. Everyone has been clearly thinking about how to reconfigure the defence expenditure. Of course we have asked Defence to find some savings. They were not the only department asked to find savings. And, as the Army has said, this issue about ammunition has not been impacted by budget reductions.

Let us get this issue on the table and get the truth out there: there is an issue that in some training areas for Army reservists there are environmental noise restrictions. In those circumstances, soldiers are advised. It is a general practice. It is called a dry drill. It is very generally understood and a common practice across the reservists, and again it has nothing to do with budget reductions. Army training, we know, continues to be very effective, whether involving dry drills or whether using blank or live ammunition.

The idea that this would be the critical, leading question from the opposition today in question time really beggars belief. I know the concern was raised about the rising sun badge and at the time Senator Carr did not have information on that. But that too was raised in Senate estimates and it was very clear from the information that the defence officials gave that it was the Chief of Army who made that decision to remove the rising sun badge from the downturned brim of the general duty grade 2 slouch hat. His decision had nothing to do with budget announcements or any other financial considerations. His actual justification for the decision—so that people do understand—was that the rising sun badge should never be hidden from view or worn pointed to the ground, as is the case when worn on the downturned brim of the general duty grade 2 slouch hat, because it is disrespectful.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern and Remote Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Australian Strategic Policy Institute said: 'Next year, 2012-13, the defence budget will fall in real terms by 10.5 per cent, the largest year-on-year reduction since the end of the Korean conflict in 1953. As a result, defence spending, as a share of GDP, will fall to 1.56 per cent, the smallest figure recorded by Australia since the eve of World War II.'

We are talking about the questions I asked today. The first question asked was whether reports could be confirmed that the iconic rising sun badge that has been worn as part of the uniform of Australian soldiers since 1901 was going to be removed. I have it on good authority—and forget about what Senator Ursula Stephens just said; she is talking about a different issue—that the rising sun badge will no longer be allocated as part of the Australian uniform. As a result of the question today, Senator Carr assured me that that is wrong and he assured me that the badge will continue to be given. I will hold him to account. If by asking that question, I have that assurance then I and every member of the Army will be delighted.

My second question asked whether it was true that reservist training would be cut from 100 to 21 days per reservist member. Senator Carr did not directly answer it, but I take it from his demeanour and from his non-answer that he disagrees with that. Again, I am assured by Senator Carr that the cutting of Army reserve training days to 21 is not true and that every reservist in Australia will be able to get at least 100 training days per financial year. Again, I have it in writing that that is not true, but Senator Carr has said I am wrong and that the 100 remains. I will be following Senator Carr with a microscope to see what happens with that.

My third question was about 51 Far North Queensland Regiment, one-third of whose soldiers are Indigenous people and whose role is to be the eyes and ears of Australia, and to interact with Indigenous communities, up on our remote borders. I understand from information given to me that training days are to be cut by 75 per cent. I accept absolutely the information that has come to me. Senator Carr is saying that is not correct. I know Senator Carr is not right and I am sure that, having made that assurance here in the parliamentary chamber, he is back on the phone as I speak, ringing the generals and saying, 'General, I don't care where else you cut defence spending but make sure it's not to 51 Far North Queensland Regiment, make sure it's not about the rising sun badge and make sure it's not about reducing reserve force training days.'

I know and have on firsthand authority from any number of reservists who contact me in my office in Townsville, the garrison city of Australia, that in recent weeks there has been no ammunition, live or blank. The troops have been going around pointing their weapons and saying, 'Bang, bang, you're dead!' because there is no other way they can indicate that their training is being effected. So let the Labor Party and Senator Ursula Stephens try to misrepresent the situation, but these are real cuts to our reserve training and to our reservists. I have put on the record that I am delighted with Senator Carr's off-the-cuff answers, which he knew nothing about but said them in the chamber, and I am going to hold him to them. And isn't every reservist and every Army member around Australia delighted! (Time expired)

Carol Brown (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of the answers to questions today about defence expenditure and the defence budget. Senator Stephens in her contribution touched on a couple of the issues, about blank rounds and the Army's rising sun badge, that were raised in the questions. Before I touch on those two issues I want to say that there is, of course, no greater responsibility for a government than the defence of Australia and Australia's interests.

The defence budget was developed following a comprehensive review of the department's budget to identify contributions defence could make across the forward estimates to support the government's broader fiscal strategy. The government has made its choices very carefully. None of the savings will impede our nation's defences. We will maintain an Australian Defence Force able to protect our interests and help maintain the peace and stability of our region. Most savings come from deferring some defence acquisitions and adjusting the defence capital equipment program, but they also come from delivering further operating efficiencies. Also planned is a reduction of 1,000 civilian positions in the defence department. These will be achieved primarily through natural attrition and the tightening of recruitment practices.

Notably, there will be no adverse impact on operations—all are fully funded. I repeat: there will be no adverse impact on operations; they are all fully funded. There will be no adverse impact on military numbers—Navy, Army or Air Force. There will be no adverse implications for kit or forces about to be deployed or on deployment. There will be no reductions in conditions or entitlements for service personnel other than those already being considered as part of the Strategic Reform Program. The focus of this budget's capability activities will be on improving airlift, land mobility and submarines, afloat support, communications, interoperability and electronic and cyber warfare. The total value of projects planned to be considered for 2012-13 is approximately $9 billion. So for Senator Macdonald and Senator Johnston to come in here and try to indicate to Australians listening to the Senate today that somehow the government is putting at risk Australians and Australia's welfare is absolutely untrue. It could not be further from the truth.

One of the issues Senator Macdonald raised in his question in the Senate today was about the use of blank rounds. Senator Ursula Stephens in her contribution to this debate has already indicated that the Army has advised there is no shortage of blank or live ammunition. Ammunition has not been impacted by the budget reductions. It is very important that that is repeated and reinforced, because it appears that senators on the other side just do not understand when you tell them that the Army has advised that there is no shortage of blank or live ammunition.

Another issue which Senator Stephens went to in her contribution was the Army's rising sun badge. She was talking about the wearing of the badge on the downturned brim of the general duty grade-2 slouch hat, which may be viewed as disrespectful. I understand the rising sun badge will remain proudly worn on the upturned brim of the ceremonial grade-1 slouch hat in plain view for all to see and reflect on when ceremonial duties are being performed. The rising sun badge is the proud symbol of the Australian Army and has become an integral part of the digger tradition. I understand that this is— (Time expired)

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

Many in our community, particularly the defence community, the defence industry community and those who are concerned about our national security, cannot wait until this government's time has expired. We have just had Senator Brown tell us that there are no conditions of service that will be impacted. Tell that to the single servicemen, 21 years and older, who have just lost their entitlement to a free trip home to see their loved ones. This Labor government have probably about seven sitting days remaining before the disallowance motion tabled by the opposition will take effect. They have that long to stand up and nail their colours to the mast and say whether they will actually take away that entitlement of a serviceman as part of the budget cuts or, indeed, whether they will live up to the rhetoric that we have just heard again about how much Labor values our defence men and women.

In terms of defence cuts and their impact on training, under the Hawke government when I was still serving, when they started limiting track miles and flying hours and mothballing equipment, we did have to do exercises and rather than use blank ammunition say 'bang bang'. As I look at this current government under Prime Minister Gillard, who has limited track miles, has mothballed equipment and has reduced flying hours, it comes as no surprise to hear that, despite what may be reported through the echelons in Senate estimates, the reality on the ground for people is that those kinds of cuts may be in place.

We have heard much about the fact that current operations are not effective. But we also know that, despite those claims and despite the comments about not really touching the reserves, we are hearing day to day, week in and week out and as we would go and talk with reservists that their training days are being cut. When I go to welcome home parades and when I speak to people who are in the reserves, that is what is occurring. That affects current operations because our reserves are integrally engaged with the regular forces. Whether you are talking about the Air Force, the Navy or the Army, the reserves not only deploy with regular forces at times but particularly they backfill a lot of skills. I spoke just last night about the 300-odd reservists who have been called up to work in DMO because their skill sets are required in the technical area. People who are operations officers working with the Air Force are being used in backfilling. There are communications specialists, medical officers, dentists and lawyers. All of these people support our operations, so it is a complete fallacy for this government to say that the cuts are not affecting defence.

We heard in estimates about things like the self-propelled artillery and we can see how this government just do not get it. They are saying that was the decision by Army to cancel the self-propelled artillery. The Army admitted that this is a less capable piece of equipment that they are now going to have to buy with more field guns. It is going to offer less protection to the troops and, perversely, because it takes more people to operate it, over its life it is actually going to cost the taxpayer more. The government says, 'Well, that is what Army advised us,' but, when pressed, what did Army say? They said that they would not have done it except for the government's budget cuts. So, yes, they advised the government on that course of action, but only because the government cut the budget. The budget expenditure as a percentage of GDP is now at pre-World War II levels—1938—and if you are any kind of a student of history you will know how poorly prepared Australia was for the Second World War.

The US Defense Secretary, Leon Panetta, has said of the US as they scale back with budget cuts that the most important thing they must do is not hollow out the force. It is not just the opposition saying that about the Australian situation; there are a number of people who have had long careers in defence, people who have been commentators working in the national security space. ASPI just today has come out with an article saying that a number of commentators have expressed 'dismay with the government's recent handling of defence'. It is not just that defence funding has been reduced substantially over the next few years; most observers conclude, probably rightly, that 'the government's long-term commitment to strengthen Australia's defence has evaporated'. The commitment has evaporated and the commitment to strengthen our defence means that their commitment to our national security has evaporated.

ASPI goes on to say that it is more to do with the 'way that defence is run', and I have certainly got much more to say in this place in the light of the defence procurement inquiry and looking at the impact of government initiatives—things like the Strategic Reform Program, where again cost-saving measures are being driven that are bringing about decisions like the self-propelled artillery decision, which is not in our national interest. (Time expired)

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The time for debate has expired.

Question agreed to.