Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Speaker. My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, Senator Brandis.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

'Speaker'! Where did you get that one from?

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President! I refer the minister to the press conference on April 16 2015 at which Mr John Birkler, Director of National Security Research Division at RAND Corporation, confirmed that RAND's report on Australian shipbuilding failed to address the building of Australia's future submarines because the government's charter directions were to exclude submarines. Can the minister confirm that the government specifically directed the contractor to ignore Australia's submarine-building capabilities in the analysis?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am sorry to say that I am not familiar with Mr Birkler's statement, but I will check it and I will get back to you.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I refer the minister to table 3.3 on page 38 of the RAND report, which lists Australia's future submarines as 'an offshore build'. Will the minister again confirm that RAND Corporation was told to ignore Australia's submarine-building capacity because the Prime Minister has already done a secret deal with the Japanese government to build Australia's future submarines?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am not familiar with the instructions to the RAND Corporation, but I will have a look at them and get back to you in relation to that specific matter. But in relation to the second element of your question, I can tell you that no decision has been made—

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You voted for it in NSC and you know it.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can tell you, Senator, being the only person in the Senate at the moment who was a member of the National Security Committee of cabinet, that no decision has been made of the kind you suggest.

Senator Conroy interjecting—

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Conroy, you have asked your question.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. I refer the minister to the Japan Times last week, which reports that the Japanese National Security Council will meet to decide whether or not to participate in the bid to build Australia's future submarines. And a Japanese government source stated that Japan is highly likely to be selected. Why does the Japanese government believe they have a deal with the Prime Minister to build Australia's future submarines?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have not seen last week's Japan Times, but, as it happens, by coincidence I did happen to read last Friday's London Times, which contained a report to similar effect—that is, that the National Security Council of Japan was meeting this week. And, according to that report, the National Security Council of Japan was expected to authorise Japan to bid in the competitive evaluation process for the Australian submarine.