Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Attorney-General, representing the Minister for Defence. In the last 24 hours, another 140-plus job losses have been announced in the naval shipbuilding sector: 128 at BAE Systems in Williamstown, in Victoria, and another 26 at ASC in Adelaide. This brings a total of over 1,200 jobs lost in Victoria, South Australia and New South Wales, at Forgacs, and many hundreds more job losses are predicted in the coming 12 months. Naval shipbuilders have said repeatedly that excluding Australian naval shipbuilders from the $2 billion naval supply ship tender is damaging. In light of this, will the government reopen or reconsider the tender that is currently limited to South Korea and Spain and allow Australian companies to compete?

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

Thank you very much, Senator Xenophon, for that question, and thank you for your customary courtesy in giving me advance notice of the question. Whenever a job is lost, and particularly when a job is lost in the shipbuilding industry, that is a matter for regret. It is also a matter for people to take responsibility for, and you know, Senator, as we all know on this side of the chamber, that the reason why the Australian naval shipbuilding industry has faced what has been commonly described as a 'valley of death' is that, for six years, the Labor Party when in government did nothing. Not a single Australian naval ship was commenced during the entirety of the six years of the Labor government. The future submarine program was postponed and postponed and postponed again, and the air warfare destroyer project was allowed to fall behind and was the subject of massive cost overruns. That is the legacy and that is the context.

You asked me specifically about the supply ship. The Navy needs to replace the current supply ship, the HMAS Success, as soon as possible, and the HMAS Siriusdoes not provide the full level of capability that the Navy needs. I said before that the former Labor government neglected the Australian naval shipbuilding industry. The Labor government knew, because Navy told them, that Success had to be replaced. They knew that, when Success had reached the end of its operational lifespan, Sirius would not be able to fill that gap and yet they delayed as well. No supply ship was commissioned or begun under the Labor government, although they well knew that that would leave an urgent capability gap as well, which this government is attempting to fill. (Time expired)

Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Given that the supply ships are worth up to $2 billion and all that work will go overseas under the current tender arrangements, and shipbuilders say that they could be part of at least a hybrid build so that hundreds of millions of dollars worth of work can take place here, why won't the government consider that in the context of allowing Australian industry to participate, as they have told me they can, so that we can stem the loss of critical skills and jobs in this sector?

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

The answer to your question, Senator Xenophon, is: because of the urgency of replacing HMAS Success, which is rapidly approaching the end of its operational life. As I said a moment ago, the former Labor government knew that, but they did nothing to ensure that the Success would be replaced by a ship commenced and built in an Australian shipyard. But I will tell you, Senator Xenophon, what we have done. You as a South Australian senator would well know this. Last week, the cabinet meeting in Adelaide announced that we would be bringing forward the Future Frigate program and that all of the future frigates would be built at the ASC shipyards in Adelaide—the biggest naval shipbuilding project in Australian history ever, brought forward by two years and commenced in Adelaide. That is the way this government is dealing with the legacy left to us by the former Labor government.

Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That very welcome announcement is still five years away. Being involved in a hybrid build, at least of naval supply ships, could stem those job losses. Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. What contracts will the government actually enter into over the next three years to stem these losses and prevent long-term and significant damage to our naval shipbuilding capacity?

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

Well, Senator Xenophon, I had begun to tell you. And let me give you the context here. When we came into office we learned, from the CDF and from the Secretary of the Department of Defence, that unless the future frigates program was brought forward, unless the future submarines were commenced, there would be a loss in the naval shipbuilding industry, particularly, Senator Xenophon, in your—

Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, a point of order: the question was, why isn't the Australian industry involved in the naval supply ships, even on a hybrid basis? That is the question. The minister is being very helpful, talking about projects in years to come—and I appreciate that—but not about the naval supply ships.

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

Your question did ask what contracts the government will enter into, so it is similar to what you are suggesting. Attorney-General, I will remind you of the question.

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

So, we have brought forward the construction of the future frigates. We have brought forward the construction of the offshore patrol vessels. And we will, towards the end of this year, be announcing the outcome of the competitive evaluation process for the future submarines. But Senator Xenophon, in relation to the HMAS Success, the urgency of the need to replace that vessel as it reaches the end of its operational life, is now so acute that we have to acquire a ship as soon as possible, and the fastest way to do that is to acquire it overseas.