Linda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Defence, Senator Payne. I too would like to join Senator Back in congratulating the minister and the government for this really very new approach to defence strategic planning and strategy, so congratulations. Specifically, given the plan to deliver a more capable, agile and potent ADF, will the minister inform the Senate about the Integrated Investment Program released with the white paper earlier today?

Marise Payne (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Again, I thank Senator Reynolds for her particular ongoing interest in these matters and in the defence white paper as well. What the Integrated Investment Program does is to bring together all areas of investment in defence capability for the first time, providing transparency and certainty in our defence procurement plans. Given the size of the investment—which a number of senators have referred to this afternoon—in defence capability over the next decade and beyond, this is a very, very important focus through the Integrated Investment Program. It includes, in fact, the critical enablers, some of which I referred to in my response to Senator Madigan, which have been neglected for so long—enablers that are absolutely crucial to supporting the cutting-edge and new capabilities that we will be introducing.

We are going to be acquiring new and enhanced capabilities across the full range of capability domains, whether that is cyber or maritime and antisubmarine warfare, or strike and air combat, or land combat and amphibious warfare. We have set out a comprehensive plan for our future defence across the full spectrum of defence capabilities and enablers.

Not only is the Integrated Investment Program public and externally cost assured; it is also going to be available online and regularly updated to provide a real and functional resource for industry in particular and provide them with certainty, which has most certainly been lacking in previous years. Never before has an Australian government actually released the level of detail on its future plans for defence that we have today with this externally cost assured, 10-year Integrated Investment Program.

Through our defence white paper of this year, through the Integrated Investment Program, we will deliver that more capable, agile and potent Australian Defence Force, which Senator Reynolds has been a proud participant in and so many other Australians serve with great distinction.

Linda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Minister, in the light of the need to expand our maritime operations and antisubmarine warfare capabilities, will the minister provide details of those respective capabilities contained in the Integrated Investment Program?

Marise Payne (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can provide that detail, because it is an area of defence which was sorely neglected under the previous government. We are going to invest in our maritime capabilities with the most comprehensive regeneration of our Navy literally since the Second World War. In that process—and a number of these have clearly been announced in advance and are part of the white paper today—it includes our nine new antisubmarine warfare frigates, with construction to start in 2020. Those frigates are going to have a range and endurance to operate throughout maritime South-East Asia and be deployable from forward bases such as in the Middle East.

In air capability, we will acquire seven additional P8A Poseidon maritime surveillance and response aircraft, bringing that total to 15, significantly enhancing our maritime surveillance and response capability. In fact, I only recently—earlier this week—referred to that capability in relation to the P3s and the tragic events in Fiji. (Time expired)

Linda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Given the large range of defence capabilities, will the minister advise the Senate of the key enablers referred to in the Integrated Investment Program?

Marise Payne (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The enablers, the basic things that we require to do the job of Defence every day, have been quite neglected over an extended period of time, and we have made a very deliberate decision on this occasion to bring those enablers into the Integrated Investment Program because they have suffered from that underinvestment for so long. They include, for example, very significant upgrades of Defence bases and infrastructure around the country. That will have a significant regional impact in terms of jobs and local employment as those upgrades are occurring, and it will help us to support what is going to be our larger and more capable Defence Force.

We also are including $19 billion to assist in the operation and maintenance of the Defence estate. Most fundamentally, the basics like information and communications technology will be brought, hopefully, into the 21st century in many ways. It is an area that has suffered from significant underinvestment. (Time expired)

Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is for the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Brandis. Reports today indicate that your government has walked away from major tax reform, and yet today you have announced a major increase in defence spending. Given the so-called budget emergency and your refusal to end huge tax concessions like negative gearing and like the concessions in the superannuation system, Minister, how do you intend to pay for it?

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

Senator Di Natale, your question addresses two important topics—one is tax reform and the other is the defence white paper—and on both of those important matters of national discussion this government has been very agile. Let me deal with them one at a time.

Senator Di Natale, as you know because it has been much discussed in this chamber since late last year, the government has initiated a national conversation about tax reform in which many voices have been heard on a variety of topics. One of those topics about which much has been heard is whether or not there should be a change to the tax mix by having an increase to the GST. That was a discussion, in fact, initiated by the Premier of South Australia, Mr Jay Weatherill, and the Premier of New South Wales, Mr Mike Baird. Having heard the voices of all stakeholders in that discussion—state premiers, local government, party representatives in this parliament, economists, commentators and industries—the government has decided to rule out an increase to the GST, but there remains nevertheless a long way to go in the national discussion about tax reform.

In relation to the defence white paper, I join with my colleagues on the government side in congratulating Senator Marise Payne on a magnificent body of work. I should also acknowledge the contribution in laying the foundations for that body of work of previous defence ministers Senator Johnston and Mr Kevin Andrews. Senator Di Natale, the fiscal outlook incorporates the defence white paper and the next update of our fiscal position will be released as usual in the 2016-17 budget.

Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Minister, given your agility in ripping out $50 billion from the public hospital system and flexibility in refusing to fund year 5 and 6 of the Gonski reforms, can you tell us what future agile and flexible manoeuvres you will use to cut further services that the Australian people want and deserve?

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

Senator Di Natale, let me correct you: there has not been a reduction to Commonwealth spending on education nor has there been a reduction in Commonwealth spending on health. The fact is, Senator Di Natale, as you acknowledged in your original question, when the government were elected 2½ years ago we faced an unprecedented budget position as a result of the ruin left to us by the previous Labor government and in particular by the previous Labor finance minister, now the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, Senator Wong. So we had to find economies, but we also had to deal with areas of significant neglect left behind by the previous government. One of the areas of significant neglect was defence. The proportion of GDP spent by Australia on defence had fallen as a result of that neglect to the lowest proportion of GDP since 1938, and we make no apologies for addressing that neglect. (Time expired)

Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Minister, is your refusal to make any meaningful changes to negative gearing, any meaningful changes to ending those huge tax breaks in the super system and any meaningful changes to ending fossil fuel subsidies a sign that you are governing for the top one per cent rather than ordinary Australians or is it just a lack of courage?

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

Senator Di Natale, you mentioned negative gearing. Might I remind you, as I reminded the chamber earlier in the week, that negative gearing arrangements are availed of not by people at the top end of town, not by the wealthy one per cent and not by the top decile of income earners but by middle-class Australians—nurses, teachers, policemen and tradesmen—because they want to invest in an asset so that they can get ahead. We say to those Australians: 'We will back you. We will back you to the hilt. We will back your enterprise. We will back your ambition. We will back your aspirations.' The Australian Labor Party on the other hand wants to introduce a policy in relation to negative gearing that would have the result of taking the value out of the principal asset of most Australians—that is, their house—and we will not have a bar of it, Senator Di Natale. We will stand by Australian homeowners. (Time expired)