Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Jacqui Lambie Network) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Defence. Library research on the number of starred officers in the Australian Defence Force—that is, generals, admirals, air marshals and the like—demonstrates that the Australian Defence Force has been growing its senior command by an enormous amount over the last few decades. In the last decade, there has been an increase in starred officers despite a reduction in ships, aircraft and boots on the ground. Since 1983, the ratio of starred officers to enlisted personnel has increased by about eight times. Forty years ago, there was one general for every 1,800-odd serving people. Now there is one for every 250. Minister, what benefit does the Australian Defence Force get from having so many senior officers?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Lambie, and thank you, President, for the question. The general proposition is that—

Honourable Senator:

An honourable senator interjecting—

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Okay, that was not intended, actually. Sorry. The overarching proposition is that the military, over time, has had to adapt and modernise to a very different operating environment to the one that you might have been referring to when the ratio was one to 1,800. I am advised that over the last three years Defence has experienced some 13 per cent growth, representing an increase of 13 one-star, 15 two-star and two three-star officers in senior ADF appointments, driven by government outcomes and the need to maintain capability. Growth relating to government directed outcomes includes: support to the COVID-19 response, national bushfire recovery, Queensland floods, overseas operations, the nuclear powered submarines program and the Defence Strategic Review. Other growth has supported the Inspector-General of the ADF Afghanistan inquiry and the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide, the enhancement of space, cyber and intelligence functions and the enhancement of operational cooperation and interoperability. The brief I have says that Defence will continue to review all aspects of the ADF to ensure it is able to deliver on government direction and be sustainable and fit for purpose. More broadly, obviously there remains an ongoing challenge and an imperative for recruitment—which the senator is well aware of—which the ADF is seeking to address.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Lambie, a first supplementary?

Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Jacqui Lambie Network) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, this morning we have seen further reports that the Australian Defence Force has stuffed up another ship procurement. The $45 billion—that's right, $45 billion—taxpayer funded Hunter class frigate program is under fire, yet again, from the ANAO for being 'poor value for money'. AUKUS is a multi-decade program set to cost 10 times what the frigates will cost. Minister, how can the Australian people possibly have any confidence that AUKUS won't be just another stuff-up?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In relation to the Hunter class procurement, this is something, as the senator knows, that when I was in opposition I asked a lot of questions about. It may well be that, with hindsight, Mr Pyne might have made a different decision than the one that he made. We came to government and we inherited this program. As you know, as a consequence of the Defence Strategic Review, the government commissioned a Navy surface fleet review which included the Hunter frigates. Obviously, the government will work methodically through the recommendations of that review, which was received in the last couple of months. I think the Deputy Prime Minister has made clear that the government will respond formally in the early part of next year. More broadly, the point about defence procurement and its capability in doing that, we are very conscious of the importance of trying to continue to reform— (Time expired)

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Lambie, a second supplementary?

Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Jacqui Lambie Network) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, despite the increased number of starred officers, the ADF continues to get no better at procurement and puts our national security at risk. There is a long list of failures from helicopters to submarines to ships and much more. Neither the Chief of the Defence Force nor the secretary—both lifelong bureaucrats in Defence—has owned up to any of its failings or taken responsibility. The only consistent 'general' these men have is general incompetence. Minister, why is the government swallowing everything the ADF gives it and not holding either the CDF or the secretary to account?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator, it is the case that there have, in the past, been procurement challenges. I don't agree with everything you've said, but they have been identified in a range of reports. Defence procurement is obviously a very complex process. I would say that what we are seeking to do is to try and ensure, particularly with AUKUS and the establishment of the Australian Submarine Agency, that there is a dedicated entity that is focused single-mindedly on this enterprise. In your first supplementary question, you correctly identified that the AUKUS undertaking is probably the largest procurement that a government has entered into. It is critical we get it right and that we learn from the mistakes that were made in the past so that they are not repeated. Certainly, the government is very focused on working to ensure that occurs. (Time expired)