MONDAY 24 APRIL 2023

E&OE…

ANDREW HASTIE: For the last year the Albanese government has been telling the Australian people that we are facing the most challenging strategic circumstances since the Second World War. Last week the Foreign Minister took the stage at the National Press Club and said this and I quote, our region faces circumstances in some ways unprecedented. And these circumstances require responsive unprecedented coordination and ambition in our statecraft end quote.

The statement released today by the government called National Defence, says the current strategic circumstances are now radically different. We now face as a nation, the prospect of major conflict in the region that directly threatens our national interest. So, if you are hoping for unprecedented coordination, and ambition from the Albanese government today, you have every right to feel let down. Because the Albanese government has failed to deliver the sort of action that our strategic circumstances require.

The Albanese government has accepted the analysis of the defence strategic update of 2020 delivered by the former coalition government and has also continued AUKUS initiated by the former coalition government.

But today what we've seen is strategic doublespeak, saying one thing and then doing another. Today's announcement is a smokescreen to hide the truth about the DSR. The delays to strategic direction, the deferral of spending and the cannibalizing of capability as the Labor government costs you within the defence budget. We won't see a national strategy document until 2024. They've delayed a strategy until next year, and if we are in such a dangerous strategic period, as we all agree that we are, we've lost another year of defence preparedness without a guiding strategic document. We won't see any new money. We see the government funding the DSR recommendations through offsets, cannibalising capability. As Peter Dutton and I both warned against only a month ago. Army capabilities has been cannibalised important programs like Land 400 Phase 3, the Infantry Fighting Vehicle program have been cut from 450 to 129 vehicles. The Defence Minister has talked about an increase in defense spending over the medium term and next decade but we don't see any increase to the defense budget today. This indicates a fundamental lack of seriousness about the strategic challenges facing this nation. We see a degradation of land power by cutting the Infantry Fighting Vehicle program from 450 to 129 vehicles. Army currently has three mechanized battle groups, the third Royal Australian regiment in Townsville, the sixth Royal Australian regiment in Brisbane, and the seventh Royal Australian regiment in Adelaide. Those three mechanised battle groups are an important part of our land power, and they will be cut to just one mechanized battle group. The simple truth is that our troops will have less protection in close combat, infantry are most effective when fighting with armored support in a combined arms context. And even with the promised expansion of long range strike capability, you still need to provide security to those assets and forces and the cuts today degrade this capability.

As the Chief of Army Lieutenant General Simon Stewart has said previously and I quote, the infantry fighting vehicle is the last piece of that combined arms fighting system that we need to ensure our people have what they need to get the mission done and to survive in the future. And that includes a forward deployment of the HIMARS into the archipelago, if that were ever to occur, they would still need close infantry support in a mechanised context. There is also no sense of urgency today. The mission is clear we must respond to our strategic circumstances. We haven't seen a strategy. There is no new money and we are cannibalizing capability.

Finally, I do want to make a point about this process. Today's announcement on the eve of ANZAC Day is tricky politics. The Albanese government is using Anzac Day as a smokescreen, hoping the Australian people wouldn't notice some of these trade offs and cuts to capability. But we're calling them on this magician's trick. And we will hold them to account over coming days and months. We'll be having more to say about this as we digest this large document which was only briefed to the opposition half an hour before the Minister for Defence went live with the announcement. I now take any questions. Thank you.

JOURNALIST

What action would you like to see the government take on their Henderson dry docks that the previous government committed funds to?

 

ANDREW HASTIE

The previous government committed to the Henderson dry dock $4.3 billion. And we'd like to see that built at speed along with many other capabilities that we need to build over the next decade or so. The second drydock is absolutely critical. Now, we only have one on the East Coast. And it's really important, particularly with the special place that Western Australia will be taking in our defence strategy going forward. We've got AUKUS, we've got the forward rotation West being established here, we're going to see more allied ships coming alongside in Perth. And it's really, really important that we have a drydock that we can support our own navy and also the navies of our allies in the future years.

 

JOURNALIST

The review has highlighted some problems at Henderson, is the previous government to blame for those issues?

 

ANDREW HASTIE

Look, government has been in power for one year now. And this review is their review. And we welcome further investment in Henderson to build on investment that former coalition government made over the last decade. And we want to see speed and a sense of urgency, a sense of mission from this government, it will take sacrifice to make sure that we realise the capabilities that we need to realise, AUKUS will take sacrifice. And that's what we're calling on the government to do. We see no new dollars announced today. And somehow all these capabilities are going to come into being without extra spending? It sounds like the Deputy Prime Minister lost the battle at the table of the ERC.

 

JOURNALIST

Labor says it's been left with lots of unfunded projects. Is that a fair criticism?

 

ANDREW HASTIE

Look, when we came to government in 2013, Labor had reduced defence spending to 1.56% of GDP, the lowest since the Second World War. And in real terms, we increase defence spending by 55%. Over the last decade, we increase defense spending to 2% of GDP, we rebuilt trust with the US, UK and other important allies by investing our defence force. So we're proud of our record. We also were the ones who had the hard conversation with the Australian people in 2020, through the defence strategic update, alerting them to the challenges ahead, the increasing great power competition, the military modernization, the sorts of actions that were being taken in the shadows in our region. And we've responded to that as well by striking AUKUS in September 2021. And so we're proud of that record. And we want to ensure that we do have a strong defence force going forward. And today without any increased spending, and without a clear strategy, apart from the acceptance of the recommendations from the DSR, we think the government has failed today. And this was an important test for the government. What we're seeing is just cuts and degradation of army capability.

 

JOURNALIST

Mark McGowan, has criticised your rhetoric on China, including in a recent hot mic incident. Do you think this report vindicates your language in the past?

 

ANDREW HASTIE

I don't want to get into another squabble with Mark McGowan. He should know after last week that loose lips sink ships. And I'm not going to get into another dispute with Mark McGowan. Suffice to say he is well outside the consensus across government and across the opposition that we have to respond to the challenges in our region. And that includes a rising China that's both expansionist and revisionist in its aims. And he's the one left without a chair now that the music has stopped.

 

JOURNALIST

Should WA be building and hosting long range missiles?

 

ANDREW HASTIE

We should be looking to have as much involvement as possible in defence industry. And this is another area that Mark McGowan has led our state down. WA who has done incredibly well out of the AUKUS announcement. And we're yet to hear much from Mark McGowan. In terms of advocating for WA, and encouraging investment here as we uplift HMAS Stirling from a conventional base to a nuclear base over the next four years. There's huge opportunity for education, for businesses, for the development of a supply chain here in Western Australia. And he's playing silent on these issues. So we want to see more advocacy from the state government. And that's certainly something I'll be doing as I play the role of dual opposition in this state.

 

JOURNALIST

And in terms of those long range missiles, do you support who having them if so, where would you put them?

 

ANDREW HASTIE

Well, that's a decision of the government, but I support having the best possible defence force and that includes long range strike capabilities. And again, that'll be a decision for the defence where they're best placed so that they can reach their maximum operational effectiveness and protect us but certainly, I'm always going to advocate in Western Australia. But ultimately, what really matters is the national interest and that all Australians are kept safe by our defence force in future years.

 

JOURNALIST

Should defence play less of a role in disaster relief? And how would this work in areas like remote northern WA we've had the floods and obviously the ADF has been closely involved.

 

ANDREW HASTIE

Sure. The ADF has played a really significant role in disaster relief over the last three or four years, through fire, through flood, through the pandemic. And we honor and we thank the defence for doing that. But that is not their primary task, the primary mission of the ADF is to win our wars. That's always been the case. And so they need to focus on being the best warfighting enterprise that they can possibly be. And so we've got to work out other ways to become better at managing disasters.

 

JOURNALIS

How soon could we expect more in the Indo Pacific? How soon should we be prepared for that?

 

ANDREW HASTIE

We should always be striving for peace. And so diplomacy, regional engagement is absolutely critical. I personally know the costs of war through my family. My great uncle was aboard the SS Montevideo Maru, which was located last week along with Kim Beazley's uncle. And we know firsthand the cost of war. So the last thing we want is war, we want peace. It's no use talking about war. But one thing we must do is always be prepared to defend Australia, our interests and that of our neighbors as well, which is why AUKUS is such an important uplift in Australia's capability and contributes to regional security. That's why we're so disappointed today with the government's response to the Defence Strategic Review, because what we're seeing is no new money being invested in defence, we're seeing cost shifting and cuts and a degradation to army's capability.

 

JOURNALIST

Where do you think that money should come from?

 

ANDREW HASTIE

This is a decision for government. They've got to work out how to fund it. But the message tomorrow, of ANZAC Day is sacrifice. And if we really do believe that we are in the most challenging strategic circumstances since the Second World War, we should be making the necessary sacrifices to ensure that we have the capabilities to keep our country safe. And I don't think that is clear today. In fact, it's the opposite we're cutting capability, and we're cost shifting, and that's not good enough from the Albanese government. Thank you very much.