Topics: Labor's defence restructure, AEMO report

 

E&OE

ANDREW CLENNELL:

Now, the Albanese government is beginning a major overhaul of the defence department, reigning in multi billion dollar cost blowouts, they say, a short time ago, just after the government made its announcement, I spoke to Shadow Defence Minister Angus Taylor.

Angus Taylor, thanks for your time. Well, the PMs away and they announce a wholesale restructure of defence. What do you make of it? There's a new defence delivery agency taking into account three capability delivery groups, and they say it's autonomous. It's almost like, I don't know, flipping the bird to the department, isn't it?

ANGUS TAYLOR:

Well, that's a good question, Andrew, but the objective here has to be to get more capability and equipment into the hands of our war fighters and the risk here is this is just shuffling the deck chairs. There's no new funding here. There's no sign of any material savings, and it's very unclear how this is actually going to deliver what we need, which, as I say, is more capability in the hands of our war fighters, but also more agility in the way we do that, more sovereignty, more control over our own destiny, our own sovereign manufacturing, and none of those things are at all guaranteed by a restructure of the bureaucracy, which is wondrously exciting to many people in Canberra, but what we need as Australians is a defence force that can deal with the most uncertain times, the greatest strategic threats we've seen since the Second World War, and an environment that does need agility, that does need sovereignty, and that does need readiness, and war fighters who are ready, and most importantly, are able to deter conflict, which, of course, is the objective of the exercise.

ANDREW CLENNELL:

What's your, I mean, you've only got a first impression of this. You've only just heard the announcement, like me, but it's a new National Armaments Director, equivalent to the Secretary of Defence. So, how can you explain what your concept of that is and what do you think the government's thinking is behind the necessity of that?

ANGUS TAYLOR:

Well, they're painting it as the biggest reform to defence in 50 years. I mean, heaven help us, if moving bureaucrats around is the answer to our challenges as the Chinese Communist Party continues to militarise at an unprecedented rate, as we see other threats around the world like we've seen in the Middle East and in the Ukraine. I mean, we need a defence force that is ready to deal with a real conflict we need and to prevent it, which is the objective, of course, we need more agility. We know from what we've seen in the Middle East, from what we've seen in the Ukraine, agility is now absolutely essential if you're to succeed in these kinds of environments and there's no sign of that and and perhaps worst of all, Andrew, we know we have a defence force that is underfunded. We know it's underfunded because the government's own defence review and its integrated investment plan tells us that whilst we need to get to 3% of GDP, we're well short of that and there's no sign from any of this that any of that's going to change.

ANDREW CLENNELL:

Well, Richard Marles just said, $70 billion extra in spending we've done, and it's the biggest defence spending ever and you know, that's why we need this new Armaments Director, because we've got this record spending. So, what do you say to that?

ANGUS TAYLOR:

Well, it's been a fair bit of inflation under this Labor Government. Jimflation is raging, and that includes in defence equipment and so no doubt he's having to adjust for some of that. But the underlying spending is not getting to where we need to. We know we need to get at least 3% of GDP if we are to have the kind of defence force, we need for this environment, we are in a far less benign environment than we have been in the past, Andrew, and it's why it's so critical now that we have the preparedness, we have the agility, we have the sovereignty we need and that doesn't just mean shuffling deck chairs. That means properly funding our defence and allowing them to get to the point where they have the equipment, they need in the hands of the war fighters. As I say, the whole objective of this is to work with our allies to make sure that we deter conflict and that then will underpin the prosperity and peace we all want to see continue into the future.

ANDREW CLENNELL:

Will this stop? I mean, it appears aimed at stopping possible blowouts in projects. Do you think it'll work?

ANGUS TAYLOR:

You know, I think, I think shuffling around bureaucrats is not the the ultimate answer. It may be part of the solution, Andrew, but I don't think it's anything like the whole solution we need. We need them to be properly funded. We need an organisation that is way more agile. We're seeing really fundamental reforms happening in our allies around the world, in the way they are buying defence capability, the increase in agility. I was just over in the United States the week before last, and we're seeing dramatic changes in the way they're getting capability into the hands of their war fighters, in the way they're increasing their agility. I mean, drone warfare we've seen in the Ukraine is something that we could never have imagined a few years ago, and we've got to adapt to it fast and I think, as I say, shuffling the chairs is not the way to achieve that. We've got to get real about a Defence Capability Acquisition Group and Sustainment Group that can really deliver for our war fighters and that’s not what we’re seeing right now.

ANDREW CLENNELL:

The Government says this isn't about job cuts. What do you think? Do you have any scepticism about that?

ANGUS TAYLOR:

Well, I don't know. I mean, what I don't understand is what it's actually going to deliver, and that is not clear at all. It's clearly not going to deliver savings, which can be spent on the underlying capability we need. So, what is it going to deliver, and that is not at all clear. What we need, as I say, is a is a wholesale change in the way we buy equipment, how we manufacture here in Australia, how we adapt to changing circumstances, how we recognise new technology that's coming on board in the defence domain, whether it's sensing technology, whether it's AI, which we know is changing the way wars are being fought, whether it's autonomy, drones, for instance, or maritime autonomy, we're seeing undersea gliders, which are unmanned now, which are really starting to have an impact, as well as on the surface and that's the kind of focus we need right now if we going to have a defence force that is ready for the environment that we're facing.

ANDREW CLENNELL:

And Richard Marles has spoken about this monitoring of this Chinese task group, Chinese warships. There was a fear they were going to approach Australia or circumnavigate Australia. They've turned up in the Philippines actually; it doesn't look like it's happening. What do you think he confirmed that, and what do you make of the report?

ANGUS TAYLOR:

Well, we should be very clear, Andrew, that we are seeing activity from the Chinese Communist Party, from the PLA, the Navy, in this case that we haven't seen historically. We've seen the circumnavigation of Australia that happened not long ago. We saw live firing exercises off the south coast of New South Wales, Andrew, and this is really unprecedented activity from the Chinese Communist Party, and the Government clearly wasn't prepared for that last time around. We'll see in the future as to whether they've changed the way they're approaching these things, but we do need a government and a defence force that is absolutely prepared for this kind of activity. We're seeing flaring of our aircraft, which is extremely dangerous activity, and we need to call it out with the PLA when this happens with the People Liberation Army, when they do this kind of thing. So, I thought that was a pretty wishy-washy Marles, he always claims that he can't say any more, of course, but we need a government that's getting serious about dealing with what are clearly escalating threats.

ANDREW CLENNELL:

In terms of the AEMO report we've seen today. You're a former Energy Minister. How dire is this situation in terms of coal fired power and the like, running out of life. Why is the Opposition so confident you can keep these ageing coal fired power stations going?

ANGUS TAYLOR:

Well, if you invest in them, you can keep them going, but you only invest in them if you if you know that you have a system that wants them. Eraring is a very significant piece of the capacity, the Wiener generation capacity in New South Wales. The idea we heard a member of the Labor Party this morning trying to tell us that Kurri Kurri was going to replace Eraring. Kurri Kurri was replacing Liddell. You remember that well, Andrew. Tallawarra in the Illawarra and Kurri Kurri were the replacement for Liddell. The idea that Eraring is going to be replaced by the Kurri Kurri gas generator, which, by the way, Labor opposed for a long time, it's just absolute nonsense, and this is what you get when you've got a part time Minister that's frankly, more interested in going to climate conferences than he is in dealing with the reliability and affordability problems we've got in our grid.

ANDREW CLENNELL:

Angus Taylor, thanks so much for your time.

ANGUS TAYLOR:

Good to be with you Andrew.

ENDS.