Fresh from buying the air force a set of interim toys for $2 billion more than previously expected, the next thing on Brendan Nelson’s plate is the choice of design for the Australian Air Warfare Destroyer.
The AFR has an article on the choice between the two competing designs – an existing Spanish design and the Government’s preferred option – an “evolved version” of the American Arleigh Burke class.
That’s not news. What’s news is the latest estimate of the cost of the project. The standard estimate floating around (if you’ll pardon the pun) is 6 billion dollars. According to the AFR (behind paywall unfortunately), that’s just gone up by another billion:
Now the government is approaching, in July, the most crucial AWD decision: which of two competing designs should be chosen for the ships. With the price now estimated at more than $7 billion – $1 billion above early cost estimates – it is a decision that will define the strategic, technological, financial and political boldness of the government.
A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you’re talking about real money…
Any one find Nelson being the Minister for war and a medical doctor some what ironic, also, when ever I hear his name or see him on media, I get to examine my boots to see if I trod in something.
Six or seven billion dollars and we can’t find a couple of billion to make up the shortfall in funding for indigenous health or make any substantial inroads on hlelessness. Go figure.
Thinks….we are looking pretty grim in the polls. Let’s make sure we maintain our economic credentials.
Spend bucketloads on bullshit, with enforced contracts, and labor will have to deal with the consequences.
Bewdy back in one term.
Oh for fuck’s sakes. I even really support the idea of small grey ships bristling with rocketry and electronic warfare gear, but I’d like it even better if the price made sense.
I’d like it even better better if the potential rocket-platform boat could be shown off at the Sydney Boat Show in 2009, and licenced to approved citizen-privateers willing to spend their Easter long weekend (plus, say, one weekend a month) somewhere useful outside territorial waters.
PPPs are all the rage for roads and public housing, why not the military? It worked in my day.
What’s the story with Nelson?
I suspect that his parents didn’t get him a Leggo set when he was a kid.
He’s trying to make-up for it now buy buying all these wonderful toys that he can share with his friends so become the most popular kid in school.
Yes Evan, this is what happens when well-meaning parents inadvertantly choose the wrong toys for their children. Allocation of blame is of prime importance to the conservative mind-set. Ma and Pa Nelson have much to answer for.
Stud Nelson VC, our strutting Defence Minister, needs to enhance his image more. The shiny grey suits are just not doing it anymore. Brendon The Brave suffered enormously, public opionwise, when sprung on tv camera hightailing it from a rambunctious rabble of demonstrating uni students during a former ministerial incarnation (mincarnation?).
He needs to be filmed, combat helmeted, torso protruding from the turret of a rampaging M1A1 Abrams tank, arguably one of our country’s finest pieces of hardware in the war on terrorism and other abstract, axis-of-evily nouns. As the talented, Dr. Nelson lamented recently: “It was an absolute tragedy that the Big A’s wern’t available to help repel the Yellow Peril at Kokoda”. Plainly, Australia could have had the chockos home by Christmas 1943 if all that pig-iron had gone into Allied mountain tanks, as opposed to Mitsubishi Zeros.
Whether confronting Reds under the beds, “Momommads in the cupboards”, Jihadi combatants in the attics, or ethereal fear itself, our Defence Ministers need to look sharp and inspire confidence in a plainly petrified electorate.
Unfortunately, the Defence Minister and his attackdog mates are instilling confidence in nobody and the latest newspoll could be telling them to either give up, work harder or try something else. Perhaps he could get Reith to give him a job at Tennex.
That way he would still have toys to play with without annoying us. On the balance of probabilities we must be about due for another cabinet reshuffle anyway as the one last week never worked.
Based on past experience, I’m predicting that the Government will buy the US ships. The US will refuse to provide their best friend in the Pacific with the classified technology to make the damn things work properly, and even before the inevitable refit is complete the usual analysts will say the ships are totally unsuited to Australian needs. Since they’ll spend most of their time tied up at some base or another, this will be hard to prove either way.
But they’ll look very funky on Navy recruiting posters.
But this is totally insane – the appalling history of military hardware precurement over the last 15 years should at least act as something of a brake upon Nelson’s toy buying. Should at least have Senate committees reviewing decisions with the flea combs ready. & given that none of this seems to be happening, given that Super Hornets will soon be lumbering from an airfield near you, presumably to be ablely supported by craft with a top speed of 4 knots in a taill wind, its seems that NONE of the processes of review, checks and balances, all the beloved virtues of the Westminister system are working.
Is it just Howard’s magical ways or are the processes inherently corrupt and/or ineffectual? How can a budgetary process as large and complex as military spending be so appallingly managed in a supposed mature social democracy?
There are several problems:
1) there is a fundamental philosophical issue here: do we build our armed forces around defending Australia, intervening in the region, or fighting in coalition with the Yanks in the Middle East? The current coalition defence policy is very much oriented around the “coalition with Yanks”, perhaps too much to the exclusion of the other goals, and with correspondingly enormous expenses for high-end hardware that’s not much use except plugged in to the rest of the Yankee armed forces.
2) Generals always want to equip themselves to fight the last war. In this case, the full implications of the advance of missile technology hasn’t properly filtered through yet.
3) The Liberal Party makes political hay from being perceived as strong on defence, even though their historical record on the topic is, um, pretty spotty to say the least.
4) This particular government seems to have a reflexive buy American attitude – it seems like they don’t even bother to talk to alternatives to negotiate the price down.
5) WRT oversight, blame the nitwits who gave the Libs control of the Senate.
“there is a fundamental philosophical issue here: do we build our armed forces around defending Australia, intervening in the region, or fighting in coalition with the Yanks in the Middle East?”
Yeah that’s about it. Personally I reckon we should focus first on making it too expensive for anyone to physically invade Australia (whether old school or asymetrical inflitration), secondly on protecting our immediate offshore interests like fishing and Antartic zones and thirdly on being ready to keep the peace in an increasingly unstable Pacific so we can still safely indulge in dirty weekends on tropical islands without paying Whitsunday Islands prices.
As for the arguement that participating in Yankee adventures abroad buys us shelter under their geo-politcial/military umbrella, I’d say hosting Pine Gap, Nurranger et al has already given us a lock here.
“This particular government seems to have a reflexive buy American attitude”
To be fair, they also cocked up with the Eurotiger.
Fair point Nabs. They can stuff up European contracts as well…
Nabakov:
Agree with much of what you said.
However, now that some of our buffoons have applied the Sadim Touch to the Pacific [ that's the Midas Touch in reverse] we will probably have to kiss goodbye to our FORMER Pacific friends. You don’t honestly think their new bestest friends would want us back, do you?
Robert Merkel:
I would go for the off-the-shelf Spanish destroyers myself ….. until we can get an independent off-shore [? managed by the Irish Republic or by Finland?] Defence Anti-Corruption Task Force up and running ….. and convicting .
And then 4 [four] Spanish aircraft carriers please.
The ‘lower specifications’ of the Spanish destroyers are fine; we know exactly what we are getting with them; their design allows for their range to be readily extended …… and we can bolt on certain additional weapons and specialist equipment without degrading performance, A dozen of them would be nice …… but haven’t we blown all our dough already on gee-whiz ornaments and useless war-toys?
Graham Bell: you have a much more pessimistic outlook on Australia’s security situation than I do, clearly.
But would you agree that without some offensive air power to go with them, those Spanish destroyers are just very expensive targets for opposition aircraft?
Robert Merkel:
I’m usually a rather cheerful chap …… but, as I indicated on your “Water” thread next down, harsh reality has spoilt my usual cheerfulness.
Unless there are tectonic shifts in our defence attitudes, posture, etc., I can’t see a very bright future for “the Gepids of Asia”. I remain to be convinced that overdependence on being rescued by angels/Superman/USCavalry and on the possession of magic-bullets/Alladin’s-Lamp will necessarily guarantee our survival.
But possessing a couple of flotillas of ready-to-pounce hard-hitting warships – and the trained crews to make them very nasty – RIGHT NOW would do wonders for my optimism.