Mr MOORE (Defence) (3:21 PM) —What a hopeless opposition, a really hopeless opposition! Any general rule of an MPI is that the spokesman gets the opportunity to ask a question beforehand. That is the general rule. When we were in opposition for 13 years, if you had the MPI, you at least got one question. But this guy could not even get one up. He is a person of such little influence with the Leader of the Opposition that he could not even get a question up. He ran around looking for some audit report and he got railed. Steve, you are a nice guy, so I would not worry about it too much.

Mr Martin —I'm gone.

Mr MOORE —You will be back next week.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Nehl) —The minister will also address his remarks through the chair.

Mr MOORE —Mr Deputy Speaker, I welcome the opportunity today through this MPI to say something about the administration of Defence. I have refrained from doing so at some personal cost over the last month, but no-one should take that silence as acknowledgment of any of the points made by the shadow minister. Needless to say, I totally reject the allegation he has peddled about Defence in recent weeks and welcome the opportunity of saying something about the real situation.

Members should also appreciate that, with certain matters currently subject to court order, there are some specific issues which regrettably I cannot go into in detail at the present time. However, I do intend to outline to the House the key factors that are driving the government in its approach to Defence and to give the House a clear indication of the determination of the government to continue the job of improving the administration of Defence in this country.

Let me begin by assuring the House that the administration of the Department of Defence continues uninterrupted and unaffected by recent events. All important matters have been dealt with in a timely and professional manner, and I am determined to ensure that this continues.

In order to understand the determination of the government to improve the administration of Defence, the House needs to clearly under stand the simple but key objective which is driving the government's approach. We all know that Australia's strategic circumstances are becoming more uncertain. As a result, the demands on the men and women of our Defence Force are increasing. We need a defence force which is capable of providing the government of the day with a greater range of options with which to respond to an increasing range of possible contingencies. Accordingly, I make no apology whatsoever for setting the highest possible standards for the administration of Defence and requiring that they be met. I would not ask anything less of the senior officers and officials of Defence than I would of the men and women in uniform. They deserve nothing less and the government is determined to ensure they receive nothing less.

The defence of Australia is one of the central priorities of the government. We are strongly committed to building a stronger and more secure Australia. We are also committed to obtaining the greatest value possible for each dollar spent. We are building a defence force which is sharper, more combat focused, better equipped, more mobile, more capable and more operationally ready. We are strongly committed to this approach because the government believes Australia's strategic environment is becoming much more uncertain and, as a result, even greater demands will be placed upon Defence than at present.

The past 18 months have seen a number of events in our region which further complicate our strategic environment. Political instability caused by the Asian economic downturn, political change in Indonesia and East Timor, strained relations between United States and China, recent hostilities between India and Pakistan coupled with their recent nuclear missile tests, and the ballistic missile test by North Korea are some clear examples.

As a result of these challenges, the government has made an increasing range of demands on the ADF. We require the ADF to be ready to undertake a variety of tasks, often at short notice. We see this as a vital contribution to shaping our strategic environment and not just reacting to changes in it. This situation raises significant challenges for the government.

The government and the people of Australia must be satisfied that all current resources allocated to Defence are being used as effectively and efficiently as possible. The government is, therefore, strongly committed to improving the management and leadership of Defence and will continue to insist on the highest possible standards—and I emphasise that point.

The strategic environment around Australia is changing at a quickening pace. Defence needs to keep up with this pace of change through the reform program. We have shifted the emphasis in Defence towards enhancing current capabilities to ensure the ADF can present a greater range of practical options for the government when faced with the need to respond. Nothing better demonstrates that we are achieving a significant improvement in this area than the fact that a second Army brigade size group has been brought to 28-days readiness.

The government realises that we need a defence force which is capable of providing the government of the day with a greater range of options with which to respond to an increasing range of possible contingencies. This extra brigade provides the flexibility that this government needs in these changing times.

Nothing more strongly rejects the allegations of the Labor Party than the facts. The fact is that the ADF is in better shape and at a higher state of readiness than since the Vietnam War. This is the shape that the ADF is now in. But when we came to office, we found that the ADF was rife with inefficiencies.

The Defence Efficiency Review, which was completed in 1997, found that Defence was not working as well as it could. The Defence Reform Program is all about changing it, enhancing the ADF's combat capabilities and meeting the government's requirement for increased preparedness. These reforms seek nothing less than a fundamental alignment of the way in which Defence is managed and led. In particular, we seek to provide a De fence procurement system that is more flexible, responsive, innovative and efficient.

Because events in our region are unfolding rapidly, we are regularly reviewing our strategic circumstances. As part of this process of the review, the government intends to produce a Defence white paper in the year 2000—probably around the middle of the year—that will help to establish the future direction of the Australian Defence Force in the 21st century. The new white paper will need to show how Australian defence policy will adapt to meet our challenging strategic environment and resulting force, structure, industry and personnel requirements. Finally, it will also need to tackle some of the hard questions about how we sustain high levels of current readiness as well as a demanding future investment program within tight budget requirements.

Australia has one of the most professional and dedicated defence forces in the world. The government is rightly proud of the men and women who serve in that defence force, and I emphasise that very much as I go around the various bases in Australia, particularly with the forming of the 2nd Brigade and when witnessing the 1st Brigade in action. These men and women deserve the very best support from Defence headquarters in Canberra, and the government requires the highest standards of management and leadership from the Department of Defence now and in the future. The challenges that our nation faces demand no less.

One of the most important areas of responsibility for Defence is the acquisition of new equipment and the management of major projects essential for the strong future of our forces. This is an area where the Labor Party particularly let the people of Australia down, and the men and women of the defence forces have not forgotten it. The government is determined to improve the management of major project acquisitions within Defence. We make no apology for taking a tough line on the management of projects. We believe it is in the national interest to do so and we will continue to reform this particular area of the department.

There is no area of the administration of the department where Labor's record in government was worse than the area of management of major projects. The management of the Collins project was nothing short of a national disgrace. When Dr McIntosh's report was released a few months ago, I noticed that the shadow minister said that he welcomed the report and described our changes to Defence acquisition as positive.

Mr Martin interjecting—

Mr MOORE —Well, just look at what Dr McIntosh and Mr Prescott had to say in the report. One of the most important things they dealt with in that report was the combat system, on page 10. The report states:

Combat systems . . . have a notorious history of disasters . . . . By including the combat system with the platform in the single prime contract . . . Defence left itself wide open to such technological problems.

The report goes on to say that other countries:

have recognised the problem and have taken the major step of cancelling that route and moving to a much more reliable route based on the commercial off-the-shelf technology . . . . Although known about earlier, the problem was first seriously highlighted in 1993, but the opportunity was not then taken to make fundamental changes in the configuration of the system or in the choice of subcontractor.

It is expected that the combat system will take many hundreds of millions of dollars to fix, and this is just another costly legacy left to us by the previous administration. It is another example of where Labor's maladministration has cost the people of Australia dearly—and they dare to raise the issue of administration in the House today. Today's matter of public importance should not be about the performance of the Minister for Defence but certainly should be about the opposition spokesman for defence. The fact is that the government is taking the hard decisions necessary to improve the administration of the department and to provide the men and women of our armed services with the level of support they deserve and need.

I now turn to the coalition's record. As I indicated before, the government is committed to ensuring that we have an Australian Defence Force that is capable of providing more options to the government at a time when strategic uncertainty makes this so very important. As I have already said, Australia now boasts the highest level of readiness since the Vietnam War. All of this is part of the coalition's vision for a defence force that is adaptable and ready for the uncertainties of our region. The government's commitment to Defence can be clearly seen in our attitude towards the funding of Defence. When we came to office we maintained defence spending in line with forward estimates of the 1995-96 budget. Again, in the 1999-2000 budget, the government has committed to maintaining defence force spending.

I now turn to the strategic policy. As I have indicated before, the current strategic circumstances are more uncertain than ever before. The Howard government is well aware of this and has conducted a searching review of Australia's strategic position. We are not going to react in a knee-jerk fashion to special events. We are taking a professional approach to the development of strategic documents as this is a very serious matter. The coalition's record on strategic policy is one with a professional and systematic attention. In November 1997 the government endorsed Australia's Strategic Policy 1997. This statement is the key document to the government's plan to ensure Australia has a modern and relevant military.

A new defence white paper is in preparation and will be released by the government next year. A central element of the government's vision for defence is a lean defence force—one that is not hampered by waste and inefficiency. Our Defence Reform Program is a very important means of achieving such a force. The Defence Reform Program seeks nothing less than the fundamental realignment of the way Defence is managed and led. In particular, these reforms seek to provide a Defence procurement system that is more flexible, responsible, innovative and efficient. The fact is that the DRP will generate savings of up to $1 billion every year by early next century. Savings will be reinvested in Defence facilities and projects. The DRP is all about removing inefficiencies and reinvesting the savings into a more combat capable defence force.

As I indicated before, the government expects nothing less than the best from ADF personnel. In return, we have committed ourselves to Australian Defence Force personnel by introducing a number of initiatives. The Defence Personnel Executive was established to play an integral role in matters such as Defence Force capability considerations. The Defence Community Organisation has been established to provide effective and efficient support to Defence members and their families. Also, the ADF spouse employment initiative was established to provide ADF spouses with a range of measures to reduce employment difficulties caused by a mobile lifestyle.

I also want to discuss Australian defence industry. The importance of a strong and viable defence industry in achieving the coalition's aims cannot be understated. Likewise, the coalition's efforts to assist defence industry are extensive. This government led the largest ever Australian defence industry mission to the UK as part of our commitment to—(Time expired)