Ministers Brief

	Minister of Defence, Hon. Mark Burton.

In the February edition of the RSA Review, there was a call for the government to “come clean” on its defence policy, accompanied by some particularly ill-informed comment on our current acquisitions programme.

Let me take this opportunity to correct some of these misperceptions.

In 1999, this government inherited a Defence Force that was indeed run down. By National’s own admission, the NZDF was suffering from “nine years of neglect…perilously low in capability, and short of the funds to correct this.” (Richard Worth, Otago Daily Times, 2003) Current National Defence Spokesman Simon Power was quoted last year as saying, “I acknowledge that National and National-led governments did not allow defence spending to keep pace in the 1990s.” As a result, by 1999 we had the Army, Navy, and Air Force actively competing against each other for extremely limited funding, equipment dating from the 1960s, and a seemingly bleak future.

When this government took office in late 1999, it was obvious that the time had come to change the way New Zealand approached Defence issues. Our foundation for a clear, focused defence policy was Defence Beyond 2000, a document that was released in 1999 by Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Defence, and Trade Select Committee. The select committee process had offered opportunity for wide public involvement and debate on defence issues and priorities, and the resulting report gained considerable public and Parliamentary support.

Six months later (June 2000), we released the Defence Policy Framework, which clearly defines the key elements of our approach to defence. In May 2001, we released the Government Defence Statement, which outlined an appropriate force structure to match New Zealand’s defence objectives.

Then, in June 2002, we released the Defence Long-Term Development Plan (LTDP), a planning tool that enables decisions on defence acquisitions to be based on the government’s defence policy objectives, the priority of projects, and affordability. The LTDP, which provides for spending priorities of over $3 billion over the next decade, was updated in June 2003. All of these documents are available to the public—I urge you to access them on www.defence.govt.nz.

This government defined what we needed New Zealand’s Defence Force to do, outlined the most efficient force structure to do it, and put a plan in place to provide them with the necessary equipment—across all three services.

Claims that our Navy and Air Force have been underfunded at the benefit of the Army simply do not bear scrutiny. Since the LTDP’s release in 2002, we have replaced both of the RNZAF’s 727s with 757-200 jet aircraft. We have also announced a major 15-year life extending upgrade of New Zealand’s five C-130Hs, a project to replace the Iroquois utility helicopter and the Sioux training helicopter, and the tenders for both the Mission Systems upgrade and the Communications and Navigation Systems upgrade on our P-3 Orion fleet—projects which are worth approximately $1 billion to the Air Force alone.

Similarly, Project Protector will see the Navy replace the aging frigate Canterbury with a new multi-role vessel, off-shore and in-shore patrol vessels—a $500 million investment. These ships will allow the Navy to patrol our EEZ more effectively, as well as to work more efficiently with other agencies, such as Fisheries and Customs, in their task of protecting our borders—one of the most important security roles in today’s global environment. The new vessels will also free up the frigates for more conventional tasking, if required.

Which brings us to the Army’s new Light Armoured Vehicles (NZLAVs)—a vehicle that will bring the NZDF infantry into the 21st century. Contrary to the claims of some self-professed ‘experts,’ the NZLAV is the best vehicle for the NZ Army’s needs, offering the high level of mobility, protection, flexibility, and capability they need to deploy effectively.

The NZLAV is designed to operate over a variety of difficult terrain, with a central tyre inflation system that allows for tyre pressures to be altered while on the move to maximise traction and mobility over different types of surface. The NZLAV is equipped with base armour, as well as an interior ballistic spall liner—a protective layer which protects soldiers inside the vehicle from being injured by internal shrapnel. The vehicles can also be fitted with add-on armour, which provides protection against a range of weapons, including small arms and fragmentation from larger weapons.

While the M113s have been solid, they are at the end of their lifespan and becoming increasingly unreliable. Technology has simply moved on. Refurbishing the M113s would have resulted in a number of significant problems, including higher operating and maintenance costs, the necessity to purchase additional M113s to motorise two battalions, and a service life of only 8-10 years (in comparison to the NZLAV’s expected service life of at least 25 years).

The M113s do not have the same multi-role capability as the LAVIIIs, and additional Fire Support Vehicles (FSV) would have to be purchased for support and protection. Firepower on our M113s does not provide sufficient force protection in any situation above the lower end of peace support tasks, and its gun can only be fired when the vehicle is stationary—hardly ideal in any conflict situation.

The NZLAV is transportable by air, in a C130 Hercules, as was specified in the contract. However, as any well-informed commentator would know, defence forces around the world deploy large numbers of such vehicles by ship. The Navy’s new MRV will be ideally suited to transporting an NZLAV battalion. The most likely scenario for air transport would be a situation where a vehicle needed to be quickly deployed further into theatre—such as from Dili to Suai in the Timor Leste operations.

This government has put an end to ad-hoc defence spending. We have undergone the most thorough evaluation of New Zealand’s defence needs in more than a generation, and clearly outlined New Zealand’s internal, regional, and global defence objectives. It’s high time our world-class personnel got the equipment to match their world-class skills, and I am proud to be part of a government that does more than pay lip service to investing in their future.