House debates

Wednesday, 26 November 2014

Motions

Defence Procurement, Minister for Defence

9:24 am

Photo of Stuart RobertStuart Robert (Fadden, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Defence) Share this | Hansard source

If there was ever a shiny example of a whitewashed tomb and hypocrisy, it is this. Not content with handing over to our government a situation where $16 billion was ripped out of Defence, the Labor Party had a revolving door of three Defence ministers. The first one Labor took into power was described as an electrician in a suit.

Not content with taking levels of Defence funding as a proportion of GDP to levels not seen since 1938, not content with reducing project-spending capability—the Labor Party impacted 46 per cent of all projects through their cuts—and not content with having 14 ministerial reshuffles over their six moribund years in parliament, the Labor Party comes in this morning to cry foul. Seriously, are you kidding the nation?

The legacy that Labor left when it comes to defence should have their heads hanging in shame. A 2009 white paper went completely and utterly unfunded. Capability was thrown to the winds. At the height of what the Labor Party was doing in Defence, capability spending as a proportion of the total budget was a mere 18 per cent. That is absolutely and utterly appalling.

This is the party that decided to cut counter-IED phase 2 funding whilst we were doing combat operations in Afghanistan. And this party has the hide, the temerity and the audacity to come in and lecture this government about how defence is done. This is the first year in seven years when Defence funding has been stable—$3.9 billion more in Defence funding has been provided, in macro terms, this year than the previous year.

Defence funding as a proportion of GDP is 1.8 per cent this year. What was it under the Labor Party? It was 1.56 per cent—the lowest level since 1938. I do not think that any of those opposite were born prior to 1938, which means that there is no-one on the other side that has seen Defence funding drop to such a low level under their watch.

With that as a background—as a history; as a stinking, rotten carcase sitting over the shoulders of the Labor Party—they walk in here and have the temerity to lecture this government on exactly how defence should be managed. Let's look through the history of exactly what the Labor Party did in government. The then Prime Minister—the ultimate minister when it comes to national security—Prime Minister Gillard, could not be bothered attending the National Security Committee of cabinet. Who did she send? She sent her bodyguard. That is how the Labor Party treats defence. Their Prime Minister sent her bodyguard along to the National Security Committee of cabinet.

What did Prime Minister Rudd do? Let's look at the consistency of the Labor Party. Prime Minister Rudd sent an adviser to the National Security Committee of cabinet. That is the extent to which the Labor Party treats the National Security Committee. It is simply extraordinary.

Opposition members interjecting

Comments

No comments