Australia's Defence Capability Plan [Archive]

buglerbilly

09-03-10, 03:13 PM

War on waste: 'Defence extravagance must end'

LINTON BESSER AND DAN OAKES

March 10, 2010

Beat up or truth????

THE Defence Minister, John Faulkner, has demanded action on millions of dollars Defence has spent on luxury items, saying ''financial control is critical''.

Use interactive tool to search Defence contracts database

His comments follow a Herald investigation which revealed oil paintings, handmade Chesterfield lounges and exclusive golf and fitness club memberships are among $48 billion of contracts reported by the department since 2006.

''If you need more evidence of why the [government's] strategic reform program is required, then you have provided it,'' Senator Faulkner told the Herald.

The reform program, launched last year, will demand $20 billion worth of savings over 10 years.

His comments came as a former army chief said Australia should consider cutting its defence budget - now $27 billion - and redirecting money towards diplomacy and aid.

Peter Leahy, who retired as a lieutenant-general in 2008, also questioned the government's commitment to huge military equipment projects, suggesting the acquisitions might turn out to be expensive white elephants.

Discussing the revelations yesterday, Senator Faulkner said: ''There are issues about the culture in the organisation. Obviously those sort of things are not to be sneezed at.''

Senator Faulkner told Parliament yesterday he had asked the Secretary of the Defence Department, Ian Watt, to review the contracts published by the Herald to make sure they fell inside the reform program and ''to ensure Defence has adequate reporting procedures to give senior management the information and the opportunity to intervene''.

''Financial control is critical. All of these issues, if not dealt with already, should be and will be examined,'' he said.

Senator Faulkner said the reform program had already found $176 million in non-equipment spending that was being wasted. This included $64 million in travel costs alone.

He said some of the contracts published by the Herald had been identified as legitimate, such as the hire of a Learjet which was ''in support of combat equipment testing''. His department had previously failed to explain the expense.

The reform program is needed, according to a top-level audit in 2008, so the military can afford to expand, purchase future technology and properly defend against the uncertain strategic environment ahead.

Professor Leahy told the Herald a new national security environment, characterised by low-level conflicts, terrorism, policing and reconstruction work, might tilt the funding balance towards the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Australian Federal Police and the government aid organisation, AusAID.

Professor Leahy, who is the head of the National Security Institute at the University of Canberra, said this would be particularly so if the aggregate budget for the ''national security community'' did not increase.

Professor Leahy said the federal police's workload had rapidly increased but its budget, while growing, had not kept track. He also pointed to a report by the Lowy Institute last year that found DFAT, which has a budget of $5.29 billion, was run down and poorly equipped to deal with looming threats that include global warming, terrorism and regional power shifts.

The report argues that Australia needs robust defence, intelligence and law enforcement capabilities but says diplomacy is the most effective way to influence other nations.

Professor Leahy said the question of funding balance was already being debated in the US, where the Defence Secretary, Robert Gates, and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, have said more money needs to go to the State Department and USAID - the American equivalents of DFAT and AusAID.

Despite the changing strategic environment, the present and previous federal governments have committed to buying tens of billions of dollars worth of big-ticket items, including 100 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, 12 new submarines and three air-warfare destroyers.

Professor Leahy said the wisdom of equipping the Australian Defence Force for a war it was unlikely to fight could be questioned, and it was possible the government might back away from these acquisitions.

''We need to have a very close look at the most effective tools to use in this new security environment,'' he said.

Goknub

10-03-10, 07:41 AM

From an "end-user" perspective, the article and Leahys comments are absolute BS. Its as if the last decade never happened and we're still in the 90's talking about the "Revolution in Military Affairs". Clearly we'll never use big, nasty things like tanks or combat aircraft ever again because Leahy's Magic Eightball says "Future certain, no more war".

Its disturbing when supposedly logical people can claim basic military equipment like warships or jet fighters are "big ticket items" we don't need. With that thinking anything more advanced then .303 Lee-Enfields aren't needed. Hell, we can save a fortune scrapping all the navy's SM2s & ESSMs cause guns seemed to work well enough for the RAN in the last war.

As for the rest of the article, sure we can stop sporting comps because fitness is now unimportant in these new "push-button" wars that obviously don't require any physical effort. And visiting dignitaries can sit on empty milk crates because we are clearly too poor to afford decent couches.

I long for the day when the rod jammed up people's @$$es is removed and the idea that
A) Defence costs money
B) As a first world nation we can afford it
take hold and this fake BS outrage that surfaces every few months goes away, though not holding my breath.

End of Rant.

buglerbilly

10-03-10, 08:15 AM

Being cynical as I am, and as life has led me to be, my thoughts on all of this led me to the conclusion this is a beat-up to "excuse" the reduction or cancellation of one or more major programmes under the reasoning those "nasty" people in DoD and the Forces are wasting money so take it away from them.............typical International Labour/Labor governement SPIN aka BS, sheer unadulterated BS...........

Gubler, A.

10-03-10, 08:45 AM

$100 says they won’t? Any takers… 2-1, 3-1?

You have two unrelated events:

SMH trolls through all the online contracts and finds a lot of dirt. But nothing big or DCP related. All just lots of stupid stuff that no doubt every other Govt. department is doing as well as defence.

Lt.Gen. Leahy (ret.) shoots a broadside at the huge expenditure on submarines, fighters, etc while his diggers on actual combat operations continue to go without new AFVs and other more basic equipment or are required to carry out constabulary missions in the South Pacific. No different to similar rumblings in the UK and USA.

None of this is initiated by the Government which has no dire urge or need to make high level savings at the expense of defence (ie cancelling a major project). If the Government had its way it would be happy to replace all that expenditure on sailor, solider, airman salaries with building new equipment because it makes for great little ribbon cutting and beholden voters in the suburbs.

buglerbilly

10-03-10, 10:24 AM

I don't smoke, drink or gamble.............:D

[These emoticons are SHYTE!]

Regards

BRIAN

Gubler, A.

10-03-10, 10:54 AM

Shame... could have done with some of your petrodollars!

tiddles

10-03-10, 12:27 PM

With federal elections looming there will be no major projects cancelled, besides the 12 submarines are a long way off ,AWD & LHD would cost too many votes if cancelled due to Australian participation in the projects & so on.The PM cant go back on recent announcements at this time in the electoral cycle & I doubt that he wants to either considering recent media views he cant afford to be seen as all waffle.
General Leahy retd. is probably right when he says that the ADF is equiping for a war they are unlikely to fight. I think he has lost the plot, having this equipment will provide us with a credible deterrent against anyone wishing to put nasty thoughts into action where we are concerned.
Tiddles

buglerbilly

10-03-10, 03:50 PM

Procurement of Explosive Ordnance for the Australian Defence Force

(Source: Australian National Audit Office; issued March 10, 2010)

--Report Number: 24
--Year: 2009/2010
--Tabled: Wednesday, 10 March 2010
--Portfolio: Defence
--Agency: Department of Defence, Defence Materiel Organisation

The objective of this audit was to examine the effectiveness of Defence and the DMO’s management of procurement and through life support arrangements to meet the explosive ordnance requirements of the ADF, particularly the non-guided munitions requirements of Army.

This included a review of the progress of Defence and the DMO in implementing the recommendations of ANAO Audit Report No.40 2005–06.

Click here for the full report (200 pages in PDF format) on the ANAO website.

http://www.anao.gov.au/uploads/documents/2009-10_Audit_Report_No.24.pdf

(ends)

ANAO Audit on Procurement of Explosive Ordnance

(Source: Australian Department of Defence; issued March 10, 2010)

Defence today welcomed the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) report on explosive ordnance procurement and agrees with the two recommendations.

The ANAO recommended that:
-- Defence and the Defence Materiel Organisation (DMO) develop processes for consolidating explosive ordnance inventory requirements of all stakeholders, at an appropriate level, to facilitate efforts to optimise explosive ordnance inventory holdings from both a capability and value for money perspective; and
-- Defence undertake a strategic review of domestic manufacturing arrangements to evaluate the extent that value for money can be achieved from existing arrangements; and determine the ongoing viability of investment in domestic manufacturing capabilities.

Vice Chief of the Defence Force Lieutenant General David Hurley said, “The matters raised in this ANAO report have not affected the quality or availability of explosive ordnance provided to the ADF on operations overseas. Defence remains committed to providing our service men and women with the highest quality equipment to enable them to do their jobs.”

“The ANAO has acknowledged that Defence was already aware of a range of issues associated with procurement of explosive ordnance and has already established a number of reform programs to address these issues,” he said.

In early 2008, the Vice Chief of the Defence Force was appointed as the single point of accountability for explosive ordnance in Defence. A dedicated branch was also set up to implement widespread reform of explosive ordnance.

Additionally, the DMO established a dedicated division to manage explosive ordnance procurement. This division is progressing a complementary program of commercial and inventory management reforms and staff professionalisation.

The Defence Explosive Ordnance Committee is directing a review to better coordinate all explosive ordnance requirements. This will inform development of the 2010-11 financial year explosive ordnance procurement plan.

The DMO will not extend the current domestic contracts with Thales Australia Limited for the manufacture of explosive ordnance.

The DMO is actively pursuing opportunities to achieve best value for money from the current contracts until they expire in 2015.

Defence will assess the ongoing strategic importance of domestic munitions manufacturing and the viability of investment in these capabilities. The DMO is also investigating opportunities for future domestic manufacture of explosive ordnance which will meet Defence requirements in a cost effective manner.

“These actions accord with domestic manufacture of explosive ordnance as a priority industry capability,” said Lieutenant General Hurley.

While the report identified an apparently high level of “Other Than Serviceable” stock, these included such things as newly manufactured stock awaiting receipt inspection, stock returned to depots from combat units for re-use, and stock awaiting a “shelf-life extension” engineering decision. Stock classified “Other Than Serviceable” does not affect support to ADF operations.

-ends-

buglerbilly

19-03-10, 04:52 PM

Cost-Consciousness in Defence

(Source: Australian Department of Defence; issued March 18, 2010)

Over the last week the Sydney Morning Herald has published a series of articles that have questioned the legitimacy and appropriateness of a number of Defence contracts and other expenditures. It also painted a picture of Defence being a profligate organisation.

By way of background, on 27 February 2010, a Sydney Morning Herald journalist made an initial inquiry to Defence seeking answers to 55 questions that addressed contracts and expenditure across all Groups and Services going back several years. Many of the issues raised were wide-ranging and required detailed answers. Defence has provided responses to all of the questions put by the journalist, which can be viewed on the Defence Home Page.

While we are satisfied that, with relatively few exceptions, the expenditures covered by the Sydney Morning Herald’s questions are both legitimate and reasonable, a number of the matters raised reflect unfavourably on particular decisions taken by delegates, and affect Defence’s reputation more broadly.

We believe that Defence has a real opportunity to learn lessons from this exercise and to emerge as a stronger organisation as a result. And we will do so. To do so we need to do more to instil a culture of greater cost-consciousness across Defence. And we need to do more to assure the robustness of our spending and procurement processes.

The Government will soon consider the implementation plan for the Strategic Reform Program (SRP). The plan has been under development since May 2009 and will provide a very detailed blue-print for deep reform in Defence, including the delivery of $20 billion in savings over the next decade which will be reinvested in Defence capability that is essential to deliver Force 2030.

We expect to be in a position in the near future where we can brief all Defence staff in detail about the SRP.

At the heart of the SRP is the imperative for all of us in Defence to conduct our business more effectively and more efficiently. This starts with decisions that individuals take each day, including on the expenditure of Australian taxpayers funds provided as part of the Defence budget. The Minister for Defence, Senator Faulkner, has been very clear about the need for Defence to use its resources more efficiently, effectively and most importantly, intelligently. A culture of discipline and cost-consciousness must underpin our everyday operations and decision-making. This is integral to responding to criticisms of our spending decisions. It will also be integral to the success of the SRP.

We ask all managers, commanders and those exercising delegations to approach their business with these imperatives of discipline and cost-consciousness in mind. We must all recognise and take seriously our accountability for the effective and efficient use of Defence resources. Before we commit to expend funds we should ask ourselves some simple questions. Is this necessary? Is it value for money? Can we do better? Is it publicly defensible? We ask delegates and managers to pay particular attention to justifying and documenting their decisions. Moreover, if your procurement decision will be lodged on the AusTender database make sure that the description of the goods or services is complete and clear, ensure that the figures are accurate, and ensure that you maintain comprehensive and easily accessible records that can be made available for future review if required.

As a final comment, most of the areas of expenditure that have been covered by the Sydney Morning Herald articles will be the subject of further scrutiny as part of the SRP. Any not covered will now be subject to scrutiny in other ways.

While uncomfortable in parts, the Sydney Morning Herald articles are a timely reminder for us all of the need to reflect carefully on the decisions we take in our day to day activities as we work to reform Defence. We have no doubt that we will all learn from our recent experience. We will provide further guidance as we move into the implementation phase of the SRP.

The Minister for Defence strongly supports the publication of all the responses as another way of enhancing transparency and accountability and encouraging greater cost-consciousness in Defence. So do we.

Signed by

-- I.J. Watt
Secretary, Department of Defence

-- A.G. Houston
Air Chief Marshal
Chief of the Defence Force

-ends-

Milne Bay

01-04-10, 11:40 PM

Rudd's commitment to Defence questioned
Posted 7 hours 6 minutes ago
ABC News online

The Federal Opposition says Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's latest ministerial changes create uncertainty for Australia's Defence Force.

Mr Rudd has relieved Greg Combet of the Defence Personnel portfolio to give him more time to concentrate on fixing the failed home insulation scheme.

Veterans Affairs Minister Alan Griffin will take over the role.

Opposition MP Bob Baldwin says he is concerned that both ministers will not have the time to do their jobs properly.

"We are calling on Kevin Rudd to think seriously about applying full-time ministerial positions to the Defence Force," he said.

"The men and women of our Australian Defence Force, people who put their lives on the line for this nation, deserve that."

Mr Baldwin says the Defence Department has had a succession of new ministers while dealing with pay system problems and a new savings drive.

"I question the Rudd Government's commitment to our Defence Force at a time when they are putting [through] the greatest reform programs ever and $20 billion worth of budget cuts," he said.

Combet is talented and hard working.
Swapping and changing personnell in and out of Defence is stupid. It is such a large portfolio that it takes even talented ministers time to get a handle on it.
Moving Combet is bad news.

Gubler, A.

02-04-10, 01:08 AM

Combet is talented and hard working.
Swapping and changing personnell in and out of Defence is stupid. It is such a large portfolio that it takes even talented ministers time to get a handle on it.
Moving Combet is bad news.

Defence Personnel is just a supporting portfolio and frankly a waste of Combet's time as a senior minister in all but name only. While having a minister split between Climate Change and Defence Procurement doesn't make much sense such is the way of Government. Having Defence Procurement grow into its own ministerial appointment is a good idea.

Milne Bay

02-04-10, 01:23 AM

Defence Personnel is just a supporting portfolio and frankly a waste of Combet's time as a senior minister in all but name only. While having a minister split between Climate Change and Defence Procurement doesn't make much sense such is the way of Government. Having Defence Procurement grow into its own ministerial appointment is a good idea.

I had assumed that Greg Combet was being groomed to take Senator Faulkner's place as Defence Minister.
Now I have a high opinion of Senator Faulkner and was pleased that both he and Combet were involved in defence. It seemed that Defence was finally being given the recognition and talent to actually achieve its objectives.
I am very disappointed that Combet is out of Defence. Hopefully he'll be brought back when the Batts stop Burning.

Gubler, A.

02-04-10, 02:36 AM

Combet isn't out of defence. He's just handed off a small part of his portfolio.

buglerbilly

07-04-10, 02:16 PM

Implementation of the Defence Strategic Reform Program

(Source: Australian Department of Defence; issued April 7, 2010)

(Note: all monetary amounts are in Australian dollars unless otherwise stated)

The Minister for Defence, Senator John Faulkner, announced today that the Government had considered and endorsed the implementation plan for the Defence Strategic Reform Program (SRP).

“The SRP is designed to give Australia a stronger, more agile and harder-hitting Defence Force. After endorsing the detailed implementation plan, the Government is confident that Defence is well placed to achieve fundamental reform,” Senator Faulkner said.

“The Strategic Reform Program is a major public sector reform initiative. The SRP extends over a decade and engages all areas of Defence. It will change how Defence works in fundamental ways. It will unleash forces of innovation and change. It will achieve $20 billion in cost reductions over a decade from 2009-10, to reinvest in Defence capability.”

Defence is already on track to deliver the $797 million in cost reductions scheduled for 2009-10.

Addressing the Defence Senior Leadership Group in Canberra last Wednesday, Senator Faulkner said, “The SRP is not just about delivering savings and efficiencies. It is an integral component of the White Paper. It is the means by which we will build an organisation capable of delivering and sustaining Force 2030. To be blunt, while we have already started to build Force 2030 through decisions over the past year, achieving it in its full potential will not be possible without achieving the SRP in all its dimensions.”

Senator Faulkner also acknowledged the work Defence had put into developing the full implementation plan.

“The detailed planning work that has been underway since May 2009 is critical to the success of the SRP. I congratulate and thank all those Defence personnel who have worked so hard to develop the implementation plan.”

The Defence Strategic Reform Advisory Board, chaired by an external expert, Mr George Pappas, has been involved throughout the development of the implementation plan.

“The Board gave the Government a high level of assurance that the implementation plan is achievable,” Senator Faulkner said. “The Board will continue to advise me over the life of the Program to assist in ensuring the reforms are being implemented in the way intended by the Government.”

Senator Faulkner called on Defence’s leaders to take what is best in Defence into the future. “Reform will not be easy. We have the opportunity and responsibility to make the SRP a reality. In doing so, we will create the Defence organisation Australia needs to help secure its future.”

-ends-

buglerbilly

21-04-10, 04:25 PM

Australian Defence Policy Assessment 2010

(Source: Australian Strategic Policy Institute; issued April 21, 2010)

The Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) today released a new Special Report providing an overall assessment of Australian defence policy. In three separate essays, the report analyses Australian declaratory policy, the force structure that emerges from the paper, and defence finances.

The report argues that Australia’s latest Defence White Paper is at least as much a political document as a strategic one, intent on rebuilding defence bipartisanship after an era of controversy in strategic policy. Its picture of the strategic environment points to major uncertainties in coming decades and, consequently, to a need for Australia to enhance its own strategic weight. At the core of the assessment lies an especially worrying uncertainty—about the United States’ role in the region.

The military strategy articulated in the White Paper comes down on the side of an Australian Defence Force constructed for the defence of Australia and operations in the ‘immediate neighbourhood’—Timor, PNG, Pacific Islands and New Zealand. But in analysing the associated equipment acquisition and force structure decisions, this report finds that the extra naval weight injected into the White Paper’s ‘Force 2030’ will also strengthen the ability of future governments to contribute to operations with the US in the wider Asia–Pacific arena.

The final essay looks at defence funding over the lifetime of the White Paper and the outlook for Defence’s $20 billion Strategic Reform Program. The conclusions are sobering—current plans for a significant ramp up of defence spending between 2012 and 2017 will present the department with an enormous challenge, and the long-term funding on Force 2030 is likely to prove inadequate for the expansion that is envisaged.

Click here for the full report (20 pages in PDF format) on the ASPI website.

http://aspi.org.au/publications/publication_details.aspx?ContentID=250&pubtype=10

-ends-

buglerbilly

22-04-10, 03:00 PM

Run for the Hills! ASPI's just woken up............:horse One wonders which newspaper they have written this for?

ADF Could Face Belt Tightening: Study

(Source: Australian Strategic Policy Institute; issued April 21, 2010)

Defence might have to tighten its belt yet again as the federal government moves to return its budget to surplus as quickly as possible, a new study warns. But it was just possible all or some of the A$8.8 billion in defence spending, deferred in the 2009 budget, could be reinstated.

There were powerful countervailing factors working against that possibility, said Mark Thomson from the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) in releasing its analysis of the defence white paper.

"In fact, it's entirely conceivable that defence will be told to tighten its belt yet again, come budget night in May," he said.

The defence budget for 2009-10 stands at A$24 billion with the white paper promising 12 years of 2.2 per cent real growth following three per cent growth for nine years initiated by the Howard government.

On the downside, defence has to come up with A$20 billion of efficiencies over 10 years.

On past experience the rapid defence growth planned for 2012-17 was likely to be unachievable, Dr Thomson said.

There would be a political imperative for the government to return its budget to surplus as a tangible sign of responsible economic management.

The 2009 budget forecast a return to surplus in 2015-16, now brought forward to 2014-15 thanks to improved economic circumstances.

"But what's good news for the government is not necessarily good news for defence," Dr Thomson said.

"The risk (for defence spending) is that the government will limit expenditure so as to bring the budget into surplus in time for the election after next in late 2013 or early 2014."

This would require reducing spending sufficiently to move from deficit to surplus two years earlier than projected.

"Past experience shows that this is far from a remote possibility," Dr Thomson said.

Rod Lyon, the institute's director of strategy, said the white paper pointed to an underlying Australian concern with the future role of the United States.

The alliance with the US retained its position at the core of Australian strategic policy. "But the white paper signals a range of deeply-layered worries about the relationship, exactly because of the centrality of the alliance in traditional Australian thinking," he said.

"Those worries seem likely to last. They're not simply the product of the (previous) Bush administration.

"Indeed, Obama's strategic agenda, which seems to focus on the long-term rebuilding of US power, only increases the need for both nations to consider the way forward, not just for the next six months or one year but for the next 20 years."

-ends-

buglerbilly

23-04-10, 12:48 PM

Coalition unveils defence policies

April 23, 2010 - 6:59PM

AAP

A federal coalition government would consider a stronger role in Afghanistan, says Opposition Leader Tony Abbott.

And it would also buy unmanned aircraft to detect asylum seekers arriving by boat.

Addressing Sydney's Lowy Institute on Friday, Mr Abbott said involvement in both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars was right.

It has deepened Australia's ties with the United States and Britain as well as reinforcing its significance to the world, he said.

But while stopping short of committing precise numbers of troops to the region, Mr Abbott said Australia could and should do more, including taking a lead role in some provinces.

He was speaking during a wide-ranging, 38-minute speech outlining the coalition's defence and national security policies.

"Putting more troops at risk is not a decision that any Australian government should lightly make but the near certainty of higher casualties has to be weighed against the consequences of failing to shoulder extra responsibilities," Mr Abbott told an audience of politicians and business chiefs.

"How fair is it to leave Australia's security so much in the hands of other countries' soldiers? Or expect America and Britain to do nearly all the free world's heavy lifting?

"If satisfied that the role made strategic sense and was compatible with our other military commitments, the coalition government would be prepared to consider doing more.

"Doing more would be a sign Australia was serious about its overseas responsibilities."

The opposition leader said he fully backed involvement in the two wars, saying terrorism and nuclear proliferation were ongoing threats to the West and other nations.

The coalition would aim to increase defence spending by three per cent a year until 2018, as was the case under the Howard government, Mr Abbott said.

It would also back the purchase of new submarines to replace the current fleet, he added.

A commitment was also made to buy three unmanned Global Hawk Surveillance aircraft to aid detection of asylum seekers arriving by boat.

"These aircraft would help to protect the vast oil and gas projects now progressing on the North West Shelf," Mr Abbott said.

"Real-time surveillance and their vast area of coverage should allow much earlier detection and interception of illegal boat arrivals.

"Improved intelligence would also make it easier to track and help boats in danger of sinking."

A detailed defence policy containing fully costed plans to fund capital acquisitions would be released nearer to the federal election, Mr Abbott said.

In other policy announcements, Mr Abbott said a coalition government would ensure at least 1000 places a year are available to school leavers on the Defence Gap Year program, designed to offer young people an insight into life in the armed forces.

The coalition would also match the government's overseas aid commitments but Mr Abbott said spending should be refocused to make maximum impact on tackling poverty.

The coalition would also consider abolishing the International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament, set up by the Rudd government in 2008.

Mr Abbott questioned whether the commission made any useful contribution to Australia's non-proliferation objectives.

Chief of the army Ken Gillespie hadn't heard Mr Abbott's comments but told AAP troop numbers in Afghanistan were sufficient at the moment.

"We know what our mission is and we know what our numbers are and we're doing it pretty well," he said.

He added Australia's commitment was a matter for the government of the day.

"If (Mr Abbott) gets lucky and wins government, he can have a view of what his government might do."

© 2010 AAP

Exsandgroper

09-11-10, 10:12 PM

Australia needs 12 large subs for security

Brendan Nicholson From: The Australian November 10, 2010 12:00AM

AUSTRALIA will need 12 big, long-range submarines to help it shape its own strategic future.
The region will be increasingly dominated by China, says Paul Dibb, author of the 1987 defence white paper.

In the wake of warnings about China's growing military power at the Ausmin talks, Professor Dibb will tell a Submarine Institute conference in Perth today it is time Australians took their strategic outlook much more seriously.

"We ignore our own unique strategic geography at our peril in the decades ahead," he will say.

Having a large, more potent submarine force must be a central strategic priority for Australia and there should be bipartisan agreement politically about that, Professor Dibb will tell the conference.

The boats should be built in Australia, he will say, and they should be fitted with powerful long-range weapons such as cruise missiles.

The current white paper has called for 12 long-range subs to be built in South Australia at an estimated cost of $36 billion, with the first of the boats to be operational from 2020.

"Too much of the defence debate in this country is preoccupied with the short term. There is a blindness in Australia towards the need to do our utmost to shape our own strategic future.

"We need to return to the fundamental importance of our strategic geography and focus on the potentially threatening historical changes that are about to occur to the geopolitical landscape in our part of the world."

Professor Dibb will stress that Australia needs a larger submarine force and a potent air force and he will deride the purchase for the navy of two giant military transports.

"We do not require two 27,000-tonne amphibious assault ships that will require protection by most of our surface, sub-surface and combat air patrol forces so they can put a token land force ashore."

By 2030, China could have 100 quiet, modern submarines.

Australia needs a submarine force to protect its interests at sea against increasingly credible adversaries, he will say.

The boats need to be able to fight in a region extending from the eastern Indian Ocean to the South Pacific and from Southeast Asian waters, including the South China Sea, to the Southern ocean. They need to be able to work with allied navies in high-intensity combat.

The US has only 26 attack submarines in the Pacific compared with China's 62.

Cheers

Gubler, A.

10-11-10, 12:22 AM

Well lets hope Dibb is as wrong about his strategic predictions re China as he was about the north west of Australia in the 1980s.

Gubler, A.

10-11-10, 12:24 AM

]The US has only 26 attack submarines in the Pacific compared with China's 62.

LOL. Lets simulate this force balance by getting 26 UFC cage fighters in a room with 62 mathematics higher research degree students and see who comes out on top?

buglerbilly

17-12-10, 02:09 PM

Public Defence Capability Plan – Update 2

(Source: Australian Minister for Defence; issued December 17, 2010)

(All monetary amounts in Australian dollars unless otherwise specified)

Today I have released an updated and enhanced Public Defence Capability Plan (the DCP).

The DCP update (Update 2) provides key information for the Parliament, Defence industry and the Australian public on Defence’s Capital Acquisition Plans.

The enhancements to the DCP follow a review of the DCP commissioned by the Government from the independent Australian Strategic Policy Institute on ways to make the DCP a more useful and more transparent document.

The return to a ten-year planning horizon provides a longer term view of Defence’s capability requirements.

The updated DCP contains 140 capability projects or phases, with a total budget of over $150 billion in 2010 prices. It includes a number of new features:

-- information on initial operational capability, final operational capability, initial materiel release and life of type where that information is available;

-- more details on the opportunities that may be available to the Australian defence industry;

-- indicative timing for major scheduled project activities;

-- detail on any project related infrastructure or facilities; and

-- improved cost estimate information.

The increased information will give the Parliament, industry and the public a better understanding of Defence’s capability and acquisition plans. It will also help industry better prepare for its engagements with Defence and better plan its future investment and skilling decisions. This will help Defence to best achieve the critical task of equipping, supporting and sustaining our sailors, soldiers, airmen and air women.

It is important to note that the DCP changes over time as Defence priorities and strategic circumstances change and new projects enter the DCP, or projects are approved and as a consequence removed from the DCP.

It is therefore the case that changes will occur in coming years. Projects may be accelerated, deferred, or diminished as circumstances change. While the DCP provides the best information available at the time of publishing, some of the information in the DCP, including in relation to approval schedules is indicative.

This DCP is no exception, and since the February 2010 electronic update:

-- four projects or phases have been approved by Government and therefore removed from the DCP;

-- two projects have been cancelled; and

-- seven projects have been brought forward, 19 projects have had their indicative schedules deferred and nine projects provide more precise information on their schedule.

In addition to the four projects or phases approved and removed from the DCP, the Government has approved an additional 16 projects (including first or second pass) since February 2010.

The total value of projects approved since February 2010 is nearly $2 billion.

There is also an element of over-programming built into the DCP. Over-programming is designed to provide flexibility and to ensure that best use is made of available funding in the development of individual projects. Over-programming means that project timing may change.

The contribution of Australia’s local defence industry is crucial to our defence and national security. The Minister for Defence Materiel and I propose in early 2011 to meet with key Defence industry groups, including the Australian Industry and Defence Network (AIDN), the Defence Council of the Australian Industry Group and the Australian Business Defence Industry Unit.

2011 promises to be a demanding year for project approvals and I look forward to Defence and Industry working together to progress the plans outlined in the DCP.

This update is only available electronically. The next printed version is planned for release mid next year.

The electronic version can be found at http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/id/dcp/dcp.cfm

My Foreword to the update is available at: http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/smith/forward.htm

-ends-

buglerbilly

15-02-11, 03:43 PM

Anzac Ship Electronic Support System Upgrade, Enhanced ADF Telecommunications Networks, and Special Operations Capability Vehicle Enhancements

(Source: Australian Department of Defence; issued February 15, 2011)

The Minister for Defence, Stephen Smith MP, and the Minister for Defence Materiel, Jason Clare MP, announced today that the Government has given First Pass Approval for three major Defence capability projects: upgrades to the Anzac class frigates’ electronic support systems; enhancements to the Australian Defence Force (ADF) telecommunications networks; and enhancements to the ADF’s Special Operations vehicles and communications.

These three projects combined are estimated to involve expenditure of between $500 million and around A$1 billion by the time they are complete.

1. Anzac Ship Electronic Support System Upgrade

The Government has agreed to upgrade the Anzac class frigates’ electronic support systems, through Project Sea 1448 Phase 4A, as a complementary capability within the ongoing Anzac anti-ship missile defence program.

Project Sea 1448 Phase 4A is cost capped between $100 million and $300 million. The Government is expected to make a final decision on approval for the project in the period 2012 to 2013.

The electronic support system upgrade will provide the Anzac class frigates with the ability to detect, classify and locate the latest generation of maritime and aircraft radars, as well as the latest anti-ship missiles.

This upgrade will give the Royal Australian Navy’s Anzac class frigates a greater level of operational flexibility within the rapidly increasing complexity of modern radar systems. It will also improve the ability of the frigates to support the Navy’s future Air Warfare Destroyer capability.

2. Enhanced Telecommunications Networks for the ADF

Enhancement of the ADF’s fixed telecommunications networks, to be undertaken through Joint Project 2047 Phase 3, will enhance Defence’s information and communications technology (ICT) services.

Joint Project 2047 Phase 3 is cost capped between $300 million and $500 million. The Government is expected to make a final decision on approval for the project in 2011-2012.

The Defence telecommunications network includes 330 sites in Australia supporting some 100,000 users in Australia and overseas. The project will significantly improve network performance and meet capability requirements into the 2020’s.

3. Enhancements to Special Operations Vehicles and Communications

The Government has also given first pass approval for Joint Project 2097 Phase 1B to enhance the Australian Defence Force’s Special Operations vehicle capability.

The project will deliver a modern fleet of tactical Special Operations Vehicles and will provide significant improvements to the Special Forces’ networked communications.

Joint Project 2097 Phase 1B is cost capped between $100 million and $300 million. The Government is expected to make a final decision on approval for the project in 2013-14.

The enhancements to be delivered under JP 2097 Phase 1B will support the tactical manoeuvre of Special Forces and improve the efficiency of tactical network communications across the full spectrum of Special Operations. The vehicles will be highly mobile and able to be transported in a range of ADF aircraft and ships allowing the ADF’s Special Forces to maintain its capability edge.

-ends-

buglerbilly

19-04-11, 03:26 PM

Rising [Australian] Dollar to Give Defence Savings A Headstart

(Source: Australian Strategic Policy Institute; issued April 19, 2011)

Further delays to defence purchases and gains from currency movements are the most likely source of savings from the department in the upcoming budget.

Defence Minister Stephen Smith at the weekend flagged his department was losing the immunity from budget pain it enjoyed during the Howard government and would be expected to offer up savings to contribute to a return to surplus in 2012-3.

Although Defence has embarked on reforms intended to deliver savings over the next decade totalling $20 billion, analysts don't expect significant early returns.

"It is very difficult to run down recurrent costs and personnel. What is easy is to defer projects and not sign contracts," Australian Strategic Policy Institute budget program director Mark Thomson said.

The profile of defence equipment purchases has been shaped by the 2009 white paper and was framed in the shadow of the global financial crisis, with spending cut in the short-term, and pushed out beyond 2014. The equipment purchase budget is scheduled to fall from $5.8bn this year to $5.2bn in 2011-12 and then drop to $4.6bn in 2012-13, the year the budget is intended to return to surplus. Spending is then budgeted to jump back up to $5.5bn in 2013-14.

Mr Thomson said it was not possible to identify which projects have been delayed, with details held deliberately vague to reduce lobbying. Getting spending down in 2012-13 was the most important objective. "What matters is the holy grail of a demonstrated budget surplus," he said.

Securing savings would be helped by the rise in the dollar, which cuts the cost of imported equipment. On the assumption that about half the capital equipment bill is priced in US dollars, the 16.5 per cent appreciation of the Australian dollar since last year's budget will deliver a saving of about $1.6bn over four years.

Mr Thomson said it was clear from contractors' complaints that some substantial savings had been secured in areas where specialist knowledge had delivered monopoly returns. "However, the scale of savings they're talking about is implausible. It is one thing to cut back excess payments to specialist military firms and another thing to achieve it on things like catering, cleaning and maintenance."

Sapere Research director and former finance department deputy secretary Stephen Bartos said the running cost budget was automatically inflated by an unusual fixed 2.5 per cent indexation. This undermined the effect of savings achieved under the budget review.

Mr Bartos said there was scope for large savings if government wanted, with Defence's bureaucracy being one of the fastest growing areas of in the public service.

He said there was also the potential to improve the budget position by stopping the practice of carrying forward surplus funds within Defence and returning them to the budget.

-ends-

buglerbilly

06-05-11, 03:32 PM

Government Agreement to Progress Two Major Defence Capability Projects

(Source: Australian Department of Defence; issued May 6, 2011)

The Minister for Defence, Stephen Smith, and Minister for Defence Materiel, Jason Clare today announced that the Government has given approval to progress two major Australian Defence Force (ADF) capability projects.

These two projects combined are estimated to involve expenditure of up to $1 billion by the time they are complete.

Joint Project 2072 Phase 2B – Battlespace Communications System (Land): First Pass

The Government has given first pass approval to Joint Project 2072 Phase 2B, which is aimed at providing the ADF with a next generation telecommunications network capability. This capability will provide a modern, deployable communications system that enables the transmission of information over a range of wired and wireless networking services, such as radios, satellite and computer servers and terminals.

Joint Project 2072 Phase 2B is cost capped between $100 million and $500 million. The Government is expected to make a final decision on approval for the project in the period 2012-13 to 2014-15.

The ability to access and exchange large amounts of multimedia data is becoming increasingly important for the effective conduct of modern combat operations.

This Project will enable Army and elements of the Air Force to replace ageing mobile communications infrastructure services and provide commanders with an increased level of situational awareness, command and control and information sharing capability.

This equipment will greatly enhance Defence’s ability to use modern information technology to link sensors, weapon systems, commanders and personnel in a networked environment.

Joint Project 2080 Phase 2B.1 – Funded Project Definition Study for Defence Personnel Systems Modernisation

The Government has given approval for the Department of Defence to conduct pre-first pass analysis to investigate the costs and risks associated with streamlining and improving its human resources and payroll systems for military and civilian personnel.

The Defence Personnel Systems Modernisation (DPSM) project is a major Defence project and critical part of the Strategic Reform Program. It will provide a single, unified human resources and payroll system.

It is also expected to improve the administration of human resources and payroll within Defence and enable major reforms in key business support areas such personnel administration, career management, education and training, workforce planning and enterprise reporting. Some key benefits anticipated from the project include enhanced self-service capability and reporting, increased automation and greater supportability.

Joint Project 2080 Phase 2B.1 is cost capped between $100 million and $500 million.

Defence will now report to Government in Financial Year 2011-12 on its requirements and implementation options with a vital requirement being the integration of the military payroll capability into Defence’s core personnel management system, which is currently used to pay over 20 000 Defence civilian employees.

-ends-

buglerbilly

06-05-11, 03:36 PM

Strategic Reform Program

(Source: Australian Department of Defence; issued May 6, 2011)

(Note: All monetary amounts are in Australian dollars)

The Minister for Defence Stephen Smith and the Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare today announced additional Strategic Reform Program (SRP) initiatives and the first set of further accountability and procurement reforms for Defence.

The reforms will enhance Defence management and improve the delivery of billions of dollars of investment in new capabilities being progressively rolled out under the Force 2030 plan as set out in the 2009 Defence White Paper.

In line with the Strategic Reform Program, the Minister for Defence announced that additional Defence efficiency measures would be achieved by a reduction in Australian Public Service (APS) civilian staffing growth in Defence, and the savings effected here would contribute to the Government’s return to a Budget surplus and the Government’s broader fiscal strategy.

APS Savings: Civilian Employees

The SRP will deliver over $20 billion in savings to reinvest in the delivery of Force 2030. Early progress suggests that more can be done. In addition to the SRP measures already announced, the Government is announcing today a second phase of SRP-related savings to be realised primarily through further improvements to shared services design and implementation.

The White Paper and the workforce and shared services stream of the SRP predicted a net increase in the Defence APS workforce of 1,655 from 2010-11 to 2013-14.

Reforms to shared services and other efficiency measures means that Defence can reduce this overall forecast APS workforce growth by 1000 over the next three years.

This includes the application of the Government’s increased efficiency dividend to Defence. Under this whole of Government measure, the efficiency dividend will rise from 1.25 per cent to 1.5 per cent in 2011-12 and 2012-13, before returning to 1.25 per cent for 2013-14 and 2014-15.

Reducing the APS workforce growth will be achieved by natural attrition, not hiring new staff and, if required, some limited voluntary redundancies.

Savings from these reductions to forecast APS growth will be returned to the Budget.

There will be no reductions to the Australian Defence Force military workforce as a result of these changes.

Given priority accorded to maintaining support to operations, improving Navy sustainment and enhancing capability development, the Joint Operations Command (JOC), the Navy and the Capability Development Group (CDG) will be exempt from these additional reductions to their forecast APS workforce.

Further Shared Services Reform

Defence will undertake further externally-led reform and rationalisation of shared services, both within Defence Groups, and across Defence as a whole. The intent is to realise workforce reductions in corporate overhead functions in a way that does not reduce standards of service in support of operations or capability development.

This reform will be undertaken as part of the Strategic Reform Program, using its governance and oversight processes, including oversight by the independent Defence Strategic Reform Advisory Board chaired by Mr George Pappas.

All Groups in Defence will be subject to this examination, with priority in those areas where the largest gains in effectiveness and efficiency are likely to occur. Planning will be completed by late July, with implementation to commence in August 2011.

Project management accountability reforms

Mr Smith and Mr Clare also released the first set of further accountability and procurement reforms.

In February Minister Smith and Minister Clare foreshadowed they would bring forward a number of reforms to improve accountability in Defence and project management.

This is the initial step in that process.

It is essential that the agreed recommendations of Kinnaird and Mortimer are fully implemented and built upon.

In 2003 the Kinnaird Report recommended a number of reforms which led to the two-pass approval system, the creation of the Capability Development Group and the Defence Materiel Organisation as a prescribed agency under the Financial Management and Accountability Act.

Most of the Kinnaird reforms have been implemented and have had a positive impact.

In 2008 the Mortimer Review into Defence Procurement and Sustainment made 46 recommendations. The Government agreed to 42 of them in full and three in part.

Many of these recommendations have been implemented including increased investment in Defence industry skills and incorporation of improved commercial practices into Defence procurement.

Some of the key recommendations have not yet been fully implemented.

Defence will now accelerate the implementation of all outstanding agreed recommendations made by Mortimer as a matter of priority.

This includes:
-- project directives issued by the Secretary of the Department of Defence and the Chief of the Defence Force to ensure Defence acquisitions progress according to Government direction; and
-- benchmarking all acquisition proposals against off-the-shelf options where available.

In addition to this, the Government is today announcing a small number of reforms that build on the recommendations of Kinnaird and Mortimer.

These reforms will focus on improving project management and minimising risk at project start and identifying problems early.

They include:
-- The introduction of a two-pass approval system for minor capital projects valued between $8 million and $20 million;
-- Implementation of an Early Indicators and Warning system;
-- The expansion of the Gate Review system; and
-- The introduction of Quarterly Accountability Reports.

Details of these reforms are attached [see below].

Over the coming months the next stages of reform will include the Government’s response to the Black Review into Accountability and Governance in the Defence Department and the Government’s response to the Rizzo Review into the Maintenance of Naval Ships. (ends)

Project Management Accountability Reforms

(Source: Australian Department of Defence; issued May 6, 2011)

Mortimer Reforms

As a matter of priority Defence will accelerate the implementation of the agreed recommendations of the Mortimer Review that have not yet been fully implemented.

These include:

-- Cost-benefit analysis of projects that are not off-the-shelf purchases to rigorously review the project to assess the cost and risk against off-the-shelf purchases.

-- Establishing Project Directives to provide clear direction to Defence on decisions made by the Government regarding Defence capabilities.

-- Establishing an independent Project Performance Office within DMO to review projects and assist project teams to solve problems.

-- Regular reporting to Government requiring Capability Managers to provide advice on the status of capability development projects for which they are accountable.

-- Creating a more disciplined process for changing the scope of a project including the requirement that Defence seek the Government’s approval for significant changes to the scope of a project.

The Government will also request the Auditor General conduct a planned audit of the implementation of the Mortimer Report in the second half of this year.

Two-Pass approval for minor capital projects

Defence will immediately implement a two-pass approval system for minor capital equipment projects valued between $8 million and $20 million.

Minor capital projects are those valued at less than $20 million. Minor projects are not included in the Defence Capability Plan. They cover new equipment, modifications to existing equipment or enhancements to new equipment. In 2010-11, the planned budget for minor capital projects is around $150 million and there are about 105 minor capital projects underway.

The two-pass approval system recommended by Kinnaird has been successful in improving the budget, schedule and capability delivery of major projects.

Major projects which have been through the two-pass system demonstrate a 20 per cent to 25 per cent improvement to their schedule when compared to those that did not.

This same rigour will now be applied to minor capital projects.

These projects will now involve a formal business case for two-stage approval by the Minister for Defence.

Second pass approval for minor capital projects will require Defence to provide the Minister with tender quality data upon which to base decisions.

Early Indicators and Warning System

Defence assesses that 80 per cent of problems with Defence capability projects occur in the first 20 per cent of the project’s life.

That is why it is important to pick up problems early.

One of the biggest challenges in Defence procurement is projects running late. The earlier these issues are picked up, the earlier the problem can be fixed.

The Government will implement an Early Indicators and Warning System. This system will help identify and correct potential problems with projects.

A set of triggers will be established to give early warning of projects which are running late, over-budget or not delivering the capability required.

The Government expects that a substantial number of projects may activate the triggers. The purpose of the system is to identify problems early so appropriate action can be taken to remediate them.

The Minister for Defence, the Minister for Defence Materiel, the Secretary of Defence and the Chief of the Defence Force will be advised when these triggers are activated.

When a trigger is activated Defence will conduct an internal review of the project and recommend whether a full diagnostic examination (a Gate Review) is required and should be conducted.

The initial triggers for each project stage are set out below. These will be adjusted or added to as the system matures.

Post-first pass triggers:

Triggers will be activated if it is assessed that:
-- the project is likely to go outside a parameter agreed by Government at First Pass, as reflected in the respective Project Directive by the CDF and Secretary;
-- a significant milestone will not be achieved within three months of the schedule approved by Government at First Pass; or
-- the project cannot meet the essential requirements within the cost, schedule and risk levels approved by Government at First Pass.

Post-second pass triggers:

Triggers will be activated if it is assessed that:

-- the schedule for meeting Initial or Final Operational capability will be delayed by 10 per cent or more for off-the-shelf capability, 20 per cent or more for local adaptation of off-the-shelf capability and 30 per cent or more for developmental projects.
-- the project’s costs will exceed its approved budget;
-- the contractor is not meeting promised capability or schedule milestones or exceeding approved costs;
-- policy or legislative changes are likely to increase the project’s schedule or cost;
-- an essential capability requirement will not be met;
-- emerging requirements or regulatory or safety standards are different to those at the time the project was approved by Government and will materially affect the project;
-- industry engaged in the project does not have the required workforce or financial capacity or management commitment to meet critical project milestones; or
-- project risks have increased beyond the parameters agreed by Government.

The Defence Annual Report will publish details of the action taken on projects as a result of an early warning indicator being triggered.

Full Diagnostic Reviews

As foreshadowed in the 2009/10 Defence Annual Report and the 2009/10 Australian National Audit Office Major Projects report, Defence will expand the use of the full diagnostic review of projects, known as Gate Reviews.

Gate Reviews commenced in 2009 for selected high value and highly complex projects and have proven very effective in the early identification and resolution of problems.

All major projects managed by the Defence Materiel Organisation will now undergo at least one Gate Review per year.

Gate Reviews will also be extended to other areas of Defence including Chief Information Officer Group and Defence Support Group.

These reviews will normally be linked to a key project decision point or milestone.

Reviews will also be conducted in cases where the Government or Defence have concerns, or where a project’s early indicator or warning is triggered.

A Project Manager will also be able to request a Gate Review to enlist senior management assistance to resolve significant issues.

A Gate Review Board will be convened for each review.

A number of independent experts will be contracted to provide advice to these reviews.

Quarterly Accountability Reports
There is a need for more regular and rigorous reporting to Government on high priority projects.

Accordingly, there will be a quarterly report to the Minister for Defence, the Minister for Defence Materiel, the Secretary of the Department of Defence and the Chief of the Defence Force on designated key projects.

The report on each such project will be formally signed off by the Chief Financial Officer, the Chief Executive Officer of the Defence Materiel Organisation, the Chief of the Capability Development Group and the relevant capability manager, generally the relevant Service Chief.

This will help improve accountability and pick up problems early. This will alert senior Defence officials and Government to problems in projects so that an appropriate remediation plan can be developed early and acted on.

Reports of this nature are consistent with both the Kinnaird and Mortimer Reviews and will now be implemented.

Such reporting will begin at the next quarter, 1 July 2011, with the first such reports delivered in October.

-ends-

buglerbilly

06-05-11, 03:41 PM

Defence to Cut 1,000 Civilian Jobs

(Source: Australian Strategic Policy Institute; issued May 6, 2011)

1000 civilian jobs are expected to be cut from the Defence Department in the budget as the government attempts to save another $60 million a year. (AAP)

1000 civilian jobs are expected to be cut from the Defence Department in the budget as the government attempts to save another $300 million.

News Ltd says military jobs will not be affected, and the government hopes a broad staff freeze and natural attrition will mean only small numbers of voluntary redundancies are needed to meet the target by 2013/14.

After recent record funding, Defence can expect to do it tough in this year's budget as the government moves to return to surplus by 2012/13 as promised.

The defence budget reached a record $26.8 billion in 2010/11 - an increase 3.6 per cent in real terms - but one leading analyst believes the headline defence budget figure for 2011/12 could be smaller.

Australian Strategic Policy Institute budget analyst Dr Mark Thomson said that would be influenced by the government's overall fiscal situation, with Treasurer Wayne Swan declaring it would be very tight with everyone needing to play a part.

"We can at least expect defence to make some additional token contribution to balancing the books," Dr Thomson said.

"The combined effect of the deferrals (of capital equipment spending), probably a bit less money spent on Afghanistan and the savings on foreign exchange movements I think will mean they will probably spend less money next year than they did this year."

Defence Minister Stephen Smith said returning the budget to surplus was the government's highest priority.

Mr Smith would not be drawn on budget speculation but gave an assurance that troops would continue to be appropriately resourced in all operational commitments in Afghanistan, East Timor and the Solomon Islands.

"We are looking at defence to make a contribution to our budget outcomes, consistent with our Strategic Reform Program (SRP) approach which sees $20 billion worth of efficiency savings over the next period," he said.

In the 2009 White Paper, defence was promised three per cent real growth out to 2017/18 and 2.2 per cent until 2030, along with indexation of 2.5 per cent for the entire period.

But the government can average that out, spending more in some years and less in others. As well defence hasn't managed to spend all its capital equipment budget in recent years, with significant spending deferred to around mid-decade.

The SRP was the big stick to the White Paper carrots, requiring defence to reform its processes and come up with big savings, on the principle that government generosity could not continue indefinitely.

The upcoming budget is likely to feature a report card on SRP progress.

It's been suggested Australia could save big money by deferring purchase of the new Lockheed Martin Joint Strike Fighter, a program worth around $16 billion.

But the priority is to get the budget into surplus in 2012/13, whereas major JSF spending won't start until mid-decade.

There is considerable logic in buying some equipment now and taking advantage of the strong Australian dollar.

On that basis the fifth $US200 million C-17 Globemaster aircraft costs a third less than in 2006 when Australia first ordered four and the Aussie dollar was worth around 77 US cents.

This is a saving for the government, not defence, under longstanding "no loss no gain" arrangements with the finance department.

-ends-

ADMk2

06-05-11, 03:49 PM

Seems like an AWFUL lot more paperwork lies in ADF's future. Where did the idea come from that the way to deal with complex issues, is to add yet another layer of complexity on top of the old?

buglerbilly

07-05-11, 03:18 AM

I have no comment to make about a chunk of this as I could truly launch into gross obscenity...........like watching imbeciles trying to do what they think is brain surgery when what is needed is a brick-layer.

amtp10f

07-05-11, 04:51 AM

Funny that a number of reviews instigated by the government are (at the moment anyway) are finding that a big driver of many problems is a lack of people...

buglerbilly

17-05-11, 10:21 AM

Defence faces $500m funding shortage

May 17, 2011 - 6:14PM .

AAP

Defence faces a $500 million shortfall in the funds needed to maintain its extensive array of bases, training areas and buildings over the next three years.

A report by the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) says the shortfall will result in larger maintenance backlogs and reduce the lives of existing assets.

As well, there'll be added pressure to bring forward upgrades and renewals, it says.

In a review of defence estate maintenance, the ANAO said defence was the nation's biggest landholder with 394 commonwealth-owned properties, including 72 major bases, plus 355 domestic leases and 220 overseas leases, all valued at $20.2 billion.

A 2009 study by the Australian Valuation Office indicated the remaining useful life of defence facilities had fallen from 22 years in 2001 to 17 years in 2009.

The decline was attributed to long-term under-funding of estate maintenance.

Further pressure is anticipated with the Strategic Reform Program seeking savings of $500 million over the next decade.

"Based on the data provided by Defence from its most recent Infrastructure Appraisal process, there is a shortfall over the next three years (2011-14) of approximately $500 million in the funding available to effectively maintain the existing estate," the ANAO said in the report released on Tuesday.

"While acknowledging that maintenance will at times need to make way for other priority requirements, this level of shortfall will result in increasing maintenance backlogs in the future, and reductions in the lives of existing assets, with added pressure to bring forward upgrades and renewals."

The ANAO concluded that defence estate management had not been fully effective and would benefit from authoritative longer-term plans.

A number of reforms are under way.

One is the Base Consolidation Review which will report around mid-year on the controversial issue of rationalising landholdings, closing and disposing of some facilities, and creating a smaller number of larger bases.

Defence is also working to improve service delivery through 12 contracts for facilities maintenance across Australia.

© 2011 AAP

Mercator

18-05-11, 09:42 AM

Defence cuts cripple the nation's options

Ross Babbage
From:The Australian
May 18, 201112:00AM

THE $4.3 billion cuts to the defence budget announced last week will cripple Australia's capacity to cope with a serious security crisis during the next quarter of a century.

These cuts come at a time when China continues to ramp up its military spending by more than 12 per cent each year and deploy many new, very sophisticated surveillance and strike capabilities.

During the past two years Beijing has also conducted highly confrontational operations in the South China Sea, the Yellow Sea, the East China Sea, in cyberspace and elsewhere.

Nearly all of Australia's Asian neighbours and friends are deeply concerned about the shifting military balance and are accelerating their own defence programs.

The US is also clearly worried and is urgently reviewing its global force posture, its defence investment plans and its theatre strategies.

However, despite this darkening security horizon the Labor government appears to have a different view. It is now betting that the country will not face a major security crisis for at least 25 years. The new military capabilities that Australia would need in a major crisis, such as powerful new submarines and stronger air strike capabilities, have been pushed off into the distant future.

The budget revealed that because of slow government decision-making and delays in contractor deliveries, Defence underspent its capital acquisition budget last year by a massive $1.1bn. Instead of using this opportunity to turbo-charge high priority acquisitions such as the new submarines and stronger air combat capabilities, this money is being given back to consolidated revenue.

Moreover, over the next four years a further $1.3bn is to be taken out of the defence acquisition budget. Despite Defence Minister Stephen Smith calling this a "reprogramming" of major equipment investment, the reality is that many capabilities required to defend Australia in a future crisis have been deferred for several years and some may even be cancelled.

The two key funding promises in the 2009 Defence white paper have now been broken. The government promised to sustain 3 per cent real growth in the defence budget until 2017-18 and it also promised to reinvest all savings from Defence's strategic reform program back into priority defence capabilities. Both of these promises are now null and void.

When these promises were made in May 2009, several senior officials wondered in private whether the government would honour its part of the bargain. We now know that their doubts were justified. By cutting defence spending, the government has not only removed funds from priority defence acquisitions but it has also seriously damaged the trust of senior Defence personnel.

The real story is even worse and is best illustrated by reference to the new submarine program. Because of government foot-dragging, this critical program to buy 12 very advanced submarines is already running several years late.

The budget papers reveal that the design phase for this project is now scheduled for 2011-15 and a decision to purchase may not be made until 2019-20.

At that rate, the first new boat would not be in the water until about 2028, and the last in the 2040s.

In the meantime, billions will need to be spent to keep the Collins boats operating, despite their approaching obsolescence. This money would have been much better spent buying new boats about now.

Meantime, in the real world, China has launched some 40 very modern submarines during the past 20 years and may launch another 30 before the RAN gets its first new submarine.

Some will argue the government is asleep at the defence wheel. Unfortunately, the reality appears worse. The government has made a deliberate decision in this budget that Australia will not have the key defence capabilities required to defend the country in a serious crisis until about 2035.

Many commentators have remarked that last week's budget is dependent for its forward revenue projections on the continued rapid growth of the Chinese economy. In truth this budget also depends on China and all other major powers in our region refraining from the use of serious coercive force for the next 25 years. This is an extremely risky bet.

Ross Babbage is a former senior Defence official, former head of the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at the Australian National University, and the founder of the Kokoda Foundation, a not-for-profit national security think tank.

buglerbilly

31-05-11, 04:20 PM

Caretaker Mode Hit Defence Plan: Watt

(Source: Australian Strategic Policy Institute; issued May 31, 2011)

The democratic process was at least partly responsible for the Defence department's failure to achieve key goals and targets in the current financial year, departmental secretary Ian Watt has said.

:wtf

Defence has been savaged for underspending its financial year budget by $1.6 billion and for not signing off on as many major project acquisition programs as expected in the past 11 months.

Dr Watt told yesterday's Senate estimates hearing the election campaign and subsequent hung parliament had led to a longer-than-expected period of caretaker government.

For an extended period it was impossible to obtain government approval for major capital investments and other programs.

:f-off

This argument was challenged by Opposition senators on the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee Opposition defence spokesman, Senator David Johnston, and committee chair, Senator Russell Trood.

''Which projects would have been ready to go if the election hadn't been called?'' Senator Trood said.

Senator Johnston cited criticisms of Defence's performance outlined in a budget analysis by Australian Strategic Policy Institute Dr Mark Thomson last week.

Dr Thomson had said unless the current Defence Capability Plan Force 2030 was subject to a comprehensive audit a train wreck would result.

The plan was only updated last December.

Dr Watt took umbrage at Dr Thomson's language and rejected the analyst's claims the level of savings outlined in the Defence budget was ''not credible''.

''We have not been able to fully meet the expectations of the white paper framers,'' he said.

''That does not, however, mean it is either unachievable or should be torn up.''

He said in 2009-2010 Defence had approved 28 major capability projects.

''We are tracking towards 26 major capability projects to be approved in 2010-2011,'' he said.

While admitting this was fewer than had been planned, Dr Watt said a number of factors had come into play.

In addition to the vagaries of the democratic process, bad weather, the failure of defence industry to deliver products on time and high degrees of technical difficulty had all played their part.

Another factor, and one which may come into play as early as this week with the arrival of the first of five air-to-air refuelling tankers being purchased at a total cost of $1.9 billion in Queensland today or tomorrow, is the need to mitigate technical risks.

-ends-

buglerbilly

01-06-11, 03:38 PM

Australian Prime Minister Announces New Chiefs for the Australian Defence Force

06:48 GMT, June 1, 2011

CANBERRA | The Australian Government is today announcing new command arrangements for the Australian Defence Force.

Prime Minister Julia Gillard and Defence Minister Stephen Smith are pleased to announce the following appointments to be recommended to the Governor?General in Council.

All appointments are to be recommended for three years and to take effect from 4 July 2011.

• Lieutenant General David Hurley, AC, DSC to be the Chief of the Defence Force.
• Air Marshal Mark Binskin, AO to be the Vice Chief of the Defence Force.
• Rear Admiral Ray Griggs, AM CSC RAN to be the Chief of Navy.
• Major General David Morrison, AO to be the Chief of Army.
• Air Vice-Marshal Geoff Brown, AM to be the Chief of Air Force.

The Prime Minister and the Minister for Defence expressed the deep gratitude of the Government and the Defence Organisation to the retiring Chief of the Defence Force, Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston, AC, AFC.

Air Chief Marshal Houston joined the Royal Australian Air Force as a cadet pilot in 1970. He has served his country with distinction, providing exemplary leadership of the Australian Defence Force and the ADF community for the past six years. Air Chief Marshal Houston’s leadership of the ADF has spanned a period of high intensity for Australia’s armed forces, including our contribution to the missions in Iraq and Afghanistan and peacekeeping roles in East Timor and Solomon Islands.

Air Chief Marshal Houston has won the respect of successive Governments, the men and women of the Australian Defence Force and the Australian Community.

The Prime Minister and the Minister for Defence also thanked Vice Admiral Russ Crane for his service. Vice Admiral Crane will retire as the Chief of Navy on 7 June 2011 after 40 years in the Royal Australian Navy.

Vice Admiral Crane has had a distinguished career and as the Chief has led Navy through a period of high operational activity, and implemented a program of wide?ranging and important cultural, leadership and structural changes to position Navy to meet future challenges.

The Prime Minister and the Minister for Defence also expressed their gratitude to Lieutenant General Ken Gillespie who will retire as the Chief of Army in July after 43 years in the Australian Army.

Lieutenant General Gillespie as Chief has led the Australian Army with distinction through an extended period of operations with peacekeeping roles in East Timor and the Solomon Islands and combat and training missions in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Lieutenant General David Hurley will bring a wealth of experience to the position of the Chief of the Defence Force. He has held several senior command positions within the Australian Defence Force including as Land Commander Australia, Chief of Capability Development Group and Chief of Joint Operations. Lieutenant General Hurley is currently the Vice Chief of Defence Force.

Air Marshal Mark Binskin has extensive operational command experience having served as Chief of Staff at Headquarters Australian Theatre in 2003 and then as Director of Combined Air and Space Operations Centre responsible for the conduct of coalition air operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. He is a graduate of the Harvard Business School Advanced Management Program and the Australian Institute of Company Directors. Air Marshal Mark Binskin is currently the Chief of Air Force.

Rear Admiral Griggs has broad sea going and operational experience and has helped drive Defence’s biggest reform program. He has commanded the ANZAC Class frigate HMAS ARUNTA on operations in the Middle East and the Australian Amphibious Task Group. He also has extensive capability management and development experience, and held a senior position in the Defence Strategic Reform Program. Rear Admiral Griggs is currently the Deputy Chief of Joint Operations.

Major General David Morrison has wide ranging command experience having served as the Head of Military Strategic Commitments and Deputy Chief of Army. In that position he led the review into Army's command and control structure which resulted in reform initiatives to ensure Army is able to sustain its current and future operational tempo. Major General Morrison is currently serving as Army’s first Forces Commander.

Air Vice-Marshal Geoff Brown has extensive flying experience on helicopters, F_111 and F/A-18 aircraft. Air Vice-Marshal Brown has commanded at all levels of the Air Force, including as the Commander Air Combat Group. During Australia’s 2003 contribution to the war in Iraq, he commanded all F/A-18 and C?130 operations in Operation Iraqi Freedom. Air Vice-Marshal Brown is currently the Deputy Chief of Air Force.

The Prime Minister and the Minister for Defence congratulate the incoming Service Chiefs, and are confident that they will carry on the excellent work of their predecessors, which was in the finest traditions of the Australian Defence Force and Australia’s national security interests.

These appointments will involve the following promotions with effect from 1 July 2011:

Lieutenant General David Hurley promoted to General.

Rear Admiral Ray Griggs promoted to Vice Admiral.

Major General David Morrison promoted to Lieutenant General.

Air Vice-Marshal Geoff Brown promoted to Air Marshal.

Biographical details of the new appointments are available on the defence website www.defence.gov.au

buglerbilly

02-06-11, 02:41 PM

Defence kept govt 'out of picture': Hurley

June 2, 2011 - 9:59PM .

AAP

New defence force chief Lieutenant General David Hurley has admitted the defence department has not always kept the government properly informed.

But he says the relationship with Defence Minister Stephen Smith remains solid despite past tension.

"We made some decisions in the department but really hadn't informed government what we intended to do, not that they were wrong but the government were left out of the picture," Lt Gen Hurley told ABC Television on Thursday.

"He was right to say you have a responsibility to keep us informed.

"We have been ticked off, we have learnt our lesson and we have moved on."

Meanwhile, Lt Gen Hurley said he could understand if Australian soldiers had doubts about working alongside Afghan troops following the death of digger Andrew Jones this week.

Lance Corporal Jones was shot four times by a renegade Afghan soldier inside an allied base as he walked below the watchtower.

The killer has not been caught.

Asked if Australian soldiers would be suspicious of their Afghan counterparts after the killing of the army cook, Lt Gen Hurley said it "would be a natural reaction to think that way".

But he said Australian soldiers knew they had a job to do.

The Australian Defence Force and the Afghan National Army would conduct a "very detailed" investigation into the incident, he said.

© 2011 AAP

buglerbilly

29-06-11, 02:29 PM

Public Defence Capability Plan

(Source: Australian Department of Defence; issued June 29, 2011)

(N.B.: all monetary amounts in Australian dollars unless otherwise stated.)

Today we release a June 2011 electronic supplement to the Public Defence Capability Plan (the DCP). The DCP provides information for Defence industry on Defence’s Capital Acquisition Plans.

The supplement outlines the adjustments to the DCP since the last update in December last year.

The adjustments include projects approved by Government, (including projects approved and removed from the Defence Capability Plan), cancellations and schedule and cost adjustments.

The adjustments since the December 2010 electronic update include the following:
-- two projects or phases have been approved by Government and are therefore removed;
-- one project has been cancelled;
-- 14 projects have been brought forward, 10 projects have had their indicative schedules deferred and two projects provide more precise information on their schedule;
-- 22 projects have had their indicative cost bands updated;
-- 26 projects have had a change of title; and
-- three projects have had phases combined

In addition, a number of projects not included in the DCP due to their classification and three new projects have been approved since the December 2010 update: an additional C-17 heavy lift aircraft, the Largs Bay amphibious ship and 101 additional Bushmaster vehicles.

Since the December 2010 update, a total of 18 projects have been approved by Government, comprising:

-- Second Pass approval for nine projects at an estimated total cost of around $4 billion;

-- First Pass approval for nine projects, with funding approved of around $100 million. These projects combined are estimated to involve expenditure of over $2.5 billion by the time they are complete.

In the coming weeks Defence will incorporate these changes into the electronic DCP.

The DCP changes over time as Defence priorities and strategic circumstances change and new projects enter the DCP, or projects are approved and as a consequence removed from the DCP.

It is therefore the case that changes have and will continue to occur. Projects may be accelerated, deferred, or diminished as circumstances change. While the DCP provides the best information available at the time of publishing, some of the information in the DCP, including in relation to approval schedules is indicative.

There is also an element of over-programming built into the DCP. Over-programming is designed to provide flexibility and to ensure that best use is made of available funding in the development of individual projects. Over-programming means that project timing does change. (ends)

Reforms to Strengthen Australian Defence Industry

(Source: Australian Department of Defence; issued June 29, 2011)

Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare today announced reforms to increase opportunities for the Australian industry to compete for Defence work.

Mr Clare announced reforms to broaden and strengthen the Australian Industry Capability Program.

Currently Defence projects valued at more than $50 million require tenderers to submit an Australian Industry Capability Plan.

These plans outline how a company intends to involve Australian industry in the project through things like the use of sub-contractors or involvement in global supply chains.

Mr Clare today announced the following reforms to Australian Industry Capability Plans:

The threshold for mandatory AICPs will be reduced from $50 million to $20 million. This means around 27 additional projects in the Defence Capability Plan will now require AICPs. It means more opportunities for Australian businesses. It will apply to all tenders from 1 July 2011.

The ability of a company to arbitrarily reduce the level and type of work included in an AICP will be removed. Any Contract Change Proposal which alters the intent or outcome of a contracted ACIP will need to be approved by the Head of Commercial and Enabling Services DMO. Companies that breach their AICP obligations will be listed in the Defence Annual Report.

A new clause will be included in the Conditions of Tender allowing a company to be excluded from a tender if they have previously failed to meet their AICP obligations.

AICP performance will be included in the Company Scorecard used by Defence to assess a company’s performance. It will be made a category in its own right and will receive an appropriate weighting as a result.

Project teams will be made more accountable for AICP performance by including them in the DMO Project Manager’s Charter.
“I have met with a lot of small businesses since I got this responsibility. In the past 42 weeks, I’ve visited 48 factories, shipyards and other Defence industry sites,” Mr Clare said.

“Everywhere I go small business talks about this. These reforms are based on their feedback.

“This will create more opportunities for Australian companies.”

Global Supply Chain Program – Update

Mr Clare also provided an update on the Global Supply Chain Program.

Five multi-national Defence companies have signed a Global Supply Chain agreement with the Australian Government – Boeing, Raytheon, Thales, Eurocopter and Lockheed Martin.

Through these agreements, the Government funds multi-national Defence companies to hire a team of people to identify and certify Australian companies as part of their global supply chains.

Global Supply Chain Agreements are designed to outline the way a multinational Defence company engages and facilitates opportunities for Australian industry to compete for work in their supply chains.

The Government has invested more than $11 million in the program over the past three years.

When the program was established everyone agreed that if it could provide a 10-fold return on the Government’s investment it would be a roaring success.

To date it has delivered more than a 30-fold return on investment with more than $356 million in contracts awarded to Australian industry.

Australian SMEs have been the big winners, winning about 90 per cent of the value of these contracts.

The agreement signed with Boeing has led to about more than $200 million worth of contracts to Australian companies.

The agreement signed with Raytheon has led to more than $100 million worth of contracts, and the remainder with Thales.

“In January Lockheed Martin also joined the program and I’m hopeful with the awarding of the new naval combat helicopter contract we will see more work for Australian companies from the Global Supply Chain Program,” Mr Clare said.

“It is obviously already a great success and I’ll have more to say about the future of the Global Supply Chain Program later this year.”

Strategic Reform Plan pilots

In February Mr Clare announced the first four Smart Sustainment pilot projects.

Today he announced two more. These are:

BAE – BAE and DMO will work together at the Hydrographic SPO in Cairns to trial an Integrated Project Team concept. This pilot will allow DMO, Navy and BAE staff to apply lessons learned and work seamlessly together to sustain the ADF’s hydrographic capability.

H.I Fraser – H.I. Fraser will set up a pilot project to establish a rotatable pool of spares to reduce lead times and keep business in Australia. This pilot will be conducted in Sydney at the Mine Warfare and Clearance Diving SPO with support from the Naval Inventory Procurement Office.

“This is all about testing good ideas. The Defence industry has a lot of good ideas. I want Defence to test them and if they work, roll them out across Defence,” Mr Clare said. (ends)

Reforms to Projects of Concern

(Source: Australian Department of Defence; issued June 29, 2011)

Minister for Defence Stephen Smith and Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare today announced reforms to the Project of Concern process and removed two projects from the list.

Reforms to the Project of Concern process:

The reforms include incentives for companies to fix projects that are on the list.

The performance of companies in addressing Projects of Concern will be considered when evaluating their tenders for other projects.

If companies are not satisfactorily remediating the project this will result in a negative weighting against them and in extreme circumstances could result in exclusion from further tenders until the project is fixed.

Other reforms to the Project of Concern process include:

-- The establishment of a more formal process for adding projects to the list;

-- The establishment of a formal process for removing projects from the list;

-- The development of agreed remediation plans, including formal milestones for the removal of a project from the list; and

-- Increased Ministerial involvement and oversight of the process.

“The Project of Concern process is working. The objective of these reforms is to make it even more effective,” Mr Smith and Mr Clare said.

Industry leaders contributed their ideas on this important reform to the Projects of Concern process.

The new Project of Concern process will be implemented by the new Independent Project Performance Office within the Defence Materiel Organisation.

This Office was recommended by the Mortimer Report into Defence Procurement and Sustainment and will begin operation on 1 July this year.

Further details on the reforms to the Project of Concern process are attached.

Update to the Project of Concern list:

Mr Smith and Mr Clare also updated the Project of Concern list, removing two projects – Vigilare (AIR 5333) and High Frequency Modernisation (JOINT 2043 Phase 3A).

‘Vigilare’ is an air defence command and control system giving the Defence Force improved surveillance and communications capabilities.

The High Frequency Modernisation project provides the Australian Defence Force with a modernised high frequency communications system.

Mr Smith and Mr Clare thanked Boeing for its hard work in turning both these projects around.

“These projects are excellent examples of what can be achieved when Defence and Industry work together through the Project of Concern process,” Mr Smith and Mr Clare said.

The Projects of Concern list was established by the Government in 2008 to focus the attention of Defence and Industry on remediating problem projects.

The removal of these two projects brings the total number of Projects of Concern now removed from the list to nine.

Of these nine projects, seven have been successfully remediated and two have been cancelled. (Details attached)

Project of Concern Reforms

-- Incentive for Industry to focus on fixing problem projects:
Where a company has a project on the list, Government and Defence will weigh their performance in remediating the project when evaluating their tenders for other projects.

When a company is not satisfactorily implementing an agreed remediation plan, this will result in a negative weighting of tenders received from the company, and in extreme circumstances could result in exclusion from further tenders until the project is remediated.

-- Formal process for adding projects to the list:
The process for determining whether a project should be added to the Projects of Concern list will be as follows:

- When an Early Indicator and Warning is triggered, Defence will advise Ministers, including whether a full diagnostic review (Gate review) of the project is required.

- If a Gate review is to be conducted, Ministers will write to the Chair/CEO of the prime contractor advising them that the project has triggered an early warning, requesting their involvement in the Gate review, and emphasising the potential for the project to be added to the Projects of Concern list.

- Following the Gate review, Defence will provide Government with recommendations on how to fix the problems with the project. If the problem is very serious, it may be listed as a Project of Concern immediately.

- Alternatively, Defence will propose a series of actions that it and the company involved will undertake to fix the problems. This will include timelines, targets and thresholds which if not met will trigger a further Gate review to consider listing the project as a Project of Concern.

The decision to add a project to the list will be made by the Minister for Defence and Minister for Defence Materiel.

Remediation plans:

The Defence Materiel Organisation (DMO) and Industry will develop formal remediation plans for all projects that undergo Gate reviews.

In the case of projects confirmed as Projects of Concern, these plans will:

- identify remediation objectives;

- identify key milestones and the timeline for their achievement; and

- detail an end-state for remediation and the agreed basis on which a project will be removed from the Project of Concern list.

Where DMO and Industry cannot agree a satisfactory remediation strategy, DMO will provide formal advice to Government on whether the project should be cancelled.

For all existing Projects of Concern, formal remediation plans will be developed and agreed with Industry. These will include the basis on which these projects will be removed from the current list.

Removal of projects from the list:

There are two events that will enable a project to be removed from the Project of Concern list:

- Government satisfaction that remediation is completed in accordance with the agreed plan; or

- a decision is taken by Government to cancel the project.

Increased Ministerial Involvement:

Ministerial involvement has been a cornerstone in driving improved outcomes for Project of Concern projects.

The Minister for Defence Materiel will hold bi-annual reviews of Projects of Concern with Defence and Industry representatives.

Biannual face-to-face meetings with the Minister will ensure responsible individuals are being held to account for the progress of projects, and will give the Minister a better understanding of the progress of remediation strategies.

Projects of Concern List – Update

--Vigilare:

‘Vigilare’ is an air defence command and control system giving the Defence Force improved surveillance and communications capabilities.

It was added to the Project of Concern list in 2008 due to schedule delays.

The prime contractor, Boeing, worked closely with Defence to address the issues and get the project back on track and is to be congratulated for its efforts.

Following successful testing the system is now in operational use by the RAAF.

As a result, the Chief Executive Officer of the Defence Materiel Organisation has recommended it be removed from the Projects of Concern list.

Ministers have agreed to this recommendation.

-- High Frequency Modernisation:

This project provides Defence with a modernised high frequency communications system.

It was added to the Project of Concern list in 2008 because of the failure of the fixed network to meet project milestones.

A revised schedule was negotiated with the company and these milestones have now been achieved, 13 months ahead of the revised schedule.

As a result, the Chief Executive Officer of the Defence Materiel Organisation has recommended it be removed from the Projects of Concern list.

Ministers have agreed to this recommendation.

Current Projects of Concern List as at 29 June:

(ends)

Reforms to Disposal of Military Equipment

(Source: Australian Department of Defence; issued June 29, 2011)

Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare today announced reforms to the disposal of military equipment.

The Australian Defence Force is about to undertake the biggest disposal of military equipment since World War II.

Over the next 15 years the Australian Defence Force will replace or upgrade up to 85 per cent of its equipment. As part of that, over the next ten years Defence will dispose of:
-- up to 24 ships;
-- up to 70 combat aircraft;
-- up to 110 other aircraft;
-- up to 120 helicopters;
-- up to 600 armoured vehicles;
-- up to 12,000 other vehicles; and
-- a range of communications systems, weapons and explosive ordnance.

This represents 10 per cent of the current value of the entire Australian Government’s non-financial assets.

The disposal of military equipment provides an opportunity for Defence to generate revenue to be re-invested in new military equipment for Force 2030.

The British Government has generated ₤650 million (about $1 billion AUD) from their military equipment disposals since 1997.

Over the same period and with a similar number and type of assets, the disposal of Australian military equipment has cost around $20 million.

“That’s why I am reforming Australia’s system of military disposals – to reduce costs, generate potential revenue and provide opportunities for Defence industry involvement,” Mr Clare said.

Mr Clare said the first opportunity for the Australian Defence industry was the release of a Request for Proposal for the disposal of up to 24 Navy ships across the coming decade.

That includes HMAS Manoora, Adelaide Class frigates and Mine Hunters.

The Request for Proposal will be done in two parts:
-- HMAS Manoora – submissions will close on 15 September 2011; and
-- All other ships – submissions will close on 14 October 2011.

The latter will provide the flexibility for companies to bid for all ships, a class of ships or a single ship.

Ideas could include, but are not limited to, dismantling the ships and recycling the parts and sale within Australia or overseas.

A plan to dispose of up to 12,000 Army vehicles has also been approved. This includes Land Rovers, Unimog trucks and Mack trucks.

This will likely see the sale of vehicles to companies who will repair and upgrade the vehicle and then on-sell them.

The Request for Proposal for the vehicle disposals will be released in July.

“By disposing of this equipment in bulk, it will increase the amount of revenue Defence can raise and reinvest in new equipment,” Mr Clare said.

“It also provides the scale which gives real opportunities for business.

“The money raised from the sale of these vehicles will be invested in Force 2030, with one option being into simulators used for training that will reduce the wear and tear on Army vehicles.”

Historically significant pieces of military equipment will still be made available to the Australian War Memorial, RSLs and other historical organisations for preservation.

For example, Mr Clare has directed that a number of these Army vehicles be offered exclusively to community or heritage organisations.

“One of the main goals of the disposals system is the preservation of our military history,” Mr Clare said.

“Flexibility will be maintained in the system to make sure that happens.”

-ends-

buglerbilly

30-06-11, 03:40 PM

Minister to Bar Tardy Defence Suppliers

(Source: The Canberra Times; published June 30, 2011)

Mindless, feel-good drivel.......! :razz :razz

Contractors for major defence projects who fail to deliver risk being barred from tendering for additional work until they shape up.

Defence Minister Stephen Smith fired a shot across the bows of recalcitrant suppliers, some of whom have contracts worth billions of dollars running way past their due by dates, at the Defence Materiel Organisation's Defence and Industry conference in Adelaide yesterday.

He criticised Defence and the DMO over recent failures and flagged reforms analysts said would help develop a more corporate ethos in the way Australia buys and maintains military equipment.

Mr Smith slammed his Department's inability to spend money it had asked for, and been given, for 2010-11. ''The budget saw $1.6 billion in Defence funding being handed back. A $1.6 billion underspend is a significant failure in planning and budgeting processes,'' he said.

Shyte forecasting by his own people as well as Supplier/Contractor, over-optimistic and probably/possibly contingencied to a semi-ludicrous extent?

Mr Smith, who announced a reduction in the number of entries on the ''Projects of Concern'' list from 11 to nine, said the time had come to provide incentives to fix problems more quickly.

''When a company has a project on the list, Government and Defence will weight its performance in remediating the project when evaluating that company's tenders for other projects,'' he said.

''This could result in companies being excluded from further tenders until the project is remediated.''

Australian Strategic Policy Institute analyst Mark Thomson welcomed the tough new stance. ''That's the type of language I like to hear,'' he said.

Why? Cos you recognise it as the same type of horse-pukkie y'all issue?!! :abovelol

Asked what companies could be affected by the announcement, Mr Thomson replied: ''Any company that has a project on the Projects of Concern list''.

Companies on the list included ASC Ltd, Boeing, Thales and BAE. Projects included the $407million sustainment contract for the Collins class submarines, the $3.88 billion ''Wedgetail'' Airborne Early Warning and Control aircraft, $377 million worth of anti-ship missile defence radar upgrades for the Anzac-class frigates and $1.89 billion worth of multi-role tanker transport aircraft.

Attempts by The Canberra Times to source comment from Thales, BAE and Lockheed Martin were unsuccessful.

Mr Smith said he was not concerned government-owned enterprise ASC was one of the bidders seeking the multi-billion-dollar contract to build the navy's 12 post-Collins class submarines.

The two projects that have been fixed and taken off the Projects of Concern list are Vigilaire, an air defence command and control system, and the High Frequency Modernisation project.

Contractors were not the only ones in the minister's sights yesterday with Mr Smith announcing a raft of initiatives to make senior leaders in Defence and the Defence Materiel Organisation more directly accountable for blunders that occurred under their supervision.

High priority projects will now be subject to much more stringent reporting requirements. ''Quarterly accountability reports to the minister for defence, minister for defence materiel, the defence secretary, and the chief of defence force will be provided for designated key projects,'' Mr Smith said.

These reports are to be ''formally signed off on'' by the chief financial officer, the chief executive officer of the Defence Materiel Organisation, the chief of the Capability Development Group and the relevant service chief.

Mr Thomson said Mr Smith's actions made sense. ''He is taking a series of well-measured steps to improve performance and to tighten the management of public money,'' he said.

''The quarterly accountability reports appear to be an attempt to hold people to account in an environment where you would have expected them to speak up on problems when they occur or [to have] moved to rectify them.'' (ends)

Defence to Take Hard Line On Contractors

(Source: Australian Strategic Policy Institute; issued June 30, 2011)

Companies responsible for projects that run over budget and behind schedule could be blacklisted for future contracts under reforms announced yesterday by Defence Minister Stephen Smith.

Mr Smith also said the government would take a tighter grip on the name-and-shame ''projects of concern'' list, making the conditions for removal from the list more stringent.

He hit out at what he described as Defence's tendency to plan for more projects than can be completed, in order to retain and divert the money not spent on projects that falter.

''This creates false expectations. It means promising more than we can deliver. It also means, in effect, planning for failure,'' Mr Smith said.

The reforms were revealed by Mr Smith and Defence Materiel Minister Jason Clare to a Defence industry audience at a keystone annual conference in Adelaide.

Mr Smith chastised Defence for spending $1.6 billion less than its budget this financial year, calling it a ''significant failure in Defence's planning and budgeting process''.

However, there is growing discontent in the defence industry over delays to big projects, which it blames on the government's determination to return the federal budget to surplus by the 2012-13 financial year. Industry insiders say the delays will result in job losses and the shrinking of the skilled workforce.

The Defence Department will have a budget of $27.5 billion next financial year, equating to 7.6 per cent of the Australian government's spending and 1.9 per cent of gross domestic product.

Industry figures believe the 2009 Defence white paper - which included an ambitious wish-list of new submarines, fighters and warships to be acquired by 2030 - is so far behind schedule it needs to be rewritten.

Mr Smith and Mr Clare have homed in on the ''projects of concern'' list - which currently comprises nine projects, including the Collins class submarine - as a weak link in Defence's procurement process. Under the reforms, conditions for projects to be removed from the list will be more rigorous and the consequences for having a project on the list could be more serious for contractors.

''When a company has a project on the list, government and Defence will weight its performance in remediating the project when evaluating that company's tenders for other projects,'' Mr Smith said.

''In extreme circumstances, this could result in companies being excluded from further tenders until the project is remediated.''

Mr Clare will also meet with Defence and industry representatives twice a year ''to ensure individuals are being held to account'' for fixing projects have gone off the rails.

This week a leading defence analyst, Mark Thomson of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, said a lack of individual accountability was crippling Defence, and he expressed amazement that no individual had been held responsible for the fact that the Navy's entire amphibious fleet was out of action earlier this year.

-ends-

Chauvel

01-07-11, 06:57 AM

So on one hand we have $500 million shortfall in building and maintenace budget AND on the other Defence hands back $1.6 billion in non-expended funds.

Jesus, surely there is some means of rationalising one against the other OR are we that incompetent or bureacratically constipated.

Head in hands, cries

Chauvel

buglerbilly

01-07-11, 07:13 AM

or are we that incompetent or bureacratically constipated

yes!

buglerbilly

09-08-11, 02:43 PM

Improving Personal and Institutional Accountability in Defence

(Source: Australian Department of Defense; issued Aug. 9, 2011)

The Minister for Defence Stephen Smith, the Minister for Defence Science and Personnel Warren Snowdon and the Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare today announced further Accountability Reforms for Defence.

This builds on reforms to Defence that the Government has already announced in 2011.

The Minister for Defence said the new key reforms are:

• the establishment of two Associate Secretary positions to strengthen Defence’s capacity to implement the Black Review;
• the strengthening of personal and institutional accountability, particularly in the areas of capability development and acquisition;
• increasing rigour and contestability within capability development, including the establishment of a new process for the inclusion of projects into the Defence Capability Plan;
• improving project management skills, implementing three year postings for Australian Defence Force (ADF) personnel into capability projects, and developing employment incentives to retain key civilian staff in the capability area;
• reforming Defence planning, decision-making processes and performance management; and
• substantially reducing the number of Committees in Defence.

The Minister for Defence also released the “Review of the Defence Accountability Framework” (the Black Review) commissioned by theSecretary of the Department of Defence and the former Chief of the Defence Force and conducted by Dr Rufus Black. The reforms announced today fully implement the Black Review.

The Black Review is the first comprehensive review to examine personal and institutional accountability in Defence as a whole.

It has found that there are significant problems with performance in many parts of the Defence Organisation. Much of this goes to Defence management and the quality of its management systems.

The Black Review states “… Defence has reached a point in its history where there is a strong case to redesign its accountability system…. the current arrangements are under stress and their failure damages Defence.”

These failures damage Defence, weaken ADF capability and cost taxpayers money.

To meet the demanding challenges it faces, Defence must operate as a single, integrated organisation, and be managed as such. Defence’s accountability framework has to support this concept.

The Black Review also found that “…accountability systems are not working optimally, with respect to both the quality of decisions made and their implementation.”

The Black Review recommendations include reforms to enhance personal and institutional accountability, reforms to planning and decision-making, performance management, accountability and contestability in capability development, Defence Committees, financial management, the delivery of services across different parts of the Defence Organisation and skills development.

Implementation of the Black Review will improve Defence management and improve delivery of ADF capability and Defence’s ability to manage large, highly complex projects and systems and billions of dollars of taxpayer funds.

New Structural Reforms

To strengthen Defence’s capacity to implement the Black Review and embed a culture of accountability, the Government will create the positions of Associate Secretary(Chief Operating Officer) and Associate Secretary(Capability). The Secretary of Defence will initiate filling these positions immediately by a merit selection process.

-- Associate Secretary (Chief Operating Officer)

This officer will be responsible for the management, coordination and better integration of the Personnel Services and Policy, Defence Support and ICT Groups.

These groups are the key to much of the Defence Strategic Reform Program and their better integration is essential to achieving the efficiencies and cultural change sought.

This officer will have responsibility for the integration of these Group outputs to ensure that the development and delivery of corporate services best support Defence’s ability to effect the necessary reforms under the Strategic Reform Program.

This officer will also be responsible for implementing key parts of the Shared Services Review and the performance and cost efficiencies that the Government is seeking.

This position will play a key role in Defence Strategic Reform and have a close interaction and relationship with the Strategic Reform Group.

-- Associate Secretary (Capability)

The Associate Secretary (Capability) will be responsible for further detailed reform and delivery of integrated capability development, acquisition and sustainment within the Kinnaird/Mortimer framework to ensure it is a seamless process, with better performance and improved support for decisions to be made by Government.

This officer will also be responsible for the integration of work in relation to capability development by Strategy Group, Capability Development Group, the Defence Materiel Organisation and the Defence Science and Technology Organisation. In particular, this officer will ensure the more effective contestability and integration of advice at the early stages of the process, as well as for ensuring the performance and accountability of the overall capability development, acquisition and sustainment chain.

The Associate Secretary (Capability) will be responsible for ensuring that Defence meets the capability development and acquisition targets set in the Defence Capability Plan, and will eliminate unnecessary duplication of function and support services across Groups involved in the capability development process.

The Associate Secretary (Capability) will also be responsible for reviewing capability proposals before they are considered for inclusion in the Defence Capability Plan, to ensure they reflect the Government’s strategic requirements and that all risks are well understood.

Strengthening Accountability in Capability Development and Acquisition

The Black Review states: “Despite much work in recent years, the capability development process continues to suffer from delivery shortfalls related to poor accountability. The reality of much greater scrutiny and the prevailing environment of a capped budget make resolution of these issues essential for the credibility of Defence and the delivery of its outcomes.”

“Accountability for delivery needs to be assigned clearly to named individuals and, where there is joint accountability for delivery of an outcome (as will occur from time to time in a matrix organisation), a clear articulation of who does what to deliver the outcome.”

Improving the development, acquisition and sustainment of ADF capability will be a key priority for the Associate Secretary (Capability). This requires the full and effective participation and contribution of many parts of Defence, with a disciplined team focus on achieving an essential ‘One Defence’ outcome.

Defence will reduce administrative silos through the greater use of project teams which span the whole capability development and acquisition process, ensuring greater consistency of expertise and oversight for major projects.

Defence is also implementing improved planning to reduce over-programming in the Defence Capability Plan. Over-programming hinders the management of capability delivery by not aligning capacity with resources.

The Defence Materiel Organisation will continue to be a Prescribed Agency under the Financial Management and Accountability Act to support financial transparency and accountability. The Chief Executive Officer of the Defence Materiel Organisation will continue to provide independent advice to Government, at key points in the capability and acquisition cycle, on cost, schedule and risk.

Increasing Rigour and Contestability in Capability

Improving the quality and rigour of capability project information is an essential part of improving Defence performance.

The Kinnaird and Mortimer reforms have improved the rigour applied to the capability development process. This includes the ‘two pass’ approval process and a strengthened Central Agency (the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, the Treasury and the Department of Finance and Deregulation) role in oversight of Defence proposals being brought forward for Government consideration. The Government will continue to fully implement these reforms.

Already we are seeing signs of improvement, with around 20% to 25% reduction in slippage of scheduling of those projects caught by the Kinnaird and Mortimer reforms as compared with earlier projects not subject to that rigour.

It is essential to also address the very first stages of capability planning, to get projects right at the outset when they are for the first time proposed for inclusion in the Defence Capability Plan. Failure to get projects right at their outset means that problems are magnified later in the development of a project.

The capability requirements of the ADF are derived from Government priorities.

The management of the Defence Capability Plan must ensure that projects are fully aligned with the Government’s priorities, that risk is understood when decisions are made and then effectively mitigated through implementation. It is not acceptable for resources to be misdirected to projects or acquisitions that are not aligned with the Government’s priorities or which are unacceptably risky.

Defence will now ensure that the ongoing development of the Defence Capability Plan, in particular the inclusion of new Capability Plan Projects, will be more closely linked with the annual Defence Planning Guidance.

The Black Review states: “Consistent criticism from external sources have noted that internal contestability of advice has been diluted and that while central agencies provide some contestability they “cannot hope to mount compelling arguments from afar.”
New internal contestability within Defence will be strengthened. This will include a new process for the inclusion of new projects in the Defence Capability Plan.

Proposals for inclusion of new projects in the Defence Capability Plan will initially be subject to an assessment by the AssociateSecretary(Capability) whose mandate will include the review of all potential capability proposals to ensure that they align with strategic requirements and that cost and risk is understood and accounted for.

To strengthen the capacity to provide this contestability, Capability and Investment Resources Division will be separated from Capability Development Group and report directly to the Associate Secretary (Capability). Further, to address the number of proposals that need to be developed over the next several years, the resources of Capability Development Group will be enhanced.

Defence will work with the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, the Treasury and the Department of Finance and Deregulation to ensure they play a greater role at earlier stages of significant projects and that their specialist advice on cost, risk and alignment with Government policy is an integral component of the recommendations made to Government.

After agreement by the Secretary and CDF, new proposals for inclusion in the Defence Capability Plan will be considered by Government bi-annually, in consultation with Central Agencies.

This new arrangement will retain the flexibility to develop new capabilities rapidly in response to operational requirements and other Government priorities.

Project Management and Skills Development

Accountability rests on the foundation of appropriate skills and experience.

In its response to the Mortimer Review, the Government agreed that the Capability Development Group should be adequately resourced in terms of workforce numbers and skills to develop capability proposals. Skilling remains the major challenge in this area.

Defence will give priority to developing career streams for both ADF and civilian staff in capability development and acquisition. Reform will include implementation of three year postings for ADF personnel into capability projects, and the development of employment incentives to retain key civilian staff.

A project team will be established to structure a career model for long-term capability development in collaboration with broader Defence workforce initiatives. The new career model will include greater emphasis on skills, such as financial management, project and procurement management, and technical and engineering skills.

Reforms to Planning and Decision-making

Defence has plans for parts of its activities, but none for Defence as a whole.

Accordingly, Defence will develop a single Defence Plan to Support ‘One Defence’ and ensure better accountability of the whole organisation to the Minister and Government through theSecretaryand CDF. This plan will also translate broader Defence Planning Guidance into activities for which specific accountability can be assigned.

The Plan will establish key performance measures and specific senior individuals will be identified and held accountable for the achievement of these measures. Defence will integrate this plan with its 2012‑13 budget development and management cycle, commencing in the third quarter 2011.

The plan will be published in an unclassified version with performance measures. The performance of Defence against these measures will be reviewed annually and the results reported to Parliament as part of Defence’s Annual Report.

Performance Management

Defence performance management suffers from limited personal accountability for outcomes. This undermines performance and delivery.

Defence will implement strengthened organisational and individual performance accountability arrangements for all senior officers. Performance arrangements will focus on specifying actions and initiatives that are implemented by named individuals against specific performance measures.

Business units in Defence will be required to specify activities that align with, and support, priorities and goals identified in the Defence Plan. Accountability for delivery against these measures will be assigned to named individuals. Where there is joint accountability, divisions of responsibility for delivery will be clearly indentified.

All Defence staff will have their personal and professional accountability defined against performance plans which are linked to the Defence Plan.

Performance will be reviewed half-yearly. Defence will implement performance arrangements which encourage and reward high performance and deter under-performance.

Committee Rationalisation

Defence Committees will be restructured to support the management of Defence as an integrated ‘One Defence’ enterprise.

The Black Review states: “There are too many committees in Defence, which create diffused and confused accountability, and their operation is often characterised by confused committee roles, unstructured agendas, poor monitoring and feedback mechanisms for decisions made and weak commitment to decisions and actions down the organisation”. “The number of committees attended by the senior personnel in Army alone is 297 whilst Defence Support Group leaders attend 69”.

Defence will ensure that Committees are only established as advisory bodies to accountable decision makers. Members of Committees will be advisers to the accountable decision maker on the Committee, and the accountability of Committee members will be defined in Committee charters.

All Committees will be placed on a 12 month sunset clause, with existence beyond that date only on approval from the Secretary and CDF.

Implementation

An important element of implementation is ensuring appropriate external oversight. This strengthens accountability and provides valuable external perspectives to reform challenges.

The recommendations of the Black Review will be implemented immediately as part of the Strategic Reform Program (SRP). SRP governance and oversight processes, including oversight by the Defence Strategic Reform Advisory Board (DSRAB) chaired by Mr George Pappas, will be applied. The DSRAB is also responsible for oversight of the Shared Services Review and the APS staffing reductions announced by the Minister for Defence and the Minister for Defence Materiel as an extension to the SRP on 6 May 2011.

Mr Paul Rizzo, Chair of the Defence Audit and Risk Committee and a member of the DSRAB, has, as announced on 18 July, agreed to chair the Implementation Committee to oversight implementation of the Plan to Reform Ship Repair and Management Practices (the Rizzo Report).

Mr Rizzo will also provide oversight of implementation of the new capability reforms announced on 6 May, 29 June and 18 July. Mr Rizzo’s membership on the DSRAB will provide a link between the two oversight bodies and help ensure that reform activities are integrated.

Progress on implementation of the above reforms will be reported quarterly to the Minister for Defence, the Minister for Defence Science and Personnel and the Minister for Defence Materiel.

The Black Review is available online at www.defence.gov.au/oscdf/BlackReview

-ends-

buglerbilly

18-08-11, 02:58 PM

Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare and Minister for Defence Stephen Smith – Release of the 2011 On Line Public Defence Capability Plan

(Source: Australian Department of Defence; issued August 18, 2011)

Minister for Defence Stephen Smith and Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare today released the full electronic version of the 2011 Public Defence Capability Plan (the DCP).

The DCP provides information for the Defence industry on Defence’s planned capital equipment acquisitions.

This is the third full update of the Defence Capability Plan since the 2009 Defence Capability Plan was released by then Defence Minister Faulkner.

The DCP changes over time as Defence priorities and strategic circumstances change, new projects enter the DCP, and as projects are approved and removed from the DCP.

This update includes adjustments made since the second DCP update was released in December 2010.

This 2011 DCP update includes adjustments to the DCP since the update in December last year, and which were publicly advised on 29 June 2011 with the release of a DCP supplement, including the approval of 18 projects comprising:

-- Second Pass approval for nine projects at an estimated total cost of around $4 billion, including the acquisition of 24 new naval combat helicopters.

-- First Pass approval for nine projects, with funding approved of around $100 million to fund capability development activities.

Three new projects have been introduced to the DCP and approved since the December 2010 update: an additional C-17 heavy lift aircraft, the Largs Bay amphibious ship (to be commissioned as HMAS Choules) and 101 additional Bushmaster vehicles.

The adjustments also include the cancellation of the project to acquire additional C-130J aircraft following the Government’s acquisition of the additional C-17 heavy lift aircraft.

The on-line update includes a small number of additional changes from the December 2010 update which were not included in the June supplement. Further adjustments reflect the ongoing refinement of the information in the DCP, in particular variations to schedule and cost.

Today’s release fulfils the Government’s commitment to continue to update the DCP.

While the DCP has been enhanced following the Government’s response to independent advice from the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) on ways to make it a more useful and more transparent document, the Government continues to believe that it needs to be improved to be more useful to industry.

I have previously discussed with Industry representatives the need to improve the quality of pre-first pass information provided to Industry.

The new Associate Secretary (Capability) in Defence will be responsible for reviewing capability proposals before they are considered for inclusion in the Defence Capability Plan, to ensure they reflect the Government’s strategic requirements and that all risks are well understood.

Proposals for inclusion of new projects in the Defence Capability Plan will initially be subject to an assessment by the Associate Secretary (Capability) whose mandate will include the review of all potential capability proposals to ensure that they align with strategic requirements and that cost and risk is understood and accounted for.

After agreement by the Secretary and the Chief of the Defence Force, new proposals for inclusion in the Defence Capability Plan will be considered by Government bi-annually, in consultation with Central Agencies.

Additional measures to improve the quality of information in future Public DCPs include that future DCPs will have reduced levels of over programming.

The overall DCP program is developed taking into account the available funding, the delivery schedules for projects and the capacity of industry to develop and deliver the projects.

The principle behind over-programming is to provide flexibility and to aid in ensuring that best use is made of available funding in the event of delays to the development of individual projects.

It is a deliberate strategy to manage the risk of projects being delayed, so that funding can be diverted to other high priority Defence capability projects.

All versions of the DCP since it was first published in 2001 have been over programmed.

Defence will implement improved planning to reduce over-programming in the DCP by better aligning capacity with resources and strengthening management focus.

This process will be undertaken in conjunction with the next Defence Planning Guidance process.

As outlined in the 2009 White Paper, the Defence Planning Guidance is the Government’s premier Defence planning document between White Papers.

The Defence Planning Guidance process aligns strategic guidance, capability decisions and resource planning on an annual basis.

Future iterations of the DCP will be more closely linked to this process.

Linking updates to the DCP with the Defence Planning Guidance will ensure that information provided to Industry is based on the latest national security tasks set by Government.

This also underlines the fact that the DCP is primarily a national security document.

It is not of itself an industry policy document, but guidance to industry.

“The proposals in the Public DCP represent the various capabilities needed to achieve a balanced force capable of meeting contingencies that the ADF may be faced with over the next two decades,” Mr Smith said.

“Getting these projects right and delivering them to the Australian Defence Force on time is an essential contributor to the ADF meeting these future challenges.”

A small number of projects are not included in the Public DCP due to their national security classification.

Click here for the Public DCP home page, where the documents and related information is available in various formats.

http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/id/dcp/dcp.cfm

-ends-

buglerbilly

24-08-11, 03:04 PM

Minister for Defence Science and Personnel – Government Invests $13 Million in Research and Development for Defence

(Source: Australian Department of Defence; issued August 24, 2011)

The Minister for Defence Science and Personnel, Warren Snowdon, today announced that innovative Australian research projects involving helicopters, objects in space, sonar analysis and solar energy had been selected to receive combined funding of $13 million.

Five projects were selected out of 119 submissions received under Round 15 of the Defence Capability and Technology Demonstrator (CTD) Program.

“In supporting these proposals we have the potential to advance Defence capability, produce innovative products for Defence and civilian use and stimulate Australian industry growth,” Mr Snowdon said.

“Defence is proud to be supporting Australian business in developing these innovative products, which range from a light-weight energy system for powering a soldier’s combat equipment to a detachable device that can keep helicopters afloat during maritime emergencies.” (Full list of projects attached)

“I am especially pleased to note the five successful proposals have come from small and medium enterprises and I congratulate the companies involved for supporting innovative research and development technology,” Mr Snowdon said.

The CTD Program, managed by the Defence Science and Technology Organisation and sponsored by the Capability Development Group, supports Australian industry in demonstrating new technologies that have the potential to contribute to Defence capability.

Since the program began in 1997, Defence has invested $237 million in 99 projects. Of these, 72 projects have been completed successfully, 11 projects have transitioned either into service or as a contender for a major project, and a further 11 have transitioned into funded CTD Extension or CTD Transition Projects.

These are very good results for high-risk research and development projects that benefit Defence and Australian industry.

Click here to read the full story, with tables, on the Australian DoD website.

http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/2011/08/24/minister-for-defence-science-and-personnel-government-invests-13-million-in-research-and-development-for-defence/

-ends-

buglerbilly

31-08-11, 01:32 PM

Defence Spending to Miss Targets

(Source: Canberra Times; published August 31, 2011)

(N.B.: all monetary amounts are in Australian dollars)

Yesterday's approval of $550 million worth of military projects is not enough to put Defence back on track to meet its 2009 White Paper force development commitments, an analyst has warned.

Heading the list is $325 million for 950 unarmoured Mercedes G Wagon four-wheel-drives to complete the replacement of the Land Rover Fleet.

The sophisticated cross-country vehicles will be used for day-to-day work and to train soldiers to operate armoured versions of similar light trucks.

The Australian Strategic Policy Institute's operations and capability program director, Andrew Davies, welcomed the approvals for new training vehicles and missile and communication programs but said Australia was still well short of meeting its Force 2030 capability targets.

He blamed the substantial delays on cumbersome approval processes, industry underperformance and a Government reluctance to sign off on projects that hadn't been rigorously developed.

These, in turn, have compounded the effects of the Government's decision to defer $9 billion in planned defence spending beyond 2016 just two weeks after the White Paper was released.

The state-of-the-art G Wagons are to be complemented by 200 load modules, to be built in Newcastle, and 830 trailers which will be built in Queensland at a combined cost of $100 million.

A further $100 million is to be spent upgrading existing anti-aircraft and anti-ship missiles so they can be used on the new Air Warfare Destroyers.

Defence will also pay NATO $20 million towards a risk reduction study on the Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile.

Another $12 million will go towards upgrading Defence's satellite communications.

This money will go to portable land satellite communications terminals and upgraded satellite communications for the fleet.

Defence Minister Stephen Smith defended current practices yesterday when asked if more should be done to use defence spending to support local industry.

''It's important that when it comes to defence capability that we run a national security capability policy, not a local industry policy,'' he said. ''Having said that, in any given year you'll have $6 billion or more that goes into the Australian economy on acquisition of capability, on maintenance [and] on sustainment.''

The Government has also committed $14 million to fund 4000 training places across 109 companies to boost the skills of the Defence industry workforce.

About $1.4 million of this is to be used to support 250 aerospace, engineering fabrication and electro technology apprentices.

-ends-

buglerbilly

31-08-11, 01:43 PM

Australian Defence Almanac 2011-2012

(Source: Australian Strategic Policy Institute; published July 19, 2011)

Now I need some Sucker to go download this report and provide a summary of the crap it contains so that the rest of us don't waste our time doing the same............volunteers?

The Almanac, authored by Raspal Khosa, is a unique publication that brings together a wealth of information across the full-range of Defence activity in a single, easy-to-use reference source. It is an up-to-date, fact-filled resource that places otherwise difficult to find Defence information at the reader’s fingertips and presents it in a transparent, highly readable form.

Chapters cover:

-- Defence and strategy looking at the constitutional and legislative basis for Defence, the military justice system, Australian strategic policy and Australia's place in the world.

-- Australian Defence Force which covers ADF command arrangements, order of battle, equipment, small arms and light weapons, ordnance, platform activity levels, comparative military strength, Defence facilities, establishments and bases.

-- Department of Defence which looks at the organisation, Defence outcomes and programs and the Strategic Reform Program.

-- People which covers personnel issues such as personnel numbers, ranks, recruiting activity, enlistments, Reserve, separations and salaries.

-- Money provides Defence funding, comparative regional defence spending, comparative Commonwealth spending, top 30 Defence projects and top 30 Defence contractors.

-- Australia and the World considers significant treaties, conventions and agreements, Australian membership of intergovernmental bodies and international organisations, ADF overseas deployments and international engagement.

--Counter-terrorism covers counter-terrorism arrangements, governance structures for counter-terrorism, national terrorist situation, budget appropriations for agencies, agencies' CT roles, terrorist organisations in Australia and regional terrorist incidents.

Click here for the paper’s (152 pages in PDF format) download page, on the ASPI website.

http://www.aspi.org.au/publications/publication_details.aspx?ContentID=303&pubtype=8

-ends-

Gubler, A.

31-08-11, 02:06 PM

From memory previous editions of this almanac were just rehashes of the Defence ministerial statements from the federal budget.

buglerbilly

31-08-11, 02:30 PM

Wot? You're NOT going to read it?

You never know what you might miss.............NOT!

buglerbilly

07-09-11, 02:47 AM

More U.S. forces Down Under

By Philip Ewing Tuesday, September 6th, 2011 10:34 am

Australia and the United States have been close allies forever, and they’re about to get closer, according to press reports: Secretary Panetta and Secretary of State Clinton are set to meet with their Australian counterparts soon to sign agreements that will give American units more access to Australian military bases, including ports and logistics facilities. They’ll also mean Australian and U.S. commanders will work even closer than they do now, with “‘full knowledge and concurrence’ with full access to intelligence and maintenance facilities,” as The Australian newspaper put it.

Defence editor Brendan Nicholson makes it sound as though the Aussies have already been read in about the key role they’ll play in the Pentagon’s Mother of All Reviews, which, as you’ve read before here on Buzz, probably will call for protecting or even adding to the American presence in the Western Pacific as it thins and withdraws forces elsewhere. Or as Nicholson wrote:

The increased US access to facilities in Australia is expected to be a significant feature of the Obama administration’s ongoing global force posture review examining where US forces would be best placed to deal with future threats and uncertainties, including the increasing military power of China.

Mr Smith has ordered a similar review to work out where in Australia the nation’s own forces should be based. Australian and US officials are liaising closely on both reviews to ensure they are complementary. As US planners looking for ways to move forces around the world more effectively broke the globe down into regions, Australian officials worked closely with them on the Asia-Pacific.

US forces will not establish new bases on Australian soil, but they will be welcomed into existing facilities with the less politically risky formula of being given unfettered access to “places, not bases.”

American and Australian officials are betting that it’s wise to work out these agreements now, during a time of relative calm, rather than having to wrangle with the details in the event any unpleasantness happens out in the Western Pacific. The more safe harbors American forces have across the Pacific, the better fixed they’ll be.

Or to put it another way: If you bring up DoD’s official report on China’s military capabilities and turn to page 31, you’ll see the ranges of China’s various “anti-access” missiles — the ones Chinese commanders might use to keep enemy warships away to create space and time to operate. The various layers easily encompass South Korea, Japan and even Guam, but not Australia. For now.

Photo: Marine Corps // A U.S. Marine trained with Australian soldiers during the Talisman Sabre exercise in July.

Read more: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2011/09/06/more-u-s-forces-down-under/#ixzz1XDtMnVrD
DoDBuzz.com

buglerbilly

11-09-11, 05:26 AM

Australia's bill: $27b and counting

Tom Hyland

September 11, 2011 .

With a bill of almost $30 million, experts are beginning to question if it's worth it.

Anybody wasting their time and attending this "conference"..................and who called for it?

AS AUSTRALIA'S bill for fighting terrorism edges towards $30 billion, security experts are beginning to question whether we are getting value for money.

This estimate is based on what we have paid to fight two wars, boost intelligence and policing, and strengthen domestic security in the 10 years since the September 11 attacks on the United States.

Part of the problem in assessing the value of the security bill is a lack of clarity in official accounting, and the absence of any cost-benefit analysis. Unlike the US, Australia does not have a separate homeland security budget.

The US budget, since September 11, is about $US1 trillion - that is, $US1000 billion. Add in the costs of the US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the cost is $US3-4 trillion.

Mark Thomson, a former Defence Department official and now an analyst at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, is an expert on the defence budget. Drawing on budget figures, he calculates Australia has spent an extra $21.3 billion on defence and security since 2001.

The largest share has gone on the military commitments to the Iraq war ($2.4 billion) and Afghanistan ($7 billion and counting). A further $10.4 billion has been spent on extra security at home.

The Australian Federal Police and ASIO have been major beneficiaries. The nominal increase in ASIO's budget over the past nine years is 471 per cent, according to Mr Thomson's calculations. Its budget allocation in 2001 was $69 million. This year it is close to $400 million, after peaking at $450 million in 2007. Mr Thomson's total figure of $21.3 billion also includes an extra $1.5 billion in aid to Iraq and Afghanistan. It does not include spending by state and local governments, nor the cost of extra security introduced by business and non-government organisations.

These costs are calculated by Athol Yates, executive director of the Australian Security Research Centre. He says Canberra spends about $10.5 billion on homeland security, while state and local government plus private industry spend another $5.5 billion.

When combined with extra military spending, the tally is $26.9 billion so far. Given Australia's commitment to Afghanistan will continue at least until 2014, the bill will easily reach $30 billion in coming years. Whether Australia is getting value for its security dollar will be the focus of a security industry conference in Canberra this week. Mr Yates, conference chairman, said there was growing evidence that a lot of the spending was ineffective, and some a waste.

''A key theme is about recalibrating our security response,'' Mr Yates said. ''This is a polite way of saying, 'Guys, we know this isn't right any more, we can't justify it, there's no evidence to support the expenditure to date.' ''

More than 100 Australians have been killed by terrorists since 2001 - all overseas, most in the 2002 Bali bombing. While there have been no terrorist attacks in Australia, agencies such as ASIO argue they have foiled four ''mass casualty events''. In a recent speech the ASIO director general, David Irvine, said the organisation was conducting ''literally hundreds'' of investigations into possible terrorist plans.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/australias-bill-27b-and-counting-20110910-1k32c.html#ixzz1XbuxiqcZ

Mercator

11-09-11, 06:35 AM

The annual defence budget is approximately $22 billion. So Mr Hyland is saying, on an annualised basis, we have been paying a little more than 10% extra towards our security ($2.7 B per year) . Is the world more than 10% less safe since 9/11? I would think so.

But it wouldn't be so sexy if you put it like that.

Also, even if we didn't go to Iraq and Afghanistan, that $10 billion spent at home would probably still be spent. I certainly don't recall any clamour on the domestic front tocut this spending -- the ALP continues to spend it. And the $1.5 billion in aid – even the Greens agree on that.

More to the point, if some joker got through, Mr Hyland would be writing scathing opinion pieces about how successive governments did nothing.

A lazy piece that does nothing to challenge the drivel he's being fed.

ADMk2

11-09-11, 07:22 AM

Any of these geese bother looking into the fact that the money spent on ADF, intelligence, police, bio-health, disaster response and security has uses beyond counter-terrorism operations and would probably have been spent anyway?

Fergwits...

buglerbilly

14-09-11, 06:09 AM

Smith to discuss Afghanistan in US

Stephen Johnson

September 14, 2011 - 1:59PM .

AAP

Defence Minister Stephen Smith says Afghanistan will be high on the agenda at top-level talks in the United States marking the 60th year of the Australia-US alliance.

The AUSMIN talks will be held in San Francisco, where Australia and the US signed the ANZUS treaty in September 1951, binding Australia to cooperate with the US on defence matters in the Pacific.

"It's the 60th anniversary of our alliance with the United States - the US alliance continues to be the pillar and the bedrock of our strategic, security and defence arrangements," Senator Smith said.

Senator Smith will attend the AUSMIN talks on Wednesday and Thursday (US local time) with Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd and US counterparts including US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

"Of course, Afghanistan will be the subject of very serious consideration," he said.

Mr Smith said he also hoped to discuss Australia's Joint Strike Fighter and submarine programs in a "separate conversation" with US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta.

Cyber security, Libya, US military power, and the rise of China and India were also likely to be on the agenda, he said.

The AUSMIN talks will also mark 10 years since the ANZUS treaty was invoked by then prime minister John Howard after terrorist attacks on US soil in September 2001, which led Australia to join US-led forces in Afghanistan.

On his way to AUSMIN, Mr Smith will stop in Los Angeles to take formal delivery of a Boeing C-17 military transport aircraft at Boeing's Long Beach factory.

"In Los Angeles, I will formally take delivery, take receipt, of Australia's fifth C-17 airplane," he told reporters in Sydney on Wednesday.

"C-17 has been a very important heavy aircraft lift capability for us, and we've seen it perform magnificently in recent times, not just in Australia in the face of floods and cyclones, but also in Christchurch in the aftermath of the earthquake there and also in Japan."

© 2011 AAP

buglerbilly

27-09-11, 02:35 PM

Industry and Defence Cooperation on Projects of Concern

(Source: Australian Department Of Defence; issued September 27, 2011)

Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare today begins a two-day round of meetings with senior Defence officials and CEOs of companies which have projects on the Projects of Concern list.

In February this year, Mr Clare committed to holding biannual face-to-face meetings with industry and Defence. The first round of meetings was held in February.

“The purpose of these meetings is simple – to make sure there is focus from the top of Government, Defence and industry to remediate these projects,” Mr Clare said. “It ensures that the senior Defence and industry people responsible for these projects are doing everything necessary to remediate them.

“Ultimately, we want these projects off the list. This is about working together to get these projects back on track.”

On 29 June this year Mr Clare and Minister for Defence Stephen Smith announced at the Defence and Industry Conference in Adelaide a range of reforms to strengthen the Projects of Concern system.

These reforms include:
-- the establishment of a more formal process for adding projects to the list;
-- the establishment of a formal process for removing projects from the list;
-- the development of agreed remediation plans, including formal milestones for the removal of a project from the list; and
-- increased Ministerial involvement and oversight of the process.

“The Projects of Concern process is working and the reforms we are implementing will make it even more effective,” Mr Smith said.

Since the Projects of Concern process began in 2008, 18 projects have been listed as Projects of Concern. Since then, nine of those have been removed – seven due to remediation and two due to cancellation.

The current Projects of Concern list is attached.

-ends-

Mercator

19-11-11, 08:48 AM

The Canberra Times:

Defence told to brace for further cuts

DAVID ELLERY, DEFENCE REPORTER

19 Nov, 2011 01:00 AM

Defence is on notice to prepare for a further round of spending cuts and program deferrals in the coming year as the Federal Government struggles to bring the budget back into surplus in 2012-13.
Labor is committed to a surplus in the next fiscal year and Defence would have to play its part, Defence Minister Stephen Smith said in a written statement to his senior leadership group yesterday.

Mr Smith was unable to appear in person due to illness.

Defence analysts say cuts could include pushing Joint Strike Fighter payments scheduled for 2012-13 back a month or two to the following year and a real reduction in the number of civilian defence positions.

Mark Thomson, the program manager for budget and development at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, said it was possible the cuts had already occurred.

''The release of the mid-year financial statement is imminent,'' he said. ''The minister could be referring to decisions that have already been made.''

Mr Thomson said he would not rule out the possibility of real job cuts - as opposed to the axing of unfilled positions that occurred in the May budget - in the civilian sector of Defence.

Uniformed service personnel were on much safer ground.

''It would be very difficult for the Government to cut uniformed positions given the current operating tempo across all three services,'' he said.

The current Defence budget of $27billion makes up 7.4 per cent of the Federal Government's total spend for the current fiscal year. It is equivalent to 1.9 per cent of gross domestic product.

''This funding places significant pressure on the Government's fiscal strategy,'' Mr Smith said. ''Defence has to expect that we will again be called upon to make a contribution in this respect.''

Mr Smith said he has received the final reports of six reviews prompted by the Australian Defence Force Academy Skype scandal and had directed the Defence Secretary and Chief of Defence Force to respond.

Mr Smith's warning of further Defence cuts comes a fortnight after claims by Access Economics the 2012-13 budget would be in deficit by $1.9billion.

--ends--

buglerbilly

19-11-11, 12:30 PM

They are blindly committed to a surplus altho the relevance of it is strictly for their own selfish survival............I sure like selfish, self-serving vermin posing as Politicians

ADMk2

19-11-11, 03:23 PM

Well they normally borrow worse than a Surfers Paradise esque trophy-wife, so a surplus would be a novelty for the ALP, however the 'surplus at all costs approach' doesn't strike me as being particularly suited to the national interest, either.

Especially when we all KNOW where that surplus is going next year. The usual pork-barrel politics...

Mercator

20-11-11, 04:56 AM

A $1 billion deficit is just as meaningless economically. It would have to be tens of billions of dollars in either direction to have a meaningful impact. But since I don't want them spending like a drunken sailors in other portfolios either, I'll take the artificial political target even if it means that Defence takes a small hit. They probably would not have managed to spend some of it anyway. The DCP is still lagging behind schedule as far as I can see. They acknowledged as much in the last estimates, though they did make all sorts of promises about speeding it up.

Chunder

25-11-11, 10:10 AM

Surplus: Money that exceeds your requirements, that doesn't reflect how much debt you have.

Page 1, Rule 2 of Politician speak for fooling the dumb fuck public, that your actually a competent government.

On the last page is the caveat * hopefully we are all dead by the time we've finished raping companies for digging holes in the ground and makes us all look stupid for claiming competence because of a fukn shovel.*

buglerbilly

28-11-11, 04:29 AM

Just announced by Smith...........

- All ANZAC frigates to get the ASMD Upgrade

- Massive radio upgrade from analogue to full digital, approx 7,000 units (predominantly Army)

- Upgrade to the Training of Pilots

- First pass for an ATC upgrade

MRH-90 added to the Projects of Concern list.............

I'll post full details once published by Defence.

Exsandgroper

28-11-11, 08:30 AM

Thanks to Bug.

Minister for Defence and Minister for Defence Materiel – New Cutting Edge Missile Defence System for ANZAC Ships

28 November 2011

Minister for Defence Stephen Smith and Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare today announced that the Government has approved the upgrade of all eight of the Royal Australian Navy’s Anzac Class frigates with an advanced Anti-Ship Missile Defence system.

The total project cost is in excess of $650 million, including the funds already spent upgrading HMAS Perth.

The ANZAC Class Anti-Ship Missile Defence (ASMD) project has also been removed from the Projects of Concern list.

The 2009 Defence White Paper outlined the Government’s intent to put all of the ANZAC Class ships through an ASMD upgrade program, subject to the successful outcome of at-sea trials on the first ship.

The upgrade of HMAS Perth as the lead ship for the ASMD program was successfully completed earlier this year.

Following exhaustive testing, including in theUnited States, the Chief of Navy agreed to the operational release of the system in July 2011.

Government has now approved the installation of the system on the remaining seven ships of the ANZAC class by 2017.

Minister Smith said this was the latest weapon in Navy’s arsenal and meant the Navy’s ANZAC frigates would be a lot more capable.

At the moment our ANZAC frigates can track and destroy one target at a time.

The new system is able to identify, track and guide missiles to multiple targets at the same time.

Minister Clare said the project was a great Australian success story – cutting edge technology developed right here inAustraliaby CEA Technologies.

The remaining upgrade installation and integration work will be undertaken by the ANZAC Ship Integrated Materiel Support Program Alliance, comprising SAAB Systems, BAE Systems and the Defence Materiel Organisation.

Minister Clare said that the ASMD upgrade program is a good demonstration of how the Projects of Concern process can effectively manage difficult projects and deliver successful national security outcomes forAustralia.

Media Note:

Imagery available at: http://images.defence.gov.au/fotoweb/Grid.fwx?archiveId=5003&search=20112625

Cheers

buglerbilly

28-11-11, 02:29 PM

Projects of Concern Update

(Source: Australian Department of Defence; issued November 28, 2011)

Minister for Defence Stephen Smith and Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare today provided an update to the Projects of Concern List.

The ANZAC Class Anti-Ship Missile Defence (ASMD) project has been removed from the Projects of Concern list and the Multi Role Helicopter (MRH-90) project has been added.

So far this year four projects have been removed from the list, three through remediation and one through cancellation.

At the beginning of the year, 12 projects were on the list. There are now nine.

This shows the system is working – fixing problem projects.

More projects are expected to be in a position to be removed from the list before the end of the year.

The Projects of Concern process was established by the Government in 2008 to focus the attention of the highest levels of Government, Defence and Industry on remediating problem projects.

In June, Mr Smith and Mr Clare announced reforms to strengthen the Projects of Concern process, including:

• The establishment of a more formal process for adding projects to the list;
• The establishment of a formal process for removing projects from the list;
• The development of agreed remediation plans, including formal milestones for the removal of a project from the list;
• Increased Ministerial involvement and oversight of the process; and
• Incentives for companies to fix projects on the list by taking into account the performance of companies in addressing Projects of Concern when evaluating their tenders for other projects.

Since the Projects of Concern process began in 2008, 19 projects have been put on the list. Since then, ten of those have been removed – eight due to remediation and two due to cancellation.

ANZAC Class Anti-Ship Missile Defence (ASMD)

The ASMD project is upgrading the ability of ANZAC Class ships to defend themselves from anti-ship missile threats.

The project was listed as a project of concern in mid-2008 due to challenges with engineering and technology development.

In July 2009, Government approved the upgrade of HMAS Perth as the lead ship for the Anti-Ship Missile Defence program. Upgrade work was successfully completed earlier this year.

Following exhaustive testing, including in theUnited States, the Chief of Navy agreed to the operational release of the radar system in July of this year.

Government has now approved the installation of the system onto the remaining seven ships of the ANZAC class by 2017.

As a result of the achievement of these milestones the Acting Chief Executive Officer of the Defence Materiel Organisation has recommended the removal of this project from the Projects of Concern list.

The Government has agreed to this recommendation.

Multi-Role Helicopter (MRH-90)

This project will provide Army and Navy with 46 new helicopters to replace the existing Black Hawk and Sea King fleets.

The project is running late, primarily due to technical issues affecting the aircraft.

The project has suffered delays of some two years to date.

There remains a risk that the program will be further delayed.

In April this year, the project underwent a comprehensive independent diagnostic Gate Review.

This review recommended a remediation strategy which was agreed to by the prime contractor, Australian Aerospace.

At that time, Mr Clare said the project would be reviewed again this year. That review was conducted in September.

The MRH project has encountered a number of significant technical issues, which have now triggered early indicators and warnings thresholds for schedule and contractor performance.

On the basis of the latest review, the Acting Chief Executive Officer of the Defence Materiel Organisation has recommended that the project be listed as a Project of Concern. The Government has agreed to this recommendation.

To manage any capability gap with the retirement of Navy’s Sea King helicopters in December 2011, Navy will generate an additional short term Seahawk flight.

Army’s Black Hawk fleet is also able to be extended to cover the capability gap in the short term.

Click here http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/2011/11/28/minister-for-defence-and-minister-for-defence-materiel-projects-of-concern-update-2/

-ends-

buglerbilly

28-11-11, 02:37 PM

Three More Projects Approved

(Source: Australian Department of Defence; issued November 28, 2011)

Minister for Defence Stephen Smith and Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare today announced that the Government has given approval for three major Defence capability projects.

This brings to 35 the number of first pass, second pass and other approvals for major projects in 2011, worth a total of around $6 billion.

The three projects are:

-- Combined pass approval for improved Battlespace Communications Systems, including purchase of around 11,000 new digital radios for ground forces (Project JOINT 2072 Phase 2A);

-- First pass approval for the lead-in fighter capability assurance program which will provide enhanced training systems to provide Air Force pilots with the capabilities they need to allow training for current and future combat aircraft (Project AIR 5438 Phase 1A); and

-- First pass approval for a new fixed-site Air Traffic Management and Control System which will replace existing radars and command and control systems which are reaching their life of type (Project AIR 5431 Phases 2 and 3).

These combined approvals are estimated to involve expenditure of around $500 million and when complete the projects are likely to represent a commitment to Australia’s national security by Government of up to $1.2 billion.

Battlespace Communications

The Government has provided combined first and second pass approval for Phase 2A of the Battlespace Communications System (Land) project and approved funding of around $450 million.

JOINT Project 2072 is a multi-phased project to provide an enhanced digital communications capability for the Australian Defence Force, primarily for the Army.

Phase 2A will deliver around 11,000 digital combat net radios that will replace existing analogue equipment and builds on approvals that Government provided for Phase 1 of the project in 2009.

The Phase 1 contractor, Harris Corporation, will be engaged for the provision of Phase 2A radios.

Lead-in-Fighter

The Government has provided first pass approval for Phase 1A of the Lead-In Fighter Capability Assurance Program (Project AIR 5438).

This project will upgrade Air Force’s capability to produce aircrew with the necessary skills to operate current RAAF combat aircraft, like the F/A-18 Classic and Super Hornet fleets as well as the future combat aircraft, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF).

The Government has approved funding of $43 million for Defence to develop options and conduct risk mitigation activities prior to Government approval at second pass, presently scheduled for 2013-14.

The total cost of Project AIR 5438 is identified in the Public Defence Capability Plan as being between $100 and $300 million.

Air Traffic Management and Control System

The Government has provided first pass approval for Phases 2 and 3 of the Air Traffic Management and Control Systems project.

This project will deliver replacement surveillance radars, and tower and approach automation systems for the current systems which are approaching the end of their life of type.

A key feature of the project will be to enhance interoperability between military and civil air traffic management systems, as announced in the 2009 ‘National Aviation Policy White Paper – Flight Path to the Future’.

The Government has approved funding of $6.9 million for capability development activities, prior to second pass, which is scheduled for 2013-2014. The total cost of Project AIR 5431 Phase 2/3 is identified in the Public Defence Capability Plan as being between $300 to $500 million.

-ends-

ADMk2

28-11-11, 02:43 PM

Apparently JASSM has completed it's live fire exercises successfully and is due to leace PoC soon. Not sure about the others though Defmin Smith definitely indicated more than one PoC project is to be removed before years end.

buglerbilly

13-12-11, 02:06 PM

Record Number of Defence Capability Approvals In 2011

(Source: Australian Department of Defence; issued December 13, 2011)

Minister for Defence Stephen Smith and Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare today announced that the Government has made a record number of approvals for Defence capability projects in 2011.

Mr Smith and Mr Clare today announced the approval of another four major Defence projects. This brings the total number of first pass, second pass and other approvals for major projects in 2011 to 46. The previous record was 39 in 2006.

The total value of the projects approved in 2011 is more than $6 billion.

The four approvals announced today are:

Maritime Patrol Aircraft Replacement (Air 7000Phase 2B):

The Government has provided an intermediate pass approval for Phase 2B of the Maritime Patrol Aircraft Replacement Project.

This project will acquire a military-off-the-shelf (MOTS) maritime patrol aircraft to replace the current AP-3C Orion fleet.

The Orion aircraft undertake surveillance, reconnaissance and response roles, strengthening Australia’s border protection operations against people smuggling, illegal fishing and piracy.

The Royal Australian Air Force AP-3C Orion fleet has performed exceptionally in Australian domestic operations, as well as in South East Asia and the Middle East. However, the fleet is expected to reach its planned withdrawal date around 2019.

First pass approval for this project, and funding of around $150 million, was provided by Government in June 2007.

This approval allowed Defence to join the United States Navy’s (USN) P8-A program.

The P-8A design is based on the commercially proven Boeing 737-800 airframe and is capable of conducting extended missions over large areas and at extended range from its operating base.

The intermediate pass approval announced today will allow Defence to expand the co-operation it is undertaking with the USN, including the establishment of a Production, Sustainment and Follow-on Development Memorandum of Understanding (MOU).

The Government has approved additional funding of almost $100 million for activities that will now be conducted up to second pass.

The Government is expected to make a final decision on the Maritime Patrol and Response platform in the period 2013-14 to 2015-16. The new aircraft systems are expected to be operational in the period 2017-18 to 2019-20.

The overall budget for Phase 2B of Air 7000 is identified in the Public Defence Capability Plan as being between $3 to $5 billion (middle of band).

This new aircraft will complement the high altitude, long endurance unmanned aircraft systems that will be acquired under Phase 1B of Project Air 7000.

Digital Terminal Control Systems

The Government has provided second pass approval for Land 17 Phase 1B of the Artillery Replacement project, with funding of around $90m.

This approval is subject to the establishment of acceptable commercial terms with the preferred contractor, Rockwell Collins Australia.

This project will modernise the Australian Defence Force’s indirect fire combat capability through the provision of modern digitised artillery systems that will increase precision, range and rate of fire. The project will acquire 96 systems.

The Government has previously approved the acquisition of 56 of the same Digital Terminal Control Systems (DTCS) under an Operational User Requirement. This approval was provided in July 2010 at a cost of around $29 million, and the systems have been fielded by the ADF in Afghanistan.

The DTCS is capable of supporting operations undertaken by each of Navy, Army and Air Force.

Lightweight Anti-Submarine Torpedo Replacement

The Government has approved the release of funding of around $70 million to allow completion of Phase 2 of the Lightweight Anti-Submarine Torpedo Replacement.

The project was initiated in 1998 and due to a range of technical and schedule difficulties, has been managed as a Project of Concern since 2008.

Stage 1 of Phase 2 of this project was approved in February 2009, at a cost of $29.5 million.

The new approval provided by Government will allow a comprehensive test program to be completed, will see the establishment of through life support systems for the capability and will allow completion of the integration activity on all the ANZAC and ADELAIDE class frigates.

There is extensive local industry involvement in this project, including through integration work on the frigates, the establishment of production facilities to manufacture and assembly torpedo components, and the establishment of a maintenance facility in Western Australia.

Woomera Test Range Upgrade

The Government has given first pass approval to upgrade theWoomera Test Range (Joint Project 3024 Phase 1).

Woomera is an essential Defence testing and evaluation asset and plays an important role in our national security and Defence capability.

Its remoteness and size makes it a unique location for large scale and long range weapons testing.

The Test Range upgrade will provide Defence with the ability to conduct sophisticated test and evaluation, and research and experimentation activities in a safe, secure and networked environment.

It will enable Defence to independently test manned and unmanned aircraft, weapons, explosive ordnance, electronic warfare systems and navigation warfare systems.

The project will deliver improvements to the Range’s command, control, safety and data acquisition systems. In particular, outdated analogue radars and optical tracking equipment will be replaced with modern networked systems.

Improved range systems will also provide for better utilisation of a scarce resource and enable greater access to the Woomera prohibited area by non Defence users.

The Government has approved $7 million to develop the project for Second Pass approval, which is scheduled for the period 2012-13 to 2013-14.

The total cost of Joint Project 3024 Phase 1 is identified in the Public Defence Capability Plan as being between $100 and $300 million. (ends)

Projects of Concern List Halved

(Source: Australian Department of Defence; issued December 13, 2011)

Minister for Defence Stephen Smith and Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare today announced the removal of another three projects from the Projects of Concern list – halving the number of projects on the list over the past 12 months.

The three projects to be removed are:

• Land 121 Phase 3B – Overlander replacement field vehicles, trailers and modules (Medium Heavy class);
• AIR 5418 Phase 1 – Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM); and
• JOINT 129 Phase 2 – Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicles.

This cuts the number of projects on the Projects of Concern list from 12 at the beginning of the year to six.

So far this year seven projects have been removed from the list, six through remediation and one through cancellation. One project has been added.

The Projects of Concern process was established by the Government in 2008 to focus the attention of the highest levels of Government, Defence and Industry on remediating problem projects.

Since then, 19 projects have been put on the list. Of those, 13 have been removed – 11 due to remediation and two due to cancellation.

The removal of these three projects is further evidence that the system is working.

In June, Mr Smith and Mr Clare announced reforms to strengthen the Projects of Concern process, including:

• The establishment of a more formal process for adding projects to the list;
• The establishment of a formal process for removing projects from the list;
• The development of agreed remediation plans, including formal milestones for the removal of a project from the list;
• Increased Ministerial involvement and oversight of the process; and
• Incentives for companies to fix projects on the list by taking into account the performance of companies in addressing Projects of Concern when evaluating their tenders for other projects.

Four out of five of these reforms have been implemented with the fifth – development of agreed remediation plans – well underway.

Land 121 Phase 3B:

This project was listed as a Project of Concern in 2008 due to increased technical, cost and schedule risks, and concern about the ability of the originally preferred tenderer’s capacity to deliver against their tendered offer.

These issues, together with probity concerns arising from additional vehicle and module requirements, led to the Commonwealth withdrawing from negotiations. A resubmission of tenders was conducted in 2010.

Yesterday, the Government announced that subject to the negotiation of a suitable contract Rheinmetall MAN had been down-selected as the preferred tenderer and will now enter into detailed negotiations to provide up to 2,700 protected and unprotected medium and heavy vehicles.

Due to this milestone being reached, the Acting Chief Executive Officer of the Defence Materiel Organisation has recommended the project be removed from the Projects of Concern list.

The Government has agreed with this recommendation.

AIR 5418 Phase 1 – Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM):

This project was approved in December 2005 to acquire JASSM for deployment on Classic Hornets.

The project was listed as a Project of Concern in November 2010 due to a failure by Defence to keep Government properly informed about the project’s progress.

The lesson of this project is that Defence cannot fail to keep Government properly and fully informed about projects and their difficulties.

The JASSM project has been used as a case study for improvements in the management of major Defence projects. Lessons from the project informed the Government’s response to the “Review of the Defence Accountability Framework” (the Black Review), which Minister Smith released in August.

In July this year, the missile was successfully tested at theWoomeraTestRangeinSouth Australia. In November the Chief of Air Force provided service release, certifying the JASSM for use onAustralia’s F/A-18 A/Bs.

The Acting Chief Executive Officer of the Defence Materiel Organisation has recommended the project be removed from the Projects of Concern list.

The Government has accepted this recommendation.

JOINT 129 Phase 2 – Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicles:

This project will provide two Shadow 200 Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehcile (TUAV) systems, each of five air vehicles, two ground control stations, and associated support systems, logistics and training.

The project was first approved in November 2005.

The project was added to the Projects of Concern list in 2008, when the original contract to acquire TUAVs from commercial sources was terminated after a number of technical issues and schedule delays.

Following cancellation of the original contract, in 2010 Government approved the acquisition of two off-the-shelf Shadow 200 systems under a United States’ Foreign Military Sales (FMS) arrangement.

The first of these has been delivered to Afghanistan.

With the achievement of this milestone, the Acting Chief Executive Officer of the Defence Materiel Organisation has recommended that the project be removed from the Projects of Concern List.

The Government has accepted this recommendation.

Projects of Concern List:

Project Description/Date Added

-- CN10 Collins Class Submarines Nov 2008
-- AIR5077/3 ‘Wedgetail Airborne Early Warning and Control Aircraft Jan 2008
-- JP2070/2&3 Lightweight torpedo replacement Jan 2008
-- AIR5402 Multi-role Tanker Transport aircraft – Air to Air Refuelling Capability Oct 2010
-- AIR5276/8B Electronic Support Measures upgrade for AP-3C Orion aircraft Oct 2010
-- AIR9000/2, 4 & 6 Multi-Role Helicopter Nov 2011

Projects removed from Projects of Concern list:

Project Description/Date Removed

-- SEA1411 Sea Sprite Helicopter (Project cancelled) Mar 2008
-- AIR87 Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter (Remediated) Apr 2008
-- LAND106 M-113 Armoured Personnel Carrier Upgrade (Remediated) May 2008
-- JP2088/1A SF Air Drop Rigid Hull Inflatable Boat Trailers (Remediated) Sep 2009
-- SEA1390/2.1 Guided Missile FFG Upgrade (Remediated) Jan 2010
-- AIR5416/2 Project ‘Echidna’ (Scope reduced) Jul 2010
-- JP2048/1A LCM2000 Watercraft for Amphibious Ships (Project cancelled) Feb 2011
-- JP2043/3A High Frequency Communications Modernisation (Remediated) Jun 2011
-- AIR5333 Air Defence Command and Control System ‘Vigilare’ (Remediated) Jun 2011
-- SEA1448/2B ANZAC-class Anti-Ship Missile Defence (ASMD) (Remediated) Nov 2011
-- LAND121/3B Medium and heavy vehicles, trailers and modules (Remediated) Dec 2011
-- JP129/2 Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (Remediated) Dec 2011
-- AIR5418/1 Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) (Remediated) Dec 2011

-ends-

buglerbilly

20-12-11, 02:18 PM

2010-11 Major Projects Report

(Source: Australian National Audit Office; issued Dec. 20, 2011)

Major Defence equipment acquisition projects (Major Projects) are the subject of considerable Parliamentary and public interest, in view of their high cost, planned contribution to national security and the challenges involved in completing Major Projects within budget, on time and to the required level of capability.

The Defence Materiel Organisation (DMO) contributes to the development and sustainment of capability for the Australian Defence Force (ADF) and expended some $5.6 billion on major and minor capital acquisition projects in 2010–11.

Over the next 15 years, the Government intends to replace or upgrade up to 55 per cent of the ADF’s equipment. This will include the purchase of equipment in all of the major elements of ADF capability, including Land, Air, Sea and Joint capabilities, as publicised in the Defence White Paper.

These procurements by the DMO do not generate new capability for the Defence Organisation until they have been successfully introduced into service with the ADF. Thus, while the DMO’s role is only part of the introduction into service of new capability, it is a significant one.

Report objective and review scope

The objective of this report is to provide:

-- a formal conclusion on the review of the Project Data Summary Sheets (PDSSs) by the Auditor-General (contained in Part 3 of this report);
- comprehensive information on the status of projects as reflected in the PDSSs prepared by the DMO;
-- ANAO analysis on the three key elements of the MPR: cost, schedule and capability, in particular longitudinal analysis of projects over time; and
-- further insights and context by the DMO on issues highlighted during the year (not included in the scope of the review by the ANAO).

The ANAO’s review of the PDSSs was conducted under an agreement with the DMO, and was performed in accordance with the Australian Standard on Assurance Engagements (ASAE) 3000. The agreement excluded from the scope of the ANAO’s review PDSS data on the achievement of future dates or events (including forecasts on delivering key capabilities, also called Measures of Materiel Capability Performance), and major risks and issues.

By its nature, this information relates to events and depends on circumstances that have not yet occurred or may not occur, or have occurred but have not yet been identified. Accordingly, the conclusion of this review does not provide any assurance in relation to this information.

While our work is appropriate for the purpose of providing a review report in accordance with ASAE 3000, our review is not as extensive as individual project performance audits conducted by the ANAO, in terms of the nature and scope of project issues covered, and the extent to which evidence is required by the ANAO. Consequently, the level of assurance provided by this review in relation to the 28 Major Projects is less than that typically provided by our performance audits.

Click here for the full report (544 pages in PDF format) on the ANAO website.

http://www.anao.gov.au//~/media/Uploads/Audit%20Reports/2011%2012/201112%20Audit%20Report%20No20%20DMO%20MPR.pdf

-ends-

buglerbilly

21-12-11, 03:24 PM

Defence Delivery Delays Hit 63 Years

(Source: The Canberra Times; issued December 21, 2011)

Commentary from the Canberra Times and Andrew Davies.............yeah baby! :doh

The combined scheduled delivery delays of defence hardware have blown out to total 63 years, further exposing gaps in Australia's defence capability.

An Australian National Audit Office report, published yesterday, revealed that major defence equipment acquisition projects continued to run behind schedule and over budget. The 2010-11 major projects report covers 28 of the largest defence projects in the country, worth a total of $46.1 billion.

Scheduled project delays have blown out to 760 months (63 years) in total - up from 688 months in 2009-10.

Projects developed or modified domestically continue to cause the greatest headaches, slipping by 74per cent and 24per cent respectively. The worst performers included the Collins class submarine replacement combat system (73per cent), Anzac Anti-Ship Missile Defence (74per cent), and Guided Missile Frigates upgrades (92per cent).

The Federal Opposition claimed the problems confirmed the Government's inability to equip the armed forces for the future.

But it wasn't all bad news.

Australian Strategic Policy Institute operations and capability director Andrew Davies said the cost and capability of the projects were on target. The report found a favourable foreign exchange rate had offset a $1.1billion increase in the budgeted cost due to price indexation.

''The performance of the equipment will be as wanted and expected, the bad news is entirely within the schedule,'' Mr Davies said. ''The moral is, if we can buy stuff off the shelf that does what we want or near enough to it, we should.

''The more we modify things or development, the harder it is and the longer it takes.''

Mr Davies said the worst performing projects were the oldest.

These included projects which were commissioned before the 2005 demerger of the Defence Materiel Organisation from Defence.

Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Materiel, Senator Gary Humphries, said Government mismanagement was putting future capability at risk.

''This has flow-on effects for the safety of our troops in war and for our national security,'' he said.

While Senator Humphries admitted current troops on overseas deployment were not at risk, he said that unless these projects were brought back under control, the Australian Defence Force of the future would be less flexible and less capable.

Click here for the full report (544 pages in PDF format) on the ANAO website.

http://www.anao.gov.au//~/media/Uploads/Audit%20Reports/2011%2012/201112%20Audit%20Report%20No20%20DMO%20MPR.pdf

-ends-

buglerbilly

23-12-11, 11:26 AM

Australia Removes TUAS from The Projects of Concern List

Posted on December 23, 2011 by The Editor

Australia’s Defense Department removed three major projects, including the Joint 129 Phase 2 project for tactical unmanned aircraft, from its official list of contracts falling behind schedule or having cost overruns.

The announcement was made by the Minister for Defense Stephen Smith and Minister for Defense Materiel Jason Clare.

The Joint 129 Phase 2 is for two Tactical Unmanned Aircraft Systems, first approved in 2005. Each system consists of five aircraft, two ground control stations as well as associated support systems, logistics and training.

But the project was added to the Projects of Concern List in 2008 when the original contract to acquire TUAV systems from a commercial supplier was terminated because of technical issues and schedule delays.

Following cancellation of the original contract, in 2010 government approved the acquisition of two off-the-shelf Shadow 200 systems, made by AAI Corp., under a US Foreign Military Sales arrangement.

The first of these has been delivered for use in Afghanistan, allowing the government to remove the project from the list, the statement said.

Source: UPI

buglerbilly

27-12-11, 12:57 PM

Australian military 'to recruit British troops laid-off in UK cuts'

The Australian navy plans to recruit up to 1,000 Royal Navy sailors facing redundancy under the Government’s defence cuts.

Photo: AFP/GETTY IMAGES

By Jonathan Pearlman, Sydney

6:00AM GMT 27 Dec 2011

The Royal Australian Navy has sent a delegation to Britain to investigate the plan, which would look to recruit some of the 5,000 Royal Navy staff due to lose their jobs over the next four years. The Australian navy would directly contact redundant sailors and offer them “career transition options”.

Australia’s Chief of Navy, Vice Admiral Ray Griggs, promised his British counterpart, First Sea Lord Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, that Australia will not recruit personnel needed by the British. But Royal Navy officers have told the Australians they were “very comfortable” with the plan.

“Navy has been closely consulting with the Royal Navy on options for RN personnel affected by the downsizing,” an Australian military spokesman said.

“The RAN is presenting itself to personnel identified for redundancy as one of their career transition options — provided these personnel meet the RAN’s requirements. The Royal Navy is very comfortable with this approach.”

The Royal Navy has already announced plans to cut about 1,020 sailors, a third of whom are being made redundant compulsorily. About 810 personnel applied for redundancy but only 670 were accepted.

But the Australian navy has struggled to fill positions in recent years, particularly skilled maintenance workers who have been lured by lucrative positions in the booming mining industry. The navy plans to specifically target British engineers to fill a shortage of about 200 workers.

The Australian navy is also starting to make plans to staff two new landing helicopter ships, which are being built in Spain and due to join its fleet in 2014.

“The plan is that the British navy would be contacting people being made redundant and telling them that there is an option for them to extend their career and giving them our contact details,” an Australian military spokesman told The Daily Telegraph. “The navy is happy for us to put out their feelers for our personnel.”

The British and Australian navies have strong historical ties and operated as one force until the end of the Second World War.

But Britain is unlikely to provided submariners, who are desperately needed by the Australian navy. The shortage has left the Australian force unable to man more than two of its Collins-Class six submarines at a time. But the Royal Navy has no immediate plans to reduce its submarine fleet and is unlikely to start downsizing until the 2020s, when it brings on new attack submarines.

Earlier this year, the British navy decommissioned HMS Ark Royal, which had been in service for more than 25 years.

The cuts and redundancies have faced heavy criticism and raised concerns that Britain’s military capability will be lowered. As many as 11,000 redundancies could be made across the Royal Navy, Army and RAF by April 2015 under plans to save GBP5 billion.

Foreign recruits to the Australian military are expected to apply for Australian citizenship as soon as they are eligible. This is normally two years after permanent residence is granted, but can be reduced to as little as three months for serving personnel. Foreign recruits are expected to have served within three years of applying for a job with the Australian forces.

Australia has frequently targeted overseas personnel, particularly from Britain, the United States, Canada and New Zealand to bolster numbers. But the forthcoming drive from Britain would be far larger than previous recruitments and could reportedly involve as many as 1000 sailors. The Australian navy has about 16,000 personnel, including about 2000 reserves.

“It is the lack of engineering and maintenance electricians in the navy that is really causing some grief,” said a defence analyst, Neil James, who heads the Australia Defence Association.