National Press Club Address: Progressive Patriotism

It’s great to be back at the National Press Club for my third address as Defence Industry Minister.

I’m proud to have served in this capacity for more than four years now… and to be the longest-running Minister for Defence Industry since the 1950s.

Stability in the Defence portfolio has been absolutely critical to allow me my good friend, Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles, the time and space to truly dig in and understand the reforms that are needed to drive change.

I offer particular thanks to the DPM for his support and hard work to drive these reforms through, because our strategic circumstances demand change across the board in order to protect what we treasure most.

And while I will get to more details soon about the reforms we’re pursuing, I want to start this speech by focusing first on understanding why we’re pursuing reform:

We’re doing this because we need to protect what we treasure most.

It’s this principle that drives my ambition—and the ambition of the Albanese Labor Government—in our investment in Defence.

I’d like to take this back to something that Prime Minister Albanese has outlined a few times now: the idea of progressive patriotism.

I see this idea as the bedrock for why we do what we do.

It is where we fully embrace and celebrate what makes our country great:

•           Fairness

•           Equality

•           Social justice

•           Democracy 

•           And let’s not forget multiculturalism.

Indeed, as the PM has often said: the vision is a country where no one is held back… and where no one is left behind.

////

Progressive patriotism, in the eyes of the Albanese Government—and the great labour movement—is confidence in, and celebration of, what our national project has built. 

It is confidence in how it is evolving, and confidence in the future.

Strong defence of our country—including the need to invest in our defence industry, people and systems—is a critical part of understanding what Australian progressive patriotism looks like today.

The first responsibility of any government is to protect the nation’s people, its interests and its sovereignty. 

Defence investment is at the heart of the confidence we must have in celebrating what our national project has built.

Because that defence investment supports jobs.

It supports skills.

It supports research.

It supports technological advancement.

It supports manufacturing.

It supports growing and deepening our self-reliance.

In a world as complex and dynamic as ours is today, seeing defence at the heart of our approach to progressive patriotism is essential.

Because, not only is it worth doing for all the benefits I just mentioned, but it is also a sign to ourselves and the rest of the world that we think Australia—our people, our way of life, our society, our institutions—are worth protecting.

Building our defence industry—delivering the capabilities we need—is an investment in our country and offers the further dividend of deterrence to protect what our great national project has built.

Endless commentators mistakenly assume that conservative politics—for some reason—is the natural side of national security, of defence.

But I contend that in Australia, it is Labor that has always followed through with the big decisions and investment needed in this space.

Because we celebrate our country, we look to the future, and we understand just how important it is to protect what we have built.

Just look at the track record of Labor Prime Ministers over the past century.

Fisher established the Royal Australian Navy and led Australia in World War One.

Curtin led Australia in World War Two.

Whitlam created the modern Department of Defence.

Hawke and Keating built the Collins Class submarines and ANZAC frigates.

Rudd recognised the rise of China in the region and the end of the unipolar moment in the ‘09 Defence White Paper.

Gillard extended the US alliance by establishing the Marine Rotational Force – Darwin.

And now, the Albanese Government is delivering the largest increase in peacetime defence investment ever—delivering the most significant reforms to the Department in 50 years—and delivering massive projects across the board from AUKUS, to continuous shipbuilding, to establishing new industries in drones and missiles.

The Albanese Government’s approach to our place in the world has always been comprehensive.

Yes, we’re delivering everything I just mentioned—because our strategic environment demands so.

But we have always sought to deliver our approach to defence in lock step with our approach to diplomacy, international development and trade to respond to the world and the region around us.

And it is this approach that continues the Labor tradition I mentioned earlier—where we have built alliances, built domestic defence industry, and invested in sovereign capabilities—not let critical industries wither and die.

Here, at home, the PM has outlined how a sense of progressive patriotism means we double down on our investment in Medicare.

How we ensure the sustainability of the NDIS.

How we invest in our schools, children and young people.

How we transform the economy to get ahead in the world as it changes around us.

Progressive patriotism recognises that defending our democracy, sovereignty and way of life is therefore also worth doing, just as much as any other element of what we seek to do as progressives.

Because our values demand that we determine our own future.

We’re investing in our people, our institutions, our sovereignty.

As progressives, we believe that Australia is worth improving, and worth protecting.

And investing in our defence—building our self-reliance and defence industry—forms an integral part of the Labor approach to progressive patriotism.

As it always has been, industry policy is security policy.

It means we still stand tall with our great friend and ally – the United States. 

But, at the same time, we can have self-reliance within the alliance—and strategic autonomy. 

And while many out there are interested in culture wars and media grabs, we’re focussed on delivery. 

Globally, there is distrust in traditional politics and traditional parties. 

We’re listening to Australians. 

And we’re focused on delivery. 

Here are a few highlights that I’m particularly proud of.

The Albanese Government is the first government to commit to continuous naval ship building in Western Australia.

Our contracts for Landing Craft Heavy and Medium will create over 3,000 highly skilled and secure jobs.

We’ve placed the largest order for Bushmasters since the Bendigo production line opened in 1999, securing around 300 local jobs for the next seven years and many more in the supply chain—using Illawarra steel and factories in Broadmeadows. 

Ghost Bat, the first combat aircraft designed and developed in Australia in more than 50 years, will enter into service with the Air Force. The first production orders have been placed. 

This is a world-leading capability that involves more than 200 Australian companies in the Ghost Bat supply chain.

We’re delivering the Australian designed and built Ghost Shark and Bluebottle autonomous maritime vessels. 

And I’m pleased to announce today that the Ghost Shark will be added as a new export priority under the Australian Defence Strategic Sales Office.

Ghost Shark production will support around 1,000 jobs and is delivering work to 42 Australian companies right now.

And the Bluebottle’s new advanced manufacturing facility in Sydney and second production site in the Hunter region are supported by an extensive Australian supply chain of more than 450 companies. 

I last stood here at the Press Club in October 2024, to deliver a speech focused on the Albanese Labor Government’s plan for a guided weapons and explosive ordnance industry.

Eighteen months later, that plan is being delivered.

Our GWEO plan stands as a testament to the Albanese Labor Government’s investment in defence, our track record of delivery, and represents a Future Made in Australia in action.

A missile factory has now opened in South Australia. And as we look to ramp up production at that site, missiles made in Australia will include more locally-made components with Moog Australia and AW Bell to deliver key parts for the Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System, or GMLRS.

A second factory is under construction near Newcastle and due to open next year, and a third is planned to be operational in 2030—backed by a budget commitment of up to $36 billion over the decade.

Taken together, all of these are testament to our progressive patriotism, to increasing our self-reliance. 

I want to be clear: the goal of growing our self-reliance is deterrence. We don’t want a fight.

Labor invests in defence to deter aggression and maintain peace, stability and security.

Failing to invest in defence leaves Australia vulnerable to aggression and coercion.

Leaving Australia vulnerable to aggression will undermine our sovereignty.

And without sovereignty, we cannot pursue all the goals of a progressive political party: standing up for human rights, charting our own foreign policy and growing our economy through trade and exports.

A strong sovereign defence industrial base mitigates risk, decreases dependencies, and means we can make things here.

Nations around the world are all now grappling with what is becoming known as the ‘resilience premium’—essentially a complete 180 on government and corporate thinking about manufacturing investment.

This is a new understanding that has sprung to life post-pandemic. 

I particularly acknowledge the work of Industry Minister Tim Ayres to address supply chain weaknesses and grow our national resilience.

In the face of geopolitical disruptions, critical supply chain ‘dependencies’ have become dangerous ‘vulnerabilities’.

In short, we’re getting back to making our own stuff where it makes sense, and leveraging our allies and trusted partners where we cannot.

That’s why, today, we’re releasing the latest iteration of the Defence Industry Development Strategy—the DIDS—the blueprint to grow the sovereign industrial base we need.

I won’t go in to all the detail here, but the DIDS isn’t just a glossy media release. 

It is a detailed plan that outlines not just what we need, but what we will do. 

This includes:

• requiring Defence primes to employ a minimum number of apprentices by setting targets based on the nature of their work—this is an essential and critical step that will deliver the workforce we need;
• Minimum Viable Contracting, to make sure our procurement activities are streamlined and efficient;
• transforming how Defence and industry will work together on exports, building on the landmark sale of Boxer vehicles to Germany and the JORN radar to Canada;
• another $80m in grant funding to support eligible businesses, bringing this program up to a quarter-of-a-billion dollars in support; and
• embedding faster innovation into defence procurement—building on our recent experience in counter-drones—where we saw capability delivered into the hands of the ADF in a matter of months after going to market—which everyone in this room will know is light speed for defence procurement!

And a key plank of what we’re doing under the DIDS is overhauling the 3 billion US dollar Defence Export Facility.

It was established in 2018 but has not lived up to its full potential. It’s only been used three times since then.

By streamlining processes and implementing new Ministerial Directions, we want the Facility to better support what our defence industry needs.

////

I’d like to also add another angle here.

As you all know, I’m also the Minister for Pacific Island Affairs, and I’d like to acknowledge my friend, Foreign Minister Penny Wong, with whom I’ve worked so closely in this portfolio. 

There’s a clear link between the two portfolios I hold. 

A strong sovereign industrial base increases our influence in the world, including in the Pacific.

Unlike others who have recently stood at this podium, I believe that Australia has a critical role to play in the Pacific as the region’s biggest development partner and its strategic partner of choice. 

As I have said many times before: we turn up, we listen, and act on Pacific priorities. 

It’s not our Pacific family. We’re part of the Pacific family.

And our role as a member of the Pacific family is critical to regional prosperity and security, including Australia’s own security. 

Some would have noticed that the date of my speech changed from Monday the 29^th of June to today.

I did that because we welcomed Prime Minister Napat of Vanuatu to Canberra earlier this week, and I wanted to be there to support the historic moment when our leaders signed the Nakamal Treaty.

Our agreement with Vanuatu is the latest in a series of agreements the Albanese Government has been putting in place that is creating a new architecture for Australia’s place in our region.

From our landmark agreements with Tuvalu and Nauru; to our new alliance with PNG, only our third ever, along with our groundbreaking support to establish the PNG Chiefs in the NRL; to our work with Fiji, Solomon Islands and Tonga to chart new chapters in our relationships.

These are all lines of massive effort, just like our defence industry investments, that bolster our national security and demonstrate the confidence with which we’re navigating our way and protecting what we treasure.

More recently, conflict in the Middle East has affected access to fuel and fertiliser, both here in Australia and across the region.

This makes us feel that conflict is no longer ‘over there’ – but close by, even when it’s on the other side of the world.

And stability, and peace, in our own region is also at risk.

Self-reliance and resilience are critical to our ability to defend ourselves and prosper in the modern world.

And so are relationships—in the region and beyond. Getting on with our neighbours has never been more important.

Australian values, Australian sovereignty, Australian self-reliance, and the Australian way of doing things, are invaluable national strengths.

But to prosper today and into the future, we need to stand proudly together, on our own two feet, and do things for ourselves.

This is at the core of the three key Defence policy documents we have released: 

• the National Defence Strategy
• the Integrated Investment Program and 
• the Defence Industry Development Strategy.

What is also at the core of these documents is a recognition that if the world has changed and become more dangerous, then Defence needs to change to meet those challenges.

////

It’s been clear for a while that the systems we have been working with are no longer fit for purpose.

The fact is, these systems were designed for a very different world.

So in addition to the investments we’re making in our defence, we’re undertaking the biggest reforms to Defence in more than 50 years to deliver this agenda.

These reforms are essential, and they show that only Labor can be trusted with our national security. 

You can announce all the money in the world for Defence capabilities, but if you’re not buying the right capabilities, or able to deliver them on time, then what’s the point?

The reforms announced by the DPM and I are essential and right for our times.  

They will focus on streamlining processes, reducing duplication and invest in a skilled workforce to deliver the capability required by the Australian Defence Force. 

These reforms will ensure accountability for decision-making and for delivery.

They will grow and value commercial skills and behaviour in government.

And these reforms will support and reward engaging with risk.

These reforms are happening right now.

I know there are many opinions about what we’re doing in Defence. 

Let me say, we’re turning a very big ship around.

We have to move quickly, while also being methodical.

And for those who say ‘too much, too soon’—I cannot be more clear: the way Defence was operating had become outdated and compromised for at least the last decade. 

Not the people, I want to be very clear on this too. 

Defence personnel are some of the hardest working, smartest, most committed in the game but the systems were broken. 

The fact is these systems were designed for a very different world.

Through these reforms, we’re making sure that when Defence is developing capability projects, they are setting them up for success—because one thing I’ve learned is that most issues associated with Defence projects can be traced back to how they were developed, long before any contract with industry was signed.

Now, there are many examples, but a particular one I recall was looking at the project to upgrade the Adelaide class frigates when I was a staffer to then-Minister Greg Combet—when Navy wrote capability requirements that breached the laws of physics; Defence then went to the market asking for those laws of physics to be broken; and ADI contractually agreed to breach the laws of physics!

And then, when the project inevitably fell apart, each blamed the other for not being able to breach the laws of physics.

Under the reforms we’re delivering, this would not have happened.

Under these reforms, we will be making sure that military off-the-shelf options are not discarded—and that discipline around decision-making and capability requirements is enforced.

Changes kill budgets, and changes kill schedule. While there will always be a place for developmental programs, we live in a period where we no longer have lengthy warning times before a conflict.

That means we need to be more disciplined and realistic when we make capability investments, and not discard military off the shelf options, which present much lower risk, unless there is a very good reason.

That discipline and realism was not prioritised in the existing systems and processes in Defence.

To give another example of broken systems in Defence, a key decision-making committee—the Investment Committee—was established as a critical oversight function for the introduction of new capabilities.

But over time, the system evolved and is no longer fit for purpose.

To illustrate, the Committee met 13 times in 2025, for around 60 hours, with an additional 14 out of session meetings.

Those meetings involved 26 senior executives and star ranked members using up around 1,600 collective hours of those senior staff.

And that doesn’t include out of session meetings or the time to make meeting packs that were between 500 and 1,000 pages long.

Critically, of the recommendations put to the committee, 56 per cent were for noting.

That means, for more than half the recommendations considered by the Committee, there was no decision required.

And these are projects that matter.

We’re talking about multi-billion dollar capability projects—integral to the defence of our nation and to peace and stability in our region.

Held up by committee meetings where decision making wasn’t a central feature.

Chewing up the time of our most senior and experienced public servants and costing taxpayers money.

Again, I am not critical of the outstanding work done by the thousands of hardworking ADF and Defence public servants. But the reality is, we have not been served well by this system.

So, today I announce that the Government has abolished this committee and we’re replacing it with the Capability Investment Board, a streamlined and fit-for-purpose body focussed on decision making—not simply noting.

This will take us from 26 members of the old Committee down to 4 members of the new Board. 

Larger forums are good for information sharing. But you need a smaller group for disciplined decision making and ensuring accountability. 

And the Capability Investment Board will apply rigour and evidence-based scrutiny to make sure that we’re pursuing the right projects, and that projects are set up for success.

In addition to this example, we’re also marking:

• the establishment—as of yesterday—of the Defence Delivery Group, and
• Capability development consolidated under the Vice Chief of the Defence Force.

These moves are designed to restore accountability.

Under this system, the VCDF is responsible for choosing the equipment the ADF needs.

And the National Armaments Director is accountable for delivering it.

The new Defence Delivery Group is already at work, led by interim National Armaments Director Nadine Williams. And the search for the permanent Director is underway. 

The NAD will report directly to Ministers and provide strategic leadership and accountability at the highest level to deliver the critical capabilities we need.

The Defence Delivery Group will operate for the next year, before it transitions into the Defence Delivery Agency.  

These are the biggest reforms to the Department in over 50 years.

This will make sure that we fund the projects needed by the ADF, but also that we’re set up for success. 

To illustrate this point, the Reform Task Force recently examined a range of projects and found that the average total cost increased by 38 percent from project conception to Government decision.

And this was before any contracts with industry were signed.

In dollar terms, this amounted to a net increase in costs of $29 billion on this sample of projects alone.

That represents an opportunity cost: funding that could have been invested better, if costings had been done better in the first place. 

It wasn’t that the projects themselves were bad projects or not needed.

I see two issues at play: 

First, the system didn’t impose any discipline on changes to requirements which meant that designs were re-worked and re-costed.

And second, the system entrenched incentives that encouraged cost underestimation to secure support for a project, discouraging frank or accurate costing.

Take the Hunter class project for example. 

Hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of changes were ticked off without consultation with delivery areas on the impact to cost, schedule or the design.

A project with the right intent and capability at the time, but let down by a system that prioritised gold-plated requirements without considering cost and schedule impacts.

The Task Force found that Defence’s costing capability has atrophied over time—it’s become fragmented, under resourced, and over-reliant on contractors and consultants.

When we came to Government in 2022, there were more than 8,000 contractors and consultants working in Defence, many doing jobs normally done by public servants and ADF members.

We have brought this down to around 5,000 and further reductions over the next three years will result in a total expected saving of more than $3 billion on external labour by 2028-29.

Importantly, at the same time, we’re investing in the capability of the Defence workforce so they have the skills, experience and commercial acumen required to work more effectively with industry and deliver better capability to the ADF.

It must be said that these reforms have not come about because of any failings of the thousands of people in the Defence workforce. It’s about ensuring they are set up for success.

For too long, they have been hamstrung by processes and systems that were not fit for purpose.

I was heartened to read that Senator James Paterson says he is “open-minded” about these reforms. 

We welcome that because, really, this is something that should be above politics where both sides of politics want our ADF to be the best it can be, in the national interest.

But even with these reforms, and growing our sovereign defence industrial base, Australia will never operate in isolation.

Australia will always be deeply integrated with international partners—collaborating and cooperating to design, develop, produce and sustain capability.

AUKUS is the clearest example.

Let’s be crystal clear: AUKUS is the greatest industrial project we have ever undertaken: fundamentally, about sovereign manufacturing, making the subs here, and training Australians so that we have a sovereign capability for decades to come.

There is no doubt it is a mammoth undertaking. 

But it’s been brilliant to see progress happening on this huge endeavour and uplift in our defence industry and workforce. 

A few months ago, I visited Derby in the UK where I saw the first systems under construction that will go into our AUKUS submarines.

AUKUS isn’t something happening in the distant future.

It is happening right now.

////

To round this out, I’d like to return to where I started today.

I’m going to speak plainly about an assumption that is wrong.

That assumption is the notion that patriotism is something that belongs only to conservative parties. 

Be that the new President of the Liberal Party saying that they must position themselves as the patriot party, or other conservative figures in this country taking any opportunity to drape the flag around themselves.

I’m a patriot, and I’m a progressive. 

These two concepts are not mutually exclusive, no matter what some people would have you believe. 

If anything, progressive politics and patriotic politics are one and the same thing.

It’s my patriotism that underpins my love of Australia, and together with my progressive values, this patriotism drives my determination to make Australia better and keep Australia safe.

Progressive patriotism means backing Australian workers and Australian industry to make and sustain our critical Defence capabilities.

Progressive patriotism means growing our self-reliance and strengthening our sovereignty.

It means investing in the areas of domestic industry we need in this challenging environment to secure our place in the world.

And we should be clear about how critical this investment in our defence industrial base is. 

It employs tens of thousands of people, and is an insurance policy should global supply chains be disrupted.

Here is the essence of what I put on the table today:

A Future Made in Australia, by Australians – ready to protect and defend all that we hold dear.

We have a critical role in ensuring the stability and security of a future world.

This investment in self-reliance, in progressive patriotism, will help us fulfil that role—and do it in a way that recognises the country we are today, and protects the country we want to be tomorrow.

ENDS