Doorstop Interview, Melbourne

SUBJECTS: Land Forces 2024; Closure of the Afghanistan Inquiry report; GWEO; Melbourne protests; ADF recruitment.

RICHARD MARLES, DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER: Well, it's great to be here with the Minister for Defence Industry, Pat Conroy, at Land Forces. What we have around us is a fantastic demonstration of Australian capability. Australian capability in terms of developing the equipment which our soldiers need to do their job, to keep Australians safe. We've got great examples. Companies such as Hanwha, which is making our infantry fighting vehicle, Rheinmetall, which is making our reconnaissance vehicle, as just two examples of the kind of technologies that are being built right here in Australia, at Avalon, in Brisbane, which are creating Australian jobs and in the process, supporting our Army. It's fantastic to be here with the Minister for Defence Industry. It's really wonderful to see the technology which is on display and with that, I'll hand over to Pat.

PAT CONROY, DEFENCE INDUSTRY MINISTER: Thanks Deputy Prime Minister. Under the National Defence Strategy, we're seeing the biggest transformation of the Australian Army in decades, if not ever, into one focused on littoral manoeuvre and long‑range strike. And to do that mobilization and change requires the Australian defence industry, that supports around 100,000 jobs, to step up and support the ADF more. So, what we're seeing here is some of the most advanced technologies, the most skilled workers in the world supporting the Australian Defence Force. And it's so inspirational, and it's part of the Albanese Labor Government's future made in Australia agenda – 100,000 Australian workers making a defence future made in Australia.

JOURNALIST: Some comments today from Peter Dutton saying that the stripping of the war medals, you’re throwing lower ranked diggers under the bus and there should be more scrutiny on higher ups, even up to the Chief of the Defence Force. What do you say to those comments?

MARLES: Well, I'm disappointed to see the comments of the Leader of the Opposition. We've really sought to proceed this week on a bipartisan basis and I really would acknowledge the comments of the Shadow Minister for Defence and the Member for Menzies, both of whom have constructively participated in the discussion this week, both of whom are former servicemen in the Special Forces. This has been a very significant step in terms of making the decision that we have in relation to command accountability and therefore, as a result of that, being able to close out the Brereton Report. I mean, the point I would make in terms of the Leader of the Opposition is that when he was the Defence Minister, he actively suspended making a decision in relation to command accountability. Now that’s not a point that we’ve particularly wanted to make this week, but that is actually what he did when he was the Defence Minister. He suspended the decision-making in relation to command accountability. Difficult decisions require leadership. That's what I've done as the Minister for Defence so that we can close out the Brereton Report. In terms of the specifics of the decision, what we've done is followed to the letter the reasoning and the thinking of Major General Brereton in his report. And that's why we've made the particular decisions that we have. Obviously, I've not indicated the specifics of that, the people involved, but what I have said is that what has guided me is the reasoning of the Brereton Report. And that's simply because it was Major General Brereton and his team which undertook the hundreds of interviews here, which received the thousands of pages of testimony. They are the ones who were in the best position to make the judgments about where accountability lies, and we have not seen to disturb those judgements.

JOURNALIST: Minister, the advice sat on your desk for some time, but you chose to release it a couple of days after the Royal Commission, a day after the Suicide Prevention Day, and the day of the Chief of Army Symposium. Why of all days did you do that?

MARLES: Look, we understand that this is a difficult decision to make. And the closing out of the Brereton Report, you know, is a significant moment. Whenever we were doing it, it was going to be a difficult moment, but it was important that we do this. We wanted to do it as soon as we were at a point of having sent, written the letters, which were the final step in the process. This was the opportunity to close out Brereton. It is very much focused on events in Afghanistan and so we've sought to move it on in that way.

JOURNALIST: Minister, Israeli companies here are keen to do business with Australia. They say their equipment is as good and cheaper than that of the US. Will Australia keep buying US equipment? How do you rate their technology? And will you consider Israeli companies for the GWEO?

MARLES: Will we keep buying US equipment? Is that your question?

JOURNALIST: Israeli technology. And how do you rate it, and can they get into the GWEO? 

MARLES: We have a contract with Hanwha for the infantry fighting vehicles for the Australian Army. It's no secret that there is Israeli tech which forms a part of that platform. We have not made a decision to disengage with Israel, and so we acknowledge the fact that there is Israeli tech on that platform, albeit that our contract is with Hanwha. We continue to go forward in a way which seeks to purchase the best equipment possible to enable our sailors, soldiers and aviators to do their job in a way which keeps them safe. 

JOURNALIST: Will you consider their missile systems, their air defence systems, though, for the GWEO? 

MARLES: I’ll ask the Minister for Defence Industry to comment. They are not front and centre in terms of who we are working with in relation to GWEO. As people know, both Lockheed and Raytheon, two American companies, were the companies, which for some years now, are the companies that we've been partnering with in relation to GWEO. And of course more recently, the Minister for Defence Industry made the announcement about the partnership with Kongsberg, which is a Norwegian company. And so, that's where our focus has been in relation to GWEO and that's how we're proceeding.

CONROY: Oh, look, I think the DPM made essentially my point, which is our strategic partners for domestic manufacturing are partners of missiles that we have in the inventory. We want to make missiles in this country that the ADF are using and want to equip with. That's why– 

JOURNALIST: Spike is in our inventory.

CONROY: That’s why Lockheed Martin is a partner, because we are equipping the ADF with GMLRS and we'll be making GMLRS missiles in this country next year. That's why Kongsberg is building a factory next year– sorry, starting by the end of this year, to build Naval Strike Missiles and Joint Strike Missiles that will create 500 jobs. So our strategic partnerships are based on the companies that have large inventories in the ADF and there’s scope for domestic manufacture and, as the DPM said, that's the approach we're taking. 

JOURNALIST: Minister Conroy, on a related matter, you were very critical of the protestors ahead of this week and some of their tactics. What did you make of this week?

CONROY: Oh, look, I'm actually going to defer to the DPM as the Melburnian, and I think it's important that someone who's of this state comments on behaviour in this state.

MARLES: Look, I've been very disappointed in what we've seen with the protests. Obviously, in this country people have a right to peaceful protest. That's a fundamental right in Australia. But so too do police have a right to go about their work in a manner which is safe, and people who are attending this conference have a right to go about their business here in a manner which is safe. And I think we need to just take a step back and understand what's going on here. I mean, this is the sixth iteration of Land Forces, the first of which was in 2014. The Australian Defence Force does support Land Forces; the Chief of Army has had his symposium, which has happened at the same time as Land Forces. 11 different chiefs of army from armies around the world have attended that symposium. That symposium is a critical avenue by which we build understanding between our defence forces and actually, symposiums of that kind, in turn make their own contribution to the maintenance of peace. And that's actually what has been going on in terms of the Australian Defence Force. And the Australian Defence Force needs to be equipped to do the work it does, to keep Australia safe, to keep Victoria safe, to keep Melbournians safe. And that's what all of this industry is about. We really do need to have a very clear respect for those who wear our nation's uniform and for the companies which supply the equipment which enable those people to do their job. Now if we want to talk about violence, what we have seen from the protestors is violent behaviour, and that is utterly unacceptable. What we see from the Greens addressing the protestors today is licensing that sort of behaviour. I mean, I think this year, we have watched the Greens throw their lot in with thuggery time and time again. They are not a party which is [inaudible] a platform of peaceful protest. You simply can't make that argument, given we see Greens senators and Greens Members of Parliament turning up to events, protests such as this, events such as the CFMEU rally. This is a really important convention which is ultimately about keeping Australia safe, keeping Victoria safe, and keeping Melburnians safe. And I do think that Melburnians and Victorians understand that. 

JOURNALIST: Can I ask about recruiting? The ADF, in terms of personnel numbers, is smaller than it was 10 years ago. You now have the Royal Commission into Defence and Veterans’ Suicide, it also has created something of a negative feel about the ADF. How can you make the ADF more popular, particularly for young people?

MARLES: Well, it is a good question, because recruiting is really one of our significant challenges. And you're right, we need to be making it much more attractive to younger people. I think, perhaps, to start with the observation around the Royal Commission; in receiving the Royal Commission's report on Monday, having had a few more days to test the recommendations of it, it is a really impressive and thoughtful piece of work. It deals with significant issues of the past which need to be rectified. But in rectifying it, I really hope that the work that emanates out of the Royal Commission actually will be the platform for creating a Defence Force with an environment which is much more attractive for people to serve in and for young people to serve in. So I think, you know, we need to see the call to action that comes out of the Royal Commission as being to make Defence that kind of organization which is attractive for people to serve. And then, you know, from there, and in a sense we get it walking around a conference like this, the opportunities in terms of location, in terms of skills, in terms of doing things that you could not do in civilian life, are really exciting around joining the Defence Force. It is a great career. It is a career fundamentally of service. It is a really noble act to wear our nation's uniform. But the observation I'd make, and I'm sure that Pat would join me in this, in having met so many of our servicemen and women who wear our nation's uniform, what comes with it is a huge sense of fulfilment. It is a great job to pursue and I think we need to be telling that story as loudly as we can. And I'm actually confident that the Royal Commission represents a really strong platform in which we can go move forward, and it will help recruitment.

ENDS