Television interview, Afternoon Briefing

SUBJECTS: Australia’s future general purpose frigates; AUKUS; Middle East conflict; Australian Defence Force recruitment 

PATRICIA KARVELAS, HOST: I want to bring in the Defence Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister, Richard Marles. Welcome.

RICHARD MARLES, DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER: Good afternoon, Patricia. How are you?

KARVELAS: Good. Japan is potentially involved in AUKUS Pillar 2. Is this the first step towards that? Is that why Japan was selected?

MARLES: Well, the Mogami-class vessel was selected because it’s the best vessel for Australia, and that’s really important to understand. And in saying that, both the final two bidders – tkMS, which builds the MEKO-class vessel in Germany, and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, which builds the Mogami-class vessel in Japan – they’re both excellent bids. But at the end of the day, when you assess the platforms that we were looking at – the two ships – their cost, the way in which we would sustain them over the long term, the Mogami vessel is the best vessel for Australia. That’s why it was chosen.

KARVELAS: Part of the reason that it can be crewed with fewer members – like, fewer crew – is that part of the reason?

MARLES: That is definitely part of it. So, to put that in context, it operates with a crew of 90 people. The frigate that it will ultimately replace is the ANZAC-class frigate that we operate at the moment. Now, it has a crew of 170. The Mogami-class frigate has a displacement of 6,200 tonnes; ANZAC’s is 3,500 tonnes. So, a much bigger ship being operated with a much smaller crew – and there’s no doubt that that will have a very significant long-term impact, both in terms of the challenge for us in crewing the ship, but also the ultimate long-term cost.

KARVELAS: Does this have anything to do with AUKUS?

MARLES: No, no it doesn’t. I mean, AUKUS is obviously very central to our defence posture and what we’re seeking to do in terms of providing a long-range submarine capability for Australia, as well as innovating in other areas of military technology with the US and the UK. But this decision is really quite separate. I mean, when we came to government, we inherited the oldest combatant surface fleet that the Navy had been operating since the Second World War. And there was no prospect of seeing a new combatant vessel into service until 2034, which was the Hunter-class vessels. That was a capability gap. The Surface Fleet Review made it clear we need to meet that capability gap. That’s what the general purpose frigate was about, and that’s why we’re moving very quickly in relation to this.

KARVELAS: There have been reports that the US supported the Japanese bid over the German bid. Is that right?

MARLES: The US aren’t relevant in terms of their –

KARVELAS: Do they not – they’re not part of the consultation at all?

MARLES: Oh, well, we talk with countries around the world, but ultimately this was an Australian assessment about which ship would work best for Australia. And that’s where we clearly landed with the Mogami-class frigate.

KARVELAS: Did the US provide a view?

MARLES: The US did not provide a view. This was an Australian decision about which was the best frigate to pursue, and that’s the decision.

KARVELAS: And do you have explicit guarantees that Australia could get the next-generation ships before the Japanese do?

MARLES: So, the Mogami-class vessel is being operated by Japan right now, in terms of the Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force. They are doing the next generation of Mogamis. There is a production line associated with that, and we have slots within that production line for the three vessels that will be built in Japan. It is then the intention to move the production of these vessels – as soon as we can. We see that as being after the first three – to Western Australia, the Henderson Defence Precinct. Now, it’s contingent on that precinct being ready, but we’re confident that will be the case. And then ultimately what this will be is the heart of the continuous naval shipbuilding program that we have in Western Australia.

KARVELAS: So, what assurances do we have that this will all be realised and that the cost won’t blow out? Because you don’t need to be told – Defence procurement has been a hot mess in this country.

MARLES: Well, firstly, the focus here is speed to service because we need to have a new surface combatant in the water as quickly as we can. And that’s why we’re having the first batch – the first three – being built overseas. And we do have a sense of confidence, given that there is an existing production line with these ships being built, and we have our ships in that slot. So, there is a high degree of confidence about all of that, and we are confident that this will be within the budget that we have over the next 10 years. So, in terms of that – we’ve put aside $55 billion for the surface fleet over the next 10 years within the Integrated Investment Program, which is the 10-year procurement schedule. Ten billion of that goes to the general purpose frigate, and we’re confident that within that we will be able to pay for the general purpose frigate over that period.

KARVELAS: I understand there are many measures as to how the decision was eventually made, but is the regional element – and the, you know, threat of China – part of that consideration? Wanting to partner with a country – in the broader region?

MARLES: Well, it’s not part of the consideration in terms of why we chose the Mogami-class vessel versus the MEKO-class vessel. I really want to emphasise that the only criteria here was which would be the best platform for Australia going forward.

KARVELAS: It wasn’t about strategic relationships?

MARLES: Not in terms of the choice. We've been very clear that the capability needs to be the fundamental basis upon which we are making these decisions. That we are procuring a general purpose frigate, that we are, you know, doubling the size of our surface combatants, that we are seeking to get ships into our Navy as quickly as we possibly can, is a reflection of the strategic landscape that we face. And, and that was very much part of what the Service Fleet Review assessed when, when it came down with its recommendations, which the government accepted at the beginning of last year.

KARVELAS: Just on some Defence recruitment figures – you know, as the Defence Minister, Defence recruitment has notoriously been difficult. There are some improvements, but in February, Defence said it was only hitting, I think it was, 72% of recruitment targets. Why is it so low when they have 70,000 applications?

MARLES: Well, it’s 75,000 applications in the last year – so that’s a step forward. It’s actually the highest number of applications in the last five years. But really importantly, we’ve seen our enlistment go up by 7,000 in the last 12 months. That’s the highest enlistment that we’ve done in 15 years, and that’s really a very significant step forward. It’s a 17% increase on the enlistments that we did the year prior to that. There are still challenges here in terms of recruitment, without a doubt. And we do need to shorten the period of time between when people express their interest and when they actually end up in the Defence Force. And I would, in direct answer to your question, say that is the issue where we need to do more to improve. Now we have improved – it’s down.

KARVELAS: What more can you do to improve? Is it about, you know, staffing levels that you’re investing into the recruitment process?

MARLES: I would actually think that the answer to that question is it’s about making our best practice everyday practice. So, to properly answer that – when we came to government, it was about a 300-day gap between when people were applying to join the Defence Force and when they ended up in it. Now, it’s down to 266 days. That’s better, but there’s a long way to go.

KARVELAS: Get it down to?

MARLES: We want it down around 125. But to explain my previous answer – about 10% of the recruits that we are bringing into the Defence Force, we’re doing under 150 days. So, our best practice is actually not bad, but it’s really about making that our everyday practice. We need to be applying that across the board. We are doing that in areas where we need the skills the most, but we actually need to be getting to a point where that is how we recruit across the board. There’s improvement here. There’s a long way to go. And I think the way I’d describe this is – when we came to government, again, we had a shrinking Defence Force. In the last two years prior to coming to government, the Defence Force shrunk by about 1,400 people. Now, we’ve got a growing Defence Force again. So we’ve turned it around. But we have aspirations to significantly grow the Defence Force through the back end of this decade and into the 2030s. To achieve that, we really do need to make progress on this question of how long it takes to join.

KARVELAS: I have to ask you about Palestinian statehood, because it looks like it’s on the cusp of happening. There are reports, though, that the right-wing faction of the Labor Party – particularly the Victorian right – has been resistant. You are the leader of the Victorian right, is that right?

MARLES: Well, this is not an issue of internal factional politics within —

KARVELAS: But there is a divergence of view about the urgency of Palestinian statehood?

MARLES: Look, what I would say in relation to this, Patricia, is very much to echo the words of the Foreign Minister today. I mean, it has been a bipartisan position across Australian politics to support a two-state solution, and that’s been the case for decades.

KARVELAS: Well, no – but Labor’s order of things has changed. That happened last year when Penny Wong said it didn’t have to be at the end of the peace process. A couple of days ago – I’ve just watched this evolve – so, I’m intrigued about where we’re at now. It was about conditions; now it’s a sense of urgency. So, there has been a change in the language?

MARLES: It reflects what we’ve seen as a change in the circumstances in the Middle East. And the Foreign Minister spoke about that eloquently today – and you’ve put that at the top of the show – and I’d back in what she said.

KARVELAS: So, do you think there’s a sense of urgency?

MARLES: There’s definitely a sense of urgency in the way in which the Foreign Minister described it. You know, I think the whole world really is looking with horror at what’s playing out in the Middle East – the humanitarian situation on the ground in Gaza, the loss of innocent lives there. Obviously, that informs the way in which countries around the world are seeing this. But also, it’s really important to reiterate – in the same breath – we need to see hostages returned.

KARVELAS: But you don’t need to see them returned before you can declare that you’re committed to statehood. That’s what I’m trying to –

MARLES: Well, as we have talked about – the issues that are, as one imagines, a pathway to statehood – and if you see a two-state solution as being the position that one holds, that ultimately we all accept is where we want it to end up. The involvement – or rather, the non-involvement – of Hamas in any future Palestinian government is critically important. The return of hostages is clearly important. And these are the factors that are obviously occupying our attention as we think about this issue. But in the same breath, we know that an enduring peace will only be achieved if a two-state solution is ultimately realised. And that is being manifestly put on display in terms of the tragedy that we see unfolding in the Middle East right now.

KARVELAS: Richard Marles, thanks for coming in.

MARLES: Thanks, Patricia.

ENDS