Originally posted by lionnoisy:
School of Political and
International Studies,The Flinders University of South Australia,
March 2004,Copyright 2004 Maryanne Kelton
There are 2 distinctly different issues being raised raised by
lionnoisy here ...
1) That of a recruitment/staffing shortage
This is undeniably true and unfortunately not that easy to
redress.
The ADF is a volunteers force or in SAF speak, they are all sign-on
Regular(s). As with any volunteer army in a free economy, they have
to contend with the private sector for recruitments from a finite
labour pool.
When times are bad and unemployment is high, the Armed Forces
rarely has a problem filling it's billets. When times are good and
the economy is booming, as is Australia's now, the Armed forces has
to compete with the private sector for it's personnel ... IMO, this
is where the bulk of their problem is stemming from right now. The
minerals boom in WA is sucking up a lot of their HR at the
moment.
Unfortunately, this is a problem that will confront any Armed
Forces not just the Aussies. The SAF will be in a similar position
were it to rely on an all volunteer force.
Easy enough to laugh at a soci-economic problem that afflicts all
free market economies. Now if the noisy lion will like to try his
hands at coming up with workable solution that won't blow the
budget, I'm sure there is a CDF position (or at least a G1
position) open somewhere for him.
2) The issues of flaws with the Collins Subs
The exposition of this issue in the Australian media is a mix of (a
bit of) facts and a whole lot of political agenda. People who have
spent their whole life in the sanitised political environment of
Singapore sometimes do not have any idea how "dirty" politics can
get overseas.
Yes, there were build problems with the 1st boat in the Collins
fleet but these have been resolved. The Collins fleet is now
functioning as it should and in some areas have exceeded design
parameters. The forthcoming Combat Systems upgrade will likely make
them the best (on paper) conventional sub class in the world.
Talking about shooting yourself in the foot, it is rather apt that
lionnoisy has quoted a report that if he had bothered to read would
have shown to him that the problems with the Collins were more
political than actual.
Even if noisylion had not bothered to read that far, if he had just
made it to page 4 it can be seen that the main thrust of the report
was to ...
"Analyse how the projects realisation has been detrimentally
affected by its manipulation in Australian domestic politics.
Concurrently I demonstrate how during the construction course the
Collins project was captive of a change in broader foreign and
defence policy orientation between the two governments who assumed
responsibility for its creation and delivery.
Whilst the project was initiated during an era of the ALPs
promotion of a more independent policy posture, after its election
in 1996 the Coalition prioritised its bilateral relationship with
the US. The policy divergence between these two postures manifested
themselves in the tangible tensions surrounding the delivery of the
Collins submarines."
For the unintiated, the Collins project straddles a change in
the ruling party where the Australian Labour Party (ALP) was
replaced by the Liberal Party Coalition in 1996. Kim Beasly, who
was the ALP Defense Minister who initiated the Collins project mid
1980s also happens to be the Leader of the ALP contesting against
the Liberals round about the time the "problems" with the Collins
were first politicised in the period leading up to the early
2000s.
Hence to quote Lionnoisy's report,
"This politicisation of the project also served another function
in addition to the denigration of Beazley Labor. By disregarding
the action already in position to address any deficiency in the
submarines, and by publicising instead the supposed faults, the
government could clear the deck to allocate more funds to the
project and invite assistance from the US.
and ...
The politicisation of the project was similarly evident in the
continued criticism of the then Leader of the Opposition, Kim
Beazley, Reith had earlier stated that, (most) Australians will
remember he is the man who is responsible for the Collins class
submarines and we are still trying to fix up the problems that he
created at a very significant cost to the taxpayer.
Clearly, through further criticism of the Collins submarine
project, the Coalition could target Beazley. As Beazley had enjoyed
popular support for much of the pre-election period up until early
September 2001 it was vital that he be neutralised electorally.As
John Moore had so effectively publicised any fault in the
submarines previously, Reith could reasonably expect that
discrediting Beazley through this project would be successful.
Thus, both John Moore and Peter Reith in their public rhetoric to
rectify the dud subs had acted to allay the domestic threat and
sustain the Coalitions incumbency."
Moore & Reith are the Libs Coalition Defense Minister during
the period.
The problems with the Collins class subs, while real, have been
truly blown out of proportion and are largely due to:
i) Politicisation of the project due to change in ruling party with
different foreign policies.
ii) Initial build problems with the 1st of class vessel constructed
in Kockums shipyard. These have largely been resolved.
For a read, sans politics, into the evolution of the Collins Class
Sub from people in the industry, have a look at this thread
...
RAN Collins
class subs: verdict?
