Yates Dianne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Yates Dianne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:638;Page:8744] 
8.  
DIANNE YATES (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Defence 
: What reports has he received assessing New Zealand’s defence policy and the New Zealand Defence Force? 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Minister of Defence) 
: 
 Yesterday the Australian Strategic Policy Institute released a report on New Zealand’s defence capabilities and relationships. The report was overwhelmingly positive about what had been achieved under the Labour-led Government’s building up of our defence forces after the massive rundown of armed forces under National during the 1990s. The report concludes—[ 
Interruption 
]  
Madam SPEAKER 
: Please be seated. It is becoming very difficult to hear the Minister who is in fact addressing the question. 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: The report concludes that the armed forces are “becoming modern [fully] capable operational forces” that are “adopting appropriate levels of modern technology”. On key relationships with Australia and the United States the report states that New Zealand’s defence relationships with both countries are “strong and getting stronger”. 
Dianne Yates 
: What does the report say about investment in the New Zealand Defence Force and its current capability? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: The report acknowledges the impact of the $3.5 billion investment in capital equipment in the long-term development plan and the additional $4.6 billion through the Defence Sustainability Initiative. The report states that the current Government’s policies if they continue mean that the armed forces are fiscally sustainable compared with the previous situation in the 1990s. The report concludes that as a result of this Government’s policies and strategy overall the New Zealand Defence Force is “as capable today as it has been in the past thirty years and as capable as it needs to be.” That is a ringing endorsement of this Labour-led Government’s defence policy. 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: Will the Government guarantee that the frigate that is to be deployed to the Gulf next year will be able to protect its crew given that the ministry itself says that one of the frigate’s major self-defence capabilities the torpedoes will be unsupportable in 2008 and are not scheduled to be replaced until 2015 and the ministry has actually said there will be very serious risks in the Gulf if they are not replaced? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: I think the member will find that by the time the capability of those torpedoes expires the Navy will have replaced them. Not only that; if the member cares to look at the 2006 long-term development programme he will see a range of other things that are being done to enhance the self-protection of the Navy. While I am commenting on the Navy can I say I am sure the member will be very proud of the fact that this Government is commissioning seven new ships under Project Protector over the next year—more than National did in the entire 9 years of its failed Government. 
Ron Mark 
: Does the Minister not accept that the best evidence one can rely on for making an assessment as to defence capabilities is the actual performance of Defence Force personnel on the ground and could he share with the House some of his observations and my observations from our recent visit to Afghanistan? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: I agree entirely with what the member has said. I had the privilege last week along with Mr Mark of visiting the New Zealand provincial reconstruction team in Bamian and talking to the local people and to the local governor about the team’s performance. Every member in this House ought to be proud of the capability of the team’s members and of the professionalism of what they do and the way that they do it in building up a strong partnership with the local people. The team is much admired with a great deal of gratitude being expressed by the local governor by Hamid Karzai the President of Afghanistan who mentioned it specifically and by the local people whom those New Zealand troops serve. 
Dianne Yates 
: Has any progress been made in respect of the question of attrition in the armed forces which is raised in the report? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: Yes. The figures that Professor Rolfe the author of this report quotes in the report in fact are from 2004. Since then attrition in the Army has dropped from 18 percent to 14.83 percent and in the Air Force from 11.9 to 8.22 percent while the Navy figures have held steady at 13.6. Overall in the last year the strength of the New Zealand Defence Force has been increased by over 420 men and women. That is an increase of 3.7 percent in our Defence Force numbers in just the last year. 
Ron Mark 
: Madam Speaker— 
Gerry Brownlee 
: How many photos are you in Ron? 
Ron Mark 
: If you shut up Gerry you will hear. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Will the member please be seated. I ask the member to withdraw and apologise for that comment. I would also say that members who chip across the House provoke a response. I did not hear the comment that provoked that response; the response however was inappropriate. 
Ron Mark 
: I withdraw and apologise. I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. It seems it is becoming a pattern in this House that certain members of the National Party can chip in on a member’s question. I asked a question of the Minister before and you allowed Mr Brownlee continually to bellow. You did not censure him at all. I barely had had an opportunity to start my next question before he started again. In return I responded and I am the one who ends up—again—being rebuked by you while Mr Brownlee gets away scot-free every time. I just want to know where the fairness is. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Please be seated! As I pointed out the member—and I did not hear whether it was Mr Brownlee who made the interjection that prompted your response—was not bellowing. A member had obviously made a comment. I did not hear what it specifically was. As far as I am concerned the matter has been dealt with. Would the member please ask his supplementary question. 
Ron Mark 
: Has the Minister noted the comment made in the Australian Strategic Policy Institute report that the Army is stretched by deployments and cannot meet its requirement to produce a battalion group without significant risk; and when will he and the Government approve an increase in baseline funding for the Army to allow it to bring both its infantry battalions up to full strength with four rifle companies—one of those companies being a ranger company—as recommended by the Labour Party and the New Zealand First Party in the  
Inquiry into Defence Beyond 2000 
 report back in 2000? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: It is fair to say that with the high operational tempo of the New Zealand Defence Force at times our infantry regiments have been stretched. We have had on average at least 400 people deployed overseas through most of the last 7 years. Sometimes the number has been as high as 800. In the 1990s or the 1980s before that the numbers were much smaller. That is precisely why we introduced the Defence Sustainability Initiative which will add $4.6 billion in expenditure to personnel and other areas. That is why we have increased—as the member will have learnt from my answer to the previous question—our Defence Force personnel by over 420 in just the last year alone.