Goff Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGoff Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 24 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:14270. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]6.Hon PHIL GOFF (Labour—Mt Roskill) to theMinister of Defence: Have attrition rates in the last year which reached 23 percent in the Navy and 24 percent in the Army reduced the capability of the New Zealand Defence Force?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Defence): As the Chief of Defence Force told the member at the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee on 6 December 2012 and also on 22 June 2013 the New Zealand Defence Force has had no cut in capabilities. The member is also working with out-of-date statistics. The New Zealand Defence Force attrition rate today is 14 percent which is below the historic long-run average and well below the 19 percent figure under Labour. Both army and navy attrition rates today are significantly beneath levels reached under Labour.Hon Phil Goff: When the navy admits that skill and experience levels in critical trade groups have been seriously degraded—their words Minister—by the significant reduction in the number of trained personnel available why does he keep on pretending that this has not reduced the navy’s capability?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Because the fact is that it has not. The navy is actually performing to all the targets that have been set for it by the Government and it is meeting all the outputs that it is contracted to meet by other Government agencies.Hon Phil Goff: If the navy is meeting all of its targets why does the navy say in its latest report that it cannot crew more than four out of six of its new naval patrol force vessels—Phil Twyford: What?Hon Phil Goff: —cannot crew more than four out of six of its new naval patrol force vessels—and that the HMNZSWellington was not available for most of 2012-13 because of high attrition rates? How can that possibly not represent reduced capability?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: I question the selective light that that member is casting on that report. The fact is that when you look at the New Zealand Defence Force’s annual report it shows that the frigates were available for 126 percent of their target last year. The HMNZSEndeavour was mission-available for 116 percent of its target. The operational dive team exceeded its target hours in the—Hon Phil Goff: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You heard my question clearly. It related to the naval patrol force—it said that they could not crew more than four out of six—and how the HMNZSWellington was not available most of the time. I do not want to hear about that other irrelevant stuff.Mr SPEAKER: Order! Well the member may well have to. He has asked a question—whilst it was relatively specific—about reduced capability of the forces particularly the navy. The Minister the Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman has a right to address that and he is attempting to do so.Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: And I would like to continue doing that. So regarding the patrol vessels the offshore patrol vessels would have met their targets if a second sub-Antarctic patrol was undertaken but for totally unrelated reasons that did not happen. The inshore patrol vessels were made available for 466 days of patrolling against a target of 455 days so they actually exceeded their target availability to their agencies. So once again Phil Goff is making it up—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The last part of that answer is unnecessary.Hon Phil Goff: When the air force says explicitly that it cannot meet all expected output and readiness measures because “of a limited number of trained crews andequipment obsolescence and deficiencies” how does this not represent reduced capability?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: That is just incorrect. I can tell him about the air force. If you look at the helicopter forces’ flying rate it is higher than in previous years. The Airborne Surveillance and Response Forces—the Orions—exceeded their target with 151 percent of their target. The Boeings hit 100 percent of their target. The Hercules reported missing some targets but still achieved over 1300 hours of flying. The NH90s and the A109s are new capabilities brought into service as well as the Orion and Hercules upgrades. It is just completely incorrect. The fact is that the only air force capability that has ever been cut was the Skyhawks under the Labour Government and that—Hon Phil Goff: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! This is a point of order.Hon Phil Goff: Since the Minister says that what I said was incorrect I seek leave to table the quote that I quoted accurately to the House about not being able to meet all expected targets.Mr SPEAKER: What is the source of this quote?Hon Phil Goff: The source is the Minister’s very own annual defence report.Mr SPEAKER: No—[Interruption] Order! That is available to members if they so need to look it up.Hon Clayton Cosgrove: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Without being improper the issue that I think was raised with you about the tabling of documents and that you agreed to consider—this is an example of that of what Mrs King and I discussed with you—is where a member’s word is refuted. I was just wondering—you had agreed you would consider that—if given this case you would rule on that.Mr SPEAKER: On the basis that there was a discussion—and I think on reflection that the member Phil Goff has quoted from a document that is available and the Minister in the start of an answer said: “That is not correct.”—I will allow the member to again put the leave for that document to be tabled. It is then over to the House what it decides to do.Hon Phil Goff: I seek leave accordingly.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that particular annual report. Is there any objection to that? There is not. It can be tabled.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.Hon Phil Goff: When did the National Government ever admit publicly to the electorate that its goal was to reduce the number of regular force personnel in the New Zealand Defence Force every year that it was in Government resulting in today’s figures being 1200 fewer people in the Defence Force than it had in 2009—a cut of more than 12 percent?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: What I can tell the member is that navy numbers grew by 4.4 percent last year and army numbers grew by 1.6 percent. Air force numbers may have been flat but the fact is that as new technology arrives—Hon Phil Goff: It’s not true. It’s simply not true.Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: —you do not need as many people to staff it. It is true. I am sorry Phil. You are the guy who—Mr SPEAKER: Order!