Penk ChrisTUESDAY 28 JULY 2020(continued on Wednesday 29 July 2020)ESTIMATES DEBATEIn CommitteeDebate resumed on the Appropriation (2020/21 Estimates) Bill.External Sector (continued)CHAIRPERSON (Hon Ruth Dyson): Members when we suspended last night the committee was considering Vote Defence in the external sector. CHRIS PENK (National—Helensville): Thank you Madam Chair. May I begin my contribution by acknowledging as I understand that others on this side of the Chamber and the Minister himself the Hon Ron Mark did last night our women and men of the New Zealand Defence Force. We pay tribute to them for the service that they provide and indeed we thank them for it. I'd like to ask a series of questions of the Minister who is currently available the Hon Shane Jones. Perhaps a good place to start would be the situation in relation to various acquisitions that have been made over the last three years and to the extent that's within scope of the debate any future plans that the Government might have in the works. Of course it's in the nature of defence of large items of military hardware and the strategic nature of such planning that we do need to be forward-focused. So perhaps I can start with the senior service the Royal New Zealand Navy and invite the Minister to provide an update on various upgrades of course to the frigates but also the new ship that—or vessels in general actually—he can provide on the horizon in terms of what we are expecting to take delivery of commission and so forth. Hon SHANE JONES (Minister of Forestry): In a very confident but potentially lame vein I shall channel the real Minister. Thank you for those questions. One particular point that the honourable member Chris Penk raises is the concept of what are the future investments. I will go straight to what has proved to be a challenging issue which is the rundown of our defence estate in the sense of the need to commit up to $400 million more money in creating more robustness and fit for purpose actual defence estate. A sum of $156 million across three Budgets has been dedicated. The business cases—which would be discoverable through the Official Information Act process—of up to $400 million worth of infrastructure works at Ōhākea have been approved and the overall capital funding for defence regeneration has increased from $1.7 billion under the previous Government to $2.1 billion out to 2030. Should the member desire to get more information about that I shall share with him where the links are. In relation to the management of the process with these huge multibillion-dollar acquisitions I think it's fair to say that of all the Government departments—and I don't have a great deal to do with the administrators of the defence department but they have gone through an incredibly rigorous process of upgrading their ability to secure assets manage assets over the life of that said asset and in fact they're a bit of a star in my view in terms of broader infrastructure. We need look no further than the delivery of the Manawanui or more importantly the purchase of the five new Super Hercules to replace our ageing Hercs. These are not trifling sums of money and we should in the House have confidence that they now have a very robust system for handling this type of acquisition and these sums of money. Sadly we cannot say that about every other part of the estate. CHRIS PENK (National—Helensville): I thank the Minister for the answer. I would like to return to the subject of the real estate the defence estate in terms of bases. Obviously we need to consider that question from the point of view of strategic location and of course as it relates to other trends and factors within the population of New Zealand and a number of things that interact with the requirements for our people to want to serve and to be able to serve. I give an example of the fact that often the spouse or partner of a serving defence person would have requirements in terms of their own work or life situation. Of course a family may have children who have particular needs around schooling or other things that are appropriate to them being in a particular location and not the other. So I do want to acknowledge the broader context that sits around the defence estate—and the location of bases more particularly—but what I would like to know from the Minister with that disclaimer is the Government's thinking around the RNZAF Base Auckland which is at Whenuapai. I ask that partly because I'm interested as a patriotic New Zealander to know that our Royal New Zealand Air Force personnel will be able to remain in that excellent location but also by way of disclosure and disclaimer as the member of Parliament for the Helensville electorate in which that base is located. So any assurances that the Minister can give about the Government's commitment to the retention of that base on an ongoing basis would be appreciated. Hon SHANE JONES (Minister of Forestry): Apparently the new system is that whoever is in the chair actually has to make a credible attempt to answer the question. So I have been chided by one of your colleagues for uncharacteristically being vague. I just want to talk first about the naval base. Yes there have been some discussions as to the future location of the naval base. No Cabinet has not signed off on a new location for the naval base. Similarly the Minister of Defence the Hon Ron Mark has actually stood up to be counted in a bout of nimby litigation related to the operations of Whenuapai. That's a matter of public record. But if I can just carry on a little bit more about the naval base whilst there have been attempts right back to the days of the Hon John Banks when he was the member for Whangārei to relocate so-said base to Northland that question is being considered within a broader discussion and analysis as to what is the optimum shape and form of our defence estate in the future. I'm not trying to obfuscate; that work is happening as we speak. Naturally hailing from the North I see great virtues in a northern drift but that is not the position of the advice at this stage from the civil servants and neither is it Cabinet's position. The only other thing I would say is that there probably would be some military or naval usefulness in the event where at some point in time we are able to upgrade the dry dock facility which is currently located in Devonport as a part of the broader naval estate there. The member would be aware that one of the areas that has been focused on for that level of investment is Whangārei but it is a huge amount of capital—well over a quarter of a billion dollars—so it is not a decision that can be entered lightly into.