Michael McGuire: SA’s submarines lost at sea in political games

Shipbuilding means votes in SA – hence the Defence Minister’s weekend visit. But nothing he said guaranteed us submarine construction, writes Michael McGuire.

Presumably the visit of Defence Minister Peter Dutton to Adelaide at the weekend was a pre-emptive strike against the obvious question that would have been posed at some point during this election campaign – “what’s happening with the submarine program?”

The submarine program in Adelaide has long been a political sore point for the Liberal Party.

The decision by former prime minister Tony Abbott to break his 2013 election promise to build 12 subs in Adelaide caused a political fury that saw Abbott backflip on his backflip.

No wonder he carried with him that look of the permanently confused.

The statement by former defence minister David Johnston that he wouldn’t trust shipbuilder ASC to “build a canoe’’ was one of the reasons the Liberals lost a by-election in the state seat of Fisher in 2014. This was a seat it had expected to win.

Minister for Defence Peter Dutton at ASC North inspecting HMAS Dechaineux, a Collins Class Submarine in Osborne, SA on April 18. Picture: Emma Brasier

Shipbuilding is one of those issues that moves votes in South Australia.

And with Boothby, and possibly even Sturt, in danger of being lost by the Liberals, Dutton was sent to Adelaide over the weekend to offering a few small morsels and hopefully placate the local population. Or at least give the impression there is some kind of movement, where, in reality, there is very little.

Certainly, nothing of note for a state that lost a contract worth the sharp end of $90bn just last September.

And has had nothing replace the certainty of all that work but obfuscation and half promises of some golden future.

It’s hard to be optimistic about the future of submarine building in SA.

It was hard when the federal government abandoned the deal with French manufacturer Naval Group and replaced it with an 18-month feasibility study to determine whether Australia should pursue a nuclear-powered sub from either the UK or US, as part of the new AUKUS defence agreement.

It’s even harder seven months down the line.

Royal Australian Navy submarine HMAS Rankin. Picture: POIS Yuri Ramsey/Australian Defence Force via Getty Images

At the time of the announcement, PM Scott Morrison only said: we “intend to build these submarines in Adelaide’’.

Politicians are notoriously full of good intentions. Delivery is another matter.

Morrison was at it again earlier this month, telling reporters in Sydney “our intention is to maximise all of that’’ in relation to the subs being built in Australia.

He also suggested “the paramount goal is to ensure we get that capability as soon as we can’’. A comment which suggests speed of delivery was more important than a local build.

The reaction to that forced Morrison on to radio station FIVEaa to “put people’s mind at rest’’ that we “will build as much of them in SA as we possibly can’’.

But no detail.

One of the key features of the ditched Naval plan was that 60 per cent of the contract value would be spent in Australia.

At his weekend press conference, Dutton refused to commit to any figure, hiding behind the feasibility study and even, preposterously, blaming Labor at one point.

Reporter: “you haven’t been able to clarify that with us, you can’t guarantee that it won’t be below 60 per cent … ‘’

Dutton: “As I say to you, I would love to be here today commissioning a new vessel that Labor had ordered, but they didn’t order one.’’

Labor were undoubtedly sluggish with subs as well, but Dutton’s government has been in charge for nine years.

They have had at least four different submarine plans and delivered zero subs. Indeed, they are paying Naval anything up to $5bn not to build subs.

All of which leaves Australia relying on the Collins-class up until about 2040, even though Dutton also said we are now living in “a very uncertain world’’.

There is a question of national sovereignty at stake as well. Last year, former state Liberal leader and Labor cabinet minister Martin Hamilton-Smith told a senate inquiry the nation needed to ask itself if it wanted the subs to operate without depending on overseas supply chains or governments.

“If the answer to that question is ‘yes, we need to stand on our own two feet’, then that raises serious implications if the submarines and warships are to be built overseas,’ said Hamilton-Smith, who now runs the Australian Sovereign Capability Alliance.

At this stage it would appear both Liberal and Labor are happy not to engage meaningfully on subs.

That’s probably because both have terrible records on the topic and neither has a good story to tell.