Acquiring subs early makes sense

While Defence Industry Minister Melissa Price wants Australian jobs to be at the centre of Australia’s fleet of nuclear-powered submarines, it would make sense for at least the first couple to be leased or built overseas. Three weeks ago Defence Minister Peter Dutton said leasing nuclear-powered submarines would give Australian submariners and workers vital skills ahead of the delivery of our own fleet. It also would help plug a long gap before the first of the new submarines, if built from scratch, was ready to be put in the water in about 2040.

Dennis Richardson, a former secretary of the Department of Defence, was correct on Saturday when he told Greg Sheridan the government should not allow domestic political considerations to compro­mise a national en­terprise. In terms of cost and schedule, it would make sense for the first one or two boats to be substantially built overseas, Mr Richardson said.

Security considerations are vital. John Howard called on the Morrison government to consider the lease of nuclear subs from the US and Britain to fill the current defence gap. As Sheridan wrote: “As the euphoria which first greeted the AUKUS announcements washes away, profound and troubling questions remain about Australia’s slender military capabilities going forward.” Coalition senator and former major general Jim Molan said the subs were too far off to have any effect on the strategic challenge posed by China.

As Richard Ferguson writes, the defence industry has hit back at suggestions it cannot handle building the nuclear submarines. Australian Industry and Defence Network chief executive Brent Clark called the claims ludicrous. On Saturday, former deputy prime minister John Anderson told Sheridan: “ We are being less than forthright if we think we can build something as complex as nuclear submarines here in an effective and timely way.”

At this stage, such discussion is healthy. Ms Price has “full confidence in the Australian defence industry to deliver”. And building up the nation’s defence capability makes sense. But time is short. Much needs to be learned from overseas. But one point is clear, Cameron Stewart wrote on Saturday. France’s claim that Australia ­deceived it over its $90bn submarine project on the day the contract was cancelled is false. Contrary to claims by French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian, a Defence Department letter sent to Paris that day does not say Australia is ready for the “rapid signature for the second phase of the program”. It does not mention the second phase. It only says French shipbuilder Naval Group has completed a formal engineering design review, which, it states, in no way automatically leads to the next phase.