‘People should be highly sceptical’: Greens Senator on Labor’s ‘remarkable situation’



Greens Defence Spokesperson David Shoebridge says he is “highly sceptical” of Labor’s defence announcement because it has taken them two years to make “any of the hard decisions” they should have made.

The new surface fleet strategy announced by Defence Minister Richard Marles on Tuesday will cost $11.1 billion over a decade.

It increases the number of surface combatants from 11 to 26, but the six optionally crewed vessels are yet to be developed.

“People should be highly sceptical of Defence’s capacity to deliver any of this, and it’s a pretty remarkable outcome,” Mr Shoebridge told Sky News Australia.

“Labor has spent two years in office doing this review – during those two years, failed to make any of the hard decisions.

“It’s a remarkable situation Labor’s found themselves in.”

source

22 thoughts on “‘People should be highly sceptical’: Greens Senator on Labor’s ‘remarkable situation’”

  1. "can't identify the purpose, very large and not fit for purpose"…how can it have no identifiable purpose and not fit for purpose? also, scrapping the project would have been expensive in itself, just like the French subs being cancelled, which the greens bleated loudly about one thing I must admit, I am a bit surprised that the current govt has looked at acquisitions. the last time they were in office they did nothing but had their pictures taken as the last lot of ships were built and created the "valley of death" for ship building in this country (GFC didn't give them the appetite for that I suppose, it was all MRRT, school halls and pink bats).

    Reply
  2. "Greens Defence spokesperson"? The Greens don't have a credible defence position, much less policy. I accept both the major parties have been weak on defence. But, to go to the Greens for ANY opinions on defence is to akin to ask a child how to deal with education. But worse than that. Much, much worse.

    Reply
  3. I don’t think we’ll have to worry about warships military, aircraft or weapons. We don’t have the soldiers sailors or pilots. They don’t have the numbers in the defence force they leaving by the dozen so we’ll just be sitting ducks exactly how they want us to be ready for take over

    Reply
  4. Maybe a few of these hard decisions should have been made by the Liberals. Seems to me their focus has been on submarines and not on replacing older surface vessels. They could have started designing some of these ships ready to start building.

    Reply
  5. What happened to the submarine deal.? Based on the knowledge
    that passenger plane MH370 disappeared after crashing into the
    sea says frigates are useless but submarine that can be loaded
    with missiles carrying nuclear weapons seems obviously a better
    alternative for Australia's defence.
    There's too much sex and booze in parliament house for Australia's
    good. One only needs to remember the Brittany Higgins case to
    prove my point. But I know a whole lot more.
    Would a divided nation be stronger militarily ? Yes or No ?

    Reply
  6. Am I the only one thinking that Australia is ripe for invasion,and all this is for nothing.
    We have one of the greatest mineral deposits in the world,not to mention pollution free wide open spaces.

    Thanks to all the home truths being made public about our woefully incapable defence farce,surely one of our less than amicable neighbors will be rubbing their hairy little palms together,plotting our demise as a nation,and ultimate surrender.
    The tyranny of distance from our closest allies only serves to make this even more possible..

    Just throwing it out there.

    Reply

Leave a Comment