Here is an article on NZ's poor little rich military
In reality, Defence has had vast amounts of taxpayer money earmarked for its use by this government. Despite the huge surpluses that Finance Minister Michael Cullen has chosen to amass, the health system has not enjoyed the instant gratification given to Defence, virtually from the moment that the Clark government took office.
Since the Defence Ministry's annually upgraded Long Term Development Plan was announced in 2002, 22 major projects have proceeded, totalling some $3 billion over the next decade – with roughly 40 percent being spent on the Air Force alone. Yes, the Air Force did lose the old Skyhawks, but its new expenditure includes:
$352 million for the upgrade of the Air Force P-3 Orions
an estimated $100-200m for the purchase and modification of two Boeing 757s for transporting VIP personnel and cargo
an estimated $400-$550m for the replacement of the current fleet of Iroquois utility helicopters
an estimated $11m to replace the Sioux training helicopters
an estimated $8m upgrade of Ohakea Air Force Base.
As for the Army, its new big-ticket items include:
$93m for a new fleet of Pinzgauer light operational vehicles to replace the Army's Land Rovers
$672m for a fleet of LAVs (light armoured vehicles) to replace the old M-113 tracked vehicles. The additional operational costs for these vehicles will rise from $12.9m this financial year to an estimated $15.21m in 2007/08
$26.8m for 24 Javelin medium-range anti-armour weapon systems
$120m for the so-called TMCS (tactical and mobile communication system) radios
$10m for an identification, alerting and cueing air defence missile capacity to complete our current Mistral VLLAD (very low-level air defence) system.
And the Navy hasn't missed out. Its checklist includes:
$500m for the Protector project that involves the acquisition of a new multi-role vessel, two 85-metre offshore patrol vessels and four 55-metre inshore patrol vessels to enhance military and economic security within our exclusion zone
the review of the Crown's long-term ocean-based research needs, and how the Navy can meet them.
In addition, the first phase (estimated cost: $10m) of the joint command and control system (JCCS) was completed in October 2003, and Cabinet approval is being sought for the next phase.
The bureaucrats haven't missed out, either. Their bounty includes:
a new $58.3m Defence HQ building in downtown Wellington, to be surrounded by an anti-terrorism security zone that will exacerbate the city's parking problems.
And for the troops? The 2004 Budget allocated a $20m pay rise for the armed forces – their fourth in four years – plus an additional $16m to enhance Air Force recruitment. In mid 2003, Defence Minister Mark Burton noted that the pay increases for 2003 alone "will equate to an increase of $1000 to $5000 per annum for the majority of personnel".
None of these figures includes the multi-million cost of the deployments in Timor Leste, Afghanistan and Iraq. True, the huge amounts cited above are spread over several years – yet, if anything, the sums are understated, in that most do not include project-creation costs, operational costs and inflation adjustments due after 2005/06.
Yes, Defence (like the health and education sectors) has been underfunded for years. It is also true that the Navy's Protector project will have economic and biosecurity benefits. By the same logic – presuming that national security is the rationale for the spending spree – the $70.2m in police anti-terrorism funding also belongs in this tally, as does the extra
$14.8m allocated to create dedicated police national security teams.
Can such massive expenditures possibly be justified, given the social and infrastructural needs evident elsewhere in New Zealand? The armed forces do face recruitment and retention problems – but then, so do the health and education systems, without being blessed with such a slew of new, ameliorative projects.
In election year, the government will be pointing to its 2004 Budget package of $1.2 billion for families in need. Very welcome, no doubt. It will be up to Labour to explain why it first ensured that the Army and Air Force had each been allocated similar levels of support. Odd priorities, some might think, for a centre-left government.
