I doubt it would be Big Gerry and much more likely to be Bill English who has the respect of caucus and wider party. The endorsement from Key will help.
NZDF General discussion thread
- Thread starter NZLAV
- Start date
I really really want to now the real reason behind Key's resignation, he was surely a lock in for a forth term, I was sure his ego would have pushed him towards that goal, however there's been speculation that Obama might appoint him as head of the IMF, not a role he could take up if he was still PM.
Sorry for going political but it's an interesting subject.
The real reason is as exactly as Key stated it KiwiRob. Family - boring as it is. There are no hidden agenda's about it. A 365/24/7 job for 10 years once you hit 55 would start to have less appeal after a while.
As I expected it will be Bill English and Paula Bennett looks likely to come in as DPM. Joyce has taken the FinMin role.
The Party polling should hold up over 45% but Bill's personal polling will not be as strong as Key's.
With the upcoming Cabinet reshuffle will we get a new Defence Minister or will Big Gerry keep his current portfolios? That is the question. The next and more important question is, what will be the new Cabinets policy and attitude towards defence? I don't know what Bill English thinks about defence. I believe that he and Joyce are very economics focussed. Paula Bennet would be a good choice for DPM and I have thought for a long time that she has the makings of a good PM.
The projected surpluses out to 2020 look very good but this is the Shaky Isles and the survival of said surpluses are subject to geological processes.
The OBEGAL surpluses will make defence acquisitions somewhat easier:
$0.5b in 2017
$3.3b in 2018
$5.4b in 2019
$6.8b in 2020
$8.5n in 2021
The 2017 surplus evidently was going to be much higher than half a billion but was scaled back due to Kaikoura.
Big Gerry remains as Minister of Defence. He's also picked up the role of Minister of Civil Defence as well and still Number 4 in Cabinet.
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/pm-announces-new-cabinet-line
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/pm-announces-new-cabinet-line
Novascotiaboy
Active Member
Ngati
Will there likely be any chances of changes to defence priorities under the new PM? Will the status quo be maintained under Minister Brownlee and projects in play allowed to continue?
Will there likely be any chances of changes to defence priorities under the new PM? Will the status quo be maintained under Minister Brownlee and projects in play allowed to continue?
For the short term I think the status quo will apply. On one of the ex defence personnel social media sites it was claimed that he is pro defence but I can't verify that. I don't know the new PM's, Bill English, views on defence. He is a social conservative, has traditional Roman Catholic views and like me grew up in rural Southland, which is at the bottom of the South Island. Back then, when he and I were young, Southland was quite conservative and he grew up on the family farm. What was different with his education was that whilst many rural Catholic Southland kids went to Catholic boarding schools in either Southland or Otago (I did, as did a lot of my rural cousins), he went to a Catholic boys boarding school in the Hutt Valley in Wellington, which is half a country a way - on the other island even. Apparently he's quite academic; he has an honours degree in English literature and after working on the family farm worked at Treasury as a policy analyst for a while. He is a policy wonk by all accounts unlike our previous PM who possesses a different skill set.
Bill English did support defence in the late nineties as a member of Bolger's cabinet and it appeared that he supported the F16's and a third Frigate ( scuttled by Winston Peter's). This was rather controversial at the time. As leader of the opposition he also called for the re-introduction of the ACF. However this was a long time ago. What his views are now is hard to know as he has not spoken much publicly on the matter. When John Key was queston on the ACF early in his reign at a gathering in Bulls , his reply was "can't afford it"and when further questioned simply moved on. So will this change? That is the big question.
Well that is interesting. I get the impression that Key had quite a tight control on Cabinet and caucus so what he said went. Maybe Bill English will follow up on his earlier Defence leanings and now because of his financial stewardship the country is in a position to afford such items. I suppose we will have to wait and see. It's like when we were small kids waiting for Xmas to come - took flammin' ages - eons even. :rotfl
gday Kiwi,s.
Was wondering if QAMR had their own "veggies" or dismounted infantry, I heard that there was a plan to have their own infantry.
Was wondering if QAMR had their own "veggies" or dismounted infantry, I heard that there was a plan to have their own infantry.
The last two PM's were the same when it came to control of cabinet, But waiting for christmas may be a little bit of a problem as we don't know which christmas it will be.
G'day cobber. "Veggies", haha love it. I don't know myself. Cadre Dave or Reg R probably would know.
Mate in NZ us Infantry are called Cabbages (due to our old berets) anyhow,
QAMR still has a Rifle Company on loan from 1RNZIR which will revert back to the Battalion in the near future, after that QA will get Infantry when they are required, the experiment with Motorised Infantry is well and truly over. Both Battalions have rerolled back to Light Infantry & QA can concentrate on its needs with out the distraction of looking after crewmen & dismounts.
Dave
Haha veggies?? We like to use the correct terms this side of the ditch and yes as CD has stated cabbage is that term, for good or bad, good to see inter corp banter still alive and kicking though.
W coy is currently attached to QA from 1BN but yes as CD has said this then leaves them short a company therefore not technically a full battalion. I would wonder if it would then be advantageous to raise another coy specifically for CAV if this is still to be the 3rd manoeuvre unit otherwise could possibly be left alittle on the light side in terms of numbers? What is the org at the moment CD, 2 sqns of @20 hulls each plus HQ element and recon/support? Will it then be "large" enough to support itself as a seperate independant entity or still require rounding out from the battalions or reserves anyway thus not entirely a 3rd unit in itself per se? Maybe keeping a coy organic to QAMR could be a good thing and dedicate a sqn as per then have the other one on call for the BNs but guess it all comes down to direction, structure, manpower etc and that all important funding.
Funny how the plan has gone full circle and heading back to "battlefeild taxis" of old as and when needed to support light infantry considering the planning, conversion and overall cost involved in motorising both battalions, guess better to try then wonder but overall an "expensive" lesson in more ways than one depending on how you look at it.
Your correct on the 2 x Sqn Reg nothing has changed in that regard, we are going back to the days of 1 Scots ie being a battlefield taxi of old, the greatest lesson to come out of the motorisation trial as I put it was the training cost involved to keep LAV crews current while also providing a pathway for the dismounts.
W Coy reverts I think back to 1R in the new year and having a look at the current Army News there is a short article on 1R ISR Platoon receiving new tracker dogs to supplement the visual trackers which takes us back to the Malayan conflicts days as you say we have really gone full circle.
Dave
It appears that our new PM has signaled that NZ will work more with NATO in the future.
Then the NZG had better stump up more operational funding and not take it from the $20 billion CAPEX.
t68
Well-Known Member
Yes could not agree more, if the future brings more involvement with NATO one would assume that it might be prudent to have similer kit with a vast number of NATO members, no sence running all the way back to Japan or NZ for spares, hopefully that also translates in increasing the capacity of Navy in both combat and Amphibous warfare vessels.
Yeah totally agree with NZDF stepping it up a little & contributing more 'rolling' contributions rather than the piecemeal ones we tend to do. Mind you as stated more resources would be needed to sustain rolling contributions - a 3rd frigate would be a key point to that but I'm not convinced that's about to happen (as part of the ANZAC replacement project).
Playing devil's advocate... be wary of just what English is quoted as saying... "It does seem to fit our skill set, where they want to focus a bit more on prevention in some of these fragile states rather than combat and civil breakdown. So if the future focus is going to be a bit more on peacekeeping and training, then that would fit our skill set."
To paraphrase - 'more on peace keeping & less on combat'... this was the argument Clark's Govt used to support their downscaling of combat capabilities!
