t68
Well-Known Member
An interesting coalition to say the least defence wise, who will have the most sway will determine the outcome, if it's the greens you might aswell rename the NZDF the coast guard
NZDF General discussion thread
- Thread starter NZLAV
- Start date
Shanesworld
Well-Known Member
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
The formal coalition is between Labour and NZF - the Greens may only be providing confidence and supply "from the outside of the tent". Bizarrely the Greens have yet to formally support the Labour/NZF coalition (due to their membership still having to vote > 75% in agreement). Would be even more bizarre if their membership decided not to support the coalition because of the dominance of centrist NZF in the coalition relationship ... presumably that won't happen but presumably if somehow it did, we might be facing a new election? Unless National and Labour agree to a grand coalition but that's unlikely.
So in terms of defence policy the Greens can make their feelings known and Labour may listen to some extent but presumably NZF will temper anything radical (such as downgrading combat capabilities further).
One of their first big tests will be the FAMC project which was meant to Cabinet in the next few months. I'd expect it to go ahead, but whether or not is downgraded will have to be seen. The Navy's Littoral Operations Support Capability (LOSC) vessel is another project approaching sign off.
Anyway will NZF make good their promise to restore an ACF ....?
[Oh for the possible interest of other readers outside of NZ, the incumbent National Party won a greater proportion of (Party) votes (44.4%) and electorate seats (and therefore overall seats) than Labour (36.9%) and the Greens (6.3%) combined (43.2%), but thanks to the MMP voting system the Labour Party and NZF @ 7.2% (with Greens providing C&S) was able to outnumber National to form a government (NZF could have gone either way). This is unprecedented for NZ so I suspect there will be a sizeable proportion of the population questioning the merits of the MMP voting system again. Especially those that realise that National actually received more List seats (than MMP's legitimate seat allocation formula finally reduced/re-allocated to them) to actually govern outright by itself with over 50% of the vote. If the voting system was SM then that would have been the official result]!
So in terms of defence policy the Greens can make their feelings known and Labour may listen to some extent but presumably NZF will temper anything radical (such as downgrading combat capabilities further).
One of their first big tests will be the FAMC project which was meant to Cabinet in the next few months. I'd expect it to go ahead, but whether or not is downgraded will have to be seen. The Navy's Littoral Operations Support Capability (LOSC) vessel is another project approaching sign off.
Anyway will NZF make good their promise to restore an ACF ....?
[Oh for the possible interest of other readers outside of NZ, the incumbent National Party won a greater proportion of (Party) votes (44.4%) and electorate seats (and therefore overall seats) than Labour (36.9%) and the Greens (6.3%) combined (43.2%), but thanks to the MMP voting system the Labour Party and NZF @ 7.2% (with Greens providing C&S) was able to outnumber National to form a government (NZF could have gone either way). This is unprecedented for NZ so I suspect there will be a sizeable proportion of the population questioning the merits of the MMP voting system again. Especially those that realise that National actually received more List seats (than MMP's legitimate seat allocation formula finally reduced/re-allocated to them) to actually govern outright by itself with over 50% of the vote. If the voting system was SM then that would have been the official result]!
Last edited:
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
MMP has been discussed here from time to time. God forbid it should ever be adopted here. We would end up with Liberal-NDP coalitions for all eternity, or perhaps even worse.
Yes, MMP does make life interesting and not always for the right reason, with the lack of experience in the new leadership and the youth we have just joined the charisma club like Canada and France. Do we have another Junior in the making? It will be interesting to see if there are any concessions on Defence. As Winston had little interest in the subject, but NZ first has two ex army officers in their caucus it could be interesting to be a fly on the wall.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Can't believe there is another junior lurking about, a scary thought.
Yep under MMP it can even get worse.
Yep under MMP it can even get worse. You might wind up with a W.P. clone
I am sure that we could export said item to Canada as part of NZ Canadian relations. Won't even charge the cost and we might even pay shipping.
I think a "Give a little page" would easily cover the cost in no time at all.
Shanesworld
Well-Known Member
Some of us are having a bake sale to get some more frigates if you want to join in.
Defence is a single line in the Labour-NZ First coalition agreement sign just now.
"Re-examine the Defence procurement programme within the context of the 2016 Defence Capability Plan budget."
So the $20B is kept and it will be re-examined but no details.
One thing is that with an evidence based business case approach it will be harder to downgrade some programmes like FASC or FAMC.
It seems NZ First owns Foreign Affairs and Defence.
"Re-examine the Defence procurement programme within the context of the 2016 Defence Capability Plan budget."
So the $20B is kept and it will be re-examined but no details.
One thing is that with an evidence based business case approach it will be harder to downgrade some programmes like FASC or FAMC.
It seems NZ First owns Foreign Affairs and Defence.
t68
Well-Known Member
And that's a good thing judging by the links supplied by NG a few days ago.
Agree with your thoughts in regard to the budget, Ron Marks has more of a tendency to like a more combat focussed approach to procurement so we may see a move in this direction. A pet of his is a light strike / trainer, but I suspect he would find this a hard sell to the other members of Government.
So the $20 billion is safe for the time being, but for how long. I see that the NZ 1st defence policy of a SDSR every 4 years instead of a White Paper every 5 years didn't make it make it into the agreement.
I read this elsewhere
So he maybe open to a 2 tier FASC.
The Labour - Greens agreement doesn't including anything pertaining to defence and whilst the Greens have an Associate Finance portfolio, their Ministers are subject to the Cabinet Manual and Cabinet responsibility, which means that once Cabinet makes a decision all Cabinet members are required to support it and abide by it.
So now we wait and see what the new defence direction will be.
As long as they do not do anything stupid for 3 years then it should be fine.
We are getting a 2 tier FASC in many respects with the MEPT/AWOT project so just find a few modest million more cash down the back of the Beehive couch to expand the leased B350 fleet! Easy win right there.
I do not think it will change greatly but there maybe one or two disappointing choices.
A thing to remember about replacement choices is that the politicians in NZ do not normally chose the equipment that is to be used. However they do control the purse strings, so control the scope of any program and this does have a strong influence on how successful or not a program is as an over tight budget will cause us to wind up with something like the protector ships.
kiwipatriot69
Active Member
Projects that are underway now though, surely funding won't be cut, otherwise we will be paying a penalty?
I would hope not, especially in regard to the C130 replacement as this program is well advanced. The call by NZ first to prioritise the $20 b is interesting and were that could lead us is anyone's guess as some of NZ 1 leadership have not always been noted to be consistently logical. Time will tell, but the next few years promise to be far from boring in regard to defence capital spending.
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
This is almost certainly correct where a contract has been negotiated and signed. The only major example of this I am aware of is the replacement tanker.
As far as the surveillance and airlift replacement programmes go, there hasn't even been a Request for Proposals yet (i.e. a tender), let alone a winner being chosen. The same applies to the proposed Southern OPV and (I'm less certain) the LOSC.
Delaying or cancelling them would mightily piss off the would-be suppliers, but it is highly unlikely they would have any grounds to claim compensation from the NZ government