OPV's contribute little towards our ability to defend our selves in the event of conflict and currently NZ has very little that can.
Whilst this is true, the "dilemma" is historically (since the 1970's) the RNZN's 4th frigate (until 1995) has been tasked with EEZ patrol and border protection duties. It would be much cheaper operationally and CapEx wise to simply use a dedicated OPV for these functions (meaning funding saved could be utilised elsewhere where much needed). The downside of this, as you state, is that they contribute little to actual defence and the second downside is that some specialised crew are still needed for the OPV, which can be problematic when their skills and experience are primarily needed elsewhere (eg for combatants).
Looking ahead a worthwhile solution IMO could be not to replace the two current
Otago-class OPV's like-for-like, instead replace them with a combatant or combatants (thus increasing the size of the combatant fleet, say to at least four, as the
ANZAC's are also replaced like-for-like). This then improves our ability to defend ourselves (and provide better presence in the Indo-Pacific etc).
However there is still a need for a SOPV, a vessel that can patrol, surveil and handle the rougher (and dangerous) Southern Ocean (as the Australian/NZ experience of using combatants that weren't designed for use in the deep south has proved to be problematic). If we looked at something like the proposed Danish
Future Arctic Patrol Vessel (Arktiske Patruljeskibe), i.e. the upgraded 2025 iteration rather than the original concept, to assess its suitability to operate in our region, then we could have a "better than OPV" type vessel that with its organic helicopter/hanger and its modular mission deck could be equipped for sea warfare functions such as mine-laying, underwater ISR (ASW support of other kill-chain assets) and embark troops/divers and their sea craft & unmanned craft for insertion/MCM ops etc. If such a vessel was suitable, and if two were acquired, then we perhaps it could also be utilised in the South Pacific to provide presence, border patrol and surveillance.
With the deteriorating international situation we need to improve this situation as fast as we can, but the current government us walking around with it's hands in it's pockets doing as little as it thinks it can get away with while trying to make the public believe all is under control.
If we assume recent baseline defence spending is $5b/year, and the Govt last year budgeted for a $12b increase over the next four years ($3b/year) that looks like a 60% increase in defence funding. That's pretty steep increase with further increases projected in the following four years to lift funding to 2% gdp by 2032 (basically a 100% increase on 2024 expenditure), with indications it could go higher, particularly as "pressure" is applied by our allies to the West we won't want to remain the odd man out (and let's not forget a special shout out to CRINKS for helping to make the case). Personally I wouldn't frame this as a government walking around with its hands in its pockets but each to their own.
The problem with OPV's is they look good, save money, but have no place in a combat environment and we are desperately short of combat capability in both our Navy and Air Force.
Agree that this needs to be addressed further particularly once the current four year funding plan is completed. I would suggest we are perhaps in the latter part of "crawl" stage, rebuilding (following the then GOTD's covid duties which hollowed out defence personnel). I've seen statements of doubling the Army intake this year and also increasing naval training numbers (presumably air force is the same), so we are on the up and laying the foundations (gaining experience and skillsets) to further increase efforts from around 2029. Got to start somewhere, to get there ...
