It was on Paul Henry this morning that it will be released later this morning, with a focus on cyberdefence.
NZDF General discussion thread
- Thread starter NZLAV
- Start date
It came through via Twitter via a reputable source (actually I just googled "defence white paper nz" and limited it to last week and it showed up).
I'm not getting my hopes up for the white paper - expecting turgid blandness & fiscal non-commitment really. I'll guess the policy statements will look like they were copied from the last two white papers. Wouldn't be surprised if more equipment is pushed off into the never-never (as in the great Australian desert wasteland) of future-projected spending.
Actually, I'm more interested in the public submissions (presuming they are released at the same time). Probably more intelligent ideas in there (and a few nutty ones) than in the official document.
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
Chance would be a fine thing!
Although given the adverse publicity recently over the lack of Navy patrolling of the EEZ, some measures to convince the public fish stocks are being protected might be a last-minute addition to the document.
Ngati
The Budget made it clear cyber-defence was in for a big funding boost, but i thought it was mainly via the intelligence agencies rather than NZDF. I guess all will be revealed soon, after a very long wait.
Defense News breaks down the latest Budget allocations by service here:
http://www.defensenews.com/story/de...16/06/03/new-zealand-defense-budget/85286358/
I was being sarcastic re MSM. I have a copy of the budget documents and the funding appeared to be going to the spooks.
2016 dwp
According to Stuff there is a $20 billion upgrade for aircraft, ships and cyberdefence for NZDF. Apparently the DWP is 100 pages but not on the Ministry website yet. Apparently the DWP states what will be replaced but makes no mention what with, which is par for the course. $20 billion is a goodly sum.
ADDITION - Ministers Statement
DWP Infographic
According to Stuff there is a $20 billion upgrade for aircraft, ships and cyberdefence for NZDF. Apparently the DWP is 100 pages but not on the Ministry website yet. Apparently the DWP states what will be replaced but makes no mention what with, which is par for the course. $20 billion is a goodly sum.
ADDITION - Ministers Statement
DWP Q&A
DWP Infographic
Last edited:
The whitepapers not online yet, but Stuff and the Herald have summaries:
Defence White Paper: $20b defence upgrades for new planes, boats and cyber security | Stuff.co.nz
Government announces up to $20 billion spending for Defence Force over next 15 years - National - NZ Herald News
Defence White Paper: $20b defence upgrades for new planes, boats and cyber security | Stuff.co.nz
Government announces up to $20 billion spending for Defence Force over next 15 years - National - NZ Herald News
Pretty much the status quo with the exception of the additional Ice-strengthened OPV,
757, C-130, P-3 and Frigates are committed to being replaced
I think that 20 billion over 15 years is fair and reasonable. It does not surprise us though who have looked closely at this over the last few years. No specifics of course but we knew what was in store.
Now I am waiting for the cries of angst from the hard left types about all the social spending that will be missed out on, about toadiness towards the evil Americans and other such rubbish.
Now I am waiting for the cries of angst from the hard left types about all the social spending that will be missed out on, about toadiness towards the evil Americans and other such rubbish.
The angst has already started with them getting their knickers real twisted and all wound up about a possible USN ship visit in November for the RNZN 75th. They had no sense of humour when I ask them why they didn't protest about the presence of PLAN ships here that may or may have not carried nukes. :flame
:splat :daz
I had a look thru the DWP Q&A and I note that the govt state that NZ defence spending is around 1% GDP and it has no intention of increasing that between now and 2030
So one wonders where all of that $20 billion is coming from.
Gracie1234
Well-Known Member
I imagine the funding will go above 1% GDP, as that is where we are now with no big purchases, and that figure was just put out to the public to quiet the noise of the $20B. I noticed it was reported that this is half what the UK and Aus spend. Makes sense.
I do not get hung up so much about the the GDP% as a measure. It is quite crude in some respects and at times compares apples with oranges. Take the Danes and Norwegians for example. Their GDP%'s (1.3-1.4%) is less than other nations but they do Defence spending more effectively than many other nations.
This DWP16 at first glance is a step in the right direction and a crystal clear message that MarSurv is front and centre. You cannot read this without having BAMS being seriously considered.
This DWP16 at first glance is a step in the right direction and a crystal clear message that MarSurv is front and centre. You cannot read this without having BAMS being seriously considered.
No you can't and I think another lost capability maybe being thought about seriously again. I noted the section in Chapter Four on Asia and how that has entered their thinking. Also the term "lines of communication" has been used frequently as well. I haven't read it all yet. Only got to start of Chap 5 and having a caffeine fix.
The media commentary so far appears to be in favour, which is good.
Last edited:
Yes I can. MarSurv will not be cut and in fact will be enhanced. Noted a number of times in the DWP text and confirmed in the house this afternoon. You must be reading a different DWP that I am looking at this afternoon.
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
In my view the WP sets out a realistic vision for the future, but I'm sceptical it is achievable on approx. 1% of GDP.
One of the few concrete pieces of new information is that the new tanker will be ice-strengthened. I wonder if they have also managed to fit a Chinook-capable flight deck? As far as I can remember, they were the only options for which separate costing was sought.
If you want to see some carping and moaning, just look at the comments underneath the Stuff article! As per most internet comment sections, the dire standard of comprehension and grammar makes it hard to take many of them seriously.
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
Perhaps I'm misreading something, but I think you and Ngati are vigorously agreeing with each other.
You are probably right. I may have misread it that MarSurv could be lost - maybe the sentence by NG was agreeing with me. I do not think we are losing anything - however I cannot see any lost capability regained - ala ACF. Then again that would not be front and centre in this document.
Just watched Gerry, Crusher Collins & Findlayson in the General Debate speak on the vital role of Defence and Security. Very robust views on why the defence reorientation under the DWP is vital.
It is the money not the % of GDP that matters in my view. The DWP is actually better than what I thought it would be (my expectations were low) - in fact the 15 year plan is gone from $16b to $20b. Note they are looking at working around the capital charge with Treasury - that is buried in the text. The CC impacts the NZDF unlike other ministries.
The views by people on stuff and herald are prompted. The left has so little money there only political communication avenue is to avalanche blogs and message boards. I will not read it because it will increase my blood presure and it is irrelevant anyway.
I was agreeing with you and the no was meaning no you can't get hung up on % GDP.
I have read it through and it is a far better document than its predecessors for a few years. It sets out where the priorities are and where they see their concerns being.
A change in the Green Party policy and attitude?
Another quote from the same story which I hope takes root in the Kiwi psyche:
Ron Mark has started dribbling rubbish already. He is still claiming that the govt want to replace the C130s with (only) C17s at a cost of $3 billion. He also says that NZ doesn't need strategic airlift and that we only need tactical airlift, plus that the NH90s are no good because you can't fly them off a frigate. Gawd help us.