John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Yes, I saw that in an earlier post. Needless to say, had a similar event occurred in Canada junior would have gladly caved into leftist demands to pacify the leftist Quebec vote he needs to say in power.
NZDF General discussion thread
- Thread starter NZLAV
- Start date
It wasn't Pommy operational doctrine that Freyberg rejected at all. After his and other Kiwis WW1 experience of the Pommy Army's attitude he ensured that NZ troops wouldn't be tried and punished by the Pommy Army anymore. He also had a letter from the NZ Govt stipulating that he could withdraw NZ forces from any Pommy operation that he though would waste NZ lives for SFA. Pity he didn't use it when the Greek campaign came up. He was very protective of his NZ troops and once went ape when he found out that pommy red caps (MPs) had beaten and imprisoned Kiwi troops in Cairo. A red cap Major and Lt were in deep doodoo because of that.
Stuart M
Well-Known Member
Oh yes he did reject Pom doctrine, specifically the whole binary brigade stuff, and as he was responsible to NZgov not just for the Division as an entity, but also for its training, so he got the whole lot moved over to Syria after Battleaxe .
He had no faith in Auchinlecks methods.
CHAPTER 1 — Aftermath of Libyan Campaign | NZETC (victoria.ac.nz)Tiny Freyberg said:
I stand corrected then. I did a research piece on him when i was at Uni. That was back in 1989.
Simon Ewing Jarvie
Active Member
It is becoming increasingly difficult to put togethernand article on defence policies for election 2023. National Party defence and veterans spokesman relieved of command. To a bloody war and a sickly season. National MP Tim van de Molen stood down from all portfolios National MP Tim van de Molen stood down from all portfolios
Stuart M
Well-Known Member
I've seen that behaviour before, and I'm sure most have, and he most certainly was doing an intimidation routine. The cheeky bugger, one does not behave like that without intent and he knows it.
Of more concern is that Brownlee just got Defence back, and he's very much in the 'not really caring about defence' camp, but I understand that he's out at the next election, and if so who gets defence if Nats get back in?
I don't think it will matter under a C. Luxon government as I don't see him wanting to spend any thing more on defence than he has to. I did write to the different parties (except the Greens) on the subject and the reply I got from National was by far the least encouraging of the lot. Both the remaining parties , Labour and Act were talking some increases, though nailing these down did not happen.
Last edited:
Hawkeye69
Member
If National/Act get elected to the seats of Government it will because of the promises they will get the cost of living crisis under control and the economy going again. A poll this week said 48% of those polled the biggest issue this election was the cost of living crisis, so if elected National/Act would have 3 years to turn things around and put more money in voters back pockets. Add to this the Reserve Bank stating last week that interest rates would not start moving downwards until at least 2025.
So National/Act will be looking to cut as much government spending as they can.
So National/Act will be looking to cut as much government spending as they can.
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
Not sure that's a fair characterisation! Under "Big Jerry's" watch as DefMin 2014-2017 he:
Advocated for the C-17 purchase years ahead of the formal air mobility replacement project timeframes (due to the C-17 "whitetail situation") and even managed to swing a RAAF C-17 visit to showcase the capabilities to his fellow MP's. Interestingly Labour supported the C-17 purchase but ironically the "pro-defence" NZ First party didn't. (Not his fault the bean-counters at Treasury were non-supportive of the NZDF's plans to fund the purchase (eg by reducing the 757 fleet) and kept insisting they look for other savings, which stalled Cabinet approval until it was too late when 2 of the 3 remaining whitetails were then sold to another buyer)!
But in terms of successes he managed to have defence spending increased in 2016 and got Cabinet sign-off on the original $20b CapEx investment plan also in 2016, Cabinet approval for the Army's Modular Assault Rifle System - Light (LMT CQB16) to replace the Steyr's, new SAS vehicles (Supacat Extenda high mobility vehicle ) the Navy's AOR tanker replacement, the Navy's Littoral Operations Support Capability (not his fault the next Govt bought a cheaper second-hand vessel!), $1.7b for defence estate regeneration, finally the decades long delayed upgrades for the P-3K Orions ASW/underwater ISR systems and supported the NZDF training mission in Iraq etc.
He actually got a lot done for the time (which was when the Govt was prioritising achieving its first budget surplus in years and were pretty "stingy" in many other portfolios)!
No reason why van de Molen couldn't get the defence portfolio back if there is a change of Govt, but the postive news is there are plenty of other excellent candidates (former NZDF/ADF officer Chris Penk would be an excellent choice but is probably earmarked for other senior roles). But frankly I would give the role to ACT if I could because that way the NZDF would be supported very, very well (kind of like how NZFirst supported them rather well in coalition with Labour 2017-2020) ... well assuming that's a coalition condition of course.
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
Well even under the Clark Labour Govt 1999-2008 (despite first electioneering on a "peacekeeping" focus - East Timor, 9/11 and the WoT quietly changed that), the Key National Govt 2008-2017 (despite dealing with the GFC and the costs of the Canterbury earthquake recovery etc) and the Ardern Labour/NZF coalition Govt 2017-2020, defence spending increased incrementally year after year and remember most of that was in supposedly in a "benign strategic environment" ... so with the change of attitude in recent times I'm somewhat optimistic things will improve and at a quicker pace than "incremental". Granted maybe not as "fast" as we all want here, but the scene has been set, so to speak, to see further changes for the better. Also remember it is a long term scenario being played out.
In the meantime checkout what is happening with the Solomon Islands of late (and stand by for their upcoming elections and potential for "issues") and in other parts of Melanesia (involving CCP influence), and checkout efforts by the US, Australia and NZ to shore up support in Polynesia, other parts of Melanesia and most of Micronesia. Again the scenes are being set so to speak and the NZG/NZDF will be playing their part.
Stuart M
Well-Known Member
Yeah, he did do that, but I've always viewed that as maintenance of the status quo, which both major parties will do to avoid embarrassment should they need to use the armed forces.Not sure that's a fair characterisation! Under "Big Jerry's" watch as DefMin 2014-2017 he:
Advocated for the C-17 purchase years ahead of the formal air mobility replacement project timeframes (due to the C-17 "whitetail situation") and even managed to swing a RAAF C-17 visit to showcase the capabilities to his fellow MP's. Interestingly Labour supported the C-17 purchase but ironically the "pro-defence" NZ First party didn't. (Not his fault the bean-counters at Treasury were non-supportive of the NZDF's plans to fund the purchase (eg by reducing the 757 fleet) and kept insisting they look for other savings, which stalled Cabinet approval until it was too late when 2 of the 3 remaining whitetails were then sold to another buyer)!
But in terms of successes he managed to have defence spending increased in 2016 and got Cabinet sign-off on the original $20b CapEx investment plan also in 2016, Cabinet approval for the Army's Modular Assault Rifle System - Light (LMT CQB16) to replace the Steyr's, new SAS vehicles (Supacat Extenda high mobility vehicle ) the Navy's AOR tanker replacement, the Navy's Littoral Operations Support Capability (not his fault the next Govt bought a cheaper second-hand vessel!), $1.7b for defence estate regeneration, finally the decades long delayed upgrades for the P-3K Orions ASW/underwater ISR systems and supported the NZDF training mission in Iraq etc.
He actually got a lot done for the time (which was when the Govt was prioritising achieving its first budget surplus in years and were pretty "stingy" in many other portfolios)!
No reason why van de Molen couldn't get the defence portfolio back if there is a change of Govt, but the postive news is there are plenty of other excellent candidates (former NZDF/ADF officer Chris Penk would be an excellent choice but is probably earmarked for other senior roles). But frankly I would give the role to ACT if I could because that way the NZDF would be supported very, very well (kind of like how NZFirst supported them rather well in coalition with Labour 2017-2020) ... well assuming that's a coalition condition of course.
Penck could do it, but I'd be surprised if van de Molen gets it back after this.. to much room for bad publicity now.
Stuart M
Well-Known Member
This is true, but the threat of other nations bringing the harm, including to them personally, can focus the minds of politicians rather sharply, the first Labour government is a good example of this.
As I have said in previous posts, there is simply not enough debate on defence to increase public awareness on defence. our pollies simply in most cases don't have the knowledge to do this. The budget as pointed out previously is around half what it was in GDP terms of what it was in the 1980;s. Act has a policy to increase spending to 2% GDP in 3 years, but whether Luxon will even consider this I doubt.
Last edited:
Unfortunately the time needed now does not allow us the luxury of waiting for a direct threat as to rebuild the NZ defence forces up to a leavel that even is in the region of the capabilities that we had in the late 1980's will take 10 to 20 years.
Simon Ewing Jarvie
Active Member
Tim VdM has been ruled out by Luxon as a future Minister. He won't be getting anything in a change of govt. Chris Penk is perfectly capable of leading Defence but I wonder if his legal quals will be more in demand. Having said that, Paul East was both Defence Minister and Attorney-General 96-97. The only high-ranked ACT MP who could potentially do a good job of Defence is Nicole McKee but I doubt National will want to give it up (having been through the process in 2008 which saw Heather Roy get Associate Defence Minister.)No reason why van de Molen couldn't get the defence portfolio back if there is a change of Govt, but the postive news is there are plenty of other excellent candidates (former NZDF/ADF officer Chris Penk would be an excellent choice but is probably earmarked for other senior roles). But frankly I would give the role to ACT if I could because that way the NZDF would be supported very, very well (kind of like how NZFirst supported them rather well in coalition with Labour 2017-2020) ... well assuming that's a coalition condition of course.
The most important measure of a minister is actually how effective they are in getting money for their portfolio. Defence normally sits round no. 18 in the Cabinet seniority. Ron Mark was able to get money for Defence because NZ First had a firm grip on Labour's fiscal nuts. How else do you explain the $3B PGF? Gerry Brownlee is actually keen on defence - I have spoken with him often about it. But the fact he has it now is irrelevant really because, in all likelihood, he will be the next Speaker if there is a change of Govt.
Simon Ewing Jarvie
Active Member
It's true that each year there is 'new money' in Vote Defence Force which goes to OPEX. When you look at the numbers, the increases closely resemble the amount that the Govt claws back in capital charge and depreciation. So it is just 'churn' not real money. With OCR rising and forcing capital charge up, combined with the acquisition of new platforms such as P8 and C130, capital charge and depreciation will increase markedly. To keep the lights on, the next govt (no matter what party) will have to 'increase' Vote Defence Force. They will trumpet it as being strong on defence but actually, the output will be flat-lining at best.
Simon Ewing Jarvie
Active Member
The best predictor is past performance. I was working in a Minister's office after the 2008 election when Bill English was finance minister. The first thing he did was direct all ministers to find at least 5% cuts in all their portfolios. It is likely something similar will happen again.
Govt's usually last 3 terms. Weaker ones two terms (Labour 1984-1990 & probably the current govt), really bad ones only a single term (Labour 1972-1975). They have formed a pattern of being able to point to one significant defence decision in their total term. These 'symbols' often end up being what can't be avoided. For the incoming govt, the maritime helo replacement will be their defence 'precious.' There will be pressure to put the SOPV back on the acquisition path. Land Forces are the cheapest to run so expect small changes there like protected mobility fleet harmonisation. Progress on the defence estate will likely continue in concert with treaty initiatives and PPPs.
Next year's budget will be sorted by the time Parliament lifts for the summer break. I expect Vote Defence Force 2024 will have announcements about future spending and a small amount of OPEX to cover projects already underway. This will all have been preceded by some whole-of-govt cost-cutting including Defence. ACT's 2% of GDP may be agreed to in principle but Luxon has already shown how he intends to manage expectations by saying that they will consider [INSERT SUBJECT] when inflation is below X%. The projected new Defence Capability Plan is not expected till mid/late 2024 so that will be the justification to deal with most things in budget 2025. There will be increased pressure on NZDF to reduce HQ's numbers and move tail to teeth which I agree with.
If the National Intelligence and Security Agency is established next year, it is likely that it will also be used to delay defence acquisition decisions in the short term while the govt wrestles with the books.
I hope that's useful. Lots of moving parts!
Last edited: