Senator REYNOLDS (Western Australia) (16:55): I rise today on this very important matter of public importance. The Abbott government is getting on with the job of ensuring that our Navy has a sustainable and affordable long-term submarine capability. Despite all of the rhetoric this afternoon from Senator Conroy and his colleagues, this is a decision on the future of Australia’s submarines and it has not yet been made.

Senator Cameron: Another Liberal lie!

Senator REYNOLDS: In fact, we would not be having this conversation at all, Senator Cameron, if Labor had not abrogated its responsibility to make the decision during its six years of government. Unlike Labor, we will be making the decisions necessary to avoid a capability gap between the Collins class and the future submarine. In doing so, however, the coalition will ensure Australia has the military capabilities to deter threats and project force. But defence acquisitions must always be made on the basis of our national defence requirements. And, when it comes to defence, we cannot be ruled solely by industry policy and protectionism. This is a huge and significant national investment in our defence capability and it is essential that we get it right. But it is a decision the previous government should have taken. They had 4½ years after the release of the 2009 white paper to do so, but they did not. That is a fact. It is not a cheap stunt like those that Senator McEwen was just referring to.

Let us have a look at some other facts. Despite all of the Labor promises, under Labor the share of GDP spent on defence fell to 1.56 per cent—the lowest level since 1938. In fact, in the 2012-13 budget Labor made the biggest single cut to defence since the end of the Korean conflict. They cut 10.5 per cent from the budget.

I experienced firsthand the impact of the broken promises that Labor made in defence. As the director for strategic reform in the Army in 2009 and 2010 I, like many others, took the Labor government at its word and worked hard to implement the strategic reform program—a program the government promised us would reduce costs and allow the resources that were to be freed up to be reinvested into Force 2030. What a demoralising and dispiriting breach of faith that proved to be. Senator Cameron, guess who was the minister during that period, who failed to make the decisions despite promising to deliver the future submarine capability? Any guesses, Senator?

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT ( Senator Williams ): Senator Reynolds, direct your remarks through the chair.

Senator REYNOLDS: My apologies, Mr Acting Deputy President. It was Senator Faulkner. In fact, I will quote Senator Faulkner. He said:

This Government is committed to carefully planning for Australia’s next generation of submarines.

The year he made that commitment was 2009. The Labor government spent 4½ years doing so much planning, they did no acting—apart from removing the funding to fund the future submarines.

Let us talk a bit more about facts. Over their six years in government, not only did unemployment increase by over 200,000 jobs but the Australian defence industry shed more than 10 per cent of their workforce because of Labor’s budget cuts and project deferrals. So the depth of the opposition’s hypocrisy on this is breathtaking. It would be sad if it were not so serious for Australia’s defence.

The so-called ‘valley of death’ that may exist for our defence industries is entirely the making of the Labor Party, who wasted their six years in government. The simple fact is that under the DCP it was never affordable and the capability promises were purely fictitious. Not only does Labor’s mismanagement of the defence program mean that defence face a deficit of $12 billion on current plans over the next decade, but an additional $18 billion is required to achieve Force 2030. To put it more simply, as a direct result of Labor’s budget cuts and policy inaction, a staggering 119 projects were delayed, 43 projects were reduced and eight were cancelled altogether.

That is what we on this side of the Senate and the defence industry and defence workers inherited from those opposite.

In 2007, Kevin Rudd promised that a Rudd government would make it a priority to ensure that the necessary preliminary work on Australia’s next generation of submarines was carried out in time for consideration and approval in 2011. Two years later, Labor promised 12 new submarines but provided no plan and no funding and, as I said, they took $20 billion out of the Future Submarine program—so no plan, no money and no jobs. I have to ask: where was the AMWU then? Where was the South Australian government then?

In stark contrast, we have taken the Future Submarine program out of the too-hard basket and we have announced that, as part of next year’s defence white paper, this government will produce a shipbuilding plan. Australian industry will finally have the long-term strategic direction it has lacked over the last six years. We will do it quickly but we will also do it effectively. It has to be done on a credible and sustainable path to achieve our two per cent funding commitment. This means prudent and sustained investment in adaptable and flexible defence capabilities that are best suited to handle strategic risks over the long term, especially as the ships, aircraft and other equipment our Defence Force uses are essential infrastructure that remain in service for decades. We are currently talking to a number of countries to explore the best possible option for Australia to obtain those outcomes. We are also determined to deliver this capability on schedule and on budget. We owe this to hardworking Australian taxpayers.

I remind senators opposite—particularly those from South Australia—that a significant amount of money is already being spent in South Australia and there will be significant future work, regardless of the decisions on the Future Submarine. The amount of defence investment in South Australia is indeed already substantial.

In conclusion, this decision has not yet been made, but this government will deliver an affordable and a realistic plan. We are a government that are making the right decisions for the right reasons. (Time expired)