|
|
Post by obiwan27 on May 16, 2018 15:27:07 GMT 12
www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2018645096/defence-unlikely-a-top-priority-for-budget-2018"Defence is a portfolio involving vast sums of money, but doesn't hit headlines as much as the likes of health, education of housing. But it is important given the increasing demands of disaster relief, cyber and maritime security and New Zealand's foreign policy priorities. The previous government made a $20 billion commitment over 15 years to upgrade the armed forces. The new government says there was no hard cash to back that up, and first it has to deal with some major budget blow-outs." What a surprise - not!
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on May 16, 2018 21:28:38 GMT 12
Maybe the government could find some money for Defence if they stop wasting it trying to educate houses.  |
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on May 17, 2018 8:18:07 GMT 12
Maybe the government could find some money for Defence if they stop wasting it trying to educate houses. Direct quote taken from the NZ website - wonder if anyone noticed and they fixed it? |
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on May 17, 2018 8:19:09 GMT 12
Had a quick look on the website again, yep no-one noticed.
|
|
|
|
Post by skyhawkdon on May 17, 2018 17:03:02 GMT 12
I haven't seen the detail yet but the commentators are saying Defence is one of the losers in this budget. Yet again Labour shows its true colours. Why anyone would want to be in the NZDF any more is beyond me. They have been shafted too many times...
|
|
|
|
Post by skyhawkdon on May 17, 2018 17:16:48 GMT 12
www.beehive.govt.nz/release/enhancing-defence-force-capabilityEnhancing Defence Force capability "Hon Ron Mark New Zealand’s Defence Force can continue making meaningful contributions to global security and peacekeeping efforts, and respond effectively to events like natural disasters, as a result of Budget 2018 funding, says Defence Minister Ron Mark. Budget 2018 provides a $367.7 million operating funding boost to the Defence and Veterans portfolios over the next four years, underpinned by an extra $324.1 million for the New Zealand Defence Forces’ operating budget. In addition, Budget 2018 provides $42.3 million in new capital funding for modernisation. “The extra funding is going to go a long way towards helping the Defence Force meet increasing demand across a range of tasks,” Ron Mark says. “Defence assets and personnel must be well prepared and ready to respond to whatever tasks the Government expects of them. This applies to both overseas deployments and events closer to home when the Defence Force is required to provide assistance to our communities, and to undertake resource and border protection operations. “We’ve seen a big increase in adverse weather events in the Pacific in the last few years, driven by climate change. Today’s announcement provides certainty to our friends in the Pacific that New Zealand is ready and able to respond in their times of need. “The funding announced today is also a huge win for conservation, the environment and fisheries protection. “It is part of New Zealand’s identity to be a good environmental steward. Pressure on scarce resources, especially in the South Pacific and the Southern Ocean, is increasing. Budget 2018 funding allows for more time monitoring and protecting these vital New Zealand interests,” says Ron Mark. Alongside the increase of $324.1 million in the Defence Force operating budget, Budget 2018 also sees: $41.3 million additional capital investment for the first tranche of investment under the Defence Estate Regeneration Programme Plan an additional $22.6 million operating funding over the next four years and $1.0 million capital funding for the Defence Force to deliver the enhanced Limited Service Volunteer programme (supported by a related investment of $4.2 million over the next four years for the Ministry of Social Development to administer the programme) as announced earlier, $1.1 million in grants to the Royal New Zealand Returned & Services Association (RSA) and No Duff Charitable Trust over the next four years to support the services they provide to veterans – $250,000 for the RSA and $25,000 for No Duff Charitable Trust annually (This initiative was announced before Budget Day.) $6.3 million in 2018/19 for the repatriation of the remains of service personnel and their dependents for those buried overseas since 1955 $13.6 million over the next four years set aside for new capabilities. “This is a ringing endorsement of the Defence Force from the Coalition Government. It recognises the value it provides New Zealand and its meaningful contributions to peace and security around the world,” says Ron Mark."
|
|
|
|
Post by skyhawkdon on May 17, 2018 17:21:46 GMT 12
Absolutely NOTHING in there for new hardware. Reading between the lines the $42.3M in "capital funding for modernisation" is nearly all for the Defence Real Estate Regeneration Programme. $13.6M over four years is all they get for new capabilities... disgusting. NZ First have yet again had to swallow a very large rat!
|
|
|
|
Post by exkiwiforces on May 17, 2018 17:35:29 GMT 12
I found this comment on The Standard Blog site,
Wayne Mapp explains why there is no money allocated to new capital projects such as the P3 and Airlift replacement projects:
The operating expenses for 2017/18 was $2,070 million and the budget for 2018/19 is $2,163 million, an increase of 4.9%. The 4 year increase is around $320 million, so the defence increase is affectively all delivered this year. The following 3 years are flat. Of course Ron might get new money next year.
No real provision for capital. That is to be expected. Those allocations are only ever made when new things are actually purchased. That is why the $20 billion capital is not actually included, either by this government or the last.
Treasury Rules (which apply to all governments and have been the same for at least 20 years) don’t allow the allocation unless the specific thing to be purchased has been actually agreed. Not just the idea of it but an actual contract.
For instance in health the $750 million capital allocation is essentially for Dunedin Hospital now that it has been formally agreed. If the govt wants to replace Middlemore (which they should) there will be a capital injection of $1 billion once the decision to replace is actually made. But until then Treasury Rules don’t allow any capital allocation.
|
|
|
|
Post by kiwithrottlejockey on May 17, 2018 17:57:19 GMT 12
I only saw the end of the budget speech, but I've had the television tuned to Parliament TV since about five minutes before Grant Robertson finished speaking and I haven't heard so much as a peep about defence spending from any of the opposition MPs (all National except for the sole ACT MP) during several speeches in reply.
So there you have the Nats' attitudes to defence....it doesn't even rate a mention.
|
|
|
|
Post by harvard1041 on May 18, 2018 6:59:45 GMT 12
I kinda agree with you there Don - have a thought for the hard working folks working on the P3 - C130 replacement studies ... as both Projects are effectively shelved until there is either a disaster or a change of Govt and easy to see a scenario where both are kicked down the road for another 10 years. Serving people tend to just get on with the job the best they can.
I've always had the feeling that NZ Defence procurement generally is driven by old kit getting so old that it is no longer supportable and basically irrelevant and not driven by any match up of requirement vs capability. I think the problem stems from the fact that of all the current pollies, very few have any previous military experience (either personally or family experience) and tend to think previously hard-learnt lessons (in blood in the case of Servicemen) don't apply any more - that would be true of all NZ Politicians.
I'm currently in Singapore and regularly see F-15s, F-16s and C-130s doing their job in the skys above - and doing it well I gather...
|
|
|
|
Post by madmac on May 18, 2018 7:57:17 GMT 12
I only saw the end of the budget speech, but I've had the television tuned to Parliament TV since about five minutes before Grant Robertson finished speaking and I haven't heard so much as a peep about defence spending from any of the opposition MPs ( all National except for the sole ACT MP) during several speeches in reply. So there you have the Nats' attitudes to defence....it doesn't even rate a mention. One could read the Nats response to the diplomatic speedup across to defence as if it looks expense / difficult surrender!!! (if they haven't already). |
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on May 18, 2018 8:18:19 GMT 12
"$6.3 million in 2018/19 for the repatriation of the remains of service personnel and their dependents for those buried overseas since 1955"
That is something I simply do not understand. Why is there a need to disturb decades old graves? And if there is, why is it coming from the NZDF budget? If this is driven by a few families who suggested it, why are the families not paying? However I had not seen anything in the press that there was a move by families for this to happen, so where did the idea come from? And given that most of our military dead who're buried overseas pre-date 1955, why is there this random cut off point? Why do a few and not all? Or more importantly, why do the few at all? It is bizarre. No doubt others here will have different opinions, I have already been slammed for sharing this opinion on Facebook, but I am perplexed as to why NZDF are now having to go all over the world to pick up ancient dead bodies at their own expense. And I am particularly perplexed as to why they are accompanied on these trips by a Maori party to sing and carry on.
|
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on May 18, 2018 9:52:30 GMT 12
If this is driven by a few families who suggested it, why are the families not paying? Why should they? They didn't choose for their relatives to die and be interred on foreign soil while in government service. And I am particularly perplexed as to why they are accompanied on these trips by a Maori party to sing and carry on. If that's your attitude and description I'm not sure if there is any amount of explanation that will suffice. There are no plans to repatriate my great uncles buried in France but I would be honoured by such an accompaniment if they were. |
|
