{"id":21933,"date":"2015-08-07T11:00:36","date_gmt":"2015-08-07T01:00:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/?p=21933"},"modified":"2015-08-07T10:15:06","modified_gmt":"2015-08-07T00:15:06","slug":"gaps-in-the-naval-shipbuilding-programme","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/gaps-in-the-naval-shipbuilding-programme\/","title":{"rendered":"Gaps in the naval shipbuilding programme"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/a><\/p>\n Andrew Davies and Mark Thompson have pointed out problems<\/a> with the Government\u2019s recently announced $89 billion naval shipbuilding programme. In an earlier piece on naval shipbuilding<\/a>, they thought the Government had \u2018the tail wagging the dog\u2019\u2014naval shipbuilding is to provide the Navy with ships, not to provide industry with work. Put more simply, politics risked being put before requirements.<\/p>\n According to Andrew and Mark, the first question should be how many and what sort of ships Navy requires to meet our strategic and defence challenges. However, there\u2019s a gap here: it\u2019s not just the perceived naval<\/em> requirement for ships to meet our strategic and defence challenges that needs be to be identified\u2014it\u2019s the national <\/em>requirement. It loads the question to look solely at naval (or warfighting) requirements.<\/p>\n Last year, a Senate Committee accepted a recommendation<\/a> from Anthony Bergin and I that a \u2018national fleet\u2019 approach should be considered for building the national capability for blue-water<\/em> operations. That would ensure important capability requirements don\u2019t fall down a \u2018hole\u2019 between national agencies. So far the Government hasn\u2019t responded to this recommendation.<\/p>\n The lack of an effective ice-strengthened offshore patrol vessel in the current national fleet is an example of such a \u2018hole\u2019<\/a>. Defence doesn\u2019t want such a vessel because it\u2019s not for \u2018warfighting\u2019, while Customs sees it as beyond their current border protection requirements.<\/p>\n