More questions than answers in Defence White Paper

After nearly two years of work and a year’s delay, the National Government’s Defence White Paper generates more questions than it provides answers, says Labour Leader Phil Goff.

“The White Paper doesn’t expose the cost of proposed new expenditure, nor does it detail how it will make the up to $400 million a year in savings it sets out as its objective,” he says.

“It avoids making hard decisions about prioritisation. In the current economic climate, desirable but lower priority spending needs to be deferred.

“The up to $845 million (2008 figures) required for new missile systems on our frigates is one such area. In the current economic environment where hundreds of millions of dollars have been cut, for example from early childhood education, this proposal appears gold-plated and could be deferred.

“It would not affect most of the tasking required of the frigates.

“Cost savings of up to $400 million set out in the value-for-money review have yet to be realised. The suggestion of cuts to the brass band, libraries and the museum are a drop in the bucket compared to the cost of major purchases items, which can be expected to escalate.

“Nor are decisions consistent. The proposal to relocate Linton is made without regard to its impact on Palmerston North while John Key scrapped the proposal to relocate Whenuapai to Ohakea because it affected his electorate,” Phil Goff said.

“Little appears to have changed in terms of the White Paper’s strategic analysis.

“New Zealanders will be left suspecting that the vagueness of the White Paper disguises the likelihood that figures don’t add up and that failure to prioritise will see key capabilities of the Defence Force compromised,” Phil Goff said.

ends

© Scoop Media