My questions relate to the lack of transparency under this government around defence capability acquisition sustainment. The first responsibility of any Australian government is to protect its people, and that requires a well-equipped and well-trained Defence Force with the resources it needs to defend Australia and advance its national interests. It means ensuring that Defence identifies, acquires and sustains the capabilities our military personnel need so that they can participate in operations abroad, work with Australia's partners, respond to disasters and humanitarian crises, and protect the sovereignty of our borders. We live in a period marked both by the emergence of new threats and risks and by the rapid evolution of defence capabilities and technologies. This strategic environment makes the delivery of capabilities needed by Defence all the more critical.
From the opposition's point of view, there will be a bipartisan approach to the fundamentals of defence policy. But we will also hold the government of the day accountable. Labor has concerns about the level of transparency around the defence budget and defence investment plans. Defence is currently undertaking a $200 billion investment program, acquiring major new platforms across land, sea, air and key enabling capability streams. Yet the level of transparency around defence investment has declined markedly under this government. Let me give you some examples. Following the 2016 Defence white paper, the government's budget paper estimated that Defence would spend $46.4 billion on its capital investment program over the four years from 2016-17. But analysis by ASPI of subsequent budget papers has shown that there's been a shortfall in capital investment of $5.17 billion over the four years from 2016-17 compared to the original estimates. No doubt there are a number of reasons for this, but the government has refused to explain this $5 billion cut in the defence budget. Let me repeat that: this government has cut $5 billion from the defence capital budget over the last few years without adequately explaining why it did so and what projects were impacted.
This is symptomatic of a larger transparency problem with the Integrated Investment Program. The IIP, which members opposite spoke about, was released publicly in 2016 to facilitate a whole-of-capability and a whole-of-life approach to capability acquisition and sustainment. This is an important mechanism to ensure defence planners adopt a more integrated approach to investment, to give industry greater visibility of future capability demands and to provide public accountability for the government's defence acquisition strategy. Yet, compared to its predecessor, the defence capability plan, the IIP provides very minimal details about individual projects. In the three years since it was released, there have been no public updates to reflect changes in the profiles or time lines of planned investments. This is despite a commitment by the government to issue regular online updates to the IIP. This is a matter for industry planning and public accountability. It defies belief that this government has spent $5 billion less than it planned to do, yet the IIP doesn't reflect this change in acquisition priorities.
This goes to a broader point. I and Labor have zero confidence that this government can provide appropriate oversight of major acquisitions in defence. Let's not forget that this is the party of the $1.4 billion Seasprite disaster. This is the party that oversaw, in government, the Wedgetail project delivered 6½ years late. This is the party that, when in government, signed a contract for the FFG upgrade that defied the laws of physics. And this is the party that, when in government, purchased landing craft for our amphibious ships that didn't actually fit into the ships. Let me repeat that: they bought landing craft that didn't fit into the amphibious ships. And they've shut down the—
Government members interjecting
They say we didn't build a ship. At least we didn't build a ship that didn't fit the landing craft. And they've shut down the Projects of Concern process. Australia is investing $200 billion in defence acquisitions, and we need to ensure this investment is actually delivered in a transparent manner, so my questions to the minister are: why did Defence underspend its original planned capital budget by a total of $5.17 billion over the four years from 2016-17? What projects have been delayed or cut as a result of this $5 billion cut? When will the government start issuing the regular updates it promised in relation to the Integrated Investment Plan? And, in 2015, Defence advised that bringing forward the OPV and the future frigates would lead to $6 billion of other projects being delayed. Can the minister identify those projects as well?
You can view my speech here