Media
|
Transcripts
October 8, 2026
MICHAEL MCLAREN: James Paterson, of course, the Shadow Minister for Defence, he has been calling for the Government to act on maintenance funding shortfalls for a long time, he is with me. Good to speak, James.
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Great to be with you, Michael.
MCLAREN: It would be easier listing what we're getting right than what we are getting wrong, and that's not a reflection of the people who serve this country, but my goodness, I mean it all comes from the top, and when you think that the big vessels don't seem operational at this point in time. We've got six Collins class submarines, we would be lucky to put one at sea. We've got security breaches left, right, and centre, not a good picture
PATERSON: You're right, Michael, our men and women in uniform do amazing things with the very limited resources that they're given, but to do their jobs properly they need a government that actually backs them, that listens to the expert advice and funds defence adequately and what unites all these problems which you just described is inadequate funding. Whether it's base security, whether it is being able to put our largest ships to sea or having them stuck at Garden Island in Sydney or whether it is our ability to equip our soldiers and sailors and aircrew with the weapons they need to defend themselves and our interests. All of those problems ultimately come back to a lack of funding.
MCLAREN: I just got a text here from Peter, who says, 'she'll be right, mate', with the winking emoji. Sadly, that is, I think, the attitude and has been for a while. You know, we live in this beautiful era of peace. A lot of the rumbles that things could go south are just that. They're rumbles. They're coming from vested interests. I think a lot of that is looking very short sighted now.
PATERSON: You're right, we have a dangerously complacent attitude to defence and national security in this country. We've taken more comfort than we should from the fact that we are a long way away from where we think conflict will be in the world. But prior to Russia invading Ukraine, the Ukrainians didn't think they were about to be invaded either. And the truth is conflict could break out in our region at any time, and we may not have a say whether or not we participate in it. It may not be a sovereign choice because it might be brought to our own doorstep. Now, if we believe the advice from people like Sir Angus Houston, that that warning time is gone, that this is the most dangerous time since the end of World War II for Australia, we should be acting on it, and the government is doing the opposite. They've kept defence spending at about 2% of GDP, which is the long-term historical average in peacetime, rather than the 3% of GDP, that our best informed experts recommend.
MCLAREN: Okay, now the Americans won't like that. Some people say, well, who cares, because they're a different country to ours, we're sovereign. Well, that's true, but of course the Americans are our plan A, B and C when it comes to defence, should we be attacked by a major adversary. So that's why it matters what the Americans think. What do you reckon they're thinking, though, having been able to penetrate some of our apparently high security bases with individuals from the Pentagon and the Department of War?
PATERSON: Well, the only comfort we can take from that is it was the Americans who penetrated the base, and they told us, and we can now address it and fix it and uplift security. But it is an embarrassment, and we should be doing better, and it could be next time someone much less friendly than our American allies who tries to test the security of our bases, and they could have much more malign intent. So this is another wake up call in a long line of wake up calls, including, as you say, that incident at RAAF Base Darwin in the Northern Territory only a few weeks ago, or the drone incursions at RAAF Base Williamtown and other bases around Australia. We've adopted a peacetime mindset to defending our military bases and other key installations around the country, and we need to urgently step up base security.
MCLAREN: Just another question to that, my understanding is that some of these facilities, are guarded by private security firms. I don't even think they're armed with guns. That's my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong, but the simple part of me says, well hang on, you've got serving personnel on these bases. I mean, why aren't they guarding them?
PATERSON: You're right. A large number of our bases are guarded by private security, although some intelligence facilities and defence bases that are assessed to be a higher risk are guarded by the Australian Federal Police. And I do understand intuitively why you think, why shouldn't we just put the soldiers on those bases guarding them? But the soldiers on those bases aren't just sitting around doing nothing. Typically, they're training and getting ready for conflict if it does arrive, and you wouldn't want them just walking the perimeter when they could be building their skills. So the truth, though, is that if the ADF was larger, if we had more soldiers, then we could have more spare to guard and provide security on our bases rather than allowing private security to do it.
MCLAREN: Ok, just on the breaches, I think they were in the west a bit, like with AI, though, Senator Paterson, the breach occurred, but we only found out about it because, was it OpenAI told us about it? In this case, we had the Americans breach our sovereignty or security. We only found out because they told us about it. In AI, I think when we last spoke, we both agreed that there are breaches probably going on all over the place, we just don't know because we haven't been told, and we obviously haven't got the capability to spot all of this. Could it well be the case that we've had other breaches on our allegedly secure defence sites by less than friendly actors, and of course, we don't because, well, they haven't told us?
PATERSON: Well, I agree with you, the parallels between the two are striking. And of course, this exercise at HMAS Stirling in Western Australia is almost certainly part of an agreed, planned way of testing our bases with our American friends. I doubt they did it without our express permission and approval. But it has identified this glaring vulnerability that must be urgently addressed, just as we found with AI. But you're right, there could have been other breaches on our bases that we don't know about. When the first reports were made a few weeks ago in The Daily Telegraph about drone incursions at RAAF Base Williamtown, we subsequently learnt, with further media reporting, that there'd been dozens of these incidents all around the country that had never previously been reported and never previously had been disclosed. And we learned that our men and women on base don't have either the adequate technology to bring the drones down or adequate legal authority to bring them down. So they are basically sitting ducks for what is a very prolific technology freely available for a teenager to buy. And so again we need to step up and address the threat and act like it's a serious thing.
MCLAREN: Is it as if the people that make these decisions don't watch the 6 o'clock news and don't see what happens over Israel, don't see what's happening over Ukraine, don't see what is happening in other jurisdictions, think, well, shall I tell you what, we better give our Defence Force personnel the capability to deal with that, should it happen?
PATERSON: Well, it ultimately comes down to the members of the expenditure review committee of the cabinet of the government. I have no doubt that they've been getting advice from the Defence Department and the ADF about these security issues, about their needs. And I have no doubt that they have been sent back and told there's no money for that. Not this year, maybe come back, maybe try your luck next year. And the complacency exists at that political level. In fact, I can say with some confidence, I know that Richard Marles goes to that committee and asks for more money, and he's often sent away empty handed because the other members of the government don't understand or don't appreciate how serious this threat is, no matter what the experts tell them.
MCLAREN: Alright, just finally, you've been fantastic in trying to keep Victoria Barracks in defence hands. I had an update earlier today from some people behind the scenes telling me that there's going to be, hopefully, a very big rally out the front on Oxford Street there on October the 25th at 12:45pm, so that's a Sunday I think, October 25th, 12:45pm, I'm sure you're going to be there if you can be there. We heard earlier today, from former Governor-General Peter Cosgrove, very much dismissing the statements that have been made by people like Richard Marles about this particular site. Momentum continues to build to keep this, do you think, you know, the Prime Minister, he's feeling heat left and right. I'm not a big fan of captain's calls, James, but I mean this would be one the Prime could make and probably get some plaudits for?
PATERSON: Well, if they listen to anyone, they should listen to Sir Peter Cosgrove, one of our most respected living military leaders, not just a Governor-General, not just a CDF, not just a Chief of Army, but someone who had a 40-year career in uniform and led arguably our most successful peacetime intervention in East Timor, that husbanded a new nation. I mean, he's widely respected, and he very rarely comments on issues publicly. He is so restrained given his past roles. So we should see this for the significant intervention it is. I was hoping that Richard Mayles would step in and overrule his department and his junior ministers who had this plan to sell the bases, but he's doubled down on it, so I think you're right. I think the only authority left that can overrule them is the Prime Minister. He should heed these warnings from the Premier, from all sides of politics, from the former Governor-General, and act now to stop Richard Marles from selling off these bases before we can't stop them.
MCLAREN: Well, the ball's in his court. Thanks, James, always good to speak. Thank you for your time.
PATERSON: Thanks, Michael.
ENDS