PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Oct 9 - The real vote on the Aviation Reform Group
Old 4th Sep 2004, 14:47
  #94 (permalink)  
Like This - Do That
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Great Southern Land
Age: 57
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Army size?

****su-Tonka

You're right to an extent in refuting Hotdog's post re shutting down the ADF. The Defence bill each year as a proportion of Commonwealth outlays since the mid-1970s (ie Fraser, Hawke, Keating and Howard governments) has been about the same +/- a tiny little bit.

A Latham government won't slash Defence spending a la Whitlam but I fear a little bit for the army if the 'Sea Air Gap' nonsense comes to dominate thinking again. The army was incrementally reduced in strength (by very rough and iffy measurements I grant you if we talk solely in number of RAInf battalions) from 9 Bns of RAR in 1972 to the mid-1980s 6 Bns of RAR down to the nadir under Minister Ray (I think) of 4 ARA Bns of the RAR plus 2 RRes Bns. Also Mr Hawke's government eliminated the FAA's FW strike capability and organic fleet air defence - defence of the 'Sea Air Gap' my a#se!

So Mr Bomber Beazley has recently suggested we need another infantry battalion. Would they be so cynical as to reclassify 4RAR as light or motorised or mechanised infantry instead of (CDO) and say "Look we have another infantry battalion!"? Hope not but you never know. Frankly given the 'bare cupboard' we saw in 1999 I'd have thought that anyone trying to claim good defence credentials would arge for a massive increase in the size of the army - battalions, troop lift, battlefield mobility, logistical tail, the whole works 'n' jerks.

Didn't Mr Latham claim he'll keep the budget in surplus for each year of the next parliament? If so, imagine a 10% real increase in defence spending. Does it really amount to much as a proportion of total Commonwealth spending? Less than 1 percent, methinks.

Oh and by the way to add fuel to the argument before I sign off, Mr Dawkins as Education Minister in the Hawke ALP government oversaw the introduction of HECS. It's probably the least unfair way of helping fund the tertiary system but they also turned very good regional CAEs into 'Dawkins Universities' that now struggle to compete with the Group of 8. Should we start asking why tax payers fund everyone Tom Dicky & Harriet through a Bachelor of Leisure Studies at University of Western Buggery? Should universities be ultra elite centres of excellence.... I don't know the answer but the fact is the ALP opened the door to overt university fees in 1989 (called by whatever name).

PPRuNers I am not voting coalition this time; this government doesn't deserve it, so please don't read my criticisms of the ALP as meaning I'm a Lib stooge. I've just reread my post and the last paragraph is a bit unclear - much like my essays of old! But I'm too tired to clean it up....

Good night one and all, sleep tight.
Like This - Do That is offline