PM Transcripts

Transcripts from the Prime Ministers of Australia

Menzies, Robert

Period of Service: 19/12/1949 - 26/01/1966
Release Date:
22/05/1963
Release Type:
Statement in Parliament
Transcript ID:
748
Document:
00000748.pdf 3 Page(s)
Released by:
  • Menzies, Sir Robert Gordon
SPEECH BY RT. HON. SIR ROBERT MENZIES, KT, CH, QC, MP, ON DEFENCE REVIEW - MINISTERIAL STATEMENT

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA.
SPEECH BY
Rt. Hon. SIR ROBERT MENZIES,
M. P.
ON
DEFENCE REVIEW,
MINI STERIAL STATEMENT.
[ From the Parliamentary Debates," 22nd May, 1963.
Sir ROBERT MENZIES ( Kooyong-
Prime Minister).-by leave-May I begin
with some general observations of no great
novelty, but the recollection of which is
essential to a uiseful review of Australian
defence. Every defence programme must,
in its nature, be flexible. As international
strategic considerations change, so we must
be ready to change our own defence
arrangements. Every measure we adopt is
so adopted with knowledge of the appreciations
put before us by our expert military
and diplomatic advisers. In other words,
the condition of an effective defence programme
is that it should be based upon as
accurate an assessment as can be made of
the probable source and nature of the apprehended
attack, the area of possible conflict
and the nature of the operations, and the
nature and extent of the co-operation we
-may expect from and give to the United
Nations in general and our allies in particular.
Plainly, most of these elements
are not static; hence the importance of being
ready. to. accept changes when their need
arises. Again, ther e are internal and equipment
factors which, whatever new proposals are
adopted, will affect the rate of increase in
defence expenditure. For example:. Naval
vessels iave to be designed, laid down, built
4647163. and equipped over a substantial period of
time; aircraft cannot -be bought out of existing
stocks, and their domestic produotion,
having regard to their enormous complexity,
cannot be encompassed except over a period
of years; and the Army cannot in time of
peace be strengthened numerical-ly and in
terms of equipment and training very suddenly.
I give those illustrations for this
reason: I will be giving some new figures
for our anticipated defence votes. They will
indicate substantial increases; but, because of
the time factors which I have referred to,
those increases will be smaller in the earlier
part of the programnme than in -the later.
In -brief, no government in Australia should
announce a dramatic increase in defence
expenditure for 1963-64 just for the sake of
doing so. All new proposals must be
-phased over the necessary period of time.
In October last, my colleague, the Minister
for Defence ( Mr. Townley), whose con-
-timied absence through ill health we all
-regret so deeply, announced a new threeyear
defence program-me covering the years
1962-63 to 1964-65. He emphasized that
the programme was not static, and that adjustments
would be made as new circumstances
developed. In January of this year,
following a review of the naval programme,
which had been left a ' little vague in the

October proposals, we announced some
additional measures for strengthening the
Royal Australian Navy. I will not repeat
these two announcements in detail, as copies
of them are available to honorable members.
But it may be helpful for an understanding
of the financial quantum of our new
measures if I now set out the financial involvement
of those earlier announcementsthat
is, October plus January. Based on a
continuance of the approvals given before
our current review, the annual expenditures
were estimated to be as follows:-
1962-63
1963-64
1964-65
1965-66
1966-67
1967-68 212,200,000 219,200,000 220,000,000 222,000,000 220,000,000 220,000,000
Those figures give a total-necessarily
approximate in the case of future
years where costs are unknown--of
œ 1,313,000,000 over six years-
œ 651,000,000 in the first three years and
œ 662,000,000 in the second three years. I
want no confusion on this matter. I repeat
that this is the last October three-year programme
plus the January addition in the
case of the Navy.
We have now completed a further comprehensive
review of developments in Southb
East Asia. We have noted the uncertainties
in Laos, the acute problems in South Viet
Nam, the conflicts which exist over the
creation of the new Federation of Malaysia
-which we heartily support-and events in
and concerning West New Guinea. It certainly
cannot be said that we have entered
a period of stability in the area of immediate
strategic concern to Australia. We have
made this recent review in the light of our
treaty arrangements, but particularly in
reference to the security of our own country
and of the Territories of Papua and New
Guinea. We will defend these territories as
if they were part of our mainland; there
must be no mistaken ideas about that.
We have decided that there should be a
further progressive increase in our military
capability and preparedness. I will take the
three services in order. It will be recalled
that as recently as January we announced
two large naval projects--the purchase ot
a third guided missile destroyer and the procurement
of four " Oberon" class submarines.
We have now approved of provision
for fitting the Ikara anti-sibmarine missile, which is under development in Australia,
with United States of America cooperation,
into the Type XII. frigates and
the guided missile destroyers. This will be
a most significant development in anti-submarine
warfare. We have also approved of
the building in Australia of a 15,000-ton
escort maintenance ship. We have reviewed
our 1959 decision that fixed-wing naval
aviation should cease in 1963. After recent
re-appraisals of the wing-fatigue life of the
Venoms and Gannets, and reports of the
very low wastage and accident rate, we have
decided that fixed-wing flying is to continue
until the Venoms and Gannets reach the
reasonable end of their service life. This
will be about 1967 when the position can
be reviewed. These aircraft will, of course,
be used in conjunction with the Westland
Wessex helicopters already under delivery.
The personnel strength of the will
be increased from the , present approved
total of 13,900 to about 14,300.
I turn now to the Army: Last year it was
decided to increase the permanent Army
strength from 21,000 to 24,500 by June,
1965. We have now approved of a further
increase to 28,000. The order of battle of
the permanent field forces will be expanded
by the formation of a third regular battle
group. This will add considerably to the
flexibility of our forces and their ability to
operate in a variety of circumstances. The
Australian Regular Army Reserve will be reconstituted
to ensure that its members are
medically fit, up to date in their training,
and ready. There will also be an increase in
the strength of the Pacific Islands Regiment,
which includes Australian officers and some
senior Australian non-commissioned officers.
The present strength of the regiment is
about 700. This will be doubled as soon as
possible, consistently with adequate training
and equipment. When that has occurred
further developments will then be considered.
No major change is at present proposed
in the organization of the Citizen
Military Forces, but its target strength of
32,500 will be increased to 35,000. Major
purchases of new equipment for the C. M. F.
-and that is very important when it comes
to recruitment-have now been approved.
The procurement of modern equipment is,
of course, essential. Current expenditure in
this field is running at the annual rate of

about œ 1 1,000,000. We have now approved
as an objective the provision of the equipment
and reserves needed by the Australian
Regular Army and C. M. F. components of a
complete pentropic division of five battle
groups with appropriate combat support and
logistic units. To meet this, expenditure on
Army equipment, which has been running
at about œ 11,000,000 annually, will rise to
œ 14,000,000 in the coming financial year,
and to 17,500,000 in the succeeding years.
The items will cover the whole range of
weapons and ammunition, engineering and
technical stores, radar and radio, vehicles
and landing craft. There will be additional
purchases for the Army light aircraft squadron.
These are separate from the purchases
under the Air Force programme, which I
shall mention later. The increasing Army
strength will require a considerable expansion
of the construction programme. It is
provisionally estimated that the Army vote,
this year œ 68,000,000, Will rise to
œ 87,500,000 in 1964-65 and to œ 97,000,000
by 1967-68. But I will return to the general
financial figures later on.
We have approved of a number of
important new projects for the Royal Australian
Air Force.
A major feature of the re-equipment programme
has been the introduction of the
Dassault Mirage Ill, jet fighter to replace
the Avon Sabre. The Mirage has an
advanced supersonic performance and is
regarded by those who are in a position to
speak as the best fighter available in the
world for our purposes. As honorable
members know, orders have already been
placed for 60 of these aircraft. The first,
from French production, has already been
handed over to the R. A. A. F. and is undergoing
tests and trials. Deliveries of the
remainder, which will contain increasing
quantities of locally assembled and constructed
components, will commence late this
year. We recently secured an option on a
further order of 40 Mirage fighters. We
have decided now to take this up, thus bringing
the total to 100. At the same time, since
the effective employment of fighter aircraft
depends more than ever before on adequate
ground control of their movements and
operations, we have approved the purchase
of two new control and reporting units and
these are vastly complex and costly things. One of them is to be at Brookvale in New
South Wales and the other is to be mobile.
Tactical air transport support for the
armed forces has also received attention. We
give it a high priority. Last October, we
approved of the purchase of eight heavy-lift
helicopters and twelve fixed-wing short takeoff
and landing aircraft, subject to R. A. A. F.
evaluation and selection. It has been found
that a suitable type of heavy-lift belico-pter
is not at present available. We have therefore
decided to purchase a further eight Bell
Iroquois utility helicopters in addition to
the sixteen already approved, and to purchase
eighteen Caribou Mark 1. fixed-wing
aircraft, which have a proved capability as a
short take-off and landing aircraft in South-
East Asian conditions. The introduction of
both of these types will complement, in the
tactical field, the strategic mobility provided
by the Hercules Cl130 transports.
In addition to the current extensive programme
of airfield works and development
in such places as Darwin, Amberley, Williamtown,
East Sale and Townsville, we have
now approved of major and extensive improvements
to the airfield at Boram, near
Wewak, in New Guinea. This will have
great value for defence purposes, for civil
aviation, and for the general development of
the Territory. Overall, the new projects for
the Air Force will require an increase in
personnel strength from the present target
of 16,440 to something of the order of
18,300. It will be observed that I have so far not
spoken of the problem of the re-equipment
of the strike-reconnaissance force. This is
an important matter. The Canberra is by
no means obsolete; it is still being used by
overseas air forces, including those of Nato.
But we are giving close consideration to the
future as we must. There are, of course,
great financial problems, but there are vital
questions as to the availability of suitable
types to meet our requirements. Having
regard to our special geographic circumstances,
we must consider range, the capacity
to perform both reconnaissance and attack
and the ability to use existing runways and
services. An on-the-spot evaluation by a
team of qualified experts is necessary, as it
was in the selection of the Mirage. Such a
team will be sent overseas at an early date,

under the Chief of the Air Staff, to investigate
and report. Then, of course, the
Government will consider the matter further
in the light of the report.
I now turn to the total programme figures,
putting in parallel columns, for clarity, the
figures I quoted earlier, on the existing programme,
and the new figures based upon the
announcements I have just made, but without
anticipating or estimating the cost of a
striking reconnaissance replacement-
Annual expenditure
in existing
programme based Annual expenditure
on a continuance in new programme.
of approvals given
before this review.
Ern. Em.
1962-63 212.2 212.2
1963-64 219.2 237.5
1964-65 220 253.4
1965-66 222 269.6
1966-67 220 277
1967-68 220 269. 5
Total 1,313.4 1,519.2
This means that, beginning in 1963-64,
the average increase in the defence vote
over a period of five years will be of the
order of œ E41,000,000 a year, leaving out of
account a Canberra replacement and assuming,
of course, that no additional proposals
are approved during that period.
The effect of these decisions, when they
are carried out, will be to establish a fully
equipped, fully modern, fully supported
pentropic division. We will have an Air
Force able to provide a measure of strategic
and tactical mobility, and with 100 supersonic fighters, properly controlled, to
provide air protection. We will have a
relatively small but modern Navy equipped
to defend our shores, and to seek out and
destroy the submarines on which an enemy
is likely to rely in order to deny us that
command of the seas without which the
overseas employment and support of a
division is impossible.
Such forces will provide a significant and
welcome addition to any allied effort
required in our area of strategic concern.
But they will do more in that they will
provide a capacity -for independent action
to meet the initial shock of any emergency
with which we may in the future find ourselves
faced.
The increases I have announced will
impose substantial additional burdens upon
the Budget in a period in which the need
for national developmental expenditure will
be great and growing; greater in proportion
than may be the case in older and more
developed countries. But we feel that such
burdens will be cheerfully accepted by our
people. They are, of course, not solely
financial burdens. The improvement of the
nation's defences will require much public
co-operation, by those who join the forces
and, in the case of citizens who join the
C. M. F. and the reserves, by those who
employ them. We look for this co-operation
with complete confidence.
I lay on the table the following paper:-
Defence Review-Ministerial Statement, 22nd
May, 1963-
and move-
That the paper be printed.
By Authority: A. J. ARTHURt, Commonwealth Government Printer, Canberra.

748