Credibility gap on national security

It is apparent that the Prime Minister has chosen the election year to seek to address one of her key policy weaknesses with the release this week of a national security "strategy". It has however only served to expose yet again Julia Gillard's lack of interest and understanding in this critical area, first revealed during the 2010 election campaign when her colleagues made it known that as Deputy Prime Minister, Ms Gillard failed to attend meetings of the National Security Committee of Cabinet.

Those who drafted the strategy document listed a predictable range of threats and responses, with few if any new insights into the security environment facing Australia.

The Prime Minister's speech accompanying the release of the document delivered a collection of cliches and motherhood statements, which has become her hallmark as national leader.

Ms Gillard's lack of interest in this policy area was apparent from her seeming ignorance of decisions taken by her own government that directly contradict the goals outlined in the strategy.

For example, one of the stated pillars of the strategy is "Deterring and defeating attacks on Australia and Australia's interests", noting that "Australia's geography has always been a key consideration for our national security. This geography has been a driving imperative for the maintenance of a strong, capable and independent ADF (Australian Defence Force). It has helped discourage attack."

It warns that "strategic shocks and surprises are possible" and that "local conflicts or heightened tensions may emerge with little warning".The Prime Minister claimed "Let this be clear: in a time of fiscal constraint, we will keep the Australian Defence Force strong."

Yet she made no mention of the massive cuts her government has made to the Defence Budget that will greatly inhibit Australia's ability to meet such strategic shocks or suprises.

The government has already cancelled some defence hardware purchases and others have been delayed as a result of these cuts. Defence spending has now been reduced to the lowest level since 1938 (as a proportion of GDP).

The government's cuts have been heavily criticised by organisations such as the Australian Defence Association which said the impact of short-term cuts to defence spending can take many years to rectify and often requires far larger investments in the future. Our strongest strategic ally, the United States, has made its deep concerns known to the government. It appears the only person unaware of the impact of the Defence budget cuts is the Prime Minister.

Another pillar of national security identified in the document is "Preserving Australia's border integrity".

Arguably the greatest policy failure in a generation is the continuing border protection scandal under this government, when it decided to implement in government the border protection policies drafted by Julia Gillard when in Opposition.

The unwinding in 2008 of the Howard Government's strong border protection laws has resulted in hundreds of boats and thousands of people passing through people smuggling networks to undertake the perilous journey by sea to Australia. Tragically, hundreds of people have died on that journey.

The cost to Australian taxpayers of this policy failure has been in the billions of dollars.

It is simply not credible for the Prime Minister to ignore her greatest policy failure in a speech on national security. Her failure to detail the level of the threat to our national security of this ongoing border protection collapse defies belief.

A key focus of the Prime Minister's speech was the increasing threat of cyber attacks on government and private sector networks.

Part of the government's response is to co-locate some of the agencies working on cyber threats.

However this approach will also be undermined by the Government's parlous budget position, for funding to the key agencies involved has already been slashed.

Significant cuts were inflicted last year on the Defence Signals Directorate, ASIO, the Office of National Assessments, the Australian Secret Intelligence Service and the Defence Intelligence Organisation.

The strategy makes the observation that "There is a mutually reinforcing link between our national security and our economic wellbeing".

Self evidently the Prime Minister should have detailed the government's plan for repayment of its massive debt built up over the past 5 years through wasteful spending, and particularly in light of last year's abandonment of the much promised but still elusive surplus.

Finally, the Prime Minister revealed yet again one of her deep character flaws that prevents her from acknowledging the work of others, in this instance, past governments.

The strategy states that the last 14 years have been "transformative" for Australia's security environment since the 1999 involvement in Timor-Leste, the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, the 2002 and 2005 Bali bombings, and the military deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan - all of which occurred during the terms of the Howard Government.

In her desperation to avoid any reference to the Howard government, the Prime Minister claimed that "This National Security Strategy is Australia's first", implying incorrectly that past governments had failed to develop a strategy for Australia's national security. Given Prime Minister John Howard's relentless personal focus and commitment to this issue, it is an obvious and unnecessary slight.

The Prime Minister's speech has done nothing to make up for her lack of credibility in the national security space.