Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee, , 3:27:10 to 3:32:45
Officials provide details on the $1.2 billion cost for 75 M1A2 Abrams tanks and justify the investment as a key component of Australia's deterrence strategy.
Topics: ADF, Government spending, National security
Speakers: Fatima Payman, Meghan Quinn, Speaker 19, Speaker 21, Unknown Speaker
>> Thank you, Secretary. I've got a list of other questions and the chair is going to uh pull me up on time. Um I've got questions on the M1 A2 Abraham's SE V3 main battle tanks. I note that defense purchased 16 simulators to train ADF personnel to use the M1 A2 Abrams at a cost of $60 million. Extrapolating this to the 75 main battle tanks that were purchased, 75 simulators would cost approximately $281 million. What was the cost of the 75 main battle tanks?
Uh, Major General Sean Hoffman, Head >> can I just You're just after the cost B
>> for the 75 main battle tanks.
Look, the uh the cost of the program, the total spend for the program, which is 9007 uh is 1.8 billion, but that includes 75 uh main battle tanks and assault uh breaching capabilities as well.
>> So, but do we know the >> cost of just the 75 main battle tanks?
>> I don't have the breakdown. Are you able
to get that for us on notice? >> Where are these main battle tanks located by state and territory?
>> Leptit General Susan Coyle, Chief of
Um, how does defense justify the difference in cost between buying these tanks and buying simulators given its previous evidence uh in BE2627 question 72 that these tanks have only been used for training purposes and the fact that Australia has not deployed a tank in combat since the Vietnam War.
Senator, what I can tell you is that uh we have a range of capabilities in the Australian Defense Force which are prudent for our ability to fight and win Australia's wars and uh through government uh direction and decision. Uh tanks are a part of that capability. They're an important part important part of our capability of the Australian army in order to for us to uh to be able to fight and win the land combat battle. They are an incredibly potent capability and they also are form a part of our deterrence.
>> $1.8 billion is a lot of money.
>> It's a lot of armor, Senator.
>> So, what wars are we hoping to win?
>> So, we the the the predominant strategy as set out in the national defense strategy is one of um strategic denial and deterrence. uh we are um hoping um and posturing and working with partners uh to have to to not have to fight a war. Um but the most one of the most potent methods of having deterrence is to have capability. Uh so your adversaries think twice before they engage in armed
So was the purchase of these tanks solely based on a need to increase defense spending as a proportion of the GDP?
>> That is not correct Senator. So we go through a very detailed process. Um there's been uh in in recent years every two years approximately there's been an update to this national defense strategy through the defense strategic review the defense uh the strategy update in 24 and 26. Uh we have cascade down from the national defense strategy. We have an integrated investment program that talks about the acquisitions to be able to deliver that strategy and that's combined then with our workforce plan uh with our sustainment plan in order to have an integrated force that will defend Australia and deliver the main purpose of the national defense strategy which I have highlighted is one of deterrence.
>> Well, so we bought these tanks to win wars. Well, we haven't used a tank in in what in a war in 50 50 years. Uh so we
so just to be clear we do not buy equipment in the hope of using them. Uh we
>> invest 1.8 billion which is a lot of
>> We and that's over a long period of time. Uh but we invest in capability to defend Australia and to protect our not have a war.
>> Thank you. Thank you chair.
>> Just clarify Senator will just clarify
the dollar figure. Yeah, Senator, the uh 75 main battle tanks is 1.2 uh billion.
>> 1.2 billion. That's still a lot of money. Thanks, Chair.