Great insight and I appreciate it.

Jasin wrote on Aug 7^th, 2025 at 3:09pm:



You may recall in the early 2000s, the Minister at the time introduced the DMO - the Defence Materiel Organisation.   The idea was that the Defence Force (Uniform) would raise, train and sustain a body of personnel who would go to the sharp end and fight the good fight.   The equipment they needed would be acquired, maintained and disposed of by the DMO.  Unfortunately, the DMO became an upside down pyramid of public servants, many of whom had no idea about Defence.    So, the government produces a white paper and shows it to the Defence Chiefs with the question: What does your service need to address the concerns of the white paper?     So, the Defence Chiefs make their wish list and that is handed to the DMO with a budget - and the top.heavy and bloated DMO look for options to buy.   Defence (uniformed) is then handed a capability that sort off matches what they want - but is it the best for the task and represents value for money, or is it an interpretation of what the DMO think the Defence Uniformed mob need?    Has the capability been costed right from procurement to disposal - including all running costs?    Sadly, in most cases it hasn't and shortcuts are made, procurement is delayed and things run way over budget.

The DMO has been disbanded and the decisions and budget have been given back to the Defence Chiefs to decide what they need.    Inevitably, this has problems as many are out of touch with life in a blue, green or grey suit - which is the people at the sharp end who actually have to USE the capability.

From a Navy perspective, a combination of the above two scenarios has led to a number of issues in budget over runs, late delivery, "fitted for but not with" thinking and just out and out incompetence.

One of the things that needs to be looked at is the role of the defence force in a modern Australia.   Aside from actual combat, is the Defence Force also required to undertake humanitarian and disaster work?   What else do they need to do?.     The primary role of our defence force is to protect Australia - and it should be funded for that and have equipment related to that alone.     All other tasks should be separated from that primary function and allocated and funded by another body (think a proper coastguard, a proper humanitarian and disaster relief body) not using a billion dollar fighting asset geared to the teeth with all the armament required to go to war

We have lost the plot in many ways and terrible leadership at the top of defence and government has played the path for a dissatisfied and below par fighting force

Great post again VIC.
One point though. Military should not be conducting conventional Rescue actions. This should be done by orthodox rescue entities like the Medical and associated industries.
Alas for Australia, it is not currently culturally compliant to empower such rescue entities like SES, Fire, Marine Rescue, etc beyond just pissy volunteer levels.
In essence, it will be the Lefty region of Oceania that will create anything close to a professionalism of something like an International Rescue (like Thunderbirds, etc).
No offence, but Military and Medical are very different mindframes and performance/result aspects.

I sympathize with the ADF (a Right industry) in that it has been compromised by Leftism politics here for many decades. My sibling was in the Navy. I'm not pointing to women in the forces. No, that's as beneficial as more males in the Medical. I'm pointing to the ADF having become labelled by the international community as the Lefty Boutique Force.

Vic wrote on Aug 7^th, 2025 at 6:57pm:


Excellent summation. The LHD saga shows that 'International Rescue' mindset at its finest.  We should be first and foremost a military force whose job is, to quote something I read some years ago, 'to hurt people and break their stuff', not to fight fires, floods or staff nursing homes. A federal version of the SES and a dedicated Coastguard are needed. The only problem I can see is a blowout in the bureaucracy that would come with the formation  of such services, but this can be managed with the correct people in charge. 

I agree with Vic .
We need an ADF that is 100% committed to the task of defending Australia against threats.

It’s not their responsibility to take the role of disaster cleanup personnel.

There is ample money in the federal budget to fund ( and should fund) an  enhanced SES and Coast Guard.

The government just prefers to use the funds to build football stadiums and waste billions on Olympic venues and Commonwealth games.

The ADF has only one job, as it name confirms. Defend Australia.

This  whole concept of a defence force that acts as a secondary defacto  Local emergency service is just ridiculous.!

Hi, Vic.  I've known sailors of recent vintage and a lot of the low retention is due to the reality that they are required to be offshore for extended periods of time.. not all, of course, but ship's crew are.

Service people are not like they used to be - serving first and foremost... these days they expect their 'work from home' or rough equivalent .... and they do not want to spend long times away from their families any more.

On top of that, recent examples of pillorying of Veterans has created a serious issue with retention and interest... the current rise in interest is probably because those things are starting to fade.

Add to that 'dei' - Division, Exclusion, and Incapacity .... and you are finding people given 'inside running' - as has occurred for far too long now - who are only there for purposes of 'inclusion' - meaning that for each such a one, someone else missed out = exclusion.

You all know who I mean.  As I said - it was with surprise that I saw the latest Defence recruitment ad showing more men for a change.... considering that men are the sharp end and always will be. It is not a holiday camp (as one sailor said of HMAS Watson Training, around 1995 or so) ... and while we appreciate the numbers and certain attributes - I find it shocking to see people with chests full of medals without a shot fired when people who have spent twelve months and more in direct combat have two or three at most.

It's not a feel good exercise.... it's not just an attendance thing... medals should be earned for real commitment to real things.

I bitch a lot about this - always have.  And I think it was the HMAS Westralia that had a fire due to contractor negligence that cost lives... Vic?

Brian Ross wrote on Aug 7^th, 2025 at 9:11pm:


We certainly have along and proud history with aid to civil power in natural disasters,but when ADF equipment starts being tailored to aid to civil power instead of war fighting we need to reassess.
  Increasingly government sees the ADF as a  convenient resource and a way to deal with natural disasters on the cheap instead of investing in emergency services. The use of the ADF in nursing homes during Covid was a real wake up call as to how far this dependence has gone.