Dutton Pledges 3% GDP Defence Spend in 10 Years

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton will promise a Coalition government would boost Australia's spending on defence to 2.5% of GDP within five years and 3% within a decade.

Author

  • Michelle Grattan

    Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

Launching the Coalition's long-awaited defence policy on Wednesday in Western Australia, Dutton will commit to investing more than $21 billion to take spending to 2.5%.

Australia's current defence spending is about 2% of GDP, and due to rise to 2.3% by 2033-34. The Trump administration has flagged it wants allies to raise their spending to 3%.

Trump's under-secretary of defence for policy, Elbridge Colby, has said:

The main concern the United States should press with Australia […] is higher defence spending. Australia is currently well below the 3% level advocated for by NATO Secretary General Rutte, and Canberra faces a far more powerful challenge in China.

The opposition statement, from Dutton and shadow Defence Minister Andrew Hastie, does not go into detail about how the bigger allocation would be spent, or how it would be paid for.

Defence Minister Richard Marles gave notice of Labor's line of attack if there is no detail provided. He said on Tuesday:

It won't cut it to have vague numbers, to have aspirations, to have signposts in the future. There needs to be a great deal of specificity in respect of what that defence policy looks like.

In its statement, the opposition accuses Labor of overseeing "more than $80 billion in cuts and delays to defence in just three years, degrading morale and capability, and putting Australia at risk".

It says the commitment to 2.5% is "significantly higher than under Labor and demonstrates the Coalition's commitment to keeping Australia safe in uncertain times".

Under Labor, defence spending has stayed static at 2% of GDP for three years - and Labor has walked away from its own target of increasing defence spending to 2.4% of GDP by 2033-34, dropping it instead to 'over 2.3%'.

In its most recent budget, Labor delivered no new funding for defence.

In stark contrast, a Dutton Coalition government will increase defence spending to 3% of GDP within a decade, while Labor's spend plateaus at around 2.3%.

The opposition says Australia is facing the most complex and serious strategic circumstances since the second world war.

The rise of authoritarian powers, and conflict in Europe and the Middle East are a reminder that Australia cannot take peace for granted.

"Under the Coalition, there will be clarity around the risks we face and a strategy to deter them," the opposition says.

"We believe that investing in Defence is an investment in peace - which is maintained through a strong army, navy, air force and enhanced cyber security."

This week's statement follows an earlier Coalition commitment to reinstate the fourth squadron of F-35A Joint Strike Fighters.

Dutton said: "The Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister regularly tell Australians that we live in the most precarious period since the end of the second world war. Yet, over the last three years, Labor has done nothing about it, other than rip money out of Defence, weakening strength and morale."

Hastie said: "A Dutton Coalition government will back Australian workers and businesses in defence industry to develop the sovereign capabilities our country needs. They are a critical enabler to the Australian men and women in uniform".

Hastie has been little seen on the campaign trail.

Marles said over the last three years the government had engaged "in the biggest peacetime increase in defence spending that Australia has seen".

"We'll continue to look at what the appropriate levels of defence spending are.

"Increases in defence spending will happen under this government […] because that is, in fact, what we've done over the last three years".

The Conversation

Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

/Courtesy of The Conversation. This material from the originating organization/author(s) might be of the point-in-time nature, and edited for clarity, style and length. Mirage.News does not take institutional positions or sides, and all views, positions, and conclusions expressed herein are solely those of the author(s).