Labour will withdraw New Zealand’s SAS troops from Afghanistan within 90 days of assuming office

Why is this so funny? Well the SAS are scheduled to return home in March 2012.

The election is on 26 November 2011. 90 days after that is 24 February 2012. So the impact of their policy is to bring them home a week early.

But in reality, it probably isn’t even that. They say within 90 days of assuming office, not of the election. it normally takes at least a week to arrange a coalition, appoint Ministers and be sworn in. As a Labour-led Government this time would involve getting agreement with the Greens, with NZ First and with Mana, its actually possible the SAS would be home before they’re even sworn in

Stuff reports:

Since the fleets went out of service in 2001, it has cost $34m in maintenance and other costs to keep them to a saleable standard.

 

The Aermacchis are now partially dismantled and in crates, while the Skyhawks are under plastic wrapping and stored at the Woodbourne base near Blenheim.

As I say, a terrible decision. And here’s what’s left:

The Air Force employs 3195 staff with key equipment, including:

• Five naval helicopters (Super Seasprite)
• Six maritime patrol aircraft (Orions)
• Five Hercules (transport)
• Two Boeing 757-200s (transport)
• 13 Iroquois helicopters (transport)
• Five Sioux helicopters (transport)
• Five Beech King aircraft (transport – training)
• 13 CT-4E aircraft (transport – training)

Most of the air force is now transport, and it makes me wonder whether it is justified keeping it as a full service wing. Would it not perhaps be better (and free up money for equipment) if the remaining planes and choppers were divided up between the army and the navy, and integarted into their operations? Do we one day want an Air Vice Marshall, whose only air experience has been flying some Hercules?

How would one divided it up. My initial assumptions would be:

• Five naval helicopters (Super Seasprite) – Navy
• Six maritime patrol aircraft (Orions) – Navy
• Five Hercules (transport) – Army
• Two Boeing 757-200s (transport) – Army
• 13 Iroquois helicopters (transport) – Army
• Five Sioux helicopters (transport) – Army
• Five Beech King aircraft (transport – training) – Army
• 13 CT-4E aircraft (transport – training) – Army

Disgraced former Defence Force top scientist Stephen Wilce ignored concerns about military projects which led to at least one cost blow-out of $100 million, it was alleged last night.

Scientist Iain MacKenzie, who worked with Mr Wilce at the Defence Technology Agency, told TV3′s 60 Minutes programme that he quit after his concerns about several top-priority projects were ignored.

The main focus is on how he got hired. I agree this is a concern, and we need to find out how it happened.

But equally disturbing to me, is that the Defence Force kept him on – in the fact of criticism both internally and externally. Critics said he was clearly not up to the job.

So I want an additional inquiry – into his bosses, and why they never listened to the complaints, and most of all why they never noticed he was not up to the job. Unless they really want to argue any old unqualified person can head up their technology agency.

I think the government should consider appointing an independent person to inquire into how this happened.

Meanwhile Twitter has had fun, with the #defenceforcejobinterview tag providing:

• I raced against Usain Bolt in the 2008 Beijing Olympics; finished in the top 6, but he got all of the attention
• I convinced Tolkien to become a writer
• You’ve never seen one of course,but my face is in fact on the Medals at the olympics in recognition my successes
• Well, I get a bit upset when people call it “divine” intervention. But hey, that’s life

• Hairy Maclary was actually Lynley’s ‘special’ name for me in bed
• Well I made up sign language! Helen Keller just happened to be there at the time!
• So I said to Winston C, “Why not attack them on the beaches?
• It was gonna be Oceans 3, but I said, Why not ask George, Brad, Matt, if they have any mates they wanna bring…

• I was there when Māui fished up the North Island… I was the one who suggested he use his granny’s jawbone hook!

• If you look at the footage of the ’87 RWC victory, I’m the guy in the red jacket behind David Kirk.
• Richard actually based Rocky Horror on a Hamilton Boy’s College after ball party we had
• “It was just an offhand remark, but I said what if you made it TWO all beef patties, Special sauce…. “
• I did some PR consulting work for Shakespeare a few years back. Before then, they spelled bard with a small b.

• I told him, that jarjarbinks character was gunna ruin the movie, but would he listen ?

• Well love, as there’s still cancer I’ll admit that I’ve got at least one weakness

To abolish the Royal New Zealand Air Force as a seperate section of the the New Zealand Defence Force

I propose this with a sense of sadness. I think it was an appallingly bad decision for Labour to unilaterally (it was not in their policy and they did not consult on it) abolish the strike capability. If National had won in 2002 then it would have been possible to reverse that decision, but ny 2008 it is no longer possible – the pilots have all gone overseas etc.

So my point is that without the RNZAF having a strike capability, it is unnecessary to preserve it as a seperate section. The existing aircraft and helicopters should be transferred to the Army and Navy as appropriate.

It costs a lot to have your own section. I just don’t think you need all the costs and bureaucracy of a section whose job has sadly been downgraded to mainly transport. Are we going to one day have an Air Marshall and Air Vice Marshalls whose only experience was flying a Hercules?

This is not to denigrate any of the great officers of the RNZAF. I think moving them into the Army and Navy will result in better and mroe integrated opportunities for them. So what would I do with the current aircraft:

• Six Orions go to Navy as already used for maritime patrols – No 5 Squadron
• Five Seasprites also go to Navy, as they are used from frigates – No 6 Squadrom
• 14 Iroquois and Five Sioux (and future NH90 choppers) to Army – No 3 Squadron
• Five Hercules and Two 757s to Army – No 40 Squadron
• Five King Airs to Army – No 42 Squadron

Now I’m not a military expert and welcome feedback on the idea. The bottom line for me is that without a combat or strike capability, the Air Force has become more of a support role for the other sections, so it is best to recognise that reality.

Some people advocate not just going to two sections, but one. The idea is it would stop the infighting between the services. I’m not convinced we should go that far.