It's not how much you spend on defence but how well you spend it
It was another ignominious end. Dismantled, cannibalised for spare parts, their bodies were buried in an undisclosed location. They were never very good and were destined to be replaced, but a fatal crash in 2023 saw their demise brought forward. But Defence's jettisoning of the MRH90 Taipan helicopter wasn't the first time it had spent billions on a dud.
In October 2008, their rotor blades removed, another terrible decision was shrink-wrapped, loaded onto semi trailers and trucked out of the HMAS Albatross naval air station near Nowra. If the MRH90 decision was a blunder, the decision in 1997 to buy 11 Super Seasprites for our fleet of ANZAC class frigates, was a catastrophe.
At least the MRH90 flew. Not a single Super Seasprite became operational. You might as well have piled up in small denominations the $1 billion they cost and set fire to it.
Of course, it's not just kit that's meant to fly which has the sour taste of expensive lemon about it.
We've had the Collins class subs. Noisy, unreliable and, as discovered last year, corroding in the salt water meant to be their natural habitat. Having already cost about $20 billion, billions more is being spent to keep them going until the AUKUS subs arrive - if they do.
The largest ships our navy operates - the two Landing Helicopter Decks, HMAS Canberra and HMAS Adelaide - arrived in the middle of the 2010s riddled with defects. HMAS Canberra chalked up 6000 of them. And the cost to keep them is nudging $200 million a year.
I could go on. And on. And on some more. When it comes to spending money on defence, our track record on spending it wisely is far from flash. We have a history of spending a lot of buck for little bang.
That's why alarm bells ring when there's a clamour for increased defence spending without any detail about how and where that money should be spent.
Much of it is political noise, generated by NATO snapping to attention with a sharp "Sir, yessir!" - or a simpering "Yes, Daddy" if you were nauseated by its sycophancy when Trump visited - when it agreed to a US demand to lift its defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP.
The Albanese government has batted away the calls from the usual suspects - Pete Hegseth, Karoline Leavitt and their two local parrots, Angus Taylor and Bridget McKenzie, neither of whom have spelled out of what spending they'd cut or taxes they'd raise to meet the extra spending.
The government says Australia will decide on the capabilities it needs and spend accordingly. It's read the room and knows we don't like being told what to do - especially by the Trump administration. And we won't take well to extortion via tariffs either.
It also knows Australia doesn't need to strike the same war footing as Europe. We don't have a war on our doorstep. There's no Russia imperilling our borders.
That's not to say we shouldn't be clear-eyed about the challenges we face. China's military build-up cannot be ignored but also should not be overstated. It's unlikely to be coveting our distant shores because it's far cheaper to buy the resources we have than attempt to seize them. But can we ever know for certain? Probably not.
Defence spending is important. But it's less a question how much we spend than how well.
HAVE YOUR SAY: Should Australia follow NATO's lead and increase defence spending? Would you be happy to pay more tax to pay for more military hardware? Is China a bigger threat than the US to Australia? Email us: echidna@theechidna.com.au
SHARE THE LOVE: If you enjoy The Echidna, forward it to a friend so they can sign up, too.
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT:
- NSW Premier Chris Minns has refused to condemn the "brutal" actions of police who broke up a pro-Palestine protest that left a one-time federal Greens candidate with a serious eye injury.
- A senior public servant who gave a relative's career a leg up while hiding their connection has been found to be corrupt by the National Anti-Corruption Commission.
- One of Australia's biggest health insurers admits it incorrectly dealt with loads of claims and left customers thousands of dollars out of pocket. Bupa says it is "deeply sorry" for the conduct Australia's consumer watchdog found to be misleading and deceptive across more than five years.
THEY SAID IT: "A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defence than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom." - Martin Luther King jnr.
YOU SAID IT: Truth might be the first casualty in war, but language falls soon after in a cacophony of buzzwords and euphemisms.
"There also seems to be a great shortage of 'guardrails' in Australia in recent times," writes Ian. "No doubt, we could use some on our off-ramps. The expressions 'ethnic cleansing' and 'collateral damage' may be euphemistic, but they drip with irony and let the imagination run amok. So, they are all the more powerful expressions for it."
David writes: "A concomitant aspect of the ongoing Coca-Cola-nisation of Australia is the gradual change of pronunciation of certain syllables/words/emphases adopted by news presenters/commentators: 'progress', where 'prog' rhymes with 'dog', and 'process' where 'proc' rhymes with 'boss'. The 'cig' in cigarette is emphasised instead of the 'ette'. Is it an inferiority problem, insecurity, ignorance? Whatever, it is painful."
"The 'buzz phrase' that annoys me most? 'Reaching out' when all I did was make a phone call," writes Judith. "Nothing dramatic. I wasn't in dire straights. I didn't need rescuing. It was just an ordinary, garden variety phone call, probably to make an ordinary, garden variety enquiry about hours of trading. Or something equally mundane."
Maggie writes: "Ethnic cleansing' revolts me. There's nothing clean about it; it's genocide. 'Decimate' - not nearly as bad as some people seem to think. 'That's incredible' - I hear, 'I don't believe you'. A diplomatic off-ramp? There's danger of simplistic thinking that might cloud a complex reality."
This is a sample of The Echidna newsletter sent out each weekday morning. To sign up for FREE, go to theechidna.com.au
It was another ignominious end. Dismantled, cannibalised for spare parts, their bodies were buried in an undisclosed location. They were never very good and were destined to be replaced, but a fatal crash in 2023 saw their demise brought forward. But Defence's jettisoning of the MRH90 Taipan helicopter wasn't the first time it had spent billions on a dud.
In October 2008, their rotor blades removed, another terrible decision was shrink-wrapped, loaded onto semi trailers and trucked out of the HMAS Albatross naval air station near Nowra. If the MRH90 decision was a blunder, the decision in 1997 to buy 11 Super Seasprites for our fleet of ANZAC class frigates, was a catastrophe.
At least the MRH90 flew. Not a single Super Seasprite became operational. You might as well have piled up in small denominations the $1 billion they cost and set fire to it.
Of course, it's not just kit that's meant to fly which has the sour taste of expensive lemon about it.
We've had the Collins class subs. Noisy, unreliable and, as discovered last year, corroding in the salt water meant to be their natural habitat. Having already cost about $20 billion, billions more is being spent to keep them going until the AUKUS subs arrive - if they do.
The largest ships our navy operates - the two Landing Helicopter Decks, HMAS Canberra and HMAS Adelaide - arrived in the middle of the 2010s riddled with defects. HMAS Canberra chalked up 6000 of them. And the cost to keep them is nudging $200 million a year.
I could go on. And on. And on some more. When it comes to spending money on defence, our track record on spending it wisely is far from flash. We have a history of spending a lot of buck for little bang.
That's why alarm bells ring when there's a clamour for increased defence spending without any detail about how and where that money should be spent.
Much of it is political noise, generated by NATO snapping to attention with a sharp "Sir, yessir!" - or a simpering "Yes, Daddy" if you were nauseated by its sycophancy when Trump visited - when it agreed to a US demand to lift its defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP.
The Albanese government has batted away the calls from the usual suspects - Pete Hegseth, Karoline Leavitt and their two local parrots, Angus Taylor and Bridget McKenzie, neither of whom have spelled out of what spending they'd cut or taxes they'd raise to meet the extra spending.
The government says Australia will decide on the capabilities it needs and spend accordingly. It's read the room and knows we don't like being told what to do - especially by the Trump administration. And we won't take well to extortion via tariffs either.
It also knows Australia doesn't need to strike the same war footing as Europe. We don't have a war on our doorstep. There's no Russia imperilling our borders.
That's not to say we shouldn't be clear-eyed about the challenges we face. China's military build-up cannot be ignored but also should not be overstated. It's unlikely to be coveting our distant shores because it's far cheaper to buy the resources we have than attempt to seize them. But can we ever know for certain? Probably not.
Defence spending is important. But it's less a question how much we spend than how well.
HAVE YOUR SAY: Should Australia follow NATO's lead and increase defence spending? Would you be happy to pay more tax to pay for more military hardware? Is China a bigger threat than the US to Australia? Email us: echidna@theechidna.com.au
SHARE THE LOVE: If you enjoy The Echidna, forward it to a friend so they can sign up, too.
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT:
- NSW Premier Chris Minns has refused to condemn the "brutal" actions of police who broke up a pro-Palestine protest that left a one-time federal Greens candidate with a serious eye injury.
- A senior public servant who gave a relative's career a leg up while hiding their connection has been found to be corrupt by the National Anti-Corruption Commission.
- One of Australia's biggest health insurers admits it incorrectly dealt with loads of claims and left customers thousands of dollars out of pocket. Bupa says it is "deeply sorry" for the conduct Australia's consumer watchdog found to be misleading and deceptive across more than five years.
THEY SAID IT: "A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defence than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom." - Martin Luther King jnr.
YOU SAID IT: Truth might be the first casualty in war, but language falls soon after in a cacophony of buzzwords and euphemisms.
"There also seems to be a great shortage of 'guardrails' in Australia in recent times," writes Ian. "No doubt, we could use some on our off-ramps. The expressions 'ethnic cleansing' and 'collateral damage' may be euphemistic, but they drip with irony and let the imagination run amok. So, they are all the more powerful expressions for it."
David writes: "A concomitant aspect of the ongoing Coca-Cola-nisation of Australia is the gradual change of pronunciation of certain syllables/words/emphases adopted by news presenters/commentators: 'progress', where 'prog' rhymes with 'dog', and 'process' where 'proc' rhymes with 'boss'. The 'cig' in cigarette is emphasised instead of the 'ette'. Is it an inferiority problem, insecurity, ignorance? Whatever, it is painful."
"The 'buzz phrase' that annoys me most? 'Reaching out' when all I did was make a phone call," writes Judith. "Nothing dramatic. I wasn't in dire straights. I didn't need rescuing. It was just an ordinary, garden variety phone call, probably to make an ordinary, garden variety enquiry about hours of trading. Or something equally mundane."
Maggie writes: "Ethnic cleansing' revolts me. There's nothing clean about it; it's genocide. 'Decimate' - not nearly as bad as some people seem to think. 'That's incredible' - I hear, 'I don't believe you'. A diplomatic off-ramp? There's danger of simplistic thinking that might cloud a complex reality."
This is a sample of The Echidna newsletter sent out each weekday morning. To sign up for FREE, go to theechidna.com.au
It was another ignominious end. Dismantled, cannibalised for spare parts, their bodies were buried in an undisclosed location. They were never very good and were destined to be replaced, but a fatal crash in 2023 saw their demise brought forward. But Defence's jettisoning of the MRH90 Taipan helicopter wasn't the first time it had spent billions on a dud.
In October 2008, their rotor blades removed, another terrible decision was shrink-wrapped, loaded onto semi trailers and trucked out of the HMAS Albatross naval air station near Nowra. If the MRH90 decision was a blunder, the decision in 1997 to buy 11 Super Seasprites for our fleet of ANZAC class frigates, was a catastrophe.
At least the MRH90 flew. Not a single Super Seasprite became operational. You might as well have piled up in small denominations the $1 billion they cost and set fire to it.
Of course, it's not just kit that's meant to fly which has the sour taste of expensive lemon about it.
We've had the Collins class subs. Noisy, unreliable and, as discovered last year, corroding in the salt water meant to be their natural habitat. Having already cost about $20 billion, billions more is being spent to keep them going until the AUKUS subs arrive - if they do.
The largest ships our navy operates - the two Landing Helicopter Decks, HMAS Canberra and HMAS Adelaide - arrived in the middle of the 2010s riddled with defects. HMAS Canberra chalked up 6000 of them. And the cost to keep them is nudging $200 million a year.
I could go on. And on. And on some more. When it comes to spending money on defence, our track record on spending it wisely is far from flash. We have a history of spending a lot of buck for little bang.
That's why alarm bells ring when there's a clamour for increased defence spending without any detail about how and where that money should be spent.
Much of it is political noise, generated by NATO snapping to attention with a sharp "Sir, yessir!" - or a simpering "Yes, Daddy" if you were nauseated by its sycophancy when Trump visited - when it agreed to a US demand to lift its defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP.
The Albanese government has batted away the calls from the usual suspects - Pete Hegseth, Karoline Leavitt and their two local parrots, Angus Taylor and Bridget McKenzie, neither of whom have spelled out of what spending they'd cut or taxes they'd raise to meet the extra spending.
The government says Australia will decide on the capabilities it needs and spend accordingly. It's read the room and knows we don't like being told what to do - especially by the Trump administration. And we won't take well to extortion via tariffs either.
It also knows Australia doesn't need to strike the same war footing as Europe. We don't have a war on our doorstep. There's no Russia imperilling our borders.
That's not to say we shouldn't be clear-eyed about the challenges we face. China's military build-up cannot be ignored but also should not be overstated. It's unlikely to be coveting our distant shores because it's far cheaper to buy the resources we have than attempt to seize them. But can we ever know for certain? Probably not.
Defence spending is important. But it's less a question how much we spend than how well.
HAVE YOUR SAY: Should Australia follow NATO's lead and increase defence spending? Would you be happy to pay more tax to pay for more military hardware? Is China a bigger threat than the US to Australia? Email us: echidna@theechidna.com.au
SHARE THE LOVE: If you enjoy The Echidna, forward it to a friend so they can sign up, too.
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT:
- NSW Premier Chris Minns has refused to condemn the "brutal" actions of police who broke up a pro-Palestine protest that left a one-time federal Greens candidate with a serious eye injury.
- A senior public servant who gave a relative's career a leg up while hiding their connection has been found to be corrupt by the National Anti-Corruption Commission.
- One of Australia's biggest health insurers admits it incorrectly dealt with loads of claims and left customers thousands of dollars out of pocket. Bupa says it is "deeply sorry" for the conduct Australia's consumer watchdog found to be misleading and deceptive across more than five years.
THEY SAID IT: "A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defence than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom." - Martin Luther King jnr.
YOU SAID IT: Truth might be the first casualty in war, but language falls soon after in a cacophony of buzzwords and euphemisms.
"There also seems to be a great shortage of 'guardrails' in Australia in recent times," writes Ian. "No doubt, we could use some on our off-ramps. The expressions 'ethnic cleansing' and 'collateral damage' may be euphemistic, but they drip with irony and let the imagination run amok. So, they are all the more powerful expressions for it."
David writes: "A concomitant aspect of the ongoing Coca-Cola-nisation of Australia is the gradual change of pronunciation of certain syllables/words/emphases adopted by news presenters/commentators: 'progress', where 'prog' rhymes with 'dog', and 'process' where 'proc' rhymes with 'boss'. The 'cig' in cigarette is emphasised instead of the 'ette'. Is it an inferiority problem, insecurity, ignorance? Whatever, it is painful."
"The 'buzz phrase' that annoys me most? 'Reaching out' when all I did was make a phone call," writes Judith. "Nothing dramatic. I wasn't in dire straights. I didn't need rescuing. It was just an ordinary, garden variety phone call, probably to make an ordinary, garden variety enquiry about hours of trading. Or something equally mundane."
Maggie writes: "Ethnic cleansing' revolts me. There's nothing clean about it; it's genocide. 'Decimate' - not nearly as bad as some people seem to think. 'That's incredible' - I hear, 'I don't believe you'. A diplomatic off-ramp? There's danger of simplistic thinking that might cloud a complex reality."
This is a sample of The Echidna newsletter sent out each weekday morning. To sign up for FREE, go to theechidna.com.au
It was another ignominious end. Dismantled, cannibalised for spare parts, their bodies were buried in an undisclosed location. They were never very good and were destined to be replaced, but a fatal crash in 2023 saw their demise brought forward. But Defence's jettisoning of the MRH90 Taipan helicopter wasn't the first time it had spent billions on a dud.
In October 2008, their rotor blades removed, another terrible decision was shrink-wrapped, loaded onto semi trailers and trucked out of the HMAS Albatross naval air station near Nowra. If the MRH90 decision was a blunder, the decision in 1997 to buy 11 Super Seasprites for our fleet of ANZAC class frigates, was a catastrophe.
At least the MRH90 flew. Not a single Super Seasprite became operational. You might as well have piled up in small denominations the $1 billion they cost and set fire to it.
Of course, it's not just kit that's meant to fly which has the sour taste of expensive lemon about it.
We've had the Collins class subs. Noisy, unreliable and, as discovered last year, corroding in the salt water meant to be their natural habitat. Having already cost about $20 billion, billions more is being spent to keep them going until the AUKUS subs arrive - if they do.
The largest ships our navy operates - the two Landing Helicopter Decks, HMAS Canberra and HMAS Adelaide - arrived in the middle of the 2010s riddled with defects. HMAS Canberra chalked up 6000 of them. And the cost to keep them is nudging $200 million a year.
I could go on. And on. And on some more. When it comes to spending money on defence, our track record on spending it wisely is far from flash. We have a history of spending a lot of buck for little bang.
That's why alarm bells ring when there's a clamour for increased defence spending without any detail about how and where that money should be spent.
Much of it is political noise, generated by NATO snapping to attention with a sharp "Sir, yessir!" - or a simpering "Yes, Daddy" if you were nauseated by its sycophancy when Trump visited - when it agreed to a US demand to lift its defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP.
The Albanese government has batted away the calls from the usual suspects - Pete Hegseth, Karoline Leavitt and their two local parrots, Angus Taylor and Bridget McKenzie, neither of whom have spelled out of what spending they'd cut or taxes they'd raise to meet the extra spending.
The government says Australia will decide on the capabilities it needs and spend accordingly. It's read the room and knows we don't like being told what to do - especially by the Trump administration. And we won't take well to extortion via tariffs either.
It also knows Australia doesn't need to strike the same war footing as Europe. We don't have a war on our doorstep. There's no Russia imperilling our borders.
That's not to say we shouldn't be clear-eyed about the challenges we face. China's military build-up cannot be ignored but also should not be overstated. It's unlikely to be coveting our distant shores because it's far cheaper to buy the resources we have than attempt to seize them. But can we ever know for certain? Probably not.
Defence spending is important. But it's less a question how much we spend than how well.
HAVE YOUR SAY: Should Australia follow NATO's lead and increase defence spending? Would you be happy to pay more tax to pay for more military hardware? Is China a bigger threat than the US to Australia? Email us: echidna@theechidna.com.au
SHARE THE LOVE: If you enjoy The Echidna, forward it to a friend so they can sign up, too.
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT:
- NSW Premier Chris Minns has refused to condemn the "brutal" actions of police who broke up a pro-Palestine protest that left a one-time federal Greens candidate with a serious eye injury.
- A senior public servant who gave a relative's career a leg up while hiding their connection has been found to be corrupt by the National Anti-Corruption Commission.
- One of Australia's biggest health insurers admits it incorrectly dealt with loads of claims and left customers thousands of dollars out of pocket. Bupa says it is "deeply sorry" for the conduct Australia's consumer watchdog found to be misleading and deceptive across more than five years.
THEY SAID IT: "A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defence than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom." - Martin Luther King jnr.
YOU SAID IT: Truth might be the first casualty in war, but language falls soon after in a cacophony of buzzwords and euphemisms.
"There also seems to be a great shortage of 'guardrails' in Australia in recent times," writes Ian. "No doubt, we could use some on our off-ramps. The expressions 'ethnic cleansing' and 'collateral damage' may be euphemistic, but they drip with irony and let the imagination run amok. So, they are all the more powerful expressions for it."
David writes: "A concomitant aspect of the ongoing Coca-Cola-nisation of Australia is the gradual change of pronunciation of certain syllables/words/emphases adopted by news presenters/commentators: 'progress', where 'prog' rhymes with 'dog', and 'process' where 'proc' rhymes with 'boss'. The 'cig' in cigarette is emphasised instead of the 'ette'. Is it an inferiority problem, insecurity, ignorance? Whatever, it is painful."
"The 'buzz phrase' that annoys me most? 'Reaching out' when all I did was make a phone call," writes Judith. "Nothing dramatic. I wasn't in dire straights. I didn't need rescuing. It was just an ordinary, garden variety phone call, probably to make an ordinary, garden variety enquiry about hours of trading. Or something equally mundane."
Maggie writes: "Ethnic cleansing' revolts me. There's nothing clean about it; it's genocide. 'Decimate' - not nearly as bad as some people seem to think. 'That's incredible' - I hear, 'I don't believe you'. A diplomatic off-ramp? There's danger of simplistic thinking that might cloud a complex reality."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
3 days ago
- ABC News
British navy's largest vessel docks in Darwin, as port's defence capability tested
The British navy's largest vessel has docked at Darwin's naval base in the first visit of its kind in almost 30 years, in what the British High Commission says is a demonstration of its "commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific". Aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales is leading a "strike force", made up of vessels from 12 countries, in an eight-month deployment sailing from the Mediterranean Sea to the Atlantic Ocean. On Wednesday, the ship docked at Darwin's naval base HMAS Coonawarra after two weeks of operations associated with Exercise Talisman Sabre. Lieutenant Emily Woolcott was responsible for driving the ship into Darwin waters, which she said was a complex process for the 280-metre long and 70-metre wide ship. "This morning [Wednesday] we've had to fly on the pilot via [helicopter], get them off safely and then make sure we have the right speed to get in," Lieutenant Woolcott said. Lieutenant Commander Neil Pitt, the officer-in-charge of the ship's flight deck, said the deployment had been "full on", with crews working 24 hours a day with multiple NATO and allied forces. "We've had the Italians with us as we came back through the Mediterranean, the Americans recently, Australians embarking with rotary wing [and] New Zealanders," he said. The British High Commission said in a statement in June the Prince of Wales' visit "reinforced [the UK's] long-term strategic commitment to the Indo-Pacific region". HMS Prince Wales crew members will be on shore leave in Darwin until next week, before the vessel departs for Japan. The Canadian frigate HMSC Ville De Quebec is one of the vessels being led by the Prince of Wales, and was this week involved in testing missile rearmament at the Port of Darwin. The ship was disarmed of its operational Harpoon missiles at the port, and rearmed with practice missiles, on Monday as part of Exercise Talisman Sabre. The rearming of foreign warships in northern Australia first occurred in Darwin and Broome in September 2024, in what the Royal Australian Navy (RAN) said in a statement was "proof of concept" Australia could support foreign militaries from northern bases. "It doesn't matter which of our allies requires a rearmament, Australia needs to be able to prove that it can do that through its own supply chains" Commander of HMAS Coonawarra, Captain David Shirvington, said this week. "Most of our munitions storage facilities are located in the south of Australia, and so to be able to get them up here and transfer them onto our military assets creates time and space for us to project forces from the north of Australia." In May, the ABC revealed that at least four ports around Australia, including the Port of Darwin, were expected to subject to an expansion of existing US contracts for arms handling by subcontractors. Former naval officer Jennifer Parker, an expert associate at the National Security College, said the establishment of rearming facilities at the Port of Darwin was an "unsung" development in the defence of northern Australia. "Prior to 2024, for ships to rearm missiles they would either need to go down to Eden, which is well down on the southern NSW coast, or HMAS Stirling [in Western Australia]." The Prince of Wales' Captain Will Blackett said operations conducted during Exercise Talisman Sabre, such as the rearming and testing of missiles, were a demonstration of collective force. "One of the major points of all this is you never want to use it for real, so you spend a lot of time showing people what you can do, and then making friends and influencing people to be on your side," he said.
The Advertiser
13-07-2025
- The Advertiser
There's enough to put people off volunteering as it is
This is a sample of The Echidna newsletter sent out each weekday morning. To sign up for FREE, go to Got a partner? Got kids? Chances are that you are a volunteer. About one third of couples who have children volunteer. I can tell you exactly what they are doing. They are blowing whistles on some frozen tundra near Lithgow. They are washing jerseys in the motel sink. They are in WhatsApp groups the nation over, chivvying as they go, making sure everyone's got a lift to the game, even if the game is far from home. I loved being a team manager. So much fun (until the local rep body dumped me for asking too many questions about what participation was costing 400 bucks for a short season. Apparently, you are just meant to hand over your hard-earned money without detail. Anyhow, now the ACT government has decided to impose an $11 charge on working with vulnerable people (WWVP) cards. It's baffling. As Mainul Haique wrote, it is an "outrageous and unjust penalty on those who give so much to keep our community strong". Plus don't you love any government which talks about a new cost being modest? What would they know about the impacts on people's budgets? Why it has decided to do this is beyond me. There is already enough to put people off volunteering. First, we are all pretty short of time. Second, some organisations have people in them who behave as if they are the repository of all knowledge and refuse to pass it on. There's the same array of bad behaviour among volunteer groups as there is among those in regular workplaces. The guidelines are usually a mess, passed from one to the other. Plus, some organisations seem to imagine that all volunteers are the same (not that I have tickets on myself or anything). I arrived on my first day of volunteering at one particular organisation and was asked to open the mail. That was it. Just open the mail. Fortunately, that particular form of boring torture was short - I ended up being able to write the responses, which I loved. Is that snotty of me to expect to be able to engage my brain while volunteering? Maybe, but it turns out that some of us don't volunteer because what we do while we volunteer is boring - and we already have to do enough boring stuff (is laundry the worst or is unstacking the dishwasher the worst? You be the judge). And why anyone would place another hurdle in front of volunteers is baffling to me. We are already short of volunteers. As the lovely people at Volunteering Australia (VA) put it, "Many people find it difficult to prioritise volunteering, or to afford the costs that can be associated with volunteering, such as transport or fuel. Financial pressures are a significant barrier to volunteering, especially among younger people." They've even done the figures. About a quarter of people aged 18 to 34 years gave "financial reasons" as a reason they did not volunteer in 2022. And I think we are all feeling the cost-of-living crisis much more now than three years ago. Volunteer Australia also points out that volunteer-involving organisations are also feeling the pinch. That "affects their capacity to deliver services and safely and effectively engage their volunteers". Turns out, according to VA, that just over half (54 per cent) of volunteers incur out-of-pocket expenses through their volunteering role. So it already costs money, and adding another fee is just another hurdle. Also, I had no idea that you are more likely to volunteer in retirement if you've done it before you retired. And you have no idea how much volunteers are needed. I truly admire those people who are out there caring for our sand dunes and our wetlands, out there organising the kids to run on to fields everywhere, visiting aged care homes and sometimes even taking the biographies of the people who live there. We can't be without them. Let's clear the hurdles and smooth the way. Jenna Price is a guest Echidna and a regular columnist. HAVE YOUR SAY: What's your experience of volunteering, the good and the bad? Do you encourage or discourage others to volunteer? Email us: echidna@ SHARE THE LOVE: If you enjoy The Echidna, forward it to a friend so they can sign up, too. IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: - The Conservation and Biodiversity Research Center at Edith Cowan University in Western Australia Australia has found some black rats living in Australian cities have developed a genetic mutation that potentially increases their resistance to the most popular poisons used to kill them. - Two inmates have been accused of breaking into multiple unauthorised areas at the Alexander Maconochie Centre in the ACT and stealing personal property, including sensitive documents. - Australians are so good at finding lost people. First, we found surfer Darcy Deefholts who'd drifted 13 kilometres off the coast. Then Caroline Wilga, the 26-year-old German backpacker who'd been missing for nearly two weeks. All down to everyone pitching in. Want to nominate someone to be an Australian of the Year? Answer the call of the National Australia Day Council. THEY SAID IT: "Volunteers are at the heart of the Australian story. Volunteers coach kids' sport and plant trees. Volunteers visit people in prison and provide support to people who are sleeping rough. Volunteers assist our veterans and help run arts organisations. An Australia without volunteers would be a much diminished nation." - Andrew Leigh YOU SAID IT: Garry said men should be banned from working in childcare centres. Louise agrees: I work as a registered nurse, and when male doctors are undertaking gynaecological procedures, a female nurse is always in attendance for safety precautions. Sue doesn't agree: Men should not be banned from working in childcare centres ... cruel and dangerous PEOPLE should be banned from working with children. The childcare system isn't working as it should, guidelines haven't been followed and in some cases avoided to save money. Petrina would like to expand the idea: How can we expand that to protect the 1 in 7 Australian children being sexually abused by men in homes, schools, and other institutions? How about the 1 in 5 Australian women who are victims of sexual violence by men in workplaces, shopping centres, public places and homes? Can we ban men from all those places, too? Or how about men just stop this abhorrent behaviour so women and children can be free to live their lives. Peter comes full circle from Louise's suggestion: The evidence points to the need for a better system in child care to protect children. But male positive role modelling is important. Perhaps a "four eyes" system as used in other sectors might work; males have to have a pair of female eyes present when working with children. This is a sample of The Echidna newsletter sent out each weekday morning. To sign up for FREE, go to Got a partner? Got kids? Chances are that you are a volunteer. About one third of couples who have children volunteer. I can tell you exactly what they are doing. They are blowing whistles on some frozen tundra near Lithgow. They are washing jerseys in the motel sink. They are in WhatsApp groups the nation over, chivvying as they go, making sure everyone's got a lift to the game, even if the game is far from home. I loved being a team manager. So much fun (until the local rep body dumped me for asking too many questions about what participation was costing 400 bucks for a short season. Apparently, you are just meant to hand over your hard-earned money without detail. Anyhow, now the ACT government has decided to impose an $11 charge on working with vulnerable people (WWVP) cards. It's baffling. As Mainul Haique wrote, it is an "outrageous and unjust penalty on those who give so much to keep our community strong". Plus don't you love any government which talks about a new cost being modest? What would they know about the impacts on people's budgets? Why it has decided to do this is beyond me. There is already enough to put people off volunteering. First, we are all pretty short of time. Second, some organisations have people in them who behave as if they are the repository of all knowledge and refuse to pass it on. There's the same array of bad behaviour among volunteer groups as there is among those in regular workplaces. The guidelines are usually a mess, passed from one to the other. Plus, some organisations seem to imagine that all volunteers are the same (not that I have tickets on myself or anything). I arrived on my first day of volunteering at one particular organisation and was asked to open the mail. That was it. Just open the mail. Fortunately, that particular form of boring torture was short - I ended up being able to write the responses, which I loved. Is that snotty of me to expect to be able to engage my brain while volunteering? Maybe, but it turns out that some of us don't volunteer because what we do while we volunteer is boring - and we already have to do enough boring stuff (is laundry the worst or is unstacking the dishwasher the worst? You be the judge). And why anyone would place another hurdle in front of volunteers is baffling to me. We are already short of volunteers. As the lovely people at Volunteering Australia (VA) put it, "Many people find it difficult to prioritise volunteering, or to afford the costs that can be associated with volunteering, such as transport or fuel. Financial pressures are a significant barrier to volunteering, especially among younger people." They've even done the figures. About a quarter of people aged 18 to 34 years gave "financial reasons" as a reason they did not volunteer in 2022. And I think we are all feeling the cost-of-living crisis much more now than three years ago. Volunteer Australia also points out that volunteer-involving organisations are also feeling the pinch. That "affects their capacity to deliver services and safely and effectively engage their volunteers". Turns out, according to VA, that just over half (54 per cent) of volunteers incur out-of-pocket expenses through their volunteering role. So it already costs money, and adding another fee is just another hurdle. Also, I had no idea that you are more likely to volunteer in retirement if you've done it before you retired. And you have no idea how much volunteers are needed. I truly admire those people who are out there caring for our sand dunes and our wetlands, out there organising the kids to run on to fields everywhere, visiting aged care homes and sometimes even taking the biographies of the people who live there. We can't be without them. Let's clear the hurdles and smooth the way. Jenna Price is a guest Echidna and a regular columnist. HAVE YOUR SAY: What's your experience of volunteering, the good and the bad? Do you encourage or discourage others to volunteer? Email us: echidna@ SHARE THE LOVE: If you enjoy The Echidna, forward it to a friend so they can sign up, too. IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: - The Conservation and Biodiversity Research Center at Edith Cowan University in Western Australia Australia has found some black rats living in Australian cities have developed a genetic mutation that potentially increases their resistance to the most popular poisons used to kill them. - Two inmates have been accused of breaking into multiple unauthorised areas at the Alexander Maconochie Centre in the ACT and stealing personal property, including sensitive documents. - Australians are so good at finding lost people. First, we found surfer Darcy Deefholts who'd drifted 13 kilometres off the coast. Then Caroline Wilga, the 26-year-old German backpacker who'd been missing for nearly two weeks. All down to everyone pitching in. Want to nominate someone to be an Australian of the Year? Answer the call of the National Australia Day Council. THEY SAID IT: "Volunteers are at the heart of the Australian story. Volunteers coach kids' sport and plant trees. Volunteers visit people in prison and provide support to people who are sleeping rough. Volunteers assist our veterans and help run arts organisations. An Australia without volunteers would be a much diminished nation." - Andrew Leigh YOU SAID IT: Garry said men should be banned from working in childcare centres. Louise agrees: I work as a registered nurse, and when male doctors are undertaking gynaecological procedures, a female nurse is always in attendance for safety precautions. Sue doesn't agree: Men should not be banned from working in childcare centres ... cruel and dangerous PEOPLE should be banned from working with children. The childcare system isn't working as it should, guidelines haven't been followed and in some cases avoided to save money. Petrina would like to expand the idea: How can we expand that to protect the 1 in 7 Australian children being sexually abused by men in homes, schools, and other institutions? How about the 1 in 5 Australian women who are victims of sexual violence by men in workplaces, shopping centres, public places and homes? Can we ban men from all those places, too? Or how about men just stop this abhorrent behaviour so women and children can be free to live their lives. Peter comes full circle from Louise's suggestion: The evidence points to the need for a better system in child care to protect children. But male positive role modelling is important. Perhaps a "four eyes" system as used in other sectors might work; males have to have a pair of female eyes present when working with children. This is a sample of The Echidna newsletter sent out each weekday morning. To sign up for FREE, go to Got a partner? Got kids? Chances are that you are a volunteer. About one third of couples who have children volunteer. I can tell you exactly what they are doing. They are blowing whistles on some frozen tundra near Lithgow. They are washing jerseys in the motel sink. They are in WhatsApp groups the nation over, chivvying as they go, making sure everyone's got a lift to the game, even if the game is far from home. I loved being a team manager. So much fun (until the local rep body dumped me for asking too many questions about what participation was costing 400 bucks for a short season. Apparently, you are just meant to hand over your hard-earned money without detail. Anyhow, now the ACT government has decided to impose an $11 charge on working with vulnerable people (WWVP) cards. It's baffling. As Mainul Haique wrote, it is an "outrageous and unjust penalty on those who give so much to keep our community strong". Plus don't you love any government which talks about a new cost being modest? What would they know about the impacts on people's budgets? Why it has decided to do this is beyond me. There is already enough to put people off volunteering. First, we are all pretty short of time. Second, some organisations have people in them who behave as if they are the repository of all knowledge and refuse to pass it on. There's the same array of bad behaviour among volunteer groups as there is among those in regular workplaces. The guidelines are usually a mess, passed from one to the other. Plus, some organisations seem to imagine that all volunteers are the same (not that I have tickets on myself or anything). I arrived on my first day of volunteering at one particular organisation and was asked to open the mail. That was it. Just open the mail. Fortunately, that particular form of boring torture was short - I ended up being able to write the responses, which I loved. Is that snotty of me to expect to be able to engage my brain while volunteering? Maybe, but it turns out that some of us don't volunteer because what we do while we volunteer is boring - and we already have to do enough boring stuff (is laundry the worst or is unstacking the dishwasher the worst? You be the judge). And why anyone would place another hurdle in front of volunteers is baffling to me. We are already short of volunteers. As the lovely people at Volunteering Australia (VA) put it, "Many people find it difficult to prioritise volunteering, or to afford the costs that can be associated with volunteering, such as transport or fuel. Financial pressures are a significant barrier to volunteering, especially among younger people." They've even done the figures. About a quarter of people aged 18 to 34 years gave "financial reasons" as a reason they did not volunteer in 2022. And I think we are all feeling the cost-of-living crisis much more now than three years ago. Volunteer Australia also points out that volunteer-involving organisations are also feeling the pinch. That "affects their capacity to deliver services and safely and effectively engage their volunteers". Turns out, according to VA, that just over half (54 per cent) of volunteers incur out-of-pocket expenses through their volunteering role. So it already costs money, and adding another fee is just another hurdle. Also, I had no idea that you are more likely to volunteer in retirement if you've done it before you retired. And you have no idea how much volunteers are needed. I truly admire those people who are out there caring for our sand dunes and our wetlands, out there organising the kids to run on to fields everywhere, visiting aged care homes and sometimes even taking the biographies of the people who live there. We can't be without them. Let's clear the hurdles and smooth the way. Jenna Price is a guest Echidna and a regular columnist. HAVE YOUR SAY: What's your experience of volunteering, the good and the bad? Do you encourage or discourage others to volunteer? Email us: echidna@ SHARE THE LOVE: If you enjoy The Echidna, forward it to a friend so they can sign up, too. IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: - The Conservation and Biodiversity Research Center at Edith Cowan University in Western Australia Australia has found some black rats living in Australian cities have developed a genetic mutation that potentially increases their resistance to the most popular poisons used to kill them. - Two inmates have been accused of breaking into multiple unauthorised areas at the Alexander Maconochie Centre in the ACT and stealing personal property, including sensitive documents. - Australians are so good at finding lost people. First, we found surfer Darcy Deefholts who'd drifted 13 kilometres off the coast. Then Caroline Wilga, the 26-year-old German backpacker who'd been missing for nearly two weeks. All down to everyone pitching in. Want to nominate someone to be an Australian of the Year? Answer the call of the National Australia Day Council. THEY SAID IT: "Volunteers are at the heart of the Australian story. Volunteers coach kids' sport and plant trees. Volunteers visit people in prison and provide support to people who are sleeping rough. Volunteers assist our veterans and help run arts organisations. An Australia without volunteers would be a much diminished nation." - Andrew Leigh YOU SAID IT: Garry said men should be banned from working in childcare centres. Louise agrees: I work as a registered nurse, and when male doctors are undertaking gynaecological procedures, a female nurse is always in attendance for safety precautions. Sue doesn't agree: Men should not be banned from working in childcare centres ... cruel and dangerous PEOPLE should be banned from working with children. The childcare system isn't working as it should, guidelines haven't been followed and in some cases avoided to save money. Petrina would like to expand the idea: How can we expand that to protect the 1 in 7 Australian children being sexually abused by men in homes, schools, and other institutions? How about the 1 in 5 Australian women who are victims of sexual violence by men in workplaces, shopping centres, public places and homes? Can we ban men from all those places, too? Or how about men just stop this abhorrent behaviour so women and children can be free to live their lives. Peter comes full circle from Louise's suggestion: The evidence points to the need for a better system in child care to protect children. But male positive role modelling is important. Perhaps a "four eyes" system as used in other sectors might work; males have to have a pair of female eyes present when working with children. This is a sample of The Echidna newsletter sent out each weekday morning. To sign up for FREE, go to Got a partner? Got kids? Chances are that you are a volunteer. About one third of couples who have children volunteer. I can tell you exactly what they are doing. They are blowing whistles on some frozen tundra near Lithgow. They are washing jerseys in the motel sink. They are in WhatsApp groups the nation over, chivvying as they go, making sure everyone's got a lift to the game, even if the game is far from home. I loved being a team manager. So much fun (until the local rep body dumped me for asking too many questions about what participation was costing 400 bucks for a short season. Apparently, you are just meant to hand over your hard-earned money without detail. Anyhow, now the ACT government has decided to impose an $11 charge on working with vulnerable people (WWVP) cards. It's baffling. As Mainul Haique wrote, it is an "outrageous and unjust penalty on those who give so much to keep our community strong". Plus don't you love any government which talks about a new cost being modest? What would they know about the impacts on people's budgets? Why it has decided to do this is beyond me. There is already enough to put people off volunteering. First, we are all pretty short of time. Second, some organisations have people in them who behave as if they are the repository of all knowledge and refuse to pass it on. There's the same array of bad behaviour among volunteer groups as there is among those in regular workplaces. The guidelines are usually a mess, passed from one to the other. Plus, some organisations seem to imagine that all volunteers are the same (not that I have tickets on myself or anything). I arrived on my first day of volunteering at one particular organisation and was asked to open the mail. That was it. Just open the mail. Fortunately, that particular form of boring torture was short - I ended up being able to write the responses, which I loved. Is that snotty of me to expect to be able to engage my brain while volunteering? Maybe, but it turns out that some of us don't volunteer because what we do while we volunteer is boring - and we already have to do enough boring stuff (is laundry the worst or is unstacking the dishwasher the worst? You be the judge). And why anyone would place another hurdle in front of volunteers is baffling to me. We are already short of volunteers. As the lovely people at Volunteering Australia (VA) put it, "Many people find it difficult to prioritise volunteering, or to afford the costs that can be associated with volunteering, such as transport or fuel. Financial pressures are a significant barrier to volunteering, especially among younger people." They've even done the figures. About a quarter of people aged 18 to 34 years gave "financial reasons" as a reason they did not volunteer in 2022. And I think we are all feeling the cost-of-living crisis much more now than three years ago. Volunteer Australia also points out that volunteer-involving organisations are also feeling the pinch. That "affects their capacity to deliver services and safely and effectively engage their volunteers". Turns out, according to VA, that just over half (54 per cent) of volunteers incur out-of-pocket expenses through their volunteering role. So it already costs money, and adding another fee is just another hurdle. Also, I had no idea that you are more likely to volunteer in retirement if you've done it before you retired. And you have no idea how much volunteers are needed. I truly admire those people who are out there caring for our sand dunes and our wetlands, out there organising the kids to run on to fields everywhere, visiting aged care homes and sometimes even taking the biographies of the people who live there. We can't be without them. Let's clear the hurdles and smooth the way. Jenna Price is a guest Echidna and a regular columnist. HAVE YOUR SAY: What's your experience of volunteering, the good and the bad? Do you encourage or discourage others to volunteer? Email us: echidna@ SHARE THE LOVE: If you enjoy The Echidna, forward it to a friend so they can sign up, too. IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: - The Conservation and Biodiversity Research Center at Edith Cowan University in Western Australia Australia has found some black rats living in Australian cities have developed a genetic mutation that potentially increases their resistance to the most popular poisons used to kill them. - Two inmates have been accused of breaking into multiple unauthorised areas at the Alexander Maconochie Centre in the ACT and stealing personal property, including sensitive documents. - Australians are so good at finding lost people. First, we found surfer Darcy Deefholts who'd drifted 13 kilometres off the coast. Then Caroline Wilga, the 26-year-old German backpacker who'd been missing for nearly two weeks. All down to everyone pitching in. Want to nominate someone to be an Australian of the Year? Answer the call of the National Australia Day Council. THEY SAID IT: "Volunteers are at the heart of the Australian story. Volunteers coach kids' sport and plant trees. Volunteers visit people in prison and provide support to people who are sleeping rough. Volunteers assist our veterans and help run arts organisations. An Australia without volunteers would be a much diminished nation." - Andrew Leigh YOU SAID IT: Garry said men should be banned from working in childcare centres. Louise agrees: I work as a registered nurse, and when male doctors are undertaking gynaecological procedures, a female nurse is always in attendance for safety precautions. Sue doesn't agree: Men should not be banned from working in childcare centres ... cruel and dangerous PEOPLE should be banned from working with children. The childcare system isn't working as it should, guidelines haven't been followed and in some cases avoided to save money. Petrina would like to expand the idea: How can we expand that to protect the 1 in 7 Australian children being sexually abused by men in homes, schools, and other institutions? How about the 1 in 5 Australian women who are victims of sexual violence by men in workplaces, shopping centres, public places and homes? Can we ban men from all those places, too? Or how about men just stop this abhorrent behaviour so women and children can be free to live their lives. Peter comes full circle from Louise's suggestion: The evidence points to the need for a better system in child care to protect children. But male positive role modelling is important. Perhaps a "four eyes" system as used in other sectors might work; males have to have a pair of female eyes present when working with children.
The Advertiser
01-07-2025
- The Advertiser
It's not how much you spend on defence but how well you spend it
This is a sample of The Echidna newsletter sent out each weekday morning. To sign up for FREE, go to It was another ignominious end. Dismantled, cannibalised for spare parts, their bodies were buried in an undisclosed location. They were never very good and were destined to be replaced, but a fatal crash in 2023 saw their demise brought forward. But Defence's jettisoning of the MRH90 Taipan helicopter wasn't the first time it had spent billions on a dud. In October 2008, their rotor blades removed, another terrible decision was shrink-wrapped, loaded onto semi trailers and trucked out of the HMAS Albatross naval air station near Nowra. If the MRH90 decision was a blunder, the decision in 1997 to buy 11 Super Seasprites for our fleet of ANZAC class frigates, was a catastrophe. At least the MRH90 flew. Not a single Super Seasprite became operational. You might as well have piled up in small denominations the $1 billion they cost and set fire to it. Of course, it's not just kit that's meant to fly which has the sour taste of expensive lemon about it. We've had the Collins class subs. Noisy, unreliable and, as discovered last year, corroding in the salt water meant to be their natural habitat. Having already cost about $20 billion, billions more is being spent to keep them going until the AUKUS subs arrive - if they do. The largest ships our navy operates - the two Landing Helicopter Decks, HMAS Canberra and HMAS Adelaide - arrived in the middle of the 2010s riddled with defects. HMAS Canberra chalked up 6000 of them. And the cost to keep them is nudging $200 million a year. I could go on. And on. And on some more. When it comes to spending money on defence, our track record on spending it wisely is far from flash. We have a history of spending a lot of buck for little bang. That's why alarm bells ring when there's a clamour for increased defence spending without any detail about how and where that money should be spent. Much of it is political noise, generated by NATO snapping to attention with a sharp "Sir, yessir!" - or a simpering "Yes, Daddy" if you were nauseated by its sycophancy when Trump visited - when it agreed to a US demand to lift its defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP. The Albanese government has batted away the calls from the usual suspects - Pete Hegseth, Karoline Leavitt and their two local parrots, Angus Taylor and Bridget McKenzie, neither of whom have spelled out of what spending they'd cut or taxes they'd raise to meet the extra spending. The government says Australia will decide on the capabilities it needs and spend accordingly. It's read the room and knows we don't like being told what to do - especially by the Trump administration. And we won't take well to extortion via tariffs either. It also knows Australia doesn't need to strike the same war footing as Europe. We don't have a war on our doorstep. There's no Russia imperilling our borders. That's not to say we shouldn't be clear-eyed about the challenges we face. China's military build-up cannot be ignored but also should not be overstated. It's unlikely to be coveting our distant shores because it's far cheaper to buy the resources we have than attempt to seize them. But can we ever know for certain? Probably not. Defence spending is important. But it's less a question how much we spend than how well. HAVE YOUR SAY: Should Australia follow NATO's lead and increase defence spending? Would you be happy to pay more tax to pay for more military hardware? Is China a bigger threat than the US to Australia? Email us: echidna@ SHARE THE LOVE: If you enjoy The Echidna, forward it to a friend so they can sign up, too. IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: - NSW Premier Chris Minns has refused to condemn the "brutal" actions of police who broke up a pro-Palestine protest that left a one-time federal Greens candidate with a serious eye injury. - A senior public servant who gave a relative's career a leg up while hiding their connection has been found to be corrupt by the National Anti-Corruption Commission. - One of Australia's biggest health insurers admits it incorrectly dealt with loads of claims and left customers thousands of dollars out of pocket. Bupa says it is "deeply sorry" for the conduct Australia's consumer watchdog found to be misleading and deceptive across more than five years. THEY SAID IT: "A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defence than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom." - Martin Luther King jnr. YOU SAID IT: Truth might be the first casualty in war, but language falls soon after in a cacophony of buzzwords and euphemisms. "There also seems to be a great shortage of 'guardrails' in Australia in recent times," writes Ian. "No doubt, we could use some on our off-ramps. The expressions 'ethnic cleansing' and 'collateral damage' may be euphemistic, but they drip with irony and let the imagination run amok. So, they are all the more powerful expressions for it." David writes: "A concomitant aspect of the ongoing Coca-Cola-nisation of Australia is the gradual change of pronunciation of certain syllables/words/emphases adopted by news presenters/commentators: 'progress', where 'prog' rhymes with 'dog', and 'process' where 'proc' rhymes with 'boss'. The 'cig' in cigarette is emphasised instead of the 'ette'. Is it an inferiority problem, insecurity, ignorance? Whatever, it is painful." "The 'buzz phrase' that annoys me most? 'Reaching out' when all I did was make a phone call," writes Judith. "Nothing dramatic. I wasn't in dire straights. I didn't need rescuing. It was just an ordinary, garden variety phone call, probably to make an ordinary, garden variety enquiry about hours of trading. Or something equally mundane." Maggie writes: "Ethnic cleansing' revolts me. There's nothing clean about it; it's genocide. 'Decimate' - not nearly as bad as some people seem to think. 'That's incredible' - I hear, 'I don't believe you'. A diplomatic off-ramp? There's danger of simplistic thinking that might cloud a complex reality." This is a sample of The Echidna newsletter sent out each weekday morning. To sign up for FREE, go to It was another ignominious end. Dismantled, cannibalised for spare parts, their bodies were buried in an undisclosed location. They were never very good and were destined to be replaced, but a fatal crash in 2023 saw their demise brought forward. But Defence's jettisoning of the MRH90 Taipan helicopter wasn't the first time it had spent billions on a dud. In October 2008, their rotor blades removed, another terrible decision was shrink-wrapped, loaded onto semi trailers and trucked out of the HMAS Albatross naval air station near Nowra. If the MRH90 decision was a blunder, the decision in 1997 to buy 11 Super Seasprites for our fleet of ANZAC class frigates, was a catastrophe. At least the MRH90 flew. Not a single Super Seasprite became operational. You might as well have piled up in small denominations the $1 billion they cost and set fire to it. Of course, it's not just kit that's meant to fly which has the sour taste of expensive lemon about it. We've had the Collins class subs. Noisy, unreliable and, as discovered last year, corroding in the salt water meant to be their natural habitat. Having already cost about $20 billion, billions more is being spent to keep them going until the AUKUS subs arrive - if they do. The largest ships our navy operates - the two Landing Helicopter Decks, HMAS Canberra and HMAS Adelaide - arrived in the middle of the 2010s riddled with defects. HMAS Canberra chalked up 6000 of them. And the cost to keep them is nudging $200 million a year. I could go on. And on. And on some more. When it comes to spending money on defence, our track record on spending it wisely is far from flash. We have a history of spending a lot of buck for little bang. That's why alarm bells ring when there's a clamour for increased defence spending without any detail about how and where that money should be spent. Much of it is political noise, generated by NATO snapping to attention with a sharp "Sir, yessir!" - or a simpering "Yes, Daddy" if you were nauseated by its sycophancy when Trump visited - when it agreed to a US demand to lift its defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP. The Albanese government has batted away the calls from the usual suspects - Pete Hegseth, Karoline Leavitt and their two local parrots, Angus Taylor and Bridget McKenzie, neither of whom have spelled out of what spending they'd cut or taxes they'd raise to meet the extra spending. The government says Australia will decide on the capabilities it needs and spend accordingly. It's read the room and knows we don't like being told what to do - especially by the Trump administration. And we won't take well to extortion via tariffs either. It also knows Australia doesn't need to strike the same war footing as Europe. We don't have a war on our doorstep. There's no Russia imperilling our borders. That's not to say we shouldn't be clear-eyed about the challenges we face. China's military build-up cannot be ignored but also should not be overstated. It's unlikely to be coveting our distant shores because it's far cheaper to buy the resources we have than attempt to seize them. But can we ever know for certain? Probably not. Defence spending is important. But it's less a question how much we spend than how well. HAVE YOUR SAY: Should Australia follow NATO's lead and increase defence spending? Would you be happy to pay more tax to pay for more military hardware? Is China a bigger threat than the US to Australia? Email us: echidna@ SHARE THE LOVE: If you enjoy The Echidna, forward it to a friend so they can sign up, too. IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: - NSW Premier Chris Minns has refused to condemn the "brutal" actions of police who broke up a pro-Palestine protest that left a one-time federal Greens candidate with a serious eye injury. - A senior public servant who gave a relative's career a leg up while hiding their connection has been found to be corrupt by the National Anti-Corruption Commission. - One of Australia's biggest health insurers admits it incorrectly dealt with loads of claims and left customers thousands of dollars out of pocket. Bupa says it is "deeply sorry" for the conduct Australia's consumer watchdog found to be misleading and deceptive across more than five years. THEY SAID IT: "A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defence than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom." - Martin Luther King jnr. YOU SAID IT: Truth might be the first casualty in war, but language falls soon after in a cacophony of buzzwords and euphemisms. "There also seems to be a great shortage of 'guardrails' in Australia in recent times," writes Ian. "No doubt, we could use some on our off-ramps. The expressions 'ethnic cleansing' and 'collateral damage' may be euphemistic, but they drip with irony and let the imagination run amok. So, they are all the more powerful expressions for it." David writes: "A concomitant aspect of the ongoing Coca-Cola-nisation of Australia is the gradual change of pronunciation of certain syllables/words/emphases adopted by news presenters/commentators: 'progress', where 'prog' rhymes with 'dog', and 'process' where 'proc' rhymes with 'boss'. The 'cig' in cigarette is emphasised instead of the 'ette'. Is it an inferiority problem, insecurity, ignorance? Whatever, it is painful." "The 'buzz phrase' that annoys me most? 'Reaching out' when all I did was make a phone call," writes Judith. "Nothing dramatic. I wasn't in dire straights. I didn't need rescuing. It was just an ordinary, garden variety phone call, probably to make an ordinary, garden variety enquiry about hours of trading. Or something equally mundane." Maggie writes: "Ethnic cleansing' revolts me. There's nothing clean about it; it's genocide. 'Decimate' - not nearly as bad as some people seem to think. 'That's incredible' - I hear, 'I don't believe you'. A diplomatic off-ramp? There's danger of simplistic thinking that might cloud a complex reality." This is a sample of The Echidna newsletter sent out each weekday morning. To sign up for FREE, go to It was another ignominious end. Dismantled, cannibalised for spare parts, their bodies were buried in an undisclosed location. They were never very good and were destined to be replaced, but a fatal crash in 2023 saw their demise brought forward. But Defence's jettisoning of the MRH90 Taipan helicopter wasn't the first time it had spent billions on a dud. In October 2008, their rotor blades removed, another terrible decision was shrink-wrapped, loaded onto semi trailers and trucked out of the HMAS Albatross naval air station near Nowra. If the MRH90 decision was a blunder, the decision in 1997 to buy 11 Super Seasprites for our fleet of ANZAC class frigates, was a catastrophe. At least the MRH90 flew. Not a single Super Seasprite became operational. You might as well have piled up in small denominations the $1 billion they cost and set fire to it. Of course, it's not just kit that's meant to fly which has the sour taste of expensive lemon about it. We've had the Collins class subs. Noisy, unreliable and, as discovered last year, corroding in the salt water meant to be their natural habitat. Having already cost about $20 billion, billions more is being spent to keep them going until the AUKUS subs arrive - if they do. The largest ships our navy operates - the two Landing Helicopter Decks, HMAS Canberra and HMAS Adelaide - arrived in the middle of the 2010s riddled with defects. HMAS Canberra chalked up 6000 of them. And the cost to keep them is nudging $200 million a year. I could go on. And on. And on some more. When it comes to spending money on defence, our track record on spending it wisely is far from flash. We have a history of spending a lot of buck for little bang. That's why alarm bells ring when there's a clamour for increased defence spending without any detail about how and where that money should be spent. Much of it is political noise, generated by NATO snapping to attention with a sharp "Sir, yessir!" - or a simpering "Yes, Daddy" if you were nauseated by its sycophancy when Trump visited - when it agreed to a US demand to lift its defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP. The Albanese government has batted away the calls from the usual suspects - Pete Hegseth, Karoline Leavitt and their two local parrots, Angus Taylor and Bridget McKenzie, neither of whom have spelled out of what spending they'd cut or taxes they'd raise to meet the extra spending. The government says Australia will decide on the capabilities it needs and spend accordingly. It's read the room and knows we don't like being told what to do - especially by the Trump administration. And we won't take well to extortion via tariffs either. It also knows Australia doesn't need to strike the same war footing as Europe. We don't have a war on our doorstep. There's no Russia imperilling our borders. That's not to say we shouldn't be clear-eyed about the challenges we face. China's military build-up cannot be ignored but also should not be overstated. It's unlikely to be coveting our distant shores because it's far cheaper to buy the resources we have than attempt to seize them. But can we ever know for certain? Probably not. Defence spending is important. But it's less a question how much we spend than how well. HAVE YOUR SAY: Should Australia follow NATO's lead and increase defence spending? Would you be happy to pay more tax to pay for more military hardware? Is China a bigger threat than the US to Australia? Email us: echidna@ SHARE THE LOVE: If you enjoy The Echidna, forward it to a friend so they can sign up, too. IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: - NSW Premier Chris Minns has refused to condemn the "brutal" actions of police who broke up a pro-Palestine protest that left a one-time federal Greens candidate with a serious eye injury. - A senior public servant who gave a relative's career a leg up while hiding their connection has been found to be corrupt by the National Anti-Corruption Commission. - One of Australia's biggest health insurers admits it incorrectly dealt with loads of claims and left customers thousands of dollars out of pocket. Bupa says it is "deeply sorry" for the conduct Australia's consumer watchdog found to be misleading and deceptive across more than five years. THEY SAID IT: "A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defence than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom." - Martin Luther King jnr. YOU SAID IT: Truth might be the first casualty in war, but language falls soon after in a cacophony of buzzwords and euphemisms. "There also seems to be a great shortage of 'guardrails' in Australia in recent times," writes Ian. "No doubt, we could use some on our off-ramps. The expressions 'ethnic cleansing' and 'collateral damage' may be euphemistic, but they drip with irony and let the imagination run amok. So, they are all the more powerful expressions for it." David writes: "A concomitant aspect of the ongoing Coca-Cola-nisation of Australia is the gradual change of pronunciation of certain syllables/words/emphases adopted by news presenters/commentators: 'progress', where 'prog' rhymes with 'dog', and 'process' where 'proc' rhymes with 'boss'. The 'cig' in cigarette is emphasised instead of the 'ette'. Is it an inferiority problem, insecurity, ignorance? Whatever, it is painful." "The 'buzz phrase' that annoys me most? 'Reaching out' when all I did was make a phone call," writes Judith. "Nothing dramatic. I wasn't in dire straights. I didn't need rescuing. It was just an ordinary, garden variety phone call, probably to make an ordinary, garden variety enquiry about hours of trading. Or something equally mundane." Maggie writes: "Ethnic cleansing' revolts me. There's nothing clean about it; it's genocide. 'Decimate' - not nearly as bad as some people seem to think. 'That's incredible' - I hear, 'I don't believe you'. A diplomatic off-ramp? There's danger of simplistic thinking that might cloud a complex reality." This is a sample of The Echidna newsletter sent out each weekday morning. To sign up for FREE, go to It was another ignominious end. Dismantled, cannibalised for spare parts, their bodies were buried in an undisclosed location. They were never very good and were destined to be replaced, but a fatal crash in 2023 saw their demise brought forward. But Defence's jettisoning of the MRH90 Taipan helicopter wasn't the first time it had spent billions on a dud. In October 2008, their rotor blades removed, another terrible decision was shrink-wrapped, loaded onto semi trailers and trucked out of the HMAS Albatross naval air station near Nowra. If the MRH90 decision was a blunder, the decision in 1997 to buy 11 Super Seasprites for our fleet of ANZAC class frigates, was a catastrophe. At least the MRH90 flew. Not a single Super Seasprite became operational. You might as well have piled up in small denominations the $1 billion they cost and set fire to it. Of course, it's not just kit that's meant to fly which has the sour taste of expensive lemon about it. We've had the Collins class subs. Noisy, unreliable and, as discovered last year, corroding in the salt water meant to be their natural habitat. Having already cost about $20 billion, billions more is being spent to keep them going until the AUKUS subs arrive - if they do. The largest ships our navy operates - the two Landing Helicopter Decks, HMAS Canberra and HMAS Adelaide - arrived in the middle of the 2010s riddled with defects. HMAS Canberra chalked up 6000 of them. And the cost to keep them is nudging $200 million a year. I could go on. And on. And on some more. When it comes to spending money on defence, our track record on spending it wisely is far from flash. We have a history of spending a lot of buck for little bang. That's why alarm bells ring when there's a clamour for increased defence spending without any detail about how and where that money should be spent. Much of it is political noise, generated by NATO snapping to attention with a sharp "Sir, yessir!" - or a simpering "Yes, Daddy" if you were nauseated by its sycophancy when Trump visited - when it agreed to a US demand to lift its defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP. The Albanese government has batted away the calls from the usual suspects - Pete Hegseth, Karoline Leavitt and their two local parrots, Angus Taylor and Bridget McKenzie, neither of whom have spelled out of what spending they'd cut or taxes they'd raise to meet the extra spending. The government says Australia will decide on the capabilities it needs and spend accordingly. It's read the room and knows we don't like being told what to do - especially by the Trump administration. And we won't take well to extortion via tariffs either. It also knows Australia doesn't need to strike the same war footing as Europe. We don't have a war on our doorstep. There's no Russia imperilling our borders. That's not to say we shouldn't be clear-eyed about the challenges we face. China's military build-up cannot be ignored but also should not be overstated. It's unlikely to be coveting our distant shores because it's far cheaper to buy the resources we have than attempt to seize them. But can we ever know for certain? Probably not. Defence spending is important. But it's less a question how much we spend than how well. HAVE YOUR SAY: Should Australia follow NATO's lead and increase defence spending? Would you be happy to pay more tax to pay for more military hardware? Is China a bigger threat than the US to Australia? Email us: echidna@ SHARE THE LOVE: If you enjoy The Echidna, forward it to a friend so they can sign up, too. IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: - NSW Premier Chris Minns has refused to condemn the "brutal" actions of police who broke up a pro-Palestine protest that left a one-time federal Greens candidate with a serious eye injury. - A senior public servant who gave a relative's career a leg up while hiding their connection has been found to be corrupt by the National Anti-Corruption Commission. - One of Australia's biggest health insurers admits it incorrectly dealt with loads of claims and left customers thousands of dollars out of pocket. Bupa says it is "deeply sorry" for the conduct Australia's consumer watchdog found to be misleading and deceptive across more than five years. THEY SAID IT: "A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defence than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom." - Martin Luther King jnr. YOU SAID IT: Truth might be the first casualty in war, but language falls soon after in a cacophony of buzzwords and euphemisms. "There also seems to be a great shortage of 'guardrails' in Australia in recent times," writes Ian. "No doubt, we could use some on our off-ramps. The expressions 'ethnic cleansing' and 'collateral damage' may be euphemistic, but they drip with irony and let the imagination run amok. So, they are all the more powerful expressions for it." David writes: "A concomitant aspect of the ongoing Coca-Cola-nisation of Australia is the gradual change of pronunciation of certain syllables/words/emphases adopted by news presenters/commentators: 'progress', where 'prog' rhymes with 'dog', and 'process' where 'proc' rhymes with 'boss'. The 'cig' in cigarette is emphasised instead of the 'ette'. Is it an inferiority problem, insecurity, ignorance? Whatever, it is painful." "The 'buzz phrase' that annoys me most? 'Reaching out' when all I did was make a phone call," writes Judith. "Nothing dramatic. I wasn't in dire straights. I didn't need rescuing. It was just an ordinary, garden variety phone call, probably to make an ordinary, garden variety enquiry about hours of trading. Or something equally mundane." Maggie writes: "Ethnic cleansing' revolts me. There's nothing clean about it; it's genocide. 'Decimate' - not nearly as bad as some people seem to think. 'That's incredible' - I hear, 'I don't believe you'. A diplomatic off-ramp? There's danger of simplistic thinking that might cloud a complex reality."
