Re "AUKUS information sharing deal on nuclear submarines leaves scenario of no deal on table", canberratimes.com.au, Nov 30).
Your article reports a hidden catch casts doubt on nuclear submarines. It suggests the government has 18 months from January 2022 to determine the best plan for acquiring these submarines provided the plan does not invalidate or prejudice any of the conditions for the transfer of nuclear propulsion expertise central to the agreement.
DFAT is satisfied that this 18-month period would be sufficient to find the best solution to any of Australia's atomic energy proliferation agreements and responsibilities. Thus, it remains to be seen whether by July 2023 Defence will have a practical plan in place for the construction of these submarines in Australia which will be agreeable to the UK and USA governments; particularly with regard to the security of nuclear propulsion information.
It was observed that such information can be held in virtual and real memory. Thus, sensitive nuclear information may not be transferred until the plan is accepted by all parties to the agreement. Will 18 months will be enough, noting the long gestation period to establish a viable industrial solution for the existing Collins Class?
The brunt of this situation will be borne by our next government. One would hope to see two plans developed over the next 18 months, Plan A for nuclear submarines and Plan B to get the government out of what could be a very deep hole.
I disagree with Nic Stuart 's assessment of Peter Dutton as defence minister. Far from being out of his depth since taking over the portfolio he seems to have shown the department and the top brass who is boss by reinstituting the unit citation for our special forces (99 per cent of whom were innocent of any wrongdoing.
He has also reinstated separate training regimes for the SAS and commandos which are different types of units. And he has also actually done something to get our armed forces the equipment they desperately need. Money has been put in the budget for the purchase of more lethal guided long range missiles and for the start of an indigenous manufacturing ability to build guided missiles.
AUKUS will also be a lot more effective if it is driven by the minister and not his department. We should benefit over the next five or so years with access to the most modern technology in cyber, hypersonic missile and drone technology.
He does need to drive the urgent production and acquisition of lots and lots of drones, including drone submarines.
I believe he also needs to get cracking on the construction off shore of our nuclear subs; most likely the Virginia class but it would not hurt to look at the French Suffren class (the nuclear version of our unlamented hybrid Barracuda class). FAUKUS anyone?
Nicholas Stuart's article epitomises the "febrile verbiage" of which he accuses Peter Dutton when addressing the National Press Club. The article also states "he (Dutton) cancelled new submarines without announcing a replacement".
Where has Stuart been during the past weeks? Surely he has heard of AUKUS and the new nuclear powered subs program for the RAN?
One has to wonder what experience Stuart has had either with or within the ADF other than as a seemingly bitter pacifist.
Such published misinformation is despicable as is most of the article which seemingly has been written by a rusted-on ALP supporter and designed to denigrate and demean not only our Defence Minister but also our ADF.
Stuart conveniently forgets that during the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd governments between 2007 and 2013 the defence budget was reduced to the equivalent of that in 1938.
Not one item of major equipment was ordered to enhance the ADF's capability.
It's not often that Zed Seselja makes an insightful comment, especially relating to his continued refusal to support the repeal of the anti-ACT Andrews bill. On Monday in Parliament he did.
His main argument against repeal is that the ACT government can't be trusted. This clearly implies that people of the ACT can't be trusted to elect competent representatives. How true. We elected him (albeit with just 31 per cent of the primary vote).
Why should we risk dying like flies in catastrophic climate change or a nuclear winter because we embrace the "cut-throat" capitalism of the Anglosphere as advocated by Mr Morrison and his ilk?
There has never been a time of greater need for international co-operation and peaceful resolution of disputes and existential problems.
There are several models of neutrality, even armed, that we could draw on as well as a balanced mixed economy that is ecologically sustainable.
To tie our future to the belligerent, dysfunctional and failing American state is madness. The "age of empire" is over, as is the era of unlimited growth and consumption.
We need to think carefully and deeply about our future. We need to be smart, diplomatic and adroit on the international stage: to make peace not war, and to foster true social solidarity at home.
Ian Warden ("Semicolons lost amid the long grass", November 28, p40) deplores the decline of the semicolon, but he apparently isn't concerned about the decline of the comma.
The purpose of punctuation is to make writing more intelligible by representing the pauses in speech.
Here's an example from Ian's article:
"Do I only love semicolons because I am a prig and did literature at college and so am familiar with great writers (Jane Austen, Virginia Woolf and Herman Melville) whose works are semicolon-rich?".
There should be commas before the three occurrences of "and".
Compare the above sentence with this one from Herman Melville's Moby-Dick:
"Take almost any path you please, and ten to one it carries you down in a dale, and leaves you there by a pool in the stream".
Whenever I view chatter about the PM's family holiday I think of an actual incident on an Oberon-class submarine.
Remember those? They actually worked.
A commodore was on a familiarisation trip and he was awakened by the crew going into action fighting a fire while submerged. A nightmare.
He approached the captain, asking if he could be of assistance.
When told "not really sir" he replied "in that case I am going back to bed". Thus showing complete confidence in the crew and exhibiting real leadership. A lesson perhaps to be learned.
In an article ostensibly about Australian submarine development ("Submarines are not the best defence for Australia's community", canberratimes.com.au, November 14) Denis Moriarty's flights of fancy range widely from climate change to comparing the submarine project with the development of the Supermarine Spitfire.
Moriarty's straw man argument imagined the development of the Spitfire taking 75 years. But the Spitfire was not developed for military purposes at all. Denis missed the clue in the name "Supermarine".
The aircraft was developed by designer R J Mitchell of Supermarine to win the Schneider Trophy for the fastest seaplane.
By 1931 Supermarine had won the trophy three times giving Britain permanent possession of the trophy. That success inspired Mitchell to design a military version with the first prototype flying in 1936.
This illustrates that meaningful analysis of the development of military equipment must take account of the evolution of the industrial capacity of the nation for both military and civilian purposes.
Another example was the production of the shock-resistant steel needed for production of the Collins class submarine hulls. The capacity to produce the type of steel already existed at BHP in Port Kembla. Collaboration by the project team with the Defence Science and Technology Organisation and BHP produced a new, more resistant alloy, together with testing and welding techniques.
The Collins have served the navy well and will do so for years to come.
Alpha, Beta, Delta and now Omicron. When it comes to COVID-19 it's all Greek to me.
China could easily, legally, rule Hong Kong tighter than it does or overrun Taiwan easily, but it doesn't. Why then do people like Constable Dutton try to have you believe that the city of Hobart is in danger of being bombed by China?
Ed Highley (Letters, November 29). Manuel from Barcelona did, indeed, know nothing (about Fawlty's bet on a horse).
It was neither Fawlty Towers nor Hogan's Heroes. It was Schultz in Rowan and Martin's Laugh In, who regularly knew nothing.
Don't cross the morality line. The Lambie of God is there to kick bottoms.
Well said Senator Lambie. That's one Tasmanian senator who gives us hope.
I will really miss Scott Morrison when he shuffles off the stage. Where will we turn for political comedy? He is a satirist's Magic Pudding, the gift that keeps on giving to our humourists and cartoonists. Where else will they find a national leader who is at once so pugnacious, so touchy, so often out of his depth, and so eager to lead with the chin?
Be very careful about legalising euthanasia. We don't need any more excuses to underfund quality palliative care programs. From my experience those patients who get to the point of choosing to end their own life may not necessarily be guided objectively either by their own judgement or that of a second or even third party.
Christian Porter is protected from revealing the identity of anonymous donors to his legal bills. However Morrison wants to force Twitter and Facebook reveal the identity of select authors. Is it anonymity for some but not for others?
Does the Prime Minister's action against trolls including those using parliamentary privilege?
In keeping with the example established by her predecessor, Michaelia Cash would seem to prefer playing with safely predictable legal dice; unsurprising in view of government rorting and sleaze and her temerity in challenging her court established obligations to health of young Australians. ("Donaghue reappointed for five years", canberratimes.com.au, November 27).
COVID-19 variants are educating the world on the Greek alphabet.
Sign up for our newsletter to stay up to date.