Cut and thrust: PM cops flak in fierce air strike

By VERNON SMALL deputy political editor

Tally-ho!

Armed to the lips for a fire-fight on defence, Parliament's warlike factions strafed each other on collateral issues until yesterday's question time ritual gave way to the Real Thing.

But the early casualties were civilian observers from high schools, who must have wondered at the futility of it all.

Prime Minister Helen Clark ducked the first incoming query from National's Jenny Shipley, probing when the PM first knew that the Coalition's spending cap would be blown off.

With her best weasel-cunning look, the Prime Minister confirmed that from time to time she talked to the Finance Minister about such matters.

In any case the extra $270 million was an infinitesimal increase.

Michael Cullen helpfully dubbed it "a gentle expiration" rather than a blowout.

Quizzed by Bill English about why he kept colleagues in the dark about the slow puncture in his fiscal promise, Dr Cullen sucked up to his leader rather than supply anything relevant.

"All members of this Government bask in the light shone by the Prime Minister," he greased.

Cue laughter mixed with groans.

Social Services Minister Steve Maharey limbered up with a new name for what everyone else calls an inter-departmental cock-up over health subsidies.

It was, he said shamelessly, a case of "insufficient horizontal coordination."

The last question before the Big Debate was aimed at uncovering the level of adult literacy.

One in five had poor literacy skills, former High School principal Marian Hobbs lamented. Poor communication skills rumbled on around her.

It fell to Defence Minister Mark Burton to open the Government's defence of its defence review.

"It's a sell-out," National's chief hawk Max Bradford interjected before Mr Burton could intone the party line about rebuilding after "neglect, obsolescence and decay" under National.

Faced with a review which scrapped 17 Skyhawks and launched almost as many reviews, Mrs Shipley chose to focus on the demise of the air combat force.

Harking back to the Second World War's Battle of Crete she said New Zealand's troops there were almost obliterated without air cover.

Canning the Skyhawks was part of a move away from combat readiness to a non-combat police force; a move from burden-sharing with our allies to bludger-dom.

The armed forces were bleeding personnel and the "disgusting" decision would undermine security in the arc north of Australia.

Taking aim at a mocking Helen Clark she accused her of being "a peacenik of the first order."

But her party's commitment to a New Zealand air combat force went only so far. An incoming National Government would hold talks with Australia to determine if an independent air strike capability was the best option or whether a combined force would be appropriate.

"She is going to ring up Mr Howard and ask him what to do next," Helen Clark scoffed.

But the Prime Minister's main target was Max Bradford, who has an empty hangar in his life since his deal to buy 28 F-16 fighter planes dirt-cheap was dumped by the Labour-Alliance "bludgers."

She claimed that in 1997, before he was defence minister, Mr Bradford had mooted scrapping the Skyhawks if that was the price of buying more frigates for the Navy.

Mr Bradford's own spending preferences - $1 billion on new combat planes, $750 million each for new frigates and $600 million for an upgrade of the Orion's surveillance systems - amounted to more than any Government would spend.

She said the real debate was not about spending levels but the configuration of the defence force.

New Zealand had long operated with others, and the new shape of the armed forces presaged more cooperation, not less.

She said 17 "clapped-out Skyhawks" would not make the difference between isolationism and non-isolationism, between being combat-ready and non-combat ready.

Mr Bradford sent his sympathy to the more than 700 staff who would lose their jobs.

"Cuts, isolationism and bludging. A peacenik pandering to pacifists," he said, emptying his remaining ammunition into the empty seat where Helen Clark had been.

Firing back over defence cuts


National Party defence spokesman Max Bradford: "It is not overstating the case to say that New Zealand soldiers may end up paying for Labour's decision with their lives.

"Sending troops into any danger zone without the benefit of air cover reduces those soldiers to the status of cannon fodder."

* Act defence spokesman Owen Jennings: "Collective security has been the important basis of New Zealand's defence for over 50 years. Now that has been abandoned.

"There will be consequences from this ideological experiment. Every exporter will know instinctively that their interests have been betrayed today."

* NZ First defence spokesman Ron Mark: "To diminish our Air Force and Navy to what is merely a fisheries-monitoring role ignores the lessons taught to us throughout our short history and serves to signal to others that as we see no risk to our security, we are ripe for the taking.

"$2 billion over 10 years is not sufficient to meet our ... requirements."

* David Dickens, director of the Centre for Strategic Studies: "The real cost is that the Army will lose its capacity to work with aircraft. That's an absolutely core skill, especially for special forces.

"New communications equipment and light armoured vehicles for the Army are not enough to make up for the vulnerability now caused by the lack of experience with air combat."

* Former Defence Secretary Gerald Hensley: "The dismantling of the air combat capability ... has not been matched with any appreciable improvement for the Army.

"The Army can't train properly without some kind of air capability, for close air support, forward air control - these are all elements of a modern army. You have to be able to work with fast, high-performance aircraft."

* Sir Somerford Teagle, former Chief of the Defence Force: "Here we are, sitting in the middle of the ocean, all alone."