Navy vessels to be built to civilian standards

By KEVIN TAYLOR

Half a billion dollars worth of new vessels for the Royal New Zealand Navy will be built to civilian, not military, standards.

Defence Minister Mark Burton revealed this in answer to written parliamentary questions from National defence spokesman Simon Power.

Mr Burton said components in the vessels, like their weapons, communications and aviation capability, would be of military specification, but the ships would be built primarily to civilian standard.

He said they would mainly be used for patrol work and training, and the proposed multi-role ship would also undertake military and civilian sealift tasks.

Mr Burton caused an outcry from opposition MPs in Parliament last month when he avoided answering questions about the standard the ships would be built to.

In January 2002 the Government announced a plan to spend up to $500 million on new Navy ships.

The Navy would get a large multi-role sealift-capable vessel to replace the frigate Canterbury, at least two offshore patrol vessels and four or five inshore patrol vessels or an upgrade of the inshore patrol fleet.

Mr Power said yesterday Mr Burton was "clearly embarrassed" in Parliament last month.

"We need to be assured that any civilian vessels are not only up to standard internationally to vessels of a comparative size, but that they aren't just going to sink immediately they hit a rock."

He understood the vessels would have multiple roles, including non-military ones.

"But one would think that if a defence department was purchasing these vehicles, the primary driver would be to make sure they were to military standard."

Military ships are built to higher standards to withstand combat. They have stronger hulls, redundant systems, and better damage control capability.

Mr Power said, "We have seen this Government dismantle capability in the Air Force and now we are being told that that capability will be made up with capital expenditure in the naval area. Now, only after questioning, we find out that they are actually talking about civilian specifications."

Mr Burton is overseas, but Acting Defence Minister Margaret Wilson said last night through a spokeswoman the vessels were not expected to participate in a "war-fighting situation", so building them to full military specifications was likely to be both expensive and unnecessary.

She said there were no figures on what the Government was saving by building the ships to civilian specifications.

"The contractors are required to deliver the desired capability for $500 million, and that includes components built to both civilian and military specifications."

Six bidders are interested in the project and the successful bid is expected to be announced early next year.

Fitzroy Engineering of New Plymouth is mounting a joint bid with British firm Vosper Thornycroft.

Fitzroy chairman Peter White-Robinson confirmed yesterday the tenders were for civilian-specification ships, but he believed it was the right approach for the Government to take.

Victoria University Centre for Strategic Studies director Peter Cozens said he had not known the ships would be built to civilian standards, but he was not concerned.

He said irrespective of the fact that civil standards were inferior to military ones, the ships had to be capable of handling the rough seas in the South Pacific.

Mr Cozens, who retired from the Navy in 1993 with the rank of Commander, said building the multi-role vessel to a civilian specification was perhaps not that critical because the Navy tanker Endeavour was not built to military standard either.

"For most of its working life it's not going to be put into the firing line so to speak."

But he said all the new vessels must be able to operate in "some of the most tempestuous seas" in the world.

"One of these ships might have to go and sail through a bloody hurricane for God's sake. You want ships that are going to last the pace."

Naval battle:

Key differences between civilian and military vessels:
* Military ships are built to withstand damage from combat with stronger hulls and superstructures than civilian vessels.
* They can be pushed beyond prudent constraints and will still work.
* Military ships feature many redundant systems - for example electrical cables - so if one is damaged or destroyed another will take over.
* Naval vessels have better damage control capabilities.