Navy helicopter upgrade needed after Seasprites 'worked to the bone'

Defence Minister Judith Collins with members of the New Zealand Defence Force at Sunday's announcement.
Photo:
RNZ / Calvin Samuel
The government's $2 billion spend on new naval helicopters is being welcomed by experts, but the opposition says other problems need just as much focus.
Defence Minister Judith Collins's
pre-Budget announcement on Sunday
revealed replacement of the Navy's Seasprite helicopters would be the first major expense from the
$12 billion capability plan
unveiled last month.
She also revealed a $957m spend from the Budget - separate from the capability plan - on Defence Force activities, personnel and property.
"As a maritime nation we are prioritising naval capability. The new helicopters will be able to go further and carry larger loads, including weapons, personnel and equipment - all of which is critical for Defence to protect New Zealand and New Zealanders," Collins said.
Labour leader Chris Hipkins said it was a sensible approach, but similar levels of spending were needed in other areas like health, education and housing.
"I think the replacement of the Seasprite helicopters is necessary. We do rely on them for things like disaster recovery, for the provision of humanitarian aid, and I think ultimately it's good to see the government investing in them," he said.
"Replacement of the Seasprites is well and truly justified, but the government's clearly prioritising defence spending while offering austerity in areas like health, education and housing. I think New Zealanders need to see a similar level of commitment to investment in those areas.
"This is a government that scaled back hospital redevelopments, it scaled back school rebuilds, and has almost completely stopped building new state houses. Those are vital investments in New Zealand's future as well."
He said he was not in a position to judge the price-tag, but military procurement was different from the commercial sensitivity in the private sector in that prices were "fairly standard", so it was good to see the government being transparent about costs.
The Green Party's Defence spokesperson Teanau Tuiono called the military focus of the government's spending into question.
"Preparing for war is not how we build peace," he said, "We've been told by Nicola Willis that this upcoming budget is going to be an austerity budget, there's nothing in the bank do a lolly scramble - well someone's got all the lollies and it appears to be Judith Collins and David Seymour," he said.
Willis - the Finance Minister -
last week revealed
the 22 May Budget's operating allowance would be about $1.1 billion smaller than previously expected, but said it was not an austerity approach.
Tuiono called for a stronger focus on Pacific diplomacy and climate change mitigation, rather than spending up large on military hardware.
"Is that what the Pacific is asking us? That's a question I would have: have Pacific leaders told us they actually want us to get helicopters? What you often hear from them is that they want support around climate change.
"More can be done to support the Pacific and the focus needs to be on that relationship, and we've got to look at it in the context of the US up-sticks and leaving.
"That takes a lot of dialogue. It takes diplomacy. I don't think it means arming up."
University of Otago professor of international relations Robert Patman said New Zealand did need to do more on climate change, but disagreed that investing in defence was a preparation for war.
"In a world in which there is conflict, unfortunately, perception of weakness can make you a target and it's no secret that we've only been spending about 1 percent of GDP on defense for about two or three decades," he said.
"I think if you want an independent foreign policy you do need to have the capability to not only defend yourself but also to contribute to multilateral security operations. Most problems in the world today - particularly in the world of security, but also climate change and also economic problems - they don't respect borders.
"This defense announcement we've had doesn't signal a willingness to act unilaterally or even be part of some alignment of a great power. It signals, I think, a pragmatic recognition that since we basically rely on the multilateral system and we believe in the rules based order ... we do have to have the capability to contribute with others, to deal with problems that threaten that order."
He said the spending announcement was not only encouraging because it gave certainty over the helicopters' replacement, it was also signalling that the government was "very mindful that we're a maritime nation, and our maritime estate, so to speak - that exclusive economic zone around New Zealand - needs to be monitored".
"It's a form of insurance. You hope you don't have to use it, but... it's nice to have it in place, just in case something untoward or unexpected develops, and I think this is quite sensible policy making."
Victoria University's Centre for Strategic Studies director David Capie said the defence force had been under-invested in for decades, and in recent years had been unable to perform some of the tasks expected of it.
The helicopters were also essential, he said, for the Navy to be able to do what it needed to do - and the replacement of them was something that had been planned during the previous government's term.
"You need helicopters that can actually extend the effectiveness of our frigates and other vessels ... they're also likely to be bigger than the ones that the Navy currently operates, and so they'll also be capable to fulfil a number of other other roles, like search and rescue and humanitarian assistance and response."
He said the Seasprites had been "worked to the bone".
"We had eight helicopters, we've cut that back to five essentially to cannibalise the ones that we have, to keep them in the air ... it's another classic case of New Zealand is really running assets into the ground, it becomes more and more expensive to keep them operating, and so there are some things that just suddenly become urgent and really need to be addressed.
"So $2 billion is a lot, but this you also need to think that this is an investment over many decades of a future capability and it's part of an insurance policy that's vital for our nation's security."
At the announcement, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said the focus was on ensuring NZDF had the personnel in place and bringing new assets into the system, and signalled defence could be a priority for additional new spending.
"If we have more money, if our economy is doing better, of course we'll tip more money into it as we go," he said.
"It comes from a place of us as a new government saying 'look, we cannot have economic prosperity without defence and security. We're living in an Indo-Pacific region that is more geostrategically contested and competitive. We see rising tensions through the world but also through our region.
"It's really important you don't just spout off with your values and your words, you've actually got to follow it up with some actions and some commitment."
A spokesperson for Judith Collins said all figures for the helicopter spending - and all other estimates from the Defence Capability Plan - would be subject to finalised business cases.
Exactly which model of helicopter would be chosen would also depend on the business case, but the $2b minimum set aside for them in the Budget would cover the cost of the helicopters themselves, as well as their operating costs for the first four years.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Otago Daily Times

an hour ago

• Otago Daily Times

US attack on Iran will worsen conflict: prof

The United States attacks on three principal nuclear sites in Iran will likely worsen conflict in the Middle-East, the University of Otago's leading international relations academic says. It comes after US President Donald Trump confirmed yesterday that US forces struck Iran's three principal nuclear sites: Natanz, Esfahan and Fordow — six bunker buster bombs were dropped on Fordow, while 30 Tomahawk missiles were fired against other nuclear sites. University of Otago international relations Professor Robert Patman said that it would be naive to assume this attack would lead to any wind-down of the conflict. "I think it's reflective of the fact that Mr Trump and his administration are living in something of a bubble. "The idea that Iran is going to roll over after being hit by six bunker buster bombs and about 30 cruise missiles I think is fantasy. "I think this whole operation is based on a very shaky operating assumption that you can eliminate the threat by bombing it away." Prof Patman said Iran, over the years, had "never said it wants nuclear weapons". "It says it wants what many other countries have, which is a civilian nuclear energy generation capacity." Mr Trump was dealing with a "crisis of his own making". "He had a perfectly workable deal called the US-Iran nuclear deal, which was negotiated by the Obama administration, but Mr Trump proceeded to walk away from that — and of course, Iran no longer felt bound by its terms." Iran had the knowledge to reconstruct its nuclear capability if it so desired, Prof Patman said. "We have knowledge that most of the material at these sites was evacuated sometime ago. "So have the US just used very expensive bombs to little effect? "We don't know," he said. "I think many Middle Eastern countries will be pretty upset with Mr Trump because this could become a region-wide conflict now, particularly if the Iranian leadership decide they're going to make his life very difficult by targeting American personnel and interests." Prof Patman called the strikes against Iran "likely illegal". "Iran has said repeatedly that it is a victim in this situation. It's not the aggressor. "As the victim, under Article 51 of the UN Charter, it's got the right of self-defence," he said. New Zealand Foreign Minister Winston Peters and Defence Minister Judith Collins said yesterday the government was pursuing all options for assisting New Zealanders stranded in Iran and Israel. As part of government efforts to pursue all options for assisting New Zealanders in harm's way, government personnel and a C-130J Hercules aircraft are being deployed to the Middle East and will stand ready to assist if needed. The government was also in discussion with commercial airlines to assess how they may be able to assist. The situation in the Middle East was "fast-moving" and it will take several days for the C-130J Hercules, scheduled to leave Auckland today, to reach the region, they said. Mr Peters called for "diplomacy", saying that would be the path to peace in the Middle East — not further "military action". There were estimated to be about 50 New Zealanders in Iran and 80 in Israel, he said. Last week, the last remaining New Zealand diplomats in Iran fled the country after the government made repeated calls for New Zealanders to stay out of Iran. Meanwhile, all New Zealanders in the Middle East — not just in Iran and Israel — were urged to register on SafeTravel. Prof Patman said while these initiatives were good and necessary, New Zealand could be doing far more on a world stage. "New Zealand has got an international reputation for, first of all, wanting the abolition of nuclear weapons, but also for pursuing its own non-nuclear security policy. "This US attack on Iran, in my view, is a reckless and illegal act — it's likely to make the world less secure rather than more secure. "It's time for New Zealand to press for the reform of the UN Security Council. "The UN Security Council should not be a bystander because one of its key members is breaking international law."

Scoop

9 hours ago

• Scoop

US Starts New Horror Show For Israel

The Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa is calling out for New Zealanders to condemn the US bombing of Iran. PSNA Co-Chair, Maher Nazzal, says he hopes, but does not expect, that the New Zealand government will be critical of the US for its war escalation. 'Israel has once again hoodwinked the United States into fighting Israel's wars. 'Israel's Prime Minister has declared Iran to be on the point of producing nuclear weapons since the 1990s. It's all part of his big plan for expulsion of Palestinians from Palestine to create a Greater Israel, and regime change for the entire region.' 'Israel knows Arab and European countries will fall in behind these plans and in many cases actually help implement them.' 'It is a dreadful day for the Palestinians. Netanyahu's forces will be turned back onto them in Gaza and the West Bank.' 'It is just as dreadful day for the whole Middle East. Trump has tried to add Iran to the disasters of US foreign policy in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan. The US simply doesn't care how many people will die.'

Scoop

10 hours ago

• Scoop

Analysis: Tensions And Timing Test Luxon On First Official China Visit

, Deputy Political Editor in Beijing Analysis - Luck was not on Christopher Luxon's side for his first official trip to China. Even before the visit began, the prime minister was battling for control of the narrative, as a suite of former political leaders - including Helen Clark and Don Brash - accused the coalition of antagonising China through its embrace of the US. A clearly irritated Luxon batted away the warning - "maybe listen to fewer former politicians" - but the commentary persisted. In fact, the superpower struggle was given more prominence by events unfolding in the Middle East as Israel launched open warfare on Iran, with the US and China backing opposing sides. No surprise New Zealanders at home showed more interest in US President Donald Trump's "will-he-won't-he" contemplations than in Luxon's Shanghai sales pitch. Then came news of the Cook Islands diplomacy crisis right on the eve of Luxon's big sit-down with President Xi Jinping. Luxon had to have been cursing the timing, as his pre-meeting media conference was consumed by questions about the government's decision to suspend funding to the Pacific nation after its controversial agreements with China earlier this year. He tried valiantly to characterise New Zealand's issue as being solely with the Cook Islands government, but it was impossible to ignore China's contribution as one-half of the deals in question. That was evidenced by a pointed response from China's Foreign Ministry: that its cooperation with the Cook Islands "should not be disrupted or restrained by any third party". Was the trip a success? Such comments were not repeated, however, in the brief public parts of Luxon's high-level meetings at the Great Hall of the People. The leaders on both sides were direct in their opening remarks but not at all confrontational. President Xi Jinping acknowledged "ups and downs" in the relationship while Luxon pointedly noted the importance of "stability in our region". But both also stressed the value of their ties. Premier Li Qiang even welcomed the "candid" nature of the conversations. Certainly, there was nothing to suggest China is contemplating economic retribution, as some have suggested. Supporters of the government's approach will see that as proof its strategy is working. Its critics will caution it means only that there is still time to change course. To understand China's perspective, one can look to the state media for an indication. On Thursday, state tabloid Global Times hosted a piece by Qin Sheng, associate professor at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. Qin said the China-NZ relationship could provide an example of "healthy interaction" in a world of "rising geopolitical rivalry and pervasive uncertainty". At the same time, he warned that the US was "actively wooing" New Zealand to join its "small circles aimed at containing China" including AUKUS pillar two. "For New Zealand, it is important to see the broader picture and ensure that its choices align with the prevailing trend of history." From a personal perspective, the PM would've been thrilled that Xi had been "impressed" by him in their first meeting at APEC last year. Alas, that sentiment is unlikely to filter through to the NZ public in any meaningful way. All travelling media noted the paltry audience interest in the stories filed as they landed on the afternoon of the public holiday Matariki. More bad luck. Broadly speaking, business leaders in the delegation were enthused and positive about the China visit, but there were some quiet grumblings. Two particular gripes came up multiple times in conversations. The trip's length - just two nights in Shanghai and one in Beijing - was considered too brief from a business perspective. It was hard not to notice the extra empty seats on the 757 returning home with several delegates clearly deciding to stay on in Beijing a little longer. Several businesspeople also questioned Luxon's strategy for luring back Chinese tourists and his characterisation of the issue as a "marketing challenge". When speaking to reporters, Luxon repeatedly insisted the problem was that New Zealand lacked "share of mind" in China and simply needed more promotion. The blame, he said, lay with Labour for being too slow to come out of Covid-19. Never mind that China itself had been slower. Those spoken to by RNZ suggested the more pressing concern was cost - and pointed out the coalition had hiked visa fees and tripled the International Visitor Levy. What next? Luxon's focus will now shift to the NATO forum which is he due to attend in the Netherlands in the coming days. In his final media conference in Beijing, Luxon made clear he considered his attendance there to be quite separate from his China mission. But he must know the two are very much connected and will be viewed as such. In recent comments, NATO chief Mark Rutte has grouped China together with Russia, Iran and North Korea, as effective foes of the West. Asked about the remarks, Luxon said he had seen "no evidence" of those four powers actively working together against the West. One wonders how that "difference of opinion" - as Luxon put it - will go down when the PM arrives at the Hague. Just last week, China expert Jason Young told RNZ that one of New Zealand's biggest challenges over the next two decades would be navigating that tension between its Western security partners and its largest trading partner China. There can be no relying on luck for that.