skip to navigation skip to content skip to footer

Chapter 3 - Annual performance statements


Statement of preparation

I, as the accountable authority of the Department of Defence, present the 2017–18 annual performance statements of the Department of Defence, as required under paragraph 39(1)(a) of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act). In my opinion, these annual performance statements are based on properly maintained records, accurately reflect the performance of the entity, and comply with subsection 39(2) of the PGPA Act.

Greg Moriarty's signature

Greg Moriarty
Secretary of Defence
27 September 2018

 

The annual performance statements for 2017–18 provide an assessment of Defence’s performance in achieving our purposes by reporting on the performance measures and criteria set out in the 2017–18 Defence Corporate Plan and the performance criteria listed in the Portfolio Budget Statements 2017–18 (PBS) and the Portfolio Additional Estimates Statements 2017–18 (PAES).

For 2017–18, the purposes are directly aligned to the Defence outcomes in the Portfolio Budget Statements. This is part of a program of work to align the Portfolio Budget Statements and the Defence Corporate Plan.

To enhance readability of the annual performance statements, the performance measures and criteria are organised around the two purposes described in the 2017–18 Defence Corporate Plan:

Purpose 1: Defend Australia and its national interests.
Purpose 2: Protect and advance Australia’s strategic interests.

Outcome statements describe what the Government requires Defence to achieve using resources allocated through the Commonwealth budget process. In 2017–18 Defence had two Outcome statements:

Outcome 1: Defend Australia and its national interests through the conduct of operations and provision of support for the Australian community and civilian authorities in accordance with Government direction.
Outcome 2: Protect and advance Australia’s strategic interests through the provision of strategic policy, the development, delivery and sustainment of military, intelligence and enabling capabilities, and the promotion of regional and global security and stability as directed by Government.

The purpose of the Defence enterprise performance management architecture is to ensure alignment between Government direction, strategy, funding and capability, such that the purposes of Defence are achieved.

In line with the Enhanced Commonwealth Performance Framework, the Defence enterprise performance management architecture aims to provide a clear line of sight between:

  • Corporate Plan (purposes, activities and intended results)
  • Portfolio Budget Statements (allocation of resources to Programs to achieve Government outcomes and a forecast of expected performance)
  • Annual performance statements within Defence’s Annual Report (actual performance results for the financial year against the Corporate Plan and the Portfolio Budget Statements)
  • The Defence Financial Statements (Chapter 11).

Defence is continuing to mature the architecture and the mechanisms which will further enable improved traceability in demonstrating the achievement of Government outcomes in accordance with the requirements of the PGPA Act.

Figure 3.1 demonstrates the relationship of the annual performance statements within Defence enterprise performance management.

Figure 3.1: Defence enterprise performance management

Figure 3.1: Defence enterprise performance management

Defence’s annual performance statements provide an assessment of actual performance of results in achieving each Defence purpose. This includes analysis against each performance criterion, using the key:

  • Achieved—the intended result was achieved as planned
  • Partially achieved—the intended result was not fully achieved during the reporting period.

Note: Due to national security considerations, not all targets are available to be published.

Analysis of performance against Purpose 1: Defend Australia and its national interests

Defence achieved Purpose 1 in 2017–18. In accordance with the Chief of the Defence Force Preparedness Directive, the Government deployed Australian Defence Force (ADF) capabilities to meet requirements of Government policy. The ADF conducted operations and provided support within Australia and our immediate neighbourhood; and globally promoted stability, integrity and cohesion.

Defence engaged across a range of Commonwealth departments and agencies to support operations in Australia’s immediate neighbourhood and achieve whole-of-government outcomes. For example, Defence is contributing to Operation SOLANIA, which focuses on maritime surveillance within the Pacific region, while Operation AUGURY—Philippines is enhancing shared understanding of experiences and approaches to countering complex urban terrorist tactics. Additionally, in 2017 Defence conducted its first ‘Indo-Pacific Endeavour’—a major maritime activity designed to promote security and stability in Australia’s near neighbourhood. The first iteration transited a range of South-East Asian nations from September to November 2017. The second iteration, which commenced in June 2018, focused on the South-West Pacific. As part of this activity, ADF personnel worked alongside partner security forces to support the development of regional maritime security capacity; and humanitarian assistance and disaster relief capabilities.

Throughout 2017–18 Defence also provided assistance to a number of regional humanitarian assistance and disaster relief efforts, including those in response to Tropical Cyclone Gita in Tonga and the 7.5 magnitude earthquake that struck the Highlands in Papua New Guinea. Regional activities such as these, complemented by increased investment in the internationally focused Defence Cooperation Program, further bolster Defence’s ability to work jointly with regional partners in pursuit of Australia’s national security interests.

Contributing to stable, rules-based global security is one of Australia’s national objectives. Defence collaborated with partners on the global stage to address issues such as engagement in the Middle East and counter-terrorism. Operation MANITOU supports international efforts to promote maritime security, stability and prosperity in the Middle East region. As part of Operation MANITOU, HMAS Warramunga’s seizures totalled approximately 26 tonnes of hashish and approximately two tonnes of heroin between December 2017 and May 2018.

Through Operation OKRA, the ADF collaborated closely with the Iraqi government, Gulf nations and international partners to combat the Daesh terrorist threat in Iraq and Syria. ADF personnel provided military advice and assistance to the Counter-Terrorism Service of the Iraqi Security Forces, supported international efforts to train and build the capacity of the regular Iraqi Security Forces and operated within the United States-led international coalition assembled to disrupt and degrade Daesh.

Through Operation HIGHROAD, the ADF has directly contributed to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization led Resolute Support Mission to train, advise and assist the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces as part of Australia’s commitment to a stable and secure Afghanistan. ADF personnel provided military advice and training to the Afghan Air Force, Afghan Special Security Forces and the Kabul Garrison Command. ADF personnel provided instruction and education to Afghan trainees at the Afghan National Army’s Officer, Command and Staff and Sergeants Major Academies, to support the longer-term growth and development of the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces.

Defence intelligence agencies delivered timely assessments, signals intelligence and accurate intelligence services against the National Intelligence Priorities. This included geospatial intelligence and hydrographic outputs to support military operations and domestic and regional security priorities of the Australian Government.

Defence planned and participated in a range of national support tasks in 2017–18, including securing the Australian coastline, counter-terrorism responses, search and rescue, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief. Joint Task Force 659, comprising up to 800 ADF personnel, supported the clean-up in Darwin after Tropical Cyclone Marcus on 17 March 2018—the largest response to a natural disaster in the Northern Territory for more than 30 years. In April 2018, more than 1,000 personnel from Navy, Army and Air Force worked collaboratively with the Queensland Police Service to provide additional security for the Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games.

Defence is leading the Government’s priority agenda for the creation of a national continuous naval shipbuilding enterprise, as outlined in the 2017 Naval Shipbuilding Plan. The continuous naval shipbuilding will be founded on four key programs: Future Submarine; Pacific Patrol Boat; Offshore Patrol Vessel; and Future Frigate. Delivering the Government’s agenda will require an unprecedented level of coordination, with a focus on maximising the benefits for Australia. Defence continues to have extensive whole-of-government collaboration, mapping the complex interdependencies between relevant portfolios, to better leverage existing Government programs and resources.

Defence continues to ensure that the Defence estate is fit-for-purpose with the expansion of the Shoalwater Bay Training Area and the establishment of a training area in northern Queensland as part of the Australia–Singapore Military Training Initiative.

Purpose 1: Defend Australia and its national interests.
Outcome 1: Defend Australia and its national interests through the conduct of operations and provision of support for the Australian community and civilian authorities in accordance with Government direction.

Measure 1.i. Required preparedness levels are achieved.
Methodology Assessment of preparedness against the Chief of the Defence Force Preparedness Directive.
Source Corporate Plan, p 11
Results Achieved. The ADF’s preparedness to meet Government direction, in accordance with the Chief of the Defence Force Preparedness Directive, has been achieved. The Services delivered specific capabilities within directed preparedness time frames while supporting multiple joint operations throughout 2017–18. The enabling support of Groups enhanced the sustainment and monitoring of ADF preparedness.

Measure 1.ii. Operational outcomes meet the requirements of Government policy.
Methodology Assessment of operational deployments against operational outcomes agreed with Government.
Source Corporate Plan, p 11
Results Achieved. Defence operations and activities were successfully planned and executed as directed by the Government. Government directed operational outcomes actively promote regional stability, integrity and cohesion and contribute to United Nations and international efforts to uphold global security. Defence collaborated with other departments and agencies to manage short-notice issues, like humanitarian assistance, to longer-term complex issues, like defeating terrorism, to future operations requiring Government consideration.

Measure 1.iii. State/Territory and inter-agency cooperation enables Defence to contribute effectively to whole-of-Government outcomes, in accordance with Government direction.
Methodology Assessment of inter-agency engagement against whole-of-Government outcomes agreed with Government.
Source Corporate Plan, p 11
Results Achieved. Defence has contributed effectively to whole-of-government outcomes throughout 2017–18 by working collaboratively with other government departments and agencies at state, territory and Commonwealth level. Defence policy advice on national security issues is rigorously contested through a wide range of policy and capability stakeholders across national security agencies. In partnership with the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Defence has established a range of committees with stakeholders across the Commonwealth, industry and state and territory governments. This whole-of-government collaboration is integral to harness critical advice and expertise for the delivery of naval shipbuilding outcomes.

Intended result Government is able to deploy Defence capability to support Government policy objectives.
Performance criteria Chief of the Defence Force preparedness levels meet Government requirements.
Target Chief of the Defence Force preparedness levels are achieved as agreed with Government.
Source PAES 2017–18 Program 2.8: Australian Defence Force Headquarters, p 45; Corporate Plan, p 12
Results Achieved. The achievement of the Chief of the Defence Force’s prescribed preparedness levels resulted in ADF performance that enabled the Government to deploy Defence capabilities to support Government policy objectives.

Intended result Defence intelligence services enable efficient operations across national security agencies.
Performance criteria Defence intelligence outputs align with Government intelligence priorities.
Target Whole-of-government and Australian Defence Force intelligence requirements are met.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.1: Strategic Policy and Intelligence, p 50; PAES 2017–18, p 35; Corporate Plan, p 12
Result Achieved. The Defence intelligence agencies delivered timely and accurate intelligence services against the National Intelligence Priorities to Defence and whole-of-government stakeholders. This included maintaining a watch function to ensure continuous 24/7 situational awareness for the ADF.
The Defence Intelligence Organisation has provided strategic-level intelligence assessment to support to ADF operations, Defence and whole-of-government policy and decision-making, and capability development.
The Australian Signals Directorate’s intelligence production has aligned with Government’s intelligence priorities.
The Australian Geospatial-Intelligence Organisation met whole-of-government and ADF intelligence requirements through the provision of intelligence and operational support. This included timely and accurate geospatial intelligence and hydrographic outputs in support to military operations and domestic and regional security priorities and an evolving geospatial intelligence capability to support a broad range of Australian Government customers.

Intended result Joint forces are able to be deployed and sustained efficiently and effectively, and in accordance with Government time frames.
Performance criteria Operational outcomes meet the requirements of Government policy.
Target All operational requirements are met.
Source PAES 2017–18 Program 2.8: Australian Defence Force Headquarters, p 45; Corporate Plan, p 12
Result Achieved. Defence operations and activities were conducted successfully in accordance with direction from the Government by ensuring joint forces were operationally ready.
Defence provided timely and accurate advice to Government on operations and military commitments through multiple ministerial submissions, Cabinet submissions, Estimates briefs and personal ministerial briefings.

Intended result The generation and sustainment of the Australian Defence Force are enabled by a fit-for-purpose estate.
Performance criteria The estate meets the requirements of the Capability Managers.
Target The Defence Estate Strategy implementation plan is delivered as agreed.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.10: Estate and Infrastructure, p 72; PAES 2017–18, p 48; Corporate Plan, p 12
Result Achieved. Implementation of the Defence Estate Strategy 2016–2036 is in its second year. The following outcomes were achieved in 2017–18:
  • The Estate and Infrastructure Capital Investment Program is now fully integrated into Defence’s Integrated Investment Program.
  • The purchase of land from willing sellers is contributing to the expansion of the Shoalwater Bay Training Area and establishment of a new military training area in northern Queensland as part of the Australia–Singapore Military Training Initiative.

 

Performance criteria Operational outcomes meet the requirements of Government policy.
Target All operational requirements are met.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 1.1: Operations Contributing to the Safety of the Immediate Neighbourhood, p 36; PAES 2017–18, p 29
Results Achieved. Defence operations and activities were successfully planned and executed as directed by the Government.
Defence provided advice to the Government on ADF operations and activities that actively promote regional stability, integrity and cohesion.
Defence collaborated with other departments and agencies to manage operations in Australia’s immediate neighbourhood with Indonesia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Timor-Leste, South-East Asian countries and the island countries of the South-West Pacific.

Performance criteria Operational outcomes meet the requirements of Government policy.
Target All operational requirements are met.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 1.2: Operations Supporting Wider Interests, p 38; PAES 2017–18, p 30
Results Achieved. Defence provided advice to Government on upholding global security through operations and activities in support of international efforts.
Defence collaborated with other departments and agencies on short-notice and longer-term complex issues requiring Government consideration.
Government relies on accurate and timely advice about operations and activities. Regular feedback from ministerial staff indicates satisfaction with the level of support provided.

Performance criteria Operational outcomes meet the requirements of Government policy.
Target All operational requirements are met.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 1.3: Defence Contribution to National Support Tasks in Australia, p 40; PAES 2017–18, p 31
Results Achieved. Defence advised on and supported whole-of-government operations and activities, including providing security to Australia’s approaches, ensuring a national response to terrorism, planning and executing search and rescue activities and providing humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.
Key to this was Defence’s engagement with the Department of Home Affairs (formerly the Department of Immigration and Border Protection) civil surveillance program and Maritime Border Command.
Defence support following Tropical Cyclone Marcus in Darwin and the Gold Coast Commonwealth Games are important examples of contributions to national support tasks through the Defence Assistance to the Civil Community program.

Feature: ADF contributes to the defeat of Daesh in Iraq

Analysis of performance against Purpose 2: Protect and advance Australia’s strategic interests

Defence achieved Purpose 2 in 2017–18. Defence is continuing to ensure that Government direction on strategy is implemented across the enterprise. This includes an annual review of Defence’s classified strategy document—the Defence Planning Guidance—so that the organisation is positioned to meet the strategic objectives set by the Government and is effectively pursuing Australia’s interests in a more competitive and contested world.

The Defence Strategic Workforce Plan continued to be implemented, achieving 94 per cent of recruiting targets for permanent ADF personnel and 84 per cent for reserve personnel. All ADF services achieved Government preparedness targets in force generation and sustainment. Workforce diversity profiles improved during the reporting period, with notable improvements in the representation of women and Indigenous Australians in the ADF and APS. Defence’s updated cultural reform initiative, Pathway to Change: Evolving Defence Culture 2017–22, was launched in November 2017, demonstrating Defence’s continued commitment to improving and reinforcing a positive culture within Defence.

Defence’s corporate enabling services, including estate and infrastructure support, health support and logistics and information technology, continued to implement service delivery reforms in line with the recommendations of the 2015 First Principles Review. The Customer Satisfaction Survey, measuring customer experience and satisfaction, has been improving throughout the implementation of the First Principles Review. Defence’s military enabling services continued to integrate and mature Defence’s joint capability, ensuring that preparedness levels were achieved. Notably, the Defence Fuel Transformation Program was endorsed in May 2018, and Joint Health Command implemented a new occupational rehabilitation service delivery system and periodic mental health screening for ADF personnel.

Defence has continued to deliver the Integrated Investment Program through 2017–18, with the Government approving a total of $21 billion of capital investment across major equipment, facilities, infrastructure, information and communications technology, and science and technology. Permanent participation in the Investment Committee by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet and the Department of Finance has strengthened Defence’s capability submissions to Government. Defence managed 198 active major and minor capital equipment projects worth $103.5 billion with a 2017–18 budget of $6.9 billion. During this period Defence also managed 111 active Material Sustainment Agreement Product Schedules with an annual budget of $5.6 billion. Twenty-five Major Acquisition Projects were closed in this period, with a total budget of 0.9 per cent less than that approved by the Government.

Defence has also matured its relationship with industry, bringing the Centre for Defence Industry Capability and Defence Innovation Hub completely online and releasing the Defence Industrial Capability Plan and Defence Export Strategy in the first half of 2018. The Next Generation Technologies Fund has enabled better collaboration with industry, Australian and international universities and publicly funded research agencies, accelerating the development of new technologies and new capability.

Defence supported ADF members and veterans through the provision of financial assistance, family support programs, transition services and bereavement services, with strong inter-agency engagement with Defence Housing Australia and the Department of Veterans’ Affairs. The Defence Home Ownership Assistance Scheme panel, administered by the Department of Veterans’ Affairs, continued to provide competitive financial support for loans, which have been taken up by a high number of ADF personnel. Defence increased its engagement and information exchange with the Department of Veterans’ Affairs, ensuring greater support to ADF members and veterans by both agencies. ADF Transition Support Services continued to transform from an administrative service to one of coaching and mentoring, focusing on tailored transition plans to better prepare ADF members and their families for civilian life.

Purpose 2: Protect and advance Australia’s strategic interests.
Outcome 2: Protect and advance Australia’s strategic interests through the provision of strategic policy, the development, delivery and sustainment of military, intelligence and enabling capabilities, and the promotion of regional and global security and stability as directed by Government.

Measure 2.i. Government has confidence in the relevance and quality of Defence advice.
Methodology Bi-annual survey of the relevant ministers and the central agencies.
Source Corporate Plan, p 13
Results Achieved. Defence has provided high-quality advice over the reporting period to inform ministers’ consideration of a wide range of complex national security issues and continued efforts to implement the guidance of the 2016 Defence White Paper. This has included provision of over 3,000 individual pieces of advice and approval of over 100 submissions for major capability decisions.
Implementation of new tools during the reporting period to manage and track Defence’s advice to ministers also helped deliver improvements in the timeliness of information flows.
Defence is further strengthening coordination with ministers and their staff to improve feedback on the Department’s advice. This includes through ministers’ participation in bi-annual iterations of the Defence Committee as a means to shape and integrate Defence’s strategic and policy advice to the Government. Implementation of stronger consultation with stakeholders across Government in shaping policy and investment options has also enhanced the relevance and quality of Defence’s advice.

Measure 2.ii. Government is assured that Defence advice has been appropriately contested.
Methodology Bi-annual survey of the relevant Ministers and the central agencies.
Source Corporate Plan, p 13
Results Achieved. Defence continues to provide high-quality, accurate and timely policy advice to the Government on Defence strategy, capability and resourcing to shape Australia’s strategic environment.
Defence policy advice on national security issues is rigorously contested through a wide range of policy and capability stakeholders within Defence and across national security agencies, including principally through rolling review of the classified Defence Planning Guidance.
The Contestability Division provides a source of independent assurance to the Vice Chief of the Defence Force as chair of the Investment Committee, the Secretary and Chief of the Defence Force, the central agencies, the ministers and the Government that Defence’s capability needs and requirements are aligned with strategy and resources and can be delivered in accordance with Government direction.
The Contestability Division has contributed to a marked improvement in the early engagement between the departments of Defence, the Prime Minister and Cabinet and Finance. In 2017 central agencies advised that, since the creation of the function, there had been significant improvements in early engagement and relationships and more relevant dialogue provided by the Contestability Division on complex capability issues for the Investment Committee.

Measure 2.iii. The capability delivery process maintains the integrity of the Integrated Investment Program and delivers the required capability for the force-in-being.
Methodology Assessment of delivery against the Integrated Investment Program.
Source Corporate Plan, p 13
Results Achieved. Defence has continued to deliver the Integrated Investment Program through the $200 billion recapitalisation of ADF capability outlined in the 2016 Defence White Paper.
During 2017–18, the Government approved 111 capability-related submissions for major equipment, facilities and infrastructure, information and communications technology and science technology. This comprised of 21 ‘First Pass’ approvals, 35 ‘Second Pass’ approvals and 55 ‘Other Pass’ approvals.
Significant Government announcements included:
  • Second Pass approval for the Future Frigate program (approximately $35 billion capital)
  • Other Pass approval for Future Submarine Design and Construction (approximately
    $700 million capital)
  • Second Pass approval for Combat Reconnaissance Vehicles (approximately $5.2 billion capital).

Measure 2.iv. Defence capability is sustained consistent with Government requirements.
Methodology Sustainment meets capability manager requirements.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.9: Capability Acquisition and Sustainment, p 70; PAES 2017–18, p 47; Corporate Plan, p 13
Results Achieved. As at 30 June 2018, Defence was managing 111 active product lines with an annual budget of $5.6 billion. Availability and cost performance targets were consistently achieved in support of the Capability Manager meeting preparedness and operational outcomes through sustainment of military equipment. Of the 111 sustainment products managed, nine products (or 8.1 per cent) experienced issues with availability and cost that were significant enough to be identified as Products of Interest.

Measure 2.v. International and inter-agency cooperation enables Defence to shape the international security environment, in accordance with Government direction.
Methodology Assessment of delivery against the Defence International Engagement Strategy.
Source Corporate Plan, p 14
Results Achieved. Defence has engaged effectively through international and inter-agency cooperation. Defence and whole-of-government outcomes have been achieved through effective delivery of the Defence International Engagement Policy. Bilateral and multilateral relationships have been strengthened throughout 2017–18, and Australia’s position as a strong alliance partner has been reinforced.

Measure 2.vi. The Integrated Investment Program is managed effectively and comprises all investment and sustainment inputs, incorporating the Fundamental Inputs to Capability.
Methodology 1. Regular independent assurance of the Defence capability development process by the Defence Audit and Risk Committee. 2. Regular reviews of the Integrated Investment Program in consultation with the Minister and central agencies.
Source Corporate Plan, p 14
Results Achieved. The Integrated Investment Program is reviewed bi-annually and Defence uses this to report performance to the Government on the progress of capability delivery and seek agreement to any statement variations required to maintain alignment between Defence strategy, capability and funding. Three updates have been presented to the Government since the 2016 Defence White Paper.
Considerable consultation, both internally to Defence and externally with central agencies and the offices of the Minister for Defence and the Minister for Defence Industry, is conducted throughout the Bi-Annual Update process.
Defence conducted seven internal audits that addressed elements of the Integrated Investment Program.

Measure 2.vii. Emerging science and technology is used to support development of best value capability.
Methodology Regular assessment of how Defence’s strategic research builds understanding of future Defence capability.
Source Corporate Plan, p 14
Results Achieved. Defence has continued to use science and technology to inform the Integrated Investment Program, the Naval Shipbuilding Plan and the Defence Capability Assessment Program to advance capability.
The Next Generation Technologies Fund research frameworks have been established, enabling new approaches to collaboration to accelerate the development of future Defence capability. The Defence Innovation Hub and the Centre for Defence Industry Capability demonstrate Defence’s continuing commitment to enhance capability.
Defence has strengthened its strategic research and development alliances with industry, academia and other publicly funded research agencies. Internationally, Defence has cultivated deeper relationships with our five eyes1 partners and is building cooperative relationships with counterpart science and technology agencies across the region.
1 Five eyes nations include Australia, the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada and New Zealand.

Measure 2.viii. Defence capability development leverages industry to promote innovation.
Methodology Regular assessment of the value of Defence engagement with industry.
Source Corporate Plan, p 14
Results Achieved. Defence capability is enhanced through engagement with industry and through a strategy-led approach to Defence innovation working with Australian industry and research organisations.
Defence has also advanced the key policy deliverables to give effect to the long-term objectives of defence industry policy to meet Defence’s capability needs.
The Defence Innovation Hub has made significant progress in the reporting period. It will invest approximately $640 million over the decade to 2025–26 in maturing and further developing technologies and promoting innovative solutions to Defence capability challenges.

Intended result The Minister receives policy advice that supports effective decision-making.
Performance criteria Government has confidence in the relevance and quality of Defence policy advice.
Target Minister expresses high to very high confidence in Defence advice.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.1: Strategic Policy and Intelligence, p 50; PAES 2017–18, p 35; Corporate Plan, p 14
Result Achieved. Defence has provided high-quality advice over the reporting period to inform ministers’ consideration of a wide range of complex national security issues, and continued efforts to implement the guidance of the 2016 Defence White Paper. This has included provision of over 3,000 individual pieces of advice and approval of over 100 submissions for major capability decisions.
Implementation of new tools during the reporting period to manage and track Defence’s advice to ministers also helped deliver improvements in the timeliness of information flows.
Defence is further strengthening coordination with ministers and their staff to improve feedback on the Department’s advice. This includes through ministers’ participation in bi-annual iterations of the Defence Committee as a means to shape and integrate Defence’s strategic and policy advice to the Government. Implementation of stronger consultation with stakeholders across Government in shaping policy and investment options has also enhanced the relevance and quality of Defence’s advice.

Intended result Defence strengthens its engagement on policy development with other national security participants and other relevant parties.
Performance criteria Proposals presented to Government for decision incorporate all relevant considerations.
Target Stakeholders express high confidence in Defence engagement.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.1: Strategic Policy and Intelligence, p 50; PAES 2017–18, p 35; Corporate Plan, p 14
Result Achieved. Defence continues to strengthen its engagement on policy development with other national security departments and agencies in the development of Cabinet submissions and other proposals through several collaborative measures, including:
  • ongoing engagement with Defence and external stakeholders, including through whole-of-government task force participation and secondments, in the development of advice for the Government on matters of national significance—notably, cyber policy support of Australia’s Cyber Security Strategy, intelligence, counter-terrorism policy, foreign and security policy, foreign investment and critical infrastructure
  • consultation on international relationships and the Defence Cooperation Program as well as development of policy guidance for ADF operations and international defence activities
  • collaboration on development of the Defence Industrial Capability Plan and its Sovereign Industrial Capability Priorities, including with industry and states and territories
  • development and implementation of Defence industry policy initiatives in close coordination with other Commonwealth departments, state and territory governments and industry
  • permanent representation from the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet and the Department of Finance on the Defence Investment Committee.

Intended result An appropriate risk appetite is actively exercised based on all available information. Assured data is available to support the design of good performance measures. Managers across Defence have a view of organisational performance within their work area which is based on true information, enabling them to make effective and robust decisions.
Performance criteria Performance information uses validated information to support decision-making.
Target All performance information is supported by a reliable and validated data source.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.2: Defence Executive Support, p 53; PAES 2017–18, p 36; Corporate Plan, p 15
Result Achieved. Defence performance and risk management architecture supports regular reporting and informed decision-making across the enterprise on organisational performance and risk:
  • Administrative frameworks and policies facilitate the requirement and practice of risk-informed decision-making across Defence based on reliable evidence.
  • Governance structures ensure that Accountable and Responsible Officers validate performance measures and that supporting data and performance assessments are true and correct.

Intended result Effective and efficient health support and welfare services are provided.
Performance criteria Quality of health and welfare services delivered to Australian Defence Force members and families.
Target Delivery meets agreed standards.
Source PAES 2017–18 Program 2.4: Joint Capabilities Group, p 38; Corporate Plan, p 15
Result Achieved. The quality of health services delivered to ADF members and families was improved in 2017–18 through ongoing activities to further strengthen critical business processes and enhance member-centric, but command-responsive, service delivery.
This is evident through the results of the 2017 Customer Satisfaction Survey, which indicated improved respondent satisfaction and service quality from the previous year. There was also a decrease in the average monthly number of complaints during the reporting period.
There was an overall increase in the take-up of the National ADF Family Health Program, increasing by 1,700 in 2017–18 to a total of 48,029 dependants.

Intended result Defence implements policy direction to meet Government’s requirements now and into the future.
Performance criteria Effective implementation of the 2016 Defence White Paper.
Target The 2016 Defence White Paper implementation plan activities for 2017–2021 are delivered as agreed with the Government.
Source PAES 2017–18 Program 2.8: Australian Defence Force Headquarters, p 45; Corporate Plan, p 15
Result Achieved. The 2016 Defence White Paper Implementation Plan remained on schedule during the reporting period. Implementation was supported by annual reviews of Defence’s classified strategic planning documents that factor emerging challenges into policy settings and planning. Implementation will continue in 2018–19.

Intended result Defence develops the capability it needs to meet Government’s requirements now and into the future.
Performance criteria Effective implementation of the Integrated Investment Program.
Target The Integrated Investment Program is delivered as agreed with the Government.
Source PAES 2017–18 Program 2.8: Australian Defence Force Headquarters, p 45; Corporate Plan, p 15
Result Achieved. Defence has continued to deliver the Integrated Investment Program through the $200 billion recapitalisation of ADF capability outlined in the 2016 Defence White Paper.
During 2017–18, the Government approved 111 capability-related submissions for major equipment, facilities and infrastructure, information and communications technology and science technology. This comprised of 21 ‘First Pass’ approvals, 35 ‘Second Pass’ approvals and 55 ‘Other Pass’ approvals.
Significant Government announcements included:
  • Second Pass approval for the Future Frigate program (approximately $35 billion capital)
  • Other Pass approval for Future Submarine Design and Construction (approximately $700 million capital)
  • Second Pass approval for Combat Reconnaissance Vehicles (approximately
    $5.2 billion capital).

Intended result A competitive Australian industrial base is able to support Defence capability.
Performance criteria The intent of the Defence Industry Policy Statement is met.
Target The Centre for Defence Industry Capability and the Defence Innovation Hub operate in accordance with the Defence Industry Policy Statement.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.1: Strategic Policy and Intelligence, p 50; PAES 2017–18, p 35; Corporate Plan, p 15
Result Achieved. Defence has made strong progress on further developing and maturing the Government’s Defence Industry Policy Framework beyond that in the 2016 Defence Industry Policy Statement. The Centre of Defence Industry Capability and Defence Innovation Hub are fully operational. Defence has also advanced the key policy deliverables to give effect to the long-term objectives of defence industry policy to meet Defence’s capability needs. Notably, the Defence Industrial Capability Plan and the Defence Export Strategy were both released in the first half of 2018.

Performance criteria Enterprise planning and performance monitoring processes are delivered in line with the requirements of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013.
Target Defence meets its non-financial performance management and risk management obligations under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.2: Defence Executive Support, p 53; PAES 2017–18, p 36
Results Achieved. In the 2017–18 financial year Defence complied with the requirements of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013.
The 2017–18 Defence Corporate Plan was published on time and incorporated all required elements (Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Rule 2014, section 16E)
The 2016–17 Defence Annual Report (containing annual performance statements) was tabled on time and incorporated all required elements, as noted in the 2016–17 Defence Annual Report, Appendix C.
The Defence Audit and Risk Committee has reviewed the annual performance statements, Defence Corporate Plan, systems of internal control and systems of risk oversight and management.

Performance criteria The Service Delivery System enables Australian Defence Force operations.
Target Enabling services are delivered in accordance with agreed requirements.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.2: Defence Executive Support, p 53; PAES 2017–18, p 36
Results Achieved. Corporate enabling groups have service offers in place which outline the services being delivered to meet organisational requirements. Customer satisfaction with these services is measured through an annual Customer Satisfaction Survey.

Performance criteria Quality and timeliness of financial advice to the Minister, the Secretary and Chief of the Defence Force.
Target Financial advice meets the Minister, the Secretary and Chief of the Defence Force’s requirements.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.3: Chief Finance Officer, p 55; PAES 2017–18, p 37
Results Achieved. Defence provided precise and timely, written and verbal, strategic financial advice to the Minister for Defence, the Secretary and the Chief of the Defence Force. This included:
  • ministerial and Cabinet submissions
  • responses to Questions on Notice
  • support to Senate Estimates and other public accountability activities.
Defence provided financial information and advice based on an understanding of the underlying cost drivers of the business. All financial information was supported by reliable and validated data sources in Defence’s financial systems, meeting the Minister, Secretary and Chief of the Defence Force’s requirements.

Performance criteria Production of Defence’s Budget, Financial Statements and the annual Defence Management and Finance Plan.
Target Produced in accordance within agreed statutory time frames.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.3: Chief Finance Officer, p 55; PAES 2017–18, p 37
Results Achieved. Defence produced the Defence Budget, and the annual Defence Management and Finance Plan within agreed statutory time frames, including:
  • the Defence Portfolio Budget Submission and Defence Management and Financial Plan
  • the Defence Portfolio Budget Statements
  • the Defence Portfolio Additional Estimates Statements
  • input to the Commonwealth Budget Management System
  • Defence’s Financial Statements.

Performance criteria Status of Financial Statements.
Target Financial Statements are unqualified.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.3: Chief Finance Officer, p 55; PAES 2017–18, p 37
Results Achieved. Defence produced audited Defence Financial Statements for publication in the Defence Annual Report. The Australian National Audit Office determined that the Defence financial statements:
  • were unqualified
  • complied with Australian Accounting Standards and the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability (Financial Reporting) Rule 2015
  • presented fairly the financial position of Defence as at 30 June 2018 and its financial performance and cash flows for the year.

Performance criteria Chief of the Defence Force preparedness levels meet Government requirements.
Target Chief of the Defence Force preparedness levels are achieved as agreed with Government.
Source PAES 2017–18 Program 2.4: Joint Capabilities Group, p 38
Result Achieved. In 2017–18, the Joint Capabilities Group developed and delivered joint enabling projects, services and information warfare effects to ensure the Chief of the Defence Force’s preparedness levels were achieved as agreed with the Government.

Performance criteria Effective implementation of the 2016 Defence White Paper.
Target The 2016 Defence White Paper Implementation Plan activities for 2017–21 are delivered as agreed with Government.
Source PAES 2017–18 Program 2.4: Joint Capabilities Group, p 38
Results Achieved. In 2017–18, Joint Capabilities Group ensured implementation of the 2016 Defence White Paper through the delivery of projects that support the Government’s plans to design a future force and invest in vital enabling capabilities. These included the Defence Fuel Transformation Program, the Warehouse Management System, the Explosive Ordnance Logistic Reform Program Project and the implementation of a new occupational rehabilitation service delivery model. The Digitisation Project, complementary to the Defence eHealth System, did not meet anticipated performance with mitigation activities put in place for 2018–19.
The Information Warfare Division further developed a joint cyber capability for the ADF, including the establishment of the Defence Signals Intelligence and Cyber Command in January 2018.
The Australian Defence College delivered joint professional military education and joint individual training and met all international military training requirements.

Performance criteria Chief of the Defence Force preparedness levels meet Government requirements.
Target Chief of the Defence Force preparedness levels are achieved as agreed with Government.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.5: Navy Capabilities, p 59; PAES 2017–18, p 40
Results Achieved. The Navy achieved its commitment to generate forces to meet Government-directed activities. Reduction in achievement of unit availability days and flying hours was due to emerging defects; program changes associated with planned maintenance; and aircrew availability.

Performance criteria Chief of the Defence Force preparedness levels meet Government requirements.
Target Chief of the Defence Force preparedness levels are achieved as agreed with Government.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.6: Army Capabilities, p 63; PAES 2017–18, p 42
Results Achieved. The Army met its commitments to generate land forces to meet Government-directed activities, and the required preparedness levels were achieved and maintained as agreed with the Chief of the Defence Force. Known deficiencies continue to be managed toward effective remediation. Raise, train and sustain activities were conducted to ensure land forces were prepared and available to meet Government direction.

Performance criteria Chief of the Defence Force preparedness levels meet Government requirements.
Target Chief of the Defence Force preparedness levels are achieved as agreed with Government.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.7: Air Force Capabilities, p 65; PAES 2017–18, p 43
Results Achieved. The Air Force achieved all preparedness requirements as agreed with the Government. Variation in flying hours expended is linked to:
  • changes in demand to support operations, including Operation OKRA, Operation ARGOS, Operation ATLAS and Operation AUGURY (P-8A, AP-3C, KC-30A)
  • one aircraft type (P-8A) exceeded its budget and revised estimate due to operational tasking for Operation ARGOS
  • one aircraft type (Heron UAS) was withdrawn early from operations and did not fly, as per its revised estimate
  • transition management of new and retiring aircraft (PC-9A, PC-21, KA350, C-27J, E/A-18G, F/A-18A/B, F-35A) resulted in some variation in actual versus planned flying hours.

Performance criteria Capability proposals, once approved by Government, meet agreed schedule and are delivered within agreed costs and scope.
Target Deliver Government approved acquisition projects to budget, schedule and agreed capability scope.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.9: Capability Acquisition and Sustainment, p 70; PAES 2017–18, p 47
Results (as provided) Achieved. As at 30 June 2018, Defence was managing 198 active major and minor capital equipment projects worth $103.5 billion with a 2017–18 budget of $6.9 billion. Military equipment projects are being delivered within the agreed parameters of scope and cost. Where schedule slippage has occurred, project managers are working with the Capability Manager representatives to manage the impacts.
Of the 120 post Second Pass approved major capital equipment projects, three projects (or 2.5 per cent) had issues with capability, schedule or cost which were significant enough to be included in the Projects of Concern report. A further nine projects (or 7.5 per cent) were identified as Projects of Interest, with risks associated with capability, schedule or cost that warrant attention from senior executives. Additional information on selected major capital equipment projects can be found in the Major Projects Report, which is tabled annually with the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit.
Twenty-five Major Acquisition Projects were closed in 2017–18, 15 more than 2016–17, due to reformed closure process. These projects had a combined budget of $7.5 billion and a final spend of $7.4 billion, which is 0.9 per cent less than the budget approved by the Government.

Performance criteria Information and communication technology services meet requirements.
Target Information and communication technology (ICT) capabilities are delivered in accordance with the Integrated Investment Program requirements as governed by the Investment Committee.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.11: Chief Information Officer, p 74; PAES 2017–18, p 49
Results Achieved. Transformation of the ICT environment continued through the delivery of capability via key projects. The Centralised Processing project achieved final operating capability in December 2017 and has consolidated Defence’s computing infrastructure and applications into 11 national and three international data centres.
Critical upgrades to the Defence PROTECTED desktop computing environment are progressing through the End User Computing project and are expected to be complete by June 2019.
The Terrestrial Communications project is replacing and rationalising the existing Defence network and achieved initial operating capability in April 2018.
Changes in Defence’s complex information and communications technology operating environment, combined with changing user demands, growth and expectations, led to increased pressure to deliver key transformational technology projects in parallel to delivering the enabling technology for the major capability projects. The sequencing of projects, increased workloads, industry capacity and resource constraints have impacted on the effectiveness of information and communications technology rollouts. The impacts on capability are being managed.

Performance criteria Achievement of ADF recruitment targets.
Target Meet recruitment targets as specified by the Services.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.12: Defence People, p 77; PAES 2017–18, p 50
Results Partially achieved. ADF permanent force enlistments from all sources (ab initio and prior service) was 94 per cent of the full-year target of 5,593. Recruiting targets for the Reserve force were 84 per cent of the full-year target of 2,349.
ADF recruiting achievement has improved in recent years, with a focus on candidate engagement and targeted marketing to attract a greater diversity of candidates. A strong focus continues in regard to attracting candidates to those occupations which are more difficult to recruit to, such as Army Reserves and Medical Officers.

Performance criteria Achieve ongoing cultural reform and workforce culture initiatives that embed diversity and inclusion.
Target Workforce diversity has increased.
Cultural reform initiatives are implemented as set out in the Pathway to Change strategy.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.12: Defence People, p 77; PAES 2017–18, p 50
Results Achieved. Pathway to Change: Evolving Defence Culture 2017–22 was launched in November 2017. Efforts to implement the strategy have commenced and are ongoing. This includes a number of in-depth reviews of the six priorities intended to provide quality assurance, support and guidance for ongoing reform efforts.
With a continued focus on broadening diversity to advance capability and performance, the following progress has been made.
As at 1 July 2018:
  • 17.9 per cent of the permanent ADF is female—an increase from 16.7 per cent on 1 July 2017
  • 42.4 per cent of the ongoing APS workforce is female—an increase from
    41.9 per cent on 1 July 2017
  • 2.6 per cent of the permanent ADF identify as Indigenous—an increase from
    2.4 per cent on 1 July 2017
  • 2.2 per cent of ongoing APS employees identify as Indigenous—an increase from 2.0 per cent on 1 July 2017.

Performance criteria Actions identified in the 2016–2026 Defence Strategic Workforce Plan are implemented to attract, recruit, develop and retain a highly skilled workforce.
Target Implementation milestones are achieved.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.12: Defence People, p 77; PAES 2017–18, p 50
Results Partially achieved. Delivery of the Strategic Workforce Plan has continued. Although some individual activities have been delayed, these are not having an impact on overall delivery of the action plan. The annual update of the Strategic Workforce Plan will continue to focus on achieving the required workforce, and improving retention in certain workgroups. A focus on growing the science, technology, engineering and mathematics workforce, including enabling the shipbuilding and cyber capabilities, will continue.

Performance criteria Enhanced linkages between Defence and the Department of Veterans’ Affairs enable greater support to veterans and ADF members.
Target Improved electronic information exchange is implemented as agreed between Defence and Department of Veterans’ Affairs (DVA).
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.12: Defence People, p 77; PAES 2017–18, p 50
Results Partially achieved. Defence and the DVA work closely regarding improving information exchange to support members and veterans. The information and communications technology architecture for the Defence DVA Electronic Information Exchange Project has been approved. Funding from the 2016 Defence White Paper for implementation of this project commences from 2018–19. The project is aligned with the Veterans’ Centric Reform program.

Performance criteria Australian Defence Force members and families are supported through the delivery of the family support program, transition services and bereavement support.
Target Support is delivered in a timely and professional manner.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.12: Defence People, p 77; PAES 2017–18, p 50
Results Partially achieved. ADF members and families have been supported through successful delivery of family support programs, ADF transition services and bereavement support.
Reform of ADF Transition Support Services continued. The new transition process implemented in 2017–18 has moved from an administrative model to that of coaching and mentoring. Defence is focused on providing a tailored and individual transition plan and coaching session, which assists the ADF member and their family to be better prepared for the transition to civilian life during transition and 12 months afterwards.
The ‘partially achieved’ status reflects the continued focus on improving the transition process and outcomes for Defence. In 2018–19, Defence will further embed the transition coaching model, review the Career Transition Assistance Scheme and ADF transition seminars, promote greater engagement with families, and introduce Military Transition Support Officer roles.

Performance criteria Emerging science and technology is used to support development of best value capability.
Target Science and technology activities are balanced to support Defence capability and operational priorities in accordance with 2016 Defence White Paper.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.13: Defence Science and Technology, p 79; PAES 2017–18, p 51
Results Achieved. Defence continues to prioritise and balance investment in science and technology. Planned investment decisions are considered at the Defence Science and Technology Client Forum, prior to formal consideration by the Defence Investment Committee.
Scientific personnel have been deployed to provide urgent scientific and technical support to Defence operations, including priority access to the full range of scientific expertise within Defence Science and Technology.
Science and technology considerations inform the specialist advice, technical risk assessments and specific research to support the sustainment, acquisition and development of best-value capability for Defence, particularly through the Integrated Investment Program, the Naval Shipbuilding Plan and the Defence Capability Assessment Program.

Performance criteria Defence’s strategic research builds understanding of future Defence capability.
Target Strategic research activities are aligned with Integrated Investment Program priorities.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.13: Defence Science and Technology, p 79; PAES 2017–18, p 51
Results Achieved. The Defence strategic research program is aligned to domain-specific science and technology strategies (Maritime, Land, Aerospace, Joint and Intelligence). Research initiated under the Next Generation Technologies Fund is aligned with the priorities identified in the 2016 Defence White Paper and the Integrated Investment Program. The research program is delivered through collaborations with Australian and international universities, publicly funded research agencies and industry. The alignment of the research program to Defence priorities is verified by annual investment reviews.
The Next Generation Technologies Fund program is fully operational, accelerating the development of key game-changing technologies that will underpin new capabilities.

Performance criteria Defence science and technology capability enhanced through the delivery of collaborative partnerships with industry, academia and international research agencies.
Target Collaborative activities with industry, academia and allied defence research agencies are aligned to 2016 Defence White Paper and Defence Industry Policy Statement priorities.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.13: Defence Science and Technology, p 79; PAES 2017–18, p 51
Results Achieved. Through the Next Generation Technologies Fund a new portfolio of partnerships has been established which address the science and technology priorities set out in the 2016 Defence White Paper and Defence Industry Policy Statement.
More than 100 collaborative research activities with industry, academia and other research agencies have commenced. Major initiatives include the Defence Cooperative Research Centre in Trusted Autonomous Systems, the Grand Challenge in Counter Improvised Threats, and the Australia–United States Multidisciplinary University Research Initiative. The outcomes from these research partnerships will inform and guide Defence’s future capability decisions and provide game-changing innovations to maintain Defence’s capability edge.
Defence is an active participant in the Technical Cooperation Program with members of the five eyes1 nations. Defence is also building regional Defence science and technology relationships with Japan, the Republic of Korea and Singapore.
1 Five eyes nations include Australia, the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada and New Zealand.

Performance criteria Provision of timely payments to the Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation and quality administration of Defence Force Retirement Benefits, Defence Force Retirement Defined Benefits, Military Super Benefits Scheme and ADF Super employer and member contributions.
Target Payments are provided within agreed time frames to the Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation and quality administration of Defence Force Retirement Benefits (DFRB), Defence Force Retirement Defined Benefits (DFRDB), Military Super Benefits Scheme (MSBS) and ADF Super employer and member contributions.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.14: Defence Force Superannuation Benefits, p 81–82; PAES 2017–18, p 52
Results Achieved. Employer and member contributions to DFRB, DFRDB and MSBS were paid on time to the Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation throughout 2017–18.
The related accounting entries were correctly recorded and reconciled in compliance with the monthly financial reporting timetable set by Defence.

Performance criteria Provide quality administration of DFRB, DFRDB, MSBS and ADF Cover nominal interest transactions.
Target Administration services are provided as agreed for DFRB, DFRDB, MSBS and ADF Cover nominal interest transactions.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.15: Defence Force Superannuation Nominal Interest, p 83; 2017–18; PAES 2017–18, p 53
Results Achieved. The determination of the nominal interest transactions for DFRB, DFRDB and MSBS were correctly made and recorded in compliance with the monthly financial reporting timetable set by Defence.

Performance measure Members respond to and take up the scheme.
Target 6,000 applications received, with 3,800 members taking up the scheme.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.16: Housing Assistance, p 85; PAES 2017–18, p 54
Results Achieved. Interest in this scheme continues to remain positive with ADF members. There has been a continued high uptake of Defence Home Ownership Assistance Scheme applications/subsidised loans processed by the Department of Veterans’ Affairs as the Scheme Administrator. A total of 6,232 applications were received and 3,869 members commenced subsidy payments.

Performance criteria Ensure that interest rates provided to ADF members by the Home Loan Providers are competitive with other interest rates in the market.
Target Interest rates offered are consistently lower than other interest rates in the market.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.16: Housing Assistance, p 85; PAES 2017–18, p 54
Results Achieved. The three appointed home loan providers on the Defence Home Ownership Assistance Scheme panel are providing competitive interest rates in accordance with their obligations under their respective deeds.

 

Performance criteria Account and report ‘Other Administered’.
Target Accounting and reporting is accurate.
Source PBS 2017–18 Program 2.17: Other Administered, p 87; PAES 2017–18, p 55
Results Achieved. Transactions relating to ‘Other Administered’ were correctly determined and recorded in compliance with the monthly financial reporting timetable set by Defence. ‘Other Administered’ comprises interest on overdue accounts, interest on operational bank accounts, interest on loans to build accommodation, dividends and tax equalisation receipts from Defence Housing Australia and royalty receipts.

Table 3.1 shows Defence performance against the unit availability days, HydroScheme and flying hours performance criteria in the Portfolio Budget Statements 2017–18 and the Portfolio Additional Estimates Statements 2017–18 for Purpose 2.

Table 3.1: Unit availability days, HydroScheme products and flying hours

Source Deliverable
2017–18
Revised
estimate
2017–18
Actual
2017–18 PAES, Program 2.5: Navy Capabilities, p 41 (unit availability days1)
18
Major combatants2
3,461
3,408
21
Minor combatants3
3,880
3,546
5
Amphibious and afloat support4
1,179
1,145
7
Maritime teams5
2,555
2,541
7
Hydrographic Force6
1,574
1,547
2017–18 PAES, Program 2.5: Navy Capabilities, p 41 (flying hours)
4
S-70B-2 (Seahawk)7
190
151.50
24
MH-60R
6,050
6,059
6
AS350BA (Squirrel)8
450
633
-
MRH-90 Taipan9
1
Laser airborne depth sounder aircraft10
1,260
1,193
2017–18 PAES, Program 2.6: Army Capabilities, p 42 (rate of effort—flying hours)
7
CH-47F Chinook
2,000
2,000
34
S-70A-9 Black Hawk
4,550
4,193.6
41
B-206B-1 Kiowa
3,800
3,058.6
22
ARH Tiger11
5,050
2,867.5
47
MRH-90 Taipan
7,600
7,348.7
2017–18 PAES, Program 2.7: Air Force Capabilities, p 44 (flying hours)
62
PC-9/A12
16,952
14,836.2
8
PC-2112
2,200
1,224.2
16
KA350 King Air12
8,700
7,394
12
C-130J Hercules
7,350
6,999
8
C-17A Globemaster III
7,000
6,972
10
C-27J Spartan12
4,000
2,144
5
KC-30A MRTT13
6,000
5,662
2
737 BBJ
1,600
1,435
3
CL-604 Challenger
2,403
1,737
15
AP-3C Orion13
4,660
4,281.5
8
P-8A Poseidon13
2,562
2,773.7
6
E-7A Wedgetail
3,600
3,018.4
71
F/A-18A/B Hornet12
12,000
10,375.4
24
F/A-18F Super Hornet12
8,094
5,183
33
Hawk 127
6,500
5,782
12
E/A-18G Growler12
1,600
1,089.5
2
F-35A Lightning II12
752
701.9
2
Heron UAS14
0
0
2017–18 PBS, Program 2.1: Strategic Policy and Intelligence Deliverables, p 52 (Hydrographic Products and Services) Maritime safety updates
1,100
106315
Charting projects
15
1116
Nautical publications
29
29
Survey projects
15
1717
AHO availability
249
24718

Notes:

  1. A unit availability day is a day when a unit is materially ready and its personnel state and level of competence enables the unit to safely perform tasks in the unit’s normal operating environment, immediately.
  2. Major combatants comprises Adelaide Class Frigates (FFG) Anzac Class Frigates (FFH), Collins Class Submarines (CCSM) and the Hobart Class Air Warfare Destroyers (DDG). The decrease in unit availability days is due to emerging defects across platforms and amendments to planned maintenance schedules.
  3. Minor combatants comprises Armidale Class Patrol Boats (ACPB), Cape Class Patrol Boats (CCPB) and Coastal Minehunters (MHC). Unit availability day decrease is due to emerging defects across platforms, extensions to planned maintenance and workup requirements.
  4. Amphibious and afloat support comprises the Oil Tanker (AO), Replenishment Ship (AOR), Landing Ship Dock (LSD) and Canberra Class Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD). The decrease in unit availability days is due to defects across platforms and amendments to planned maintenance schedules.
  5. Maritimes teams comprise clearance diving, Deployable Geospatial Support and Mobile Meteorological and Oceanographic teams. The reduction in unit availability days is due to reduced capacity over the Christmas / New Year period.
  6. Hydrographic Force comprises the hydrographic ships, survey motor launches, chart production office and meteorological and oceanographic centres. The decrease in unit availability days is due to defects across platforms.
  7. The S-70B-2 was withdrawn from service in December 2017. The reduction in flying hours is due to aircrew availability.
  8. The AS350BA was withdrawn from service in December 2017.
  9. The Navy is operating MRH-90 Taipans; however, their flying hours are included under Army Aviation because the Army is joint capability manager
    of the aircraft.
  10. The reduction in flying hours is due to poor weather, aircrew availability and defects.
  11. Note that AHR operations were suspended for four months.
  12. Transition management of new and retiring aircraft resulted in variation of actual versus planned flying hours.
  13. Changes in demand to support operations.
  14. The aircraft were withdrawn from operations and did not fly.
  15. Total received. The figure of 1,100 was based on average updates over last five years.
  16. In 2017–18, 11 of the 15 (73%) of charting projects were completed. Receipt of data from external authorities did not occur in the expected time frame; hence, two projects were not commenced. Another two projects were not completed due to a combination of software implementation delays, additional training overhead of new staff and prioritisation of alternative short-notice work, including support for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum in 2018. The risk associated with the four incomplete tasks is assessed as low, noting that existing products remain current and safe.
  17. Additional survey projects were undertaken by Royal Australian Navy assets.
  18. Failure of the server room air conditioning system led to temporary shutdown of information and communications technology systems. As a result, chart production was unavailable for two days until repairs were effected.
Feature: ADF iWar capability development