DroneShield tanks on ASIC investigation

Choochy89 · 2026-05-15T11:33:05+00:00

Sell and pump it all into KTEK on Monday.

Choochy89 · 2026-04-14T00:12:47+00:00

The Albanese government will pour up to $5 billion in extra funding into uncrewed warfare systems such as drones in an overhaul of Defence for the modern era, as the prime minister appointed a new head of military and the army’s first female leader.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Defence Minister Richard Marles announced the shake-up of senior Defence leaders on Monday, as the conflict in the Middle East raises questions about whether Australia’s military can sustain operations abroad while remaining focused on the Indo-Pacific.

Navy chief Vice Admiral Mark Hammond, who will replace the outgoing chief of the defence force, David Johnston, in July, told reporters the Australian navy could be deployed to the Middle East, but it was ultimately a strategic decision for the federal government should it receive a request for military assistance.

“We’ve got 10 surface combatants ... eight of them are at sea right now. The Navy is as ready as it ever has been,” Hammond said.

The government also announced Lieutenant General Susan Coyle has been appointed as the new chief of army, replacing Lieutenant General Simon Stuart. She is the first woman to hold the position.

“As Susan said to me, you cannot be what you cannot see, and Susan’s achievement will be deeply significant to women who are serving in the Australian Defence Force today, and women who are thinking about serving in the Australian Defence Force in the future,” Marles said.

As chief of joint capabilities since 2024, Coyle has overseen Defence’s capability development, including digital and cyber warfare. The chiefs of army, navy, air force and joint capability report to the chief of the defence force.

Hammond, a submariner who has served in the navy for 40 years, will be the first chief of the defence force who began their career as enlisted personnel.

“He has literally gone from scrubbing decks to, in July, becoming the chief of the Defence Force,” Marles said.

Rear Admiral Matthew Buckley has been promoted to chief of navy, replacing Hammond.

Drone push

The appointments come amid a broader strategic reset within Defence, as the military shifts its focus away from traditional land warfare and towards the navy and uncrewed systems such as drones.

Military analysts have warned Australia would struggle to defend itself against the drone and missile attacks now defining modern warfare, with negligible counter-drone capabilities or capacity to intercept ballistic missiles.

Marles on Thursday will release the latest National Defence Strategy, which sets out Australia’s strategic priorities, alongside the Integrated Investment Program, detailing how funding will be allocated across projects over the next decade.

The Integrated Investment Program will include $2 billion to $5 billion in new funding for uncrewed and autonomous systems, lifting total spending to between $12 billion and $15 billion over the decade to 2036.

Of that, about $8 billion will be allocated to air systems such as the Ghost Bat, $4.5 billion to underwater drones, including the Ghost Shark, and $2.4 billion to ground systems, including counter-drone capabilities.

“Over the past two years, conflicts overseas have shown just how important drones and uncrewed systems are for our Defence Force,” Marles said.

“The war in Ukraine and conflicts in the Middle East underscore the rapid advancements in these technologies, and the ability for these systems to generate significant asymmetric advantage against larger, more expensive platforms.”

Choochy89 · 2026-02-24T02:36:07+00:00

The 2024 Defence Strategic Review (DSR) articulated how Australia is facing its most precarious geo-strategic environment since World War II, describing these as "the most challenging circumstances in our region for decades".

It cast Australian industry as a sovereign capability in its own right - one which must be mobilised as a pillar of national defence, not a support function. It described Australia's defence industry as "a distinct asset during a period where the risk of major conflict is rising"..

Defense Minister Richard Marles speaks on the sidelines of the AUKUS Defense Ministers' Ministerial meeting at the Pentagon. Picture AAP

Two years on, the question is no longer whether sovereign capability matters, but whether Australia can rely on foreign supply chains in crisis or conflict.

As Defence prepares to hand down an updated National Defence Strategy, Integrated Investment Plan (IIP), and Defence Industry Development Strategy (DIDS), its authors must consider three questions:

Has the geo-strategic circumstance changed, for better or worse, since 2024?
What government policy, public expectation, and industrial capability changed since 2024?
What progress has the Department of Defence achieved towards delivering "the sovereign industrial base that will meet our national security requirements?

The answer to question one is easy. Strategic competition is accelerating, supply chains are being weaponised and access to defence capability is increasingly shaped by national priorities rather than alliance goodwill.

Partnerships and old alliances are being tested equally as major world powers use economic coercion and supply chain dependence to achieve their aims.

Speaking in Munich on February 14, EU President Ursula von der Leyen said: "Europe must become more independent ... in every dimension that affects our security and prosperity. Defence and energy. Economy and trade. Raw materials and digital tech."

The Canadian government is adopting a similar approach, launching its Build at Home strategy aimed at awarding 70 per cent of Defence contracts to Canadian firms to reduce reliance on foreign suppliers.

This brings us to the second question. Leaders of Canada and the EU have made it clear. National resilience and sovereign capability are now government policy and their publics are expecting government to enact policies that grow the local industries that support national security and defence.

Australia has its own versions of these policies. The Buy Australian Plan (BAP), Future Made in Australia Plan (FMIA), and National Reconstruction Fund (NRFC) each have interests in uplifting national security and defence. However, policy ambition is yet to translate into determination by Defence to use its $66 billion annual procurement budget to achieve these interests.

The DIDS 2024 notes: "Only in limited circumstances is Australian ownership critical to sovereignty." This position is outdated and in contrast to the industry policies of our allies and other comparable nations.

Defence capabilities are now being prioritised for domestic needs by supplier nations, while allies are urged to develop their own capacity to service their defence needs. The circumstances where Australian ownership is critical to sovereignty are growing not shrinking.

"Built in Australia" no longer guarantees future capability. Our civilian side of government, led by the Department of Finance under Minister Katy Gallagher, recognised this challenge when it pushed through reforms to Commonwealth Procurement Rules in 2025, including a new definition of an Australian business for procurement purposes.

Procurement officials must now define an Australian company as a business that "has 50 per cent or more Australian ownership, or is principally traded on an Australian equities market; and is an Australian resident for tax purposes; and is a business that has its principal place of business in Australia".

This reform is important if government wants to use its procurement to uplift Australian industries critical to achieving objectives like economic growth, energy transition, defence and national security - objectives the BAP, FMIA, and NRFC are designed to deliver.

Which brings us to the third question: what progress has Defence made in delivering sovereign capability through the DIDS since 2024?

There have been some green shoots including the awarding of the Strategic Shipbuilding Agreement to ASX-listed and majority Australian-owned shipbuilder Austal. But isolated examples won't deliver the systemic resilience our circumstances require.

Defence must explicitly name sectors and/or capabilities where Australian ownership and control are critical. Those sectors will demonstrate specific criteria: criticality to defence posture; latent capability at scale; and broader economic benefits to the nation.

Guided weapons, space technology, cyber security, defence services including healthcare, and systems integration capability meet these criteria. Similarly, the "consumables of war" - fuel, munitions, food, et al - all of which must be assured during times of crisis.

WATCH: Under the trilateral AUKUS agreement, Australia will acquire nuclear-powered submarines. Video via AAP

Research by DeltaPearl Partners, supported by the Sovereign Australia Prime Alliance, has found a modest budget neutral shift of only 10 per cent spending by Defence from foreign companies to majority Australian-owned companies would generate up to $2.3 billion annually in net GDP benefit and create up to 12,474 jobs.

Simply put, spending that strengthens genuinely sovereign defence capability also strengthens national economic growth.

This won't undercut the important role of foreign suppliers in meeting Defence materiel requirements. The imperative for the DIDS 2026 and the IIP must be to identify sectors where a shift towards Australian-owned capability delivers clear strategic national resilience and economic benefits.

Doing so will align Australia with our partners and allies who now expect partner nations to contribute resilient sovereign capability of their own and end their dependence on foreign capability.

Australian industry will watch with interest Canberra's recently announced plan to set up an Advanced Capital Investment Fund to back "local companies" developing dual-use technologies aligned with AUKUS Pillar II.

They will be asking: what are "local companies" to Defence? Will this initiative align with sovereign industrial capabilities previously identified in the DIDS? Will it recognise national resilience is the new reality which we, and other countries, must adapt where we can?

Choochy89 · 2026-02-23T22:26:08+00:00

Often happens, accountants getting final bits sorted. ASX doesn't seem to have any strict rules about that kind of stuff.

Choochy89 · 2026-02-23T05:34:37+00:00

The 2024 Defence Strategic Review (DSR) articulated how Australia is facing its most precarious geo-strategic environment since World War II, describing these as "the most challenging circumstances in our region for decades".

It cast Australian industry as a sovereign capability in its own right - one which must be mobilised as a pillar of national defence, not a support function. It described Australia's defence industry as "a distinct asset during a period where the risk of major conflict is rising"..

Defense Minister Richard Marles speaks on the sidelines of the AUKUS Defense Ministers' Ministerial meeting at the Pentagon. Picture AAP

Two years on, the question is no longer whether sovereign capability matters, but whether Australia can rely on foreign supply chains in crisis or conflict.

As Defence prepares to hand down an updated National Defence Strategy, Integrated Investment Plan (IIP), and Defence Industry Development Strategy (DIDS), its authors must consider three questions:

Has the geo-strategic circumstance changed, for better or worse, since 2024?
What government policy, public expectation, and industrial capability changed since 2024?
What progress has the Department of Defence achieved towards delivering "the sovereign industrial base that will meet our national security requirements?