Naval ships from several countries anchor off shore while taking part in ceremonies marking the Canadian Navy's 100th anniversary in Victoria, British Columbia June 11, 2010. The ships are (L-R) Japan's JDS Atago, New Zealand's HMNZS Endeavour, United Sta
IN PHOTO: Naval ships from several countries anchor off shore while taking part in ceremonies marking the Canadian Navy's 100th anniversary in Victoria, British Columbia June 11, 2010. The ships are (L-R) Japan's JDS Atago, New Zealand's HMNZS Endeavour, United States USS Sampson, Canada's HMCS Winnipeg and Australia's HMAS Newcastle. Reuters/Andy Clark

Submarine construction was deliberately excluded from the Australian government’s report on naval shipbuilding. The Abbott government had ordered the $2.5 million report but specifically did not include a discussion about the building of submarines.

The recently released report contained some references to the future submarine project but consultants from Rand Corporation, a U.S.-based military research thinktank, had confirmed that the Abbott government had set terms of reference that excluded the submarines. The report was commissioned in September when David Johnston was still Australia’s defence minister.

“It was discussed in the early stages but by virtue of what the government wanted of this study it was excluded,” said Rand consultant Roger Lough who also contributed to the report. The report found that building naval warships in Australia cost about 30 percent to 40 percent more compared to other shipyards outside the country.

However, the report suggested that the high price of building naval warships in the country could be cut in half with a steady production program that could lead to a productive workforce. The report outlined some options for naval construction projects to be brought forward to address the gap between the wrapping up of existing construction projects and the beginning of new ones.

When asked if the report was sound even if the submarines were left out, Rand project leader John Birkler said they were instructed to exclude the submarines. He added that he was not sure what the result would be if they had included the submarine data in their analysis, reports The Guardian.

Birkler downplayed the potential for economies of scale in making submarines alongside surface ships and said it was not “usual” to see different kinds of ships being built in the same shipyard. Lough had insisted that the report given to the government was “meaningful.”

Australian Defence Minister Kevin Andrews described the report as “one of the most detailed studies” in the country’s history of naval shipbuilding. The defence minister blamed the former Labour government for the industry’s precarious state.

Andrews said the Abbott government is willing to commit to a long-term investment to ensure the industry will still have a future in Australia. He added that the industry should also be prepared to work with the government.

Senator Nick Xenophon said Australia would not have a successful naval shipbuilding industry without the submarines. He slammed the government’s omission of the submarines in the report and called it “gross incompetence” if it was by mistake and “gross recklessness” if by design.

To report problems or leave feedback on this article, contact: r.su@ibtimes.com.au