Muzzle public criticisms of the Collins-class submarine ?
A FORMER submariner and a confidant
of Defence Minister David Johnston has accused senior naval officers of
trying to muzzle his public criticisms of the Collins-class submarine.
Rex Patrick has asked the Australian Federal Police to examine the conduct of the navy, which he claims tried to coerce him into withdrawing from public debate by reviewing and ultimately terminating his contract to train submariners.
A series of emails between naval officers reveals a high-level navy plot to silence Mr Patrick despite the fact that he was a civilian and not bound by rules that prevent uniformed personnel commenting on defence policy.
Mr Patrick told The Weekend Australian he believed the navy’s conduct was inappropriate, and he had asked the minister to review it.
Mr Patrick, who was once offered a role as an adviser to Senator Johnston, has been a thorn in the navy’s side since 2009, when he began writing articles calling for Australia to buy cheap, off-the-shelf submarines from Europe rather than build new subs in Australia. The navy disagrees with that position.
Documents obtained under Freedom of Information reveal that senior officers believed Mr Patrick’s public comments were “impacting adversely on the Royal Australian Navy’s reputation (and) our capability”.
In late 2012 and early last year, the navy investigated Mr Patrick with a view to silencing him.
It checked the clause of his $90,00-a-year contract to provide sonar and acoustic training to submariners, but was advised his public commentary was not in breach of his contract. The navy then tried to change the terms of his contract to prevent him making public commentary.
In February last year Commodore Michael Noonan, then head of navy training, told Mr Patrick in an email that navy would re-examine his contract if he did not sign a separate agreement preventing him from making public commentary on submarines. “If (this) agreement cannot be reached, I will consider other options available to the navy in relation to the contract,” the officer wrote.
But when Mr Patrick lodged an FOI request soon after to uncover the email trail that led to this decision, the navy backtracked.
It withdrew the officer’s letter and, then, on the eve of the release of the documents, it set up a meeting with the then navy chief Vice Admiral Ray Griggs who told Mr Patrick the navy would be taking no further action.
But a year later — in May this year — Mr Patrick was told his training contract would not be renewed when it expired in June.
Defence says this has nothing to do with its previous dispute with Mr Patrick. It says the navy plans to conduct its sonar and acoustic training in-house, and it no longer needs a contractor such as Mr Patrick’s company Acoustic Force.
“Freedom of speech is a concept that members of the Australian Defence Force must give regard to,” Mr Patrick said.
“I presume that, from (the navy’s) perspective, the public is better served if debates about defence are devoid of any contributions from people who know about the subject.”source
Rex Patrick has asked the Australian Federal Police to examine the conduct of the navy, which he claims tried to coerce him into withdrawing from public debate by reviewing and ultimately terminating his contract to train submariners.
A series of emails between naval officers reveals a high-level navy plot to silence Mr Patrick despite the fact that he was a civilian and not bound by rules that prevent uniformed personnel commenting on defence policy.
Mr Patrick told The Weekend Australian he believed the navy’s conduct was inappropriate, and he had asked the minister to review it.
Mr Patrick, who was once offered a role as an adviser to Senator Johnston, has been a thorn in the navy’s side since 2009, when he began writing articles calling for Australia to buy cheap, off-the-shelf submarines from Europe rather than build new subs in Australia. The navy disagrees with that position.
Documents obtained under Freedom of Information reveal that senior officers believed Mr Patrick’s public comments were “impacting adversely on the Royal Australian Navy’s reputation (and) our capability”.
In late 2012 and early last year, the navy investigated Mr Patrick with a view to silencing him.
It checked the clause of his $90,00-a-year contract to provide sonar and acoustic training to submariners, but was advised his public commentary was not in breach of his contract. The navy then tried to change the terms of his contract to prevent him making public commentary.
In February last year Commodore Michael Noonan, then head of navy training, told Mr Patrick in an email that navy would re-examine his contract if he did not sign a separate agreement preventing him from making public commentary on submarines. “If (this) agreement cannot be reached, I will consider other options available to the navy in relation to the contract,” the officer wrote.
But when Mr Patrick lodged an FOI request soon after to uncover the email trail that led to this decision, the navy backtracked.
It withdrew the officer’s letter and, then, on the eve of the release of the documents, it set up a meeting with the then navy chief Vice Admiral Ray Griggs who told Mr Patrick the navy would be taking no further action.
But a year later — in May this year — Mr Patrick was told his training contract would not be renewed when it expired in June.
Defence says this has nothing to do with its previous dispute with Mr Patrick. It says the navy plans to conduct its sonar and acoustic training in-house, and it no longer needs a contractor such as Mr Patrick’s company Acoustic Force.
“Freedom of speech is a concept that members of the Australian Defence Force must give regard to,” Mr Patrick said.
“I presume that, from (the navy’s) perspective, the public is better served if debates about defence are devoid of any contributions from people who know about the subject.”source