In a recently uncovered issue affecting Australia’s Defence Estate management, concerns have been raised about the complexity and inefficiency of maintenance procedures on military bases following the implementation of a centralized service contract system. The controversy came to light after Defence Minister Richard Marles announced plans earlier this year to sell off 67 Defence bases, including Victoria Barracks Sydney, a historic military site functioning as the headquarters for Forces Command since 1840.

Traditionally, the sale of unused Defence land was conducted on a site-by-site basis with the involvement of service chiefs. However, the current approach, managed by the Defence Department’s Security and Estate Group, represents a significant shift toward centralization. This department has been criticized for its secretive operations and apparent mismanagement of the Defence Estate.

A Senate inquiry was established to investigate the department’s handling of Defence property and services. According to Senator Jess Collins, chairwoman of the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee, the inquiry revealed that service personnel are no longer permitted to perform basic maintenance tasks themselves. For example, a combat engineer needing to replace a simple light bulb on base must instead navigate a complicated process involving submitting a maintenance request through an application. The request is then assigned to a designated tradesperson, whose work must be supervised and coordinated with the engineer’s chain of command.

This process stems from last year’s Base Services Transformation Program, which granted exclusive six-year contracts—held by a limited number of multinational firms—to manage a wide array of base services, including maintenance, security, firefighting, housekeeping, and catering. These contractual arrangements reportedly prohibit Defence personnel from carrying out even minor repair work, effectively outsourcing these responsibilities to contracted providers.

Collins emphasized that such restrictions have led to significant delays and increased costs, with simple repairs like changing a light bulb taking days, or potentially weeks, and costing as much as $500 each. The ramifications are considerable when extrapolated across Australia’s extensive Defence Estate.

Although the Senate requested the release of initial tender documents related to these contracts in July, the government has not yet complied. Critics argue that the overcentralization and bureaucratic complexity have hampered efficient management and unnecessarily burdened military personnel and resources.

Calls have been made to return control of base maintenance and decisions to the service chiefs and base commanders, advocating for a less restrictive system that empowers on-site management and reduces administrative and financial overhead. Those critics contend that simplifying management structures could enhance operational efficiency and curtail escalating costs.