Coast Guard in addition to Royal New Zealand Navy

Novascotiaboy

Active Member
Given the non military nature of EEZ patrol and SAR would it not be more appropriate for the government of New Zealand to separate these tasks and costs from the defence budget? The creation of an entity like Australia's Border Protection Force, civilian manned, could provide a more affordable platform for providing these services. At the same time the NZDF budget could be focused on its core missions and allow scarce resources to be used for those core functions.

Through this thread I would like to see what options could be employed to increase abilities yet reduce costs in providing the service. As well, I would like contributors to offer their opinion on what a NZDF would look like without the burden of non military functions.

IMHO I envision an organization that is capable of providing resources for non military tasks from both the air and the sea. By combining the best of civilian contracting there are synergies to be created. In the air, a program similar to Provincial Airlines contract with the government of Holland to provide aerial surveillance of the Netherlands Antilles in the Caribbean would offer a three aircraft fleet. PAL has extensive experience offering this solution to governments from Canada to the Persian Gulf. Aircraft such as the B350 as used to patrol Canadian waters up to the Q series used in the Caribbean could be employed and crewed by civilian aviators, retired military.

On the water a program modelled on the Australian Border Protection Force could provide southern ocean and EEZ patrol using re-roled OSV designs with civilian crews. Either customs officers or National Police officers could be aboard for the enforcement component as the matters are better enforced under a framework of law enforcement and civil courts.

If this were implemented the resulting NZDF could look like the following;

Navy: Three frigates, one AOR, one LPD, one Littoral Support ship

Air Force: 4 Long Range ISR / ASW aircraft; nine transport aircraft consisting of three strategic heavy lift, three medium tactical, three light tactical / MEPT; 8 naval rotary; 8 tactical transport; 8 A/LUH; 3 training rotary; 11 advanced trainer; 9 COIN / FAC

What do others think?
 

MrConservative

Super Moderator
Staff member
I raised this very issue back in May.

I have the view that Customs, Maritime Police, MFish Fisheries Protection, Immigration, Bio & Environmental Security and other civilian agency roles which have skin in the game could possibly be subsumed into a new stand alone New Zealand Border Protection Service which would have legal efficacy for our contiguous zone.

Under international law within the declared 24nm contiguous zone, a nation can act to prevent violations of its environmental, fisheries, customs, fiscal, or immigration laws, or to apprehend vessels suspected of violating them with the full sovereign enforcement and prosecution of local law. A New Zealand Border Protection Service could focus on the civilian agency work within the contiguous inshore zone and leaving the NZDF focusing on purely outer EEZ, regional and global military and security matters.

Mod Edit: Firstly some ground rules before this thread goes further. If we want to discuss from a policy perspective a NZ Border Protection Service that splits the MAOT / Inshore roles of the NZDF here - by all means go for it, but we do already have 4 threads dedicated to the NZDF and therefore NZDF specific matters must be discussed there. The last thing we need is another thread that lists future Navy fleets less MOAT roles. If not the Mods will merge this thread into the main NZDF Geo-Political Thread.

Cheers, Mr C
 

MrConservative

Super Moderator
Staff member
Ah but according to our pollies, who are the fount of all wisdom and omnipotent, they aren't fit for purpose. :rolleyes:
Well not fit for purpose as RNZN vessels well beyond the 24m zone. The Navy knew that all along. The IPV's were being forced into OPV type action because the Pollies in the past did not build enough OPV's in the first place.

But I suppose the question now should be - should the IPV's be transferred to a new border protection agency that has a legislative remit to patrol and prosecute within our coastal waters? Is a new agency needed? What would be the vessel(s) type best set up for this enforcement role?
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Well not fit for purpose as RNZN vessels well beyond the 24m zone. The Navy knew that all along. The IPV's were being forced into OPV type action because the Pollies in the past did not build enough OPV's in the first place.

But I suppose the question now should be - should the IPV's be transferred to a new border protection agency that has a legislative remit to patrol and prosecute within our coastal waters? Is a new agency needed? What would be the vessel(s) type best set up for this enforcement role?
I think they should and more OPVs acquired for the offshore patrolling. I would suggest that the IPVs be owned by the NZ Border Protection Agency but the RNZN contracted to crew them. That way the RNZN still have access to ships small enough that junior officers can command them and gain the experience needed before they progress to larger ships. It's a win win because the RNZN doesn't have to purchase the vessels and the NZ Border Protection Agency doesn't have to find experienced crew. The NZ Border Protection Agency would have to pay for the RNZN crews but not at NZ commercial crewing rates.

Addition: Yes I think that there should be a separate agency along the lines of the NZ Border Protection Agency which would encompass some of the roles of the Police, Customs, NZDF, Immigration, the Security Services & MPI having both permanent staff and suitably experienced personnel, seconded from each of those ministries and departments.
 
Last edited:

Novascotiaboy

Active Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #7
Apparently Customs is getting a new vessel.

Customs new patrol boat a world-class vessel

Much smaller than an IPV. If two IPV's are currently tied up why would government not have already considered refitting these two, paint them some colour other than naval grey and use them? Unless the 54 m length of an IPV is too much for the areas served I think this would be an ideal utilization.

What agency does navaid placement in NZ as I have been unable to find any reference to dedicated buoy tender type vessels operated by government? Canada and the US use similar tenders to setvice buoys and markers in their respective coast guards.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Apparently Customs is getting a new vessel.

Customs new patrol boat a world-class vessel

Much smaller than an IPV. If two IPV's are currently tied up why would government not have already considered refitting these two, paint them some colour other than naval grey and use them? Unless the 54 m length of an IPV is too much for the areas served I think this would be an ideal utilization.

What agency does navaid placement in NZ as I have been unable to find any reference to dedicated buoy tender type vessels operated by government? Canada and the US use similar tenders to setvice buoys and markers in their respective coast guards.
Maritime NZ is the national regulatory authority, however Regional Councils are responsible for the maintenance of maritime navaids so the Regional Harbourmaster would ensure that each navaid in his / her's AOR would be compliant. Maintenance, placement, replacement etc., would be contracted out. Under the Resource Management Act Regional Councils are responsible for all coasts, coastal waters and etc., from Mean Low Water (MLW) to the 12nm limit. The area from MLW inland is the responsibility of Territorial Authorities (City or District Councils).
 

Novascotiaboy

Active Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #10
Ngati thank you very much.

That is an odd arrangement in comparison to Canada. Basically anything in the saltwater or the inland waterways and Great Lakes are national issues.

That must make for a Dogs breakfast.

So on a local level would it be the same that local air rescue helicopter trusts do at sea searches and rescues supported by RNZAF assets when available?

In the report I posted earlier it identifies two important areas for operation; from Auckland and one from Wellington. The ability to take civilian mariners and fill engineering and navigation positions supported by customs and police personnel should provide a crewing option along with with active duty and reserve navy personnel. If bound to operate in these two AO primarily it would be better than being laid up. Surely this must be being reviewed by government.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Ngati thank you very much.

That is an odd arrangement in comparison to Canada. Basically anything in the saltwater or the inland waterways and Great Lakes are national issues.

That must make for a Dogs breakfast.
Not really because the regional harbourmaster will know his / her area well. The dogs breakfast occurs, where the coastal boundary between the Regional and Territorial Authorities is delineated / defined, because it means that any coastal unit is spilt when in fact a coast, from a coastal science perspective, is a single unit that exists from where the water depth is 1/2 the wavelength of the incoming wave sets to the inland edge of the back beach. Back in the "bad" old days the (long gone) Ministry Of Works used to be responsible for coastal matters and the locals had little or no say. They ruled with an iron sledge hammer in that it was a highly centralised (in Wellington) bureaucracy. Now the locals have the chance to be heard and have input; whether or not that's taken into account is another story.
 

KiwiRob

Well-Known Member
Apparently Customs is getting a new vessel.

Customs new patrol boat a world-class vessel

Much smaller than an IPV. If two IPV's are currently tied up why would government not have already considered refitting these two, paint them some colour other than naval grey and use them? Unless the 54 m length of an IPV is too much for the areas served I think this would be an ideal.
So it's not the same design as the two new police launches, they were all supposed to be the same. I also wonder how customs can cover the entire country with a single vessel?
 

Lucasnz

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
So it's not the same design as the two new police launches, they were all supposed to be the same. I also wonder how customs can cover the entire country with a single vessel?
Put politely the can't. There was an article on the Wellington police launch I think in NZ Skipper (similar design to the new Customs Boat). The Police launch was being used to support other government agencies and went across to the sounds in the summer months. I suspect the Police, Customs and MAF could all do with an additional vessel.

If you look at the British Revenue Cutters they operate with a crew of 12. The NZ IPV need 25. Transferring the IPV in my view is not an option if a coastguard proposal was to go ahead. I don't think it should for the reasons Mr C has outlined earlier.
 
Last edited:
Top