No plans for war on Iraq in Budget: Hill

The Howard Government has not planned for a war in Iraq in its 2002-03 Budget, according to Defence Minister Robert Hill.

The United States Administration of George W. Bush is debating whether to topple the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein as part of its global assault on terrorism.

Senator Hill said yesterday, "There has been no consideration by the Government about any action in Iraq and therefore no funding is sought for any action in Iraq."

The US Vice-President Dick Cheney is currently travelling in the Middle East discussing the future of Iraq with nations the US might call upon for support if it moves against Hussein.

Mr Bush said this week, "I am deeply concerned about Iraq. This is a nation run by a man who is willing to kill his own people . . . a man who won't let inspectors in to the country. He is a problem and we're going to deal with him."

However, the Howard Government has made it clear that any US request for assistance in Iraq would be considered on its merits, but it has not given the US a blank cheque. There are also serious concerns about cost overruns.

Senator Hill told Parliament this week that an allegation the Defence budget was six weeks' late was factually incorrect.

The Defence budget was due last Friday, and was lodged on Wednesday this week, he said yesterday. It will go before Cabinet's Expenditure Review Committee soon.

The additional estimates for the Defence budget in 2001-02 show an estimated total cost overrun of about $1.1 billion, with $320 million set aside for the war on terror.

Senator Hill said the small delay in the 2002-03 Defence budget was not due just to the complexity of estimating the war costs of Australia's involvement in Afghanistan.

According to well-informed sources, the lack of forward funding for Iraq did not necessarily indicate that Australia would not help the US in its plans for Iraq.

It was standard practice in Defence not to fund contingent operations, such as the war in Afghanistan, in advance.

It was difficult to decipher the path of future US policy on Iraq, which is split between a hawkish Pentagon determined to oust Hussein and a more cautious State Department, led by Secretary of State Colin Powell.

A short while ago the big question in Australian government circles was if the US would move against Hussein, one source said. Now it was more of a question of when.

The Howard Government is closely watching the debate over Iraq. It is waiting for the outcome, expected in May, of a UN review of official sanctions and the inspections regime.

One source said if the US were serious about toppling Hussein, then it would begin a long process of coalition-building. But the problem for the US was what to do when Hussein was gone.


	Government News Index site index HOME No plans for war on Iraq in Budget: Hill By LINCOLN WRIGHT The Howard Government has not planned for a war in Iraq in its 2002-03 Budget, according to Defence Minister Robert Hill. The United States Administration of George W. Bush is debating whether to topple the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein as part of its global assault on terrorism. Senator Hill said yesterday, "There has been no consideration by the Government about any action in Iraq and therefore no funding is sought for any action in Iraq." The US Vice-President Dick Cheney is currently travelling in the Middle East discussing the future of Iraq with nations the US might call upon for support if it moves against Hussein. Mr Bush said this week, "I am deeply concerned about Iraq. This is a nation run by a man who is willing to kill his own people . . . a man who won't let inspectors in to the country. He is a problem and we're going to deal with him." However, the Howard Government has made it clear that any US request for assistance in Iraq would be considered on its merits, but it has not given the US a blank cheque. There are also serious concerns about cost overruns. Senator Hill told Parliament this week that an allegation the Defence budget was six weeks' late was factually incorrect. The Defence budget was due last Friday, and was lodged on Wednesday this week, he said yesterday. It will go before Cabinet's Expenditure Review Committee soon. The additional estimates for the Defence budget in 2001-02 show an estimated total cost overrun of about $1.1 billion, with $320 million set aside for the war on terror. Senator Hill said the small delay in the 2002-03 Defence budget was not due just to the complexity of estimating the war costs of Australia's involvement in Afghanistan. According to well-informed sources, the lack of forward funding for Iraq did not necessarily indicate that Australia would not help the US in its plans for Iraq. It was standard practice in Defence not to fund contingent operations, such as the war in Afghanistan, in advance. It was difficult to decipher the path of future US policy on Iraq, which is split between a hawkish Pentagon determined to oust Hussein and a more cautious State Department, led by Secretary of State Colin Powell. A short while ago the big question in Australian government circles was if the US would move against Hussein, one source said. Now it was more of a question of when. The Howard Government is closely watching the debate over Iraq. It is waiting for the outcome, expected in May, of a UN review of official sanctions and the inspections regime. One source said if the US were serious about toppling Hussein, then it would begin a long process of coalition-building. But the problem for the US was what to do when Hussein was gone. Canberra Times Index