By Darian Macey, March 4 2025
Grab your coffee and pull up a chair – Collab X 2025 is upon us, and it’s shaping up to be the Defence estate event of the year.
Set for 5–6 March in Canberra, this annual gathering brings together Defence Estate Group leaders, industry consultants, and infrastructure experts to tackle the big challenges and opportunities facing Australia’s military bases and facilities. And there are big numbers on the table: with the government investing $45 billion in defence infrastructure over the next decade, Collab X 2025 is a must-attend for anyone looking to stay ahead of the curve on Defence’s priorities. The conference’s open format – described as fostering “questions from the floor” and dynamic exchanges – means it won’t be a stuffy seminar. It’s more like a candid conversation among mates in the industry, but with serious business behind it.
So why is this year’s Collab X so important? Context is key. We’re meeting in the wake of a major strategic reset for Defence. Last year’s Defence Strategic Review and the new Integrated Investment Program (IIP) refocused attention on Australia’s northern bases, our maritime security, and high-tech capabilities. Billions are being re-prioritised to upgrade runways, ports and fuel depots up north, even as other projects take a back seat. At the same time, allied cooperation is ramping up – the recent AUSMIN talks added more U.S. rotations through Australian airfields like RAAF Tindal, Darwin, and even remote strips at Scherger and Curtin. This means more pressure – and opportunity – for our estate to support a larger forward presence. Meanwhile, geopolitics isn’t taking a breather: a Chinese naval flotilla’s live-fire drill in the Tasman Sea earlier this year forced commercial flights to reroute and jolted many in Canberra. The Chinese ambassador’s unapologetic stance – essentially “get used to it” – underscores the rapidly changing strategic environment our infrastructure must be ready for. And if that’s not enough, we’ve got an election on the horizon. Both government and opposition are talking up Defence – the government is sticking to its carefully costed long-term plans, while the opposition is making splashy promises like 28 extra F-35 jets with a $3 billion price tag (and some pointed questions on how they’d fund it). In short, Defence estate professionals are juggling a lot: implementing long-term plans, adapting to immediate strategic pressures, and anticipating possible policy shifts.
Collab X 2025 arrives at just the right time to make sense of all this. Over a friendly atmosphere (yes, there’s plenty of networking built in), we’ll hear straight from senior Defence leaders and fellow industry experts about where things are heading. Here’s an inside look at the key sessions – what they’re about in plain English, why they matter to our day-to-day work, and the burning questions we’ll be seeking answers to. Consider this your personal briefing for the conference, so you can hit the ground running in Canberra. Let’s dive in!
Key Session Previews
Keynote Addresses: Setting the Stage and Facing the Big Picture
What it’s about: Collab X 2025 kicks off with heavyweight keynote speakers setting the tone. We’ll hear from Celia Perkins, Deputy Secretary for Security and Estate, Pat Sowry, First Assistant Secretary, and Brigadier Matthew Quinn, the newly appointed Director General for Capital Facilities and Infrastructure. In plain English, these are the folks at the top of Defence’s infrastructure and estate game. Their addresses will give us a broad overview of Defence’s priorities going forward – think of it as the “state of the union” for the Defence estate. They’ll likely touch on everything from the latest policy updates and budget outlook, to progress on major initiatives like the Defence Strategic Review implementation, to how industry and Defence can work better together. If there are going to be any subtle announcements or signals (e.g. a hint at new funding approvals, or an update on that long-awaited base infrastructure audit), it will probably happen here.
Why it matters: This opening session is crucial because it will frame all the detailed discussions to follow. It’s where we’ll get a reality check on how Defence leadership sees the challenges we’re grappling with on the ground. For instance, we know there’s an enormous investment pipeline but also some execution hurdles – last year Defence underspent its infrastructure budget by over 30%, largely due to delays on key base projects. Will the top brass acknowledge these issues and outline how to fix them? Also, with an election looming, both major political parties have been posturing on defence infrastructure and spending. The keynotes might subtly reinforce the government’s narrative (steady investment, long-term planning) or respond to opposition critiques. Remember, Ms. Perkins and team are responsible for the Security and Estate Group (SEG) – the people who actually deliver and maintain Defence’s bases. So if you’re an industry partner, you’ll be listening for signs of upcoming opportunities (or potential slowdowns). Are they confident about rolling out the next wave of projects in the Integrated Investment Plan? How are they prioritising, especially after the 2024 IIP update that outlines $53–$63 billion in planned defence investments through 2034? The keynote will connect those strategic dots to the on-the-ground work we all do.
Key questions to be answered:
- Are there new priorities or shifts in Defence’s estate investment strategy? For example, will funding focus shift because of recent strategic events (like fast-tracking northern base hardening, or additional resilience measures after seeing regional tensions?
- How will Defence close the gap between plans and delivery? We’re keen to hear if leadership addresses the infrastructure underspend and project delays – do they have a plan to catch up so that crucial projects (runways, ports, etc.) are ready in time for strategic needs?
- What signals are being sent to industry about working together? We’ll be listening for cues on procurement improvements, contract models, or workforce initiatives. For instance, will there be a push for more collaborative contracting to improve delivery, or talk of easing bottlenecks like land access and approvals? Any mention of how to tackle the skilled labour shortage in construction (perhaps through training pipelines or recruitment) would be a big tell.
- Are any policy or funding announcements on the horizon? Sometimes these keynotes drop hints – perhaps an update on AUKUS-related infrastructure commitments, or a nod towards what might be in the next Defence budget or party platforms. If Celia Perkins or her colleagues mention reviewing base priorities post-estate audit (which was due end of 2023), or reference new government directives, take note.
Maritime Infrastructure & AUKUS Submarines: Anchoring Australia’s Future Fleet
What it’s about: One of the most anticipated sessions at Collab X 2025 is the deep dive into maritime infrastructure, with a spotlight on nuclear-powered submarines. In plain terms, this is where we talk about what it actually takes to build and support the Navy’s future – from upgrading wharves and ports to handle more (and bigger) warships, to creating the facilities needed for Australia’s forthcoming AUKUS submarines. Think massive dry docks, high-security fuel storage, specialised maintenance facilities for nuclear subs – the works. The session will likely feature insights from Navy infrastructure planners and maybe the Australian Submarine Agency, discussing progress on things like upgrading HMAS Stirling in WA and the new submarine construction yard in SA. We know the government has committed to expand HMAS Stirling (Fleet Base West) with an $8 billion investment over the next decade, transforming it into a home for both our own and visiting US/UK nuclear submarines. Additionally, there’s a $2+ billion project underway at Osborne in South Australia to build a state-of-the-art construction yard for the AUKUS subs. This session will break down these big projects in approachable terms: what’s being built, when it’s happening, and how industry can get involved. It’s not all about subs either – maritime infrastructure includes our broader naval estate, such as upgrades to shipyards, coastal bases, and even considerations for an East Coast submarine base down the line. Essentially, if it floats (or submerges) and is part of Defence’s plans, this session covers the shore-side support for it.
Why it matters: Australia is making a once-in-a-generation leap in naval capability with the AUKUS nuclear-powered submarines. But those subs won’t magically appear or sustain themselves – a huge endeavour in infrastructure underpins them. For Defence estate folks and industry partners, this means years of work ahead on planning, constructing, and upgrading facilities. The reasons this session matters are many. First, strategic urgency: The Indo-Pacific is becoming more contested, as we saw with China’s naval task groups ranging further afield (one even cruised around southern Australia recently) and live-fire drills causing a stir. To deter potential threats and uphold our security commitments, Australia needs robust maritime capabilities – and that requires top-notch bases and support infrastructure. Second, scale and complexity: Building nuclear submarine infrastructure isn’t your run-of-the-mill project. It involves new safety and security standards (we’re talking nuclear regulations, radiation safety, etc.), not to mention the technical challenges of constructing facilities like reactor maintenance workshops or high-capacity power and water systems. The learning curve is steep for Australia, which hasn’t operated nukes before. This session matters because it will translate these challenges into concrete discussion points for those of us who might design, build or manage these facilities. Third, industry opportunity and pressure: The government’s investment priorities are clearly tilted towards maritime – they’ve even said these submarine and ship projects are dominating the new funding increases. That can be great news (lots of work coming!), but also a bit ominous – it could mean other projects get delayed or scrapped to free up budget. So, knowing where we stand on maritime infrastructure helps everyone plan ahead. For example, HMAS Stirling’s initial upgrades to support visiting U.S. and UK submarines (the so-called Submarine Rotational Force West) are already in motion. Are they on track? This matters because those upgrades need to be ready before American or British subs start showing up regularly in a few years’ time. Also, how are we managing the workforce and supply chain for these projects? The drydock expansions, wharf strengthening, and heavy engineering involved will test Australia’s construction capacity.
Key questions to be answered:
- Is Australia ready to support nuclear submarines? We need to know how preparations are progressing. For instance, when will HMAS Stirling’s expanded facilities be operational for the rotational Allied subs? Are interim measures in place (e.g. temporary arrangements to dock U.S. subs, training of our personnel with U.S. help) to bridge any gaps?
- What’s the timeline and plan for the AUKUS submarine construction yard? The Osborne yard in SA got a $2 billion injection for early works, but building submarines is a decades-long enterprise. Will this session clarify the next milestones – like design finalisation, workforce ramp-up, and how local industry is being involved in the supply chain? Everyone from steel manufacturers to technical services firms will want to glean the schedule to align their own plans.
- How will we handle the workforce and skill challenges? Maritime projects demand niche skills (e.g. naval architects, nuclear engineers, submarine technicians). Is Defence or industry introducing new training programs or overseas partnerships to ensure we have the people to build and later maintain these complex vessels? There’s talk of hundreds of skilled workers needed in WA and SA – how will we get them, especially given workforce shortages across Defence and construction? (As a comparison, even the ADF is short on personnel – the military was over 5,500 members below its required strength last year, highlighting how tough the talent war is).
- What about other naval infrastructure upgrades? It’s not just subs. What about the planed upgrading of our dry docks, ship lift capacities, or fuel and weapons storage at other naval bases? For example, Fleet Base East at Garden Island (Sydney) needs investment if we’re home-porting larger ships. The session should address how the Garden Island Redevelopment fits into the big picture, ensuring our entire naval support network is up to scratch.
- Are there risks to schedule or budget we should brace for? Big naval builds often face delays (look at past submarine projects globally). If the speakers hint at any challenges – be it technical surprises in construction, environmental approval hurdles, or budget pressures (maybe due to inflation in construction costs) – that’s critical intel. It will help industry peers like us anticipate potential slow-downs or areas where contingency planning is needed.
Indigenous Partnerships in Defence Projects: More Than a Box to Tick
What it’s about: This session zeroes in on strengthening collaborations with Indigenous businesses and communities in the Defence estate sphere. In everyday terms, it’s about how Defence and industry can better engage Indigenous-owned companies, involve Traditional Owners in projects on country, and create opportunities that benefit Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. We can expect discussions around the successes and lessons of current initiatives – for example, how requirements under the Indigenous Procurement Policy are being met on major base projects, or case studies like partnering with local Indigenous enterprises for land management, construction, or maintenance tasks. There’s a good chance we’ll hear from both Defence representatives (from the Department’s Indigenous Engagement programs or Estate environment office) and Indigenous business leaders who have firsthand experience working on defence contracts. A key part of “what it’s about” is making these ideas tangible: Instead of vague slogans, this session should shed light on practical steps – like how a regional depot upgrade in the NT employed Indigenous subcontractors for civil works, or how joint ventures are forming between big primes and Indigenous SMEs to deliver projects. Essentially, it’s a conversation about building capacity and relationships: ensuring that when Defence invests in infrastructure (especially in remote areas, often on or near Indigenous land), Indigenous Australians are partners and beneficiaries, not sidelined observers.
Why it matters: For those of us in the Defence estate community, this isn’t just a feel-good, add-on topic – it’s increasingly central to how we do business. Here’s why. Firstly, many Defence bases and training areas are in or adjacent to Indigenous communities or on Traditional lands. Engaging respectfully and productively with those communities isn’t just morally right; it leads to better outcomes. Local Indigenous knowledge can guide environmental management, heritage protection, and even design decisions to ensure we’re caretakers of the land. By involving Indigenous stakeholders early, you avoid conflicts and delays – a very practical benefit. Secondly, there’s a huge opportunity to tap into a growing sector of skilled Indigenous businesses. The government has targets (and genuine commitment) to boost Indigenous participation in contracts. We’re already seeing companies rise to the occasion. For example, an Indigenous-owned contractor, TVN On-Country, has been carving out a reputation in Defence projects, boasting 20% Indigenous employees and successfully delivering works from fencing to facilities maintenance. The session will likely highlight such success stories. The Indigenous Defence & Infrastructure Consortium (iDiC) – a group connecting Indigenous businesses with defence projects – might be discussed; partnerships like the one between engineering firm Jacobs and iDiC have enabled smaller Indigenous firms to get involved in big projects, which in turn delivers social benefits. (One study found every $1 spent with Indigenous businesses generates $4.41 in social and economic value for Indigenous communities – an impressive multiplier that Defence can contribute to by steering work their way.) Third, workforce capacity and diversity. We all know the Defence construction scene is crying out for more skilled hands. By training and employing Indigenous Australians, especially in remote regions where they are the local talent, we broaden the workforce pool. Many remote area projects struggle to attract and retain outside workers; empowering local Indigenous workers can alleviate that. Plus, it aligns with broader reconciliation goals and sustains community economies – outcomes everyone can be proud of.
In a nutshell, this session matters because it addresses how we can make Defence infrastructure projects inclusive and sustainable, leaving a positive legacy. For industry peers, it’s also about learning how to engage – not just to win tenders that have Indigenous participation requirements, but to build genuine partnerships that last.
Key questions to be answered:
- How can Defence and prime contractors better integrate Indigenous businesses into the supply chain? We want specifics: e.g. setting aside portions of large contracts for Indigenous SMEs, or structuring joint ventures where Indigenous firms play significant roles (beyond just being a token subcontractor). What models have worked so far, and what are the plans to expand them?
- Are current policy settings (like the Indigenous Procurement Policy targets) achieving real outcomes on Defence estate projects? If not, what’s being considered – higher targets, more support for Indigenous bidders, breaking big projects into smaller packages that local firms can bid for? This session should shed light on whether we’ll see changes such as increased minimum Indigenous participation percentages in upcoming contracts.
- What support is there to build capability in Indigenous enterprises? It’s one thing to award contracts; it’s another to ensure Indigenous businesses can successfully deliver. Will there be mentoring programs, upskilling, or flexible contract terms to help these companies grow? Perhaps Defence could facilitate more training or even adjust how it evaluates bids to place value on Indigenous content. Any hints of new initiatives (for example, an “Indigenous Partnership Program” or funding to iDiC and similar bodies) would be significant.
- How is engagement with Traditional Owners being handled in estate planning? Beyond business contracts, a lot of projects require consultation with Traditional Owner groups, especially if there are cultural heritage sites involved or native title considerations. Are we getting that right? Should we be doing more, like early and ongoing consultation frameworks on every project? Attendees will listen for guidance or best practices here – it can make or break a project timeline if done poorly.
- Success stories and lessons learned? It’s a question for ourselves: what can we learn from projects that have successfully empowered Indigenous communities? Conversely, what pitfalls need avoiding (perhaps well-intentioned efforts that didn’t deliver results)? Expect speakers to touch on examples – and those examples will carry implicit answers to this question, offering a blueprint we can all use going forward.
Northern Australia Infrastructure Push: Building the Frontline
What it’s about: Defence’s northern bases are getting a lot of love lately, and this session is all about those significant infrastructure investments up north. In straightforward terms, we’re talking about upgrades and expansions at bases like RAAF Tindal and Darwin in the NT, RAAF Scherger and Townsville in QLD, and RAAF Learmonth and Curtin in WA, not to mention Army facilities and joint training areas across Northern Australia. This session will likely outline what’s being done to transform these locations into a true “forward line” of defence. For example, RAAF Base Tindal (near Katherine, NT) is in the midst of a $1+ billion upgrade that touches almost every part of the base: extending the runway, building new fuel storage, larger aprons for visiting aircraft, hardened shelters, etc. – all to support new capabilities like F-35 fighters and visiting US bombers. The presenters might walk us through Tindal’s progress as a case study. Similarly, there are projects to expand Darwin’s capacity (both the air base and naval base HMAS Coonawarra) to host more Allied ships and aircraft. Northern QLD isn’t left out – Scherger (a normally bare base in Cape York) and Townsville are earmarked for improvements to support advanced aircraft operations “north of the Tropic of Capricorn”. And we can’t forget the remote training ranges: places like Shoalwater Bay (QLD) and Bradshaw or Mount Bundey (NT) are being improved under the Australia-US Force Posture Initiative to enable bigger joint exercises. So, in this session, expect a plain-English run-down of what’s being built or planned in these northern locations: new runways or runway upgrades, ammunition and fuel depots, better housing and working facilities for troops, port upgrades for Navy in Darwin, and even things like better roads and communications for these remote sites.
Why it matters: If you look at a map, Northern Australia is our geographical frontline to the Indo-Pacific. The Government’s recent strategy is very clear that the north is critical for deterrence and operations – hence the push to “harden” northern bases and pre-position resources there. This session matters for several reasons. Strategically, it’s about shifting from a historically southern-focused posture to one where we can respond quickly to threats in our region. When RAAF Scherger or Curtin gets the ability to host modern fighters or tankers, it extends the RAAF’s reach into Southeast Asia and the Indian Ocean. When an Army unit can train in bigger exercises out of Townsville or Darwin with US Marines on improved ranges, it boosts our readiness and interoperability. In short, these concrete and tarmac projects have a direct line to Australia’s defence credibility. From an estate perspective, northern projects come with unique challenges: remote locations mean difficult logistics (moving materials and workers), harsh environments (monsoons, heat, cyclones – take your pick), and sometimes limited local infrastructure to build upon. That means innovative solutions are needed – another reason the session is important, as it will shed light on how Defence and industry are tackling these hurdles. For instance, are they prefabricating components down south and trucking them up? Are they doing wet-season and dry-season work cycles to cope with weather? Such details matter to those of us likely to be involved or affected. Economically and politically, Northern Australia investments are a hot topic. They promise jobs and development in regional areas and are a visible sign of the government’s commitment to defence. However, there have been signs of strain – last year, Defence planned to spend a hefty sum on northern projects but ended up undershooting that by a wide margin. Key upgrades – like the Cocos Islands airfield (important for surveillance aircraft) and some US-funded training area improvements – were delayed, with tens of millions unspent because works didn’t progress as fast as hoped. This session’s importance also lies in addressing those issues: acknowledging what’s behind the delays (e.g. contractor shortages? design changes? environmental approvals taking too long?) and how to get back on track, because the clock is ticking. Allies are counting on some of these upgrades; for example, the US Marine Rotational Force in Darwin and future Air Force rotations need certain facilities ready sooner rather than later.
For industry folks, northern projects represent a huge chunk of work – but not easy work. Understanding the government’s game plan here helps companies large and small position themselves. It also matters for Defence staff on base: they want to know when the new facilities will come online to improve their living and working conditions. All these angles make this session highly relevant.
Key questions to be answered:
- Are we on schedule to “harden” the northern bases, and what are the priority projects? Specifically, by when will key bases like Tindal, Curtin, Learmonth have their upgrades completed? The AUSMIN communiqués have identified these for future rotations and investments, so what’s the timeline? If there have been delays (like the Tindal runway extension running behind), how will those be mitigated?
- How is industry handling the remote build challenges? We’re eager to hear if new strategies are in play. For example, is Defence bundling multiple northern projects to attract bigger contractors who can invest in local capability? Or conversely, breaking them into smaller packages to give regional contractors (including Indigenous businesses) a shot? Logistics solutions like temporary worker camps, innovative construction methods (modular builds that can be assembled quickly on site) – any mention of these will answer how we’ll actually get the work done up there.
- What role are our allies playing in these upgrades? The US, for one, is co-investing in some northern infrastructure through the Force Posture Agreement. Are there any new commitments from recent talks – like the US funding a second tranche of works on airfields or fuel farms? If, say, US or Japan plans to use our northern bases more for exercises, are they contributing to expansions? The session might illuminate how international collaboration is feeding into estate development (or if not, whether Australia is budgeting alone).
- How will these new facilities be maintained and operated once built? Building is one thing; sustaining is another. A question for attendees is what the plan is for upkeep in tough climates. Will there be long-term contracts for maintaining these northern sites (a chance for industry), and are there plans to staff them? For instance, more RAAF and Army personnel might need to be posted to places like Learmonth or Scherger once they’re more active – do we have the workforce for that, or will there be a rotational manning concept? This hints at the broader question: we can build it, but can we use it to its full potential year-round?
- Do we expect any policy shifts after the election affecting these projects? Northern Australia development has bipartisan support on paper, but there might be differences in approach. If speakers drop any insight – e.g. “both sides of politics agree on these investments” or “we hope for continuity regardless of government” – it reassures everyone that these projects have a long-term mandate. Conversely, any hints of reconsideration or budget pressure could be a warning to watch for post-election adjustments.
An RAAF Base Tindal “wagon wheel” dispersal area (circular shelters) seen from above as two RAAF F-35A fighters fly past. Massive upgrades to runways, aprons and shelters are underway at Tindal to support advanced aircraft and greater Allied use of Australia’s northern bases (Major changes on the way for RAAF Base Tindal | PS News)
Driving Productivity and Capacity: The Industry (ACA) Sessions
What it’s about: Collab X isn’t just about what Defence needs – it’s also a mirror on the industry that delivers those needs. Two sessions hosted by the Australian Constructors Association (ACA) will put the spotlight on improving productivity and capacity in delivering defence infrastructure. In plainer language, these sessions are likely to tackle the question: “How do we build all this stuff better, faster, safer, and smarter?” With a defence infrastructure boom at hand (and so much to do in tight timeframes), the construction industry and Defence clients need to up their game. Expect discussions on new approaches to project delivery – such as collaborative contracting models (alliances, early contractor involvement) that aim to reduce disputes and foster innovation, and perhaps the use of digital engineering and off-site fabrication to save time. The ACA might present findings or recommendations on boosting productivity, which could range from adopting new technologies (like drones for site surveys, or modular construction techniques) to process improvements (streamlining procurement, standardising design elements across projects). Workforce capacity will be a big part of the conversation too. Essentially, these sessions are a bit more inward-looking: they’re about the construction and project management process itself, rather than any one project’s content. Think of topics like risk-sharing in contracts, managing cost escalations (a hot issue lately with materials inflation), ensuring safety and quality with an over-stretched workforce, and ways to avoid the dreaded cost/schedule overruns that have historically plagued Defence projects. Given ACA is co-hosting, we might hear from some major contractors or consultants who have worked on Defence jobs, sharing what works and what doesn’t. It’s a chance for industry peers to candidly discuss pain points and solutions – with Defence folks listening in, hopefully ready to consider changes to how projects are procured and managed.
Why it matters: At the end of the day, all the grand Defence plans mean nothing if we can’t execute them effectively. Productivity in the construction sector has been a long-standing challenge – some would say the industry hasn’t seen the same efficiency gains as other sectors in decades. When you overlay that with the scale of Defence’s agenda (so many projects, often complex and in challenging locales) plus a nationwide skill shortage and rising costs, you have a perfect storm that could derail those plans. This is why these sessions are crucial. Firstly, they address the capacity crunch. We have finite resources – workers, materials, even management bandwidth. Australia’s unemployment is relatively low, and infrastructure work in other sectors (civil, mining, commercial) is also booming, which means competition for skills. For example, if we suddenly need dozens more project managers and engineers to simultaneously deliver new barracks, a submarine facility, and three airfield upgrades, where are they coming from? Productivity improvements can help “do more with the same people” by working smarter. And attracting people to defence projects may require making those projects appealing – stable pipelines of work, reasonable contracts, and innovation-friendly environments. Secondly, procurement reform is a big deal here. Many in industry feel that traditional contracting in Defence (and government generally) can be too rigid or adversarial, leading to inefficiencies. If the ACA is involved, they’ll likely push ideas like more early contractor involvement (so builders can advise on designs to save cost/time), or better risk allocation (so contractors aren’t pricing in huge contingencies for uncertainties). They might discuss the shift away from lowest-price wins to value-based selection – ensuring quality and long-term value aren’t sacrificed. Any moves in this direction could significantly improve outcomes: fewer disputes, fewer change orders, faster completion. Third, innovation and new tools. Defence estate projects can certainly benefit from modern construction tech – building information modelling (BIM) for efficient design and facility management, 3D printing components, using robotics for repetitive tasks, etc. But adopting these at scale needs client support and industry readiness. This matters because the timeline pressures almost demand we do things differently; we can’t just throw more labor at the problem when labor is scarce. Finally, cost control. We’ve seen how inflation and supply chain hiccups have caused cost blowouts. Senate estimates have heard plenty about projects needing more money or being delayed to stay within budgets. If productivity can be improved, it helps keep costs down and schedules on track, which in turn keeps Defence’s broader investment program credible. If we fail to deliver value for money, projects might get cut (especially if government changes or budgets tighten). So these sessions are kind of about future-proofing the whole enterprise of Defence infrastructure delivery.
Key questions to be answered:
- What new contracting or project delivery models will be adopted in Defence projects? If speakers discuss trialing things like alliance contracts on a major base upgrade, or say Defence is considering more two-stage procurements (where a couple of bidders do initial design before one is selected), that’s a sign of change. Equally, will there be talk of standardising contracts across Defence to simplify things for industry? Any concrete hint like “we’re looking at using NEC4 (New Engineering Contract) frameworks” or similar would be noteworthy to answer how we’ll work together better.
- How can we boost the construction workforce and expertise for Defence projects? Are there initiatives to bring in more skilled workers – perhaps speeding up security clearances for construction workers (a sometimes overlooked bottleneck), or bringing in overseas talent (with appropriate security vetting) to fill gaps? The question of training is big: will Defence or industry consortiums set up training programs or scholarships to get more people skilled in project management, welding, electrical systems, etc., specifically for Defence work? Essentially, how do we avoid labour shortages being the Achilles’ heel of our plans?
- What role will innovation and technology play in lifting productivity? We’ll be listening for examples: e.g., use of digital twins for bases (to manage construction and future maintenance), off-site manufacturing of building modules to be installed on bases (to cut down time on site, especially in remote areas), or even AI-driven project management tools to optimise scheduling. If these sessions are forward-looking, we should come away with a sense of which innovations are ready for prime time on Defence projects.
- How will success be measured and ensured? It’s great to talk about doing things better – but are there mechanisms to actually enforce or incentivise productivity? For instance, will contracts include gainshare/painshare provisions (where if the contractor finds a way to save money, they keep a portion of the savings, and vice versa for overruns)? Will there be independent reviews or “project clinics” for troubled projects to get them back on track? We might hear about the establishment of new oversight or support bodies within Defence or industry alliances aimed at keeping this infrastructure blitz on schedule.
- Is there a cultural shift happening between Defence and industry? Ultimately, productivity is also about trust and collaboration. If these sessions reveal something like “Defence is engaging earlier and more openly with industry than before” or “contracting officers are being trained to allow more flexibility,” that points to a positive cultural change. The question behind the scenes is: are we moving from a client-contractor divide to a more partnership-based approach for these critical projects? How that’s answered (even implicitly) will influence everyone’s experience on upcoming jobs.
A US Navy Virginia-class submarine (USS Hawaii) berthing at HMAS Stirling in Western Australia, with an Australian frigate in the background. Upgrades at Stirling and other naval bases are crucial to support AUKUS submarine rotations and a growing fleet (DVIDS). Such projects exemplify the scale of Defence’s infrastructure challenge in coming years.
What to Watch For
With the stage set, here are a few key things to watch (and listen) for at Collab X 2025 that will matter to the Defence estate community:
- Insightful Speakers & Panels: Keep an eye on the keynotes by Celia Perkins and team – they’re likely to offer the first clues about any shifts in estate priorities or policy. Also notable is the maritime infrastructure panel (given AUKUS’s profile) – senior Navy or Submarine Agency staff such as Colonel Len Rouwhorst – might break some news or clarify timelines. The ACA-led discussions will be telling; watch how Defence officials react to industry calls for change. Are they nodding along, perhaps even announcing pilot programs for new contracting methods? A particularly interesting speaker to catch will be Brigadier Matthew Quinn (new DG of Capital Facilities) – as a fresh leader, his perspective or any “new direction” he signals will be important. Sometimes newcomers are candid about issues that insiders gloss over.
- Possible Policy Signals: Collab X comes just as both major political parties are fleshing out defence policies before the election. Be alert to any “reading between the lines” moments. For instance, if a Defence speaker emphasises continuity and long-term planning, it’s a subtle vote of confidence that current projects will proceed regardless of political change. Conversely, any mention of reviewing programs or funding could hint at post-election adjustments. Also, given recent events, listen for references to AUKUS progress or hurdles. Will anyone address the “what if” of changing US politics? (Even if not explicitly naming Trump, any comment like “our alliance plans are built to weather political cycles” (Quad and AUKUS face an uncertain future under Trump – 360) might be aiming to reassure that AUKUS is on solid ground). And if the topic of China’s regional activities comes up, note the context – it might be used to justify accelerating certain projects or investing in new capabilities. In short, the conference could subtly preview the defence debate we’ll see in the campaign trail.
- Trends in Infrastructure & Procurement: Beyond the specific sessions, a few emerging trends are likely to permeate discussions. Sustainability and resilience might crop up – for example, designing bases to be energy-efficient and resilient to climate impacts (northern Australia cyclones or flooding, anyone?). The Integrated Investment Plan and National Defence Strategy have nudged Defence to consider climate and disaster resilience as part of capability, so don’t be surprised if someone mentions solar panels on bases or hardened infrastructure to withstand attacks or natural events. Digital transformation of the estate could be another theme: perhaps talk of using data and smart technology to manage facilities more effectively (imagine bases where IoT sensors help predict maintenance issues – saves cost and improves reliability). On procurement, watch for further talk of alliance-based approaches – maybe even references to recent successful models in civilian infrastructure that Defence might emulate. And importantly, workforce capability will be a thread through many talks. We’ve heard stark numbers about Defence’s workforce shortages, both uniformed and in industry. Look for any mention of initiatives to grow skills: maybe partnerships with universities or TAFEs for specialised training, or recruiting drives. If there’s a Defence Infrastructure Division leader speaking, they might mention bringing on more project managers or the challenge of “the same pool of contractors being stretched thin” – which is a cue that Defence knows industry is near capacity.
- Potential Announcements: While Collab X isn’t typically an expo for big announcements (it’s more working-level), sometimes timing is everything. If the Defence Integrated Investment Program update or budget info is fresh, speakers might confirm which major projects are moving to approval. For example, we might hear that “Project X base redevelopment has just been approved for second quarter 2025” or that funding for a certain upgrade has been brought forward. Also, given it’s early March, any outcomes from the Feb Senate Estimates might be referenced – e.g., if a senator extracted a commitment or a reveal (like cost figures or a delay) about an estate project, a Defence speaker could address it here to inform industry. And since networking is a big part, sometimes offstage chatter yields hints – e.g., talk that Defence is about to release a wave of RFTs (Requests for Tender) for estate works paused during the Strategic Review. Keep your ears open during breaks; these tidbits often circulate among attendees.
In summary, watch for the human signals too – the tone and emphasis from Defence leaders. Are they in problem-solving mode, acknowledging issues openly and calling for partnership? Or are they in sales mode, highlighting successes and glossing over gaps? The former would invite us as industry partners to lean in and collaborate (a good sign for a healthy relationship), while the latter might mean we need to ask the hard questions. Either way, Collab X 2025 is poised to give us plenty of intelligence to absorb, both from the podium and between the lines.
Conclusion
By the end of Collab X 2025, every attendee – whether you’re a Defence project manager, a consultant, a contractor, or somewhere in between – will have a notebook (or brain) full of insights. The real value, though, comes in what we do with that insight. So, consider this a friendly challenge: engage actively and share your perspective. If something you hear doesn’t quite add up to your on-the-ground experience, ask about it in the Q&A. If you’ve got a success story or a cautionary tale relevant to a discussion, bring it up when you’re chatting with peers or during the panel discussions. The beauty of Collab X’s collegial format is that it’s meant to be a two-way street – Defence wants to hear from industry just as much as we want to hear from them. And don’t forget the networking sessions (including that special one with new construction panel leaders): use them to connect with colleagues old and new. You never know which conversation over a cup of coffee might spark the next big idea or partnership that helps solve a problem on your project.
Finally, keep the momentum going after the event. In the next Defence Estate Community Newsletter, we’ll feature a post-event analysis, distilling the key takeaways, any surprises, and the consensus on the road ahead. We plan to highlight not just what was said, but what it means for all of us working in this space – so your input is invaluable. If you come away from Collab X with an “aha” moment or a burning issue that deserves follow-up, let us know. Together, as a community of professionals, we can turn the insights from Collab X into concrete actions – ensuring that Australia’s Defence estate is ready for the challenges of 2025 and beyond, and that we’re all better equipped (and maybe even a bit more inspired) to get the job done. Safe travels to those heading to Canberra, and see you at Collab X 2025!
References:
- Collab X 2025 Conference Program
- 2024 National Defence Strategy and Integrated Investment Program
- Australia’s Defence Strategy Analysis
- Australia’s Missile Manufacturing Investment
- AUSMIN Talks Outcomes
- Debate on AUKUS and Australian Sovereignty
- Australia’s $74 Billion Defence Plan
- Chinese Flotilla Near Western Australia
- Impact of Global Strategic Shifts on Australia
- 2025 Security and Defence Conference
- International Defence Conference 2025
- Emerging & Disruptive Technology for Defence 2025
- Australia’s Defence Strategy Overview
- Analysis of U.S.-Australia Defence Strategies
- National Defence Strategy Digest
- Australian Army’s Contribution to National Defence Strategy
- National Defence Strategy Analysis
- Operationalizing U.S.-Australia Regional Defence Strategies
- Australia’s Defence Strategy within Regional Dynamics
- 2025 Defence Outlook Summit
Author: Darian Macey
Darian is a former Engineering Officer with the RAE with tertiary qualifications in Engineering and Project Management. He is a leading practitioner within Australia's NSI sector with previous employment in Government, project management and building contractor organisations.
