By Darian Macey, March 11 2025
If you needed proof that Defence infrastructure is a hot topic, Collab X 2025 delivered it. Over 300 people packed the room in Canberra (with 50+ more joining online), all eager to dissect the challenges and opportunities in Australia’s Defence estate. This annual forum has become the gathering for Defence Estate Group leaders, industry consultants, and infrastructure experts – and with the government investing an estimated $45 billion in defence infrastructure over the next decade, there’s a lot on the line.
1. Setting the scene
This year’s Collab X came at a pivotal moment. The Defence Strategic Review (DSR) in 2024 and a revamped Integrated Investment Program (IIP) have refocused attention on critical priorities: bolstering Australia’s northern bases, enhancing maritime security, and accelerating high-tech capabilities. Billions are being re-prioritised to upgrade runways, ports, and fuel facilities up north, even as other projects take a back seat. At the same time, allied cooperation is ramping up – recent AUSMIN talks mean more U.S. rotations through RAAF Tindal and Darwin, and even Japanese Self-Defense Force training deployments are on the horizon. All of this translates into more pressure and opportunity for our defence estate to support a larger forward presence.
Meanwhile, the broader context is anything but business-as-usual. Geopolitical tensions are simmering and on the home front we have an election on the horizon. Both government and opposition are talking up Defence infrastructure – the current government is sticking to its carefully costed long-term plans, while the opposition floats big new promises (like 28 extra F-35 jets with a $3 billion price tag). In short, Defence estate professionals are juggling implementation of long-term plans, adaptation to immediate strategic pressures, and anticipation of possible policy shifts after the election.
Collab X 2025 arrived at just the right time to make sense of all this. Over two days of candid discussions (true to its “questions from the floor” ethos), senior Defence leaders and industry experts shared where things are heading and what’s keeping them up at night. It felt less like a formal conference and more like a frank conversation among colleagues – but with serious business behind it. From a $41 billion project pipeline to the push for net zero bases, no topic was off-limits. By the end, a few things were clear: delivering Defence infrastructure on time and on budget is a tougher task than ever, collaboration is going to be key, and opportunities abound for those prepared to step up.
Let’s dive into the key insights theme by theme, and pull out what they mean for Defence infrastructure stakeholders.
2. Keynote Insights
Both days kicked off with heavyweight keynotes that set the tone. Celia Perkins (Deputy Secretary, Security and Estate Group), Pat Sowry (First Assistant Secretary, Infrastructure) and Brigadier Gabrielle Follett (Director General Estate Service Delivery) each shared their vision of the Defence estate in 2025 and beyond. Between them, they painted a picture of an ambitious infrastructure agenda tempered by real-world constraints. Here’s what they had to say:
Celia Perkins – The Defence Estate in 2025 and Beyond
Celia Perkins opened with a “state of the union” for the Defence estate. The headline: roughly 180 capital works projects totalling $41 billion are in design or delivery. It’s an immense pipeline – the largest Defence has ever tackled – and many projects are in remote locations, each with unique challenges. The clear implication: industry’s capacity will be crucial to get it all done.
One major theme Perkins highlighted was the shift towards more resilient northern base infrastructure in response to Australia’s strategic circumstances. The DSR’s Indo-Pacific focus has “driven our focus to more resilient operating capacity out of the northern bases”. She cited marquee projects up north (like big upgrades at RAAF Tindal and NT training ranges) that are well underway. This forward-posture investment is progressing, even though some other projects had to be deferred or cancelled in the reprioritisation.
Perkins also noted that 2025 being an election year will likely mean a temporary slowdown. By early April, caretaker mode will kick in, putting new project approvals on hold. Projects already in delivery will continue, and Defence is pushing to sign as many contracts as possible before that happens. She expects the current program (the IIP) to remain the game plan until a new government updates it in 2026. The message to industry: expect a brief pause in mid-2025, but don’t expect the pipeline to fundamentally change – and be ready to hit the ground running once things resume.
Despite this political wrinkle, Perkins struck an optimistic tone about funding and partnership. Defence’s infrastructure budgets are at record highs for the next four years, and they rely on industry more than ever to deliver. She pointed out that infrastructure spending has risen ~200% in the last decade while the internal Defence estate workforce shrank by about 11%. In short, Defence needs its contractors and consultants as true partners. “It’s our shared reality – and as partners we want to work on those problems together,” Perkins said of challenges like supply chain disruptions and workforce shortages. She invited the industry to bring forward expertise and ideas through forums like Collab X to help Defence meet those challenges head-on.
Brigadier Gabrielle Follett – The Future of Estate Service Delivery
Brigadier “Gabby” Follett, recently appointed to lead Estate Service Delivery, spoke about keeping bases running and the $1 billion-per-year Estate Works Program (EWP). Over the past decade the EWP grew from $250M to ~$1B annually – growth achieved through “strong collaboration and co-design” between Defence and industry. Follett stressed the importance of genuine partnerships with contractors in this space. “We seek a genuine strategic partnership, one where we work together… one team with shared objectives,” she said. In practice, her team works with over 10 major industry partners to deliver services from firefighting to facilities maintenance, so Defence and industry must act as one team to succeed.
Follett acknowledged there are still challenges in achieving that ideal. Defence must operate within rigid procurement rules and contracts, which can make flexibility difficult. Also, tighter budgets are putting pressure on service delivery. She noted the budgetary challenges “aren’t much different to what commercial entities face… (they) are looking to drive down costs. What can we pull in and apply to the Defence construct?”. In other words, Defence is open to industry ideas for efficiencies. Indeed, Follett highlighted an innovation program in which base services contractors can propose cost-saving or capability-improving ideas, and Defence is keen to implement the best of them.
A recurring theme was transparency and communication. Follett emphasised sharing information openly with industry. As an example, she admitted Defence fell behind in publishing the EWP forward work plan (vital for SMEs planning ahead) and promised to fix that lapse. By improving such transparency – and engaging with suppliers early – she aims to enable more local small businesses and Indigenous enterprises to participate in base upkeep projects. The EWP, after all, is designed to generate opportunities for SMEs and Indigenous companies across Australia.
Key Takeaways – Keynotes:
- Massive Pipeline, New Focus: Over $40B in projects underway, with emphasis on northern Australia and maritime bases to meet strategic needs. This is Defence’s largest infrastructure boom – and it hinges on industry support.
- Election-Year Caution: A mid-2025 federal election will slow approvals temporarily, but core plans remain on track. Defence is front-loading work before caretaker period and plans to restart quickly after – so industry should stay primed to accelerate when needed.
- “One Team” Mindset: All keynote speakers hammered collaboration. Defence’s estate program has grown 200% while its internal staff shrank – they need industry as true partners to deliver. Expect more engagement and also more accountability to budgets and schedules on both sides.
Pat Sowry – Infrastructure Priorities for Defence
Pat Sowry, as Head of Infrastructure, reinforced that Defence’s top priorities aren’t changing despite the shifting environment. “Nuclear-powered submarines remain a priority. Guided weapons remain a priority. Northern base resilience remains a priority,” he said plainly. In fact, Sowry revealed that Defence is launching a maritime infrastructure study to feed into the next IIP – a sign that naval bases like Henderson (WA) and HMAS Stirling are set for major upgrades to support new capabilities. He also noted a narrative shift toward mobilisation and preparedness – meaning infrastructure must enable the ADF to respond faster to contingencies. This will flesh out further investments in things like fuel storage, deployable facilities, and hardened northern sites.
On the delivery front, Sowry was frank about the need for speed and discipline. Reacting to calls to accelerate projects, he observed that “it’s not just about speed of delivery, it’s the speed to delivery.” The biggest gains will come from cutting lead times in planning and procurement. He wants to expedite the development phase and contracting process so construction can start sooner. At the same time, Sowry stressed sticking to budgets. After a year where Defence underspent its infrastructure budget by a significant margin, they are adopting measures to avoid that (like “over-programming” more projects than funding, knowing some will slip). “We’re looking for discipline in sticking to forecasts and within the budgets,” he emphasised. In practice, this means once money is allocated, Defence expects it to be spent on schedule, and industry needs to deliver accordingly.
Sowry echoed Perkins’ and Follett’s call for partnership with industry. He likened Defence and industry to being in a “three-legged race” – if one stumbles, both do. Early communication of issues, realistic forecasting, and working in unison are essential. He pointed out that Defence infrastructure projects have become vital to regional economies (often 75%+ local workforce on site), so delays or cancellations can hurt communities. That adds even more incentive to keep projects on track. Sowry closed by acknowledging the strong performance on local and Indigenous participation so far, and encouraged everyone to keep that momentum. In essence, staying on schedule and on budget – together – is now as important a deliverable as the infrastructure itself.
3. Defence’s Northern Strategy
The Northern Territory and northern Australia are pivotal to Defence’s future posture. Lucas Fiddaman (from DefenceNT) drove home the point that the NT’s strategic location cannot be overstated – it’s Australia’s gateway to the Indo-Pacific. The NT hosts major training exercises (Pitch Black, Talisman Sabre), vast training ranges, and key bases like RAAF Darwin and Tindal. With an expanded U.S. Marine presence in Darwin and even Japanese forces set to rotate through for training, the Top End is bearing more of Australia’s defence weight than ever. This means huge opportunities (and pressure) for the local infrastructure and industry to support a larger forward ADF presence.
Fiddaman candidly discussed the bottlenecks and challenges the north faces. The NT has only ~1% of Australia’s population and a relatively small industrial base. Simply put, local capacity can easily be overwhelmed by a deluge of Defence projects if not managed well. He noted that emerging sectors like oil & gas and renewables already “draw skilled workers away from more traditional [work], including Defence” – everyone is competing for the same engineers, tradies, and suppliers. The remote location and limited suppliers also mean higher costs and logistical challenges. These factors can lead to peaks and troughs that make it hard for local businesses to invest in capability.
To tackle this, Fiddaman argued for a smarter, more collaborative approach. First, Defence needs to give industry in the north clear and consistent demand signals. Local firms will scale up if they see a pipeline of work, but too often the flow is stop-start. He noted that the mining industry learned long ago to provide certainty to contractors – Defence should do the same. Second, procurement methods may need tweaking for regional conditions. Rigid one-size-fits-all policies could be adjusted to better engage NT suppliers (for example, allowing longer tender lead times or packaging work to suit local capacity). Third, early and joint planning is key. The NT Government is actively partnering with Defence – as seen in projects like the new Darwin ship lift facility that will benefit both Navy and commercial vessels. By aligning Defence projects with local infrastructure initiatives and training programs, everyone gets a better outcome.
The takeaway from the Northern Strategy session was that the north is ready and willing, but needs certainty and support. For industry, this means there’s growing opportunity in NT if you’re prepared to commit for the long haul and work closely with local partners. And for Defence, it was a reminder that investing in communities (not just assets) is vital – from housing for workers to skilling up local SMEs – so that when the big defence projects roll out, the north can actually deliver them.
Key Takeaways – Northern Australia:
- NT = Strategic Frontline: The Top End is now a critical forward hub for Defence (hosting major U.S. and future Japanese rotations), driving billions in upgrades to runways, ports, and training areas.
- Capacity Constraints: A tiny local population and competing mining/gas projects mean workforce and supply chains are stretched thin. Without smart scheduling, Defence demand could overwhelm local industry (and drive-up costs).
- Enabling Local Success: Defence can help by providing stable, visible project pipelines and adapting procurement to the regional context. Early collaboration with NT authorities (e.g. aligning with projects like the Darwin ship lift) will unlock more local capacity. For contractors, partnering with NT firms and investing in local presence will be key to capitalising on northern projects.
4. Service Delivery and Procurement Challenges
Throughout the event, there was a chorus of feedback on procurement and delivery pain points – and ideas to solve them. A major issue is timing and budget pressure: projects are often slow to get going, then rush to spend. Last year, Defence actually underspent its infrastructure budget by over 30% due to delays. In response, Defence leaders are implementing fixes like over-programming (to use all allocated funds) and pushing for faster approvals. But industry also has a role: better upfront planning and realistic bids to avoid delays down the line. Essentially, everyone agreed that predictability and staying on schedule are mutual responsibilities.
Another hot topic was making it easier for small and mid-sized businesses (SMEs) to participate. Many SMEs find Defence procurement daunting – lengthy tenders, complex contracts, and sometimes a lack of visibility of upcoming work. One attendee pointed out that even something as simple as publishing the forward works program on time can help new players prepare – and noted that hasn’t always happened. (Follett acknowledged this and vowed to get those updates back on track.) Transparency – sharing what projects are coming and how to get involved – was a recurring theme. Defence was urged to continue improving how it communicates its pipeline and to consider more streamlined procurement methods for routine projects that smaller firms could deliver.
There was also a push for earlier engagement with industry on projects. If contractors and suppliers can give input during scoping and design, it can head off problems and generate new ideas. For example, one regional contractor noted that early chats with local trades often reveal untapped skills, debunking myths about “no capacity” outside the big cities. Overall, the sentiment was that no one wins from adversarial, last-minute contracting. The future lies in more open dialogue, simpler processes (where possible), and building trust. On Defence’s side, that might mean more industry briefings, pilot programs for collaborative contracting, and holding primes accountable for including SMEs. On industry’s side, it means being proactive – attending those briefings, providing feedback, and stepping up with solutions, not just complaints.
Key Takeaways – Procurement & Delivery:
- Improve Speed & Certainty: Both Defence and industry acknowledge projects take too long to get from planning to site. Expect moves to simplify and expedite procurement, plus tighter project phasing so budgets are spent as planned.
- Open the Door to SMEs: Simplifying contracts, publishing pipeline info, and engaging earlier will lower barriers for small contractors. Defence is listening – e.g. committing to share forward work plans and seek input on tenders. This could mean more opportunities for new entrants (and more competition for incumbents).
- Transparency & Collaboration: From now on, “no surprises” is the goal. Industry wants clear visibility of upcoming work, and Defence wants early warning of delivery risks. More communication and a collaborative approach (like early contractor involvement on complex projects) are on the horizon, replacing the old adversarial model.
5. Indigenous Partnerships & Social Procurement
This panel tackled how well Defence is delivering on the promise of the Indigenous Procurement Policy (IPP) – and how to move from tokenism to genuine impact. One panellist bluntly observed that some major contractors “are just ticking the IPP box” – copying and pasting boilerplate Indigenous engagement plans to win tenders, without genuine follow-through. The call to action was for more accountability: Defence should scrutinise those plans, and primes must execute them in practice, not just on paper.
On the positive side, success stories highlighted what real partnership can achieve. Intract Australia, an Indigenous-owned construction firm, has been working with Defence for 15 years and steadily grown from small works to prime contracting roles. “Defence has been a real pioneer… it’s allowed us to grow,” said Intract’s Luke Taylor. Intract now delivers major projects with a workforce that is largely Indigenous, proving capacity building is happening. Another example is Yanun Project Management (100% Indigenous-owned), which has been engaged on Defence programs and is training young Indigenous professionals in project management – creating a new generation of Indigenous consultants for the industry.
Defence representatives acknowledged the system isn’t perfect but is improving. “Hope is not a strategy… it’s turning into courses of action,” noted one Defence panellist, pointing to changes in contracting requirements that make primes more accountable for Indigenous participation. They stressed that partnership must be two-way: Defence will provide opportunities and set targets, but industry must invest in Indigenous talent and partnerships, not just treat it as a tick-box.
The consensus was that authentic relationships are key. Instead of short-term subcontracts to meet a quota, primes should form long-term partnerships with Indigenous businesses – sharing skills, building capabilities, and growing together. And Defence needs to continue rewarding those who do (and calling out those who don’t). The ultimate goal is that in a few years, Indigenous enterprises are a normal, integral part of Defence infrastructure delivery – not because they have to be, but because they’ve proven their value. As one speaker put it, it’s about moving beyond “box-ticking” to “real partnerships full of progress.”
Key Takeaways – Indigenous & Social Procurement:
- Substance Over Symbolism: Hitting Indigenous participation targets on paper isn’t enough – Defence wants to see real outcomes (jobs, skills, thriving businesses). Expect closer scrutiny of Indigenous engagement plans and follow-through in contracts.
- Success is Possible: Indigenous-owned firms like Intract and Yanun have shown they can deliver and grow with sustained support. Leveraging their success by giving them larger roles (and supporting new entrants) will build long-term capacity.
- True Partnership: The IPP is moving from “just a policy” to a mindset. Genuine partnership means long-term relationships, joint problem-solving, and shared accountability for building Indigenous capability – not one-off token subcontracts. Both Defence and industry leaders are pushing for this cultural shift.
6. Costing Complex Projects
Defence infrastructure projects are inherently complex – remote locations, unique facility requirements, high security needs, you name it. The panel of construction cost experts hammered that point: “there are no simple projects, just degrees of complexity.” Successful projects, they argued, embrace that complexity from the start. A key takeaway was the importance of getting the scope and brief crystal clear upfront. Ambiguity or constant scope changes will inevitably drive costs up. One speaker reminded us that if the project brief isn’t clear, everyone will make their own (possibly wrong) assumptions – so time spent up front on clear requirements is a wise investment.
Another emphasis was rigorous risk management. Rather than flat contingencies, the panel advocated quantifying risks (using tools like probabilistic cost estimates) so you know where your biggest uncertainties lie. Then you can actively mitigate them – or allocate them to the party best able to manage them. This goes hand-in-hand with being realistic about external factors. In today’s environment, inflation and supply chain issues can blow up a budget if you’re not prepared. Materials and labour costs might rise faster than historical averages (as many firms learned in the last couple of years). The advice was to continuously update cost estimates and plan for escalation – don’t assume yesterday’s prices will hold tomorrow. For remote projects, assume logistics and limited local suppliers will add cost and risk, and plan accordingly.
The panel also noted that data and honesty are crucial. “Rubbish in equals rubbish out,” one said, meaning if your cost model is fed poor data or optimistic assumptions, the output will be nonsense. It’s better to confront uncomfortable truths early (like a design element that’s driving too much cost) than to hide them and hope for the best. That’s where early contractor involvement can help – builders can flag practical cost issues that designers might not see. And finally, flexibility: if costs do blow out, be prepared to de-scope or find trade-offs to stay on budget. Complex projects need constant course-correcting; the worst approach is set-and-forget.
In summary, cost control on complex projects comes down to realistic planning and proactive management. Defence and industry need to work closely – sharing information, tackling risks head-on, and not shying away from tough decisions. With the scale of spending coming (tens of billions over the next decade), getting this right isn’t just about saving money – it’s about making sure projects actually deliver the capability when and where it’s needed.
Key Takeaways – Costing & Budgeting:
- Plan for Complexity: No Defence project is “easy.” Build in time for clear scoping and thorough risk analysis. A detailed brief and quantified risks (rather than blanket contingencies) lead to more reliable budgets.
- Expect the Unexpected: Cost escalations are real – factor in inflation, supply chain delays, and remote location premiums. Update your cost plans frequently and don’t assume old unit rates will hold.
- Keep it Real: Honest data and open discussion of risks are crucial. If something will cost more or take longer, say it early. Adjust scope or approach as needed – better to deliver 90% of the scope on budget than 100% of it 50% over budget.
7. Sustainability & Net Zero: Reality vs Rhetoric
Felix Bowman-Derrick (Defence’s environmental lead) outlined a pragmatic plan for greening the Defence estate. He made clear that Defence is not trying to be a “market leader” in sustainability, but rather make steady, incremental changes that stick. In his words, they’re focusing on “small incremental shifts… we can apply consistently across the estate.” The first big target is clean energy – buying or producing renewable electricity to power bases. That alone can cut a huge portion of emissions by 2030. Beyond that, things get harder (like reducing fuel use in military vehicles, which is an operational issue), but on bases Defence is tackling what it can: replacing old gas boilers with electric systems, improving building efficiency, and embedding net-zero requirements into every new project and contract so that over time, greener choices become the default.
The session also frankly discussed the challenges to achieving net zero. One is cultural: not everyone on a project (be it engineers or clients) prioritises sustainability if it’s seen as extra cost or risk. Ongoing education and leadership are needed to get buy-in. Another major challenge is financial. Often, sustainable options (like solar panels, better insulation) require higher upfront cost but save money in the long run – yet Defence’s budgeting separates capital and operating funds. As one panellist noted, “the biggest challenge is that capital budget [for green initiatives]… their value sits in [operational savings]”. In other words, a base might not get extra capital approved for a solar farm because the benefits (fuel savings, emissions cuts) don’t show up on the capital ledger. Overcoming this requires new thinking in business cases – looking at life-cycle cost, not just upfront cost. On the industry side, presenters urged companies to bring solutions to Defence: if you can show a technology improves resilience or saves money in the long run, Defence is willing to listen even if the payback isn’t immediate.
All agreed that progress is happening – perhaps not as fast as some would like, but picking up pace. More bases are installing solar arrays, trialling electric vehicles, and designing new facilities to be net-zero energy. The “reality vs rhetoric” gap is shrinking as sustainable practices become routine. The clear message to industry was to innovate and propose: Defence won’t always lead with cutting-edge sustainability, but if industry can present a solid, low-risk case (for example, an energy performance contract or a proven green technology), Defence will increasingly integrate it. In short, net zero is now part of the brief – not an afterthought – and it will only grow in importance.
Key Takeaways – Sustainability:
- Pragmatism First: Defence’s approach to net zero is incremental. Renewable energy for bases is priority #1 (e.g. solar farms, green grid power), followed by practical efficiency upgrades. Don’t expect flashy tech for its own sake – expect solutions that balance resilience and cost.
- Mind the Gaps: A big hurdle is bridging capital costs and long-term savings. Industry can help by framing proposals around life-cycle benefits (e.g. “spend $1 now to save $3 later”). Also, not everyone in Defence is a sustainability guru – so come armed with data and educate to get buy-in.
- Sustainability is Mainstreaming: Net zero considerations are now being embedded in contracts and designs, not bolted on. That means every project has a green dimension (and opportunity). Vendors with innovative, low-risk sustainability solutions will find a more and more receptive audience as Defence seeks to meet its targets.
8. The AUKUS Impact: Infrastructure for a Nuclear Future
AUKUS – and the plan for Australia to acquire nuclear-powered submarines – is driving an unprecedented wave of maritime infrastructure investment. Nowhere is this more evident than Western Australia. David Hallinan (Deputy Secretary, Defence) explained that at Henderson and HMAS Stirling in WA, Defence is preparing projects of staggering scale: “Stirling, very big project – $8 billion, $10 billion… Henderson, tens of billions” in upgrades over the next decade. These include new dry docks, wharves, training and maintenance facilities to support the future nuclear sub fleet, on top of the regular naval shipbuilding expansion.
This simultaneous push on multiple mega-projects will stretch workforce and supply chains to the limit. Perth and WA already have major civil projects (like a new port and an airport runway) proceeding alongside Defence’s plans. The panel stressed that without unprecedented collaboration, all these projects could trip over each other – competing for the same engineers, trades and materials. Hallinan noted Defence and the WA Government have a cooperation agreement to coordinate schedules and share information. The idea is to smooth out demand and possibly share resources (for example, joint dredging campaigns or common worker accommodation facilities) so that one project doesn’t derail another. Pat Sowry added that AUKUS is a national endeavour that will be “maintained at all costs.” The Commonwealth is committed to funding and sustaining this capability, so companies investing in capacity (like training nuclear-skilled workers or expanding shipyard facilities) should have confidence the work will be there long-term.
A huge concern is the skilled workforce shortage. Western Australia’s construction and mining sectors are already vying for talent. The AUKUS panel suggested solutions like bringing in skilled workers from interstate or overseas, upskilling local workers, and scheduling projects to avoid peak overlap. Industry will likely see initiatives such as training programs (possibly funded jointly by Defence and industry) and incentives to attract workers to WA. Additionally, there’s a community aspect – building nuclear infrastructure requires public support in WA. Environmental and Indigenous clearances, community consultation (especially around the naval base’s environmental footprint) and transparency about safety will be critical to avoid delays.
For industry, AUKUS-related infrastructure represents massive opportunity – but it will require playing the long game. Companies might need to form joint ventures to handle the scale, invest in workforce development, and be ready to collaborate in new ways (even with competitors) to get the job done. The clear message: everyone – Defence, state government, contractors, workforce – must pull together to deliver this “once in a generation” program. As Pat Sowry put it, if we’re all in step in this three-legged race, we’ll succeed; if not, the stakes are too high to allow failure. AUKUS is not just another project – it’s a national mission, and the infrastructure we build for it will underpin Australia’s security for decades to come.
Key Takeaways – AUKUS Infrastructure:
- Mega-Project Overload: The scale of work at Henderson & Stirling (new sub facilities, shipyard expansion) is huge – on the order of $20B+. It coincides with other WA mega-projects, so careful coordination is needed to prevent resource conflicts.
- All-In National Effort: The government has made it clear AUKUS infrastructure will get whatever support it needs. This means steady funding (probably immune to election swings) – a green light for industry to invest in capabilities like nuclear-skilled personnel and advanced construction methods.
- Collaboration or Bust: No single agency or company can do this alone. Expect unprecedented collaboration between Defence, WA government, and industry (e.g. synchronised schedules, shared training programs). Firms that team up and share knowledge will cope best with workforce and supply chain strains. The ones that insist on “business as usual” may struggle.
9. Lessons for Industry & Next Steps
Collab X 2025 made one thing clear: business as usual won’t cut it in the coming Defence infrastructure surge. The old divides between Defence and industry, or prime and subcontractor, must give way to a more collaborative, transparent way of working. Partnership isn’t just a buzzword – it’s now a baseline expectation. For industry, the takeaway is to engage early, communicate often, and be solution-focused. The Defence leaders at Collab X showed openness to new ideas (in procurement, in design, in delivery) and a willingness to share information. Companies that lean into this – by attending forums, providing constructive feedback, and innovating – will find a willing partner in Defence. Those that don’t may find themselves left out in the cold as Defence gravitates toward partners it trusts.
Opportunities in the Defence estate space are expanding, but so are expectations. Massive projects (from base redevelopments up north to new naval infrastructure out west) are on the horizon, and Defence needs industry to build capacity for them now. This might mean forming joint ventures for scale, investing in workforce training (perhaps even co-funding training programs with Defence), and strengthening local supply chains. Staying on schedule and budget has never been more emphasised – so if you bid a job, be prepared to deliver or risk not just your reputation but future work. The next Integrated Investment Program in 2026 will likely reaffirm many of the current priorities, so use the period until then wisely: build up your regional teams, secure critical talent, and get your internal processes ready to move faster.
In short, the definitive lesson from Collab X 2025 is that industry and Defence are in this together. Australia’s strategic circumstances demand urgency and excellence in infrastructure delivery, and neither side can do it alone. But with the right collaborative mindset, both sides stand to benefit enormously – delivering capability to Defence and growth to industry. The coming years will be challenging, no doubt, but also immensely rewarding for those who step up. As one speaker quipped, “when Defence and industry truly collaborate, there’s little they can’t achieve.” After Collab X 2025, that spirit of collaboration is stronger than ever – and now it’s time to turn it into action on the ground.
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.
