Australia's involvement in Kirkpatrick's Five Eyes UAP forum

In a blog article dated 21 June 2023, I wrote about a Five Eyes UAP forum held by the All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office Director Sean Kirkpatrick. In part, I looked at whether or not an Australian representative was at that forum. Here is an update.

Grant Lavac's questions

Hon Richard Marles MP – Parliament of Australia (aph.gov.au)

Australian researcher Grant Lavac, based in Melbourne, Victoria, submitted a number of questions to the Richard Marles, MP, Australian Minister for Defence, who is also the Deputy Prime Minister of Australia. His questions were:

1. Why is Australia not publicly taking the issue of UAP seriously when our US ally is, and has publicly stated that UAP is a global issue requiring global cooperation and collaboration?

2. As the Australian Minister of Defence and Deputy Prime Minister have you been briefed on the issue of UAP to date?

3. What was the extent of Australia's involvement in the Five Eyes forum on UAP and who from Australia was represented?

4. What is the extent of Australia's (past and present) in the Five Eyes Foreign Material Program (FMP)?

The Australian Government response

The response letter dated 30 June 2023, came from B. Sleeman CSC, DSM. Air Commodore, Acting Head of Air Force Capability, and read:

"MC23-002383

Australia's position on Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena.

Thank you for your correspondence of 21 June 2023 to the Deputy Prime Minister, the Hon. Richard Marles MP regarding Australia's position on Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP). Your correspondence has been referred to me for response.

As outlined in your correspondence, we continue to assess that there is no scientific or other compelling reason to divert resources to the reporting, recording and investigation of UAP. This is reflective of the Australian Government's position on the matter.

While I understand foreign governments have released documentation regarding UAP, this is a matter for their governments as sovereign entities and will not impact Australia's decisions on this matter. Defence will address any emerging threats in accordance with existing policy.

I can confirm that Air Force has not delivered any briefing to the Deputy Prime Minister on the matter of UAP.  Air Force did not attend the Five Eyes forum on UAP or the Five Eyes Foreign Material Program mentioned in your correspondence. 

I understand Air Force has previously responded to your queries regarding this matter on a number of occasions. I am satisfied we have sufficiently addressed your query and as a result, this will be our final correspondence relating to this matter."

 My comments:

1. Air Force Capability appears to be the area of the Australian Department of Defence which has been nominated by the Minister's office to be given the responsibility of responding to queries about UAP.

2. "Air Force did not attend the Five Eyes forum on UAP." This is neither a denial nor a confirmation that a representative of the Australian Government attended the Five Eyes UAP forum held by Sean Kirkpatrick. It is simply a denial that anyone from Air Force attended. It should be noted that if you read the segment of the relevant transcript of Kirkpatrick's comments re the Five Eyes UAP forum, he did not specifically state that someone from Australia attended, simply that Five Eyes included Australia. On the other hand, he did not specifically state that someone from Canada or New Zealand attended, but their respective governments later admitted their representative had indeed attended. 

3. "...or the Five Eyes Foreign Material Program mentioned in your correspondence." Here the Air Commodore seems to understand that there was also a forum on the Five Eyes Foreign Material Program, which is not what Lavac asked. 

4. This overall DoD response is consistent with that from as far back as 2019. It remains to be seen what DOD will do in future as regards UAP and emerging threats. Though I will repeat my previous thought that surely there is an analyst in the Defence Intelligence Organisation who has a brief to at least monitor the topic of UAP.

5. Thanks to Grant Lavac for all his diligent work pursuing responses from the Australian Government on the topic of UAP.

Roger Stankovic

On a very much related piece of correspondence, in a Tweet dated 27 June 2023, Australian researcher and MUFON Director, Roger Stankovic advised that the Deputy Prime Minister had responded to his correspondence "...regarding the need to track and study UAP in our country."

The response letter was dated 23 June 2023 and signed by W. Blyth, AM, Air Vice-Marshal, Head of Air Force Capability.

"MC23-002385

Unidentified Aerial Phenomena

Thank you for your correspondence of 14 June 2023 to the Deputy Prime Minister, the Hon. Richard Marles, MP, regarding Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP). Your correspondence has been forwarded to me for response. 

At this point in time, Defence continues to assess there is no scientific or other compelling reason to divert resources to the reporting and investigation of UAP. This approach aligns with the priorities, mission and objectives of Defence.

Defence's approach is also reflective of the Australian Government's position on UAPs. I appreciate your interest in UAPs and I trust this information is of assistance."

My comments:

1. One notes the similarity of phrases used in both the letter to Lavac and the letter to Stankovic.

2. Thanks are extended to Roger Stankovic for looking to obtain a further response from the Australian Government via Air Force Capability.