How much capability is Australia leaving on the table by chasing “zero-risk” procurement?

In Part 1, Aaron Pollard laid out why real security starts with culture, not compliance and how SMEs often carry the biggest burden.

Now, in Part 2 of this Intelligence Optimised conversation, host Todd Crowley goes deeper with Aaron to expose the cost of risk aversion and the internal blockages slowing down delivery.

Key threads
✔️ Security culture v clearance culture – why risk-based controls beat a decades-old tick-box mindset.
✔️ Defence-industry friction – uneven implementation costs, secret-material rules that hit SMEs harder than primes, and the dreaded “frozen middle” that stalls projects.
✔️ Sovereign capability at stake – guided-weapons supply crunch, AUKUS submarine delays, and the talent shortfall throttling shipyards and drone lines alike.
✔️ Practical fixes – drip-feed training, message-of-the-month comms, walking the factory floor, and a simple “yes—if” policy that turns security into an enabler.
✔️ Effect-based procurement – ditch equipment wish-lists; start with the effect the war-fighter needs, then weigh options against risk, cost and timeline.

📍 Why it matters
Defence planners and security managers will recognise the rising strategic tempo in the Indo-Pacific. Continuing to treat security and procurement as exercises in risk elimination leaves forces waiting - and adversaries watching. A risk-based approach, woven through supply-chain, ICT and workforce policy, can deliver guided weapons, autonomous systems and submarines faster, while still protecting classified data and national credibility.

Whether you sit in CASG, an SME cyber team or a prime’s bid office, this episode builds on Part 1 to frame clear steps that lift security culture and keep capability on schedule - vital for Australia’s sovereign capability edge in a contested Indo-Pacific.

Find deeper briefs and tools inside Vaxa Bureau.