Sophie Scamps (Mackellar, Independent) | Hansard source

Thank you to the member for Wentworth for raising this matter of public importance. We all agree that nothing is more important than having the real capacity to defend our nation. The AUKUS pact is the largest defence spending commitment since the Second World War, yet it has not received the level of scrutiny or open debate in this place that it warrants. It is estimated that the defence deal will cost Australia at least $370 billion. Under the initial AUKUS agreement, Australia was set to receive two used Virginia class nuclear powered submarines from the United States plus one new model as early as 2032. Yet, as we heard on the weekend, all three nuclear powered submarines that Australia will receive will now be second-hand.

While the government has described this decision as placing a premium on simplicity as opposed to being linked to production challenges in the US, this decision, like much of AUKUS, remains shrouded in secrecy. That secrecy has been a problem since the beginning. The 2021 announcement blindsided France and caused significant diplomatic fallout for Australia and the United States. That pattern has continued, leaving many more questions than answers. Defence experts and many in my community are asking: Can the submarines be delivered on time and on budget? Do we need nuclear submarines, or would conventional alternatives be more suitable to replace the Collins class fleet? How and where will nuclear waste be managed? And, perhaps most importantly, does this deal genuinely serve Australia's defence and strategic needs? The lack of transparency means the public may never get a clear answer.

Other countries have subjected AUKUS to scrutiny. The UK House of Commons defence committee has released its report on the AUKUS defence pact after a year-long review into the partnership. The Pentagon has also reviewed whether AUKUS aligns with the US president's America-first agenda. Australia has had no equivalent process. Instead, the government has established a new committee to monitor AUKUS's work, the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Defence, but much of its activity will be conducted in secret. Its membership is restricted to Labor and coalition MPs only, and it will only have limited ability to report publicly. This approach risks creating a small group of insiders with access to curated information who avoid public debate and scrutiny. In the absence of a government led inquiry, civil society has stepped in. An independent public inquiry supported by non-profit organisations and unions and chaired by former environment minister Peter Garrett will hold hearings and deliver a report later this year. This is good, but it should not be left to civil society to perform the scrutiny role of government.

There are also serious questions about the feasibility of the plan to arm Australia with nuclear powered submarines, particularly under the ambitious timelines outlined. The United States is—

See this speech in context