Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ)
Internal dissent within Labor over AUKUS has erupted again, with former cabinet minister Ed Husic suggesting there should be a fresh caucus vote on the controversial agreement.
Meanwhile, critics have launched a public inquiry into AUKUS headed by former Labor minister Peter Garrett (of Midnight Oil fame), and crossbenchers have joined a call for the government to be “transparent with the Australian people about the risks to the delivery of the AUKUS submarine program and how they will effectively manage those risks”.
Husic raised AUKUS at Tuesday’s caucus meeting after a weekend announcement that Australia will now receive three secondhand Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarines from the United States instead of the earlier plan for one new and two used boats.
Read more: Australia has been the victim of an AUKUS ‘bait and switch’ Defence Minister Richard Marles met his US and British counterparts on the sidelines of the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore at the weekend, when the revised arrangement was announced.
The changed arrangements are providing another opportunity for the critics. The new outbreak comes as Labor’s national conference looms in July, where the pact, and questions around its submarines, will be a divisive issue that will require careful management by the factional leaders.
AUKUS was contested at the 2023 national conference. In his question to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, Husic asked whether, given the recent changes relating to the submarines, Albanese thought the previous caucus resolution of support, taken in opposition, still stood.
Albanese pushed support for the AUKUS agreement through caucus immediately after it was announced in 2021, with minimum opportunity for consideration. He was anxious not to allow the issue to derail Labor’s 2022 election chances. At Tuesday’s caucus, Husic was slapped down by Albanese and Minister for Defence Industry Pat Conroy.
Albanese said AUKUS was about more than submarines. Conroy said that at the time of the caucus decision, there was no deal on the Virginia-class submarines. That was dealt with after Labor came to government because of an identified capability gap, Conroy said.
The decision in opposition had dealt with whether or not caucus would permit a nuclear-build within Australia, he said. Conroy also said the revised arrangement would be much easier to manage because the three submarines would all be of the same type.
Outside caucus, Husic said the changed arrangements raised questions about Australian sovereignty in the future. “We are not going to get the deal that was promised,” he said on Sky. He said he had reservations about Australia’s ability “to exercise sovereignty in the way that we will want to, given how transactional the Trump administration is”.
“You know, you can almost imagine them saying, ‘We give you these, you will do this with them’.
And so there’s an active sovereignty question there.” Launching the inquiry, Garrett said AUKUS “was the most significant, and by far the most costly decision made in secret by an Australian government, tying us to two other sovereign governments, and taking out an extraordinary amount of taxpayers’ money on a proposition which has got a lot of distinct and very difficult complexities and potential problems lying up ahead”.
As well as Garrett the panel includes former federal Labor minister and former Western Australian premier Carmen Lawrence and former chief of the Australian Defence Force Chris Barrie. Barrie said he was joining the inquiry because he wanted to be assured AUKUS would be in Australia’s best interests.
A statement on the inquiry, which is backed by a number of unions and other groups, said: “There has never been a more critical time to get the truth about AUKUS and what it means for our nation”.
“The Federal Government is planning to spend an unprecedented $368 billion-plus of our taxes on submarines without answers to basic questions like: will Australia receive the submarines we’re paying for, where will the high-level nuclear waste be stored, how many Australian jobs will this create and at what cost?” The most important question was: “will this make us safer — or turn us into a nuclear target?” The inquiry will be taking submissions from the public and experts and holding public hearings in most capital cities.
It is being crowd-funded and is to report by October 30. Crossbencher Allegra Spender moved a “Matter of Public Importance” in parliament calling for transparency. Her call was supported by six other crossbenchers and by Barrie.
She said in a statement: Recent developments are highlighting escalating risks to the delivery of the AUKUS project and Australia’s ability to manage those risks. The USA is continuing to fail to produce submarines at the rate that is required for the President to be able to commit to giving Australia Virginia-class submarines.
The government has just agreed with the USA that Australia will not get any new Virginia-class submarines, reducing Australia’s capability, with no justification that this is in Australia’s interests. The government has admitted there are changes to the program based on the Colby Review but have not been transparent about what the review said and what changes are coming from it.
Other crossbenchers expressing concern were teals Monique Ryan, Kate Chaney, Nicolette Boele, Zali Steggall and Sophie Scamps.
The list also included non-teal independent Dai Le who said, “If the government can scrutinise disability support down to the dollar, it can scrutinise a $368 billion submarine deal”.
Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/06/02/view-from-the-hill-ed-husic-stirs-pot-on-aukus-as-peter-garrett-to-lead-public-inquiry/