Australians deserve the truth
about AUKUS

Andrew Wilkie MP: “We Are Shocked by the Complete Abandonment of Proper Process”

Independent Member for Clark

“This whole deal rests on the assumption that the United States is a reliable ally now and for the next 50 years. I don't think there's any strategic analyst in the country who would be able to put their hand on their heart and say that either the UK or the US is a reliable ally even now, let alone what it's going to look like in 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 years' time.”

Yee-Fui Ng: “We're Not Even Guaranteed the Nuclear Submarines”

Associate Professor of Law, Monash University

“I was pretty shocked to go through the agreements and see that we're not even guaranteed the nuclear submarines and paying so much money for something that you might not get.”

The Hon. Kim Beazley AC: “It Will Be a Political Decision Whether or Not They Turn Up”

Former Deputy Prime Minister of Australia

“This is not a statement of hostility with anybody having these submarines. It's a statement of our willingness to defend ourselves with a deterrent which will be vastly more effective than anything else we can see, imagine putting in place for ourselves.”

Bernard Keane: “The Social Licence of AUKUS Has Steadily Diminished”

Journalist for Crikey

“The social licence of AUKUS is one that has steadily diminished simply through the secrecy of government.”

Dr Don Brash: “AUKUS Simply Plants a Target on Australia's Back and Hands the Trigger to Washington”

New Zealand Former Politician

“As long as New Zealand has a close military relationship with Australia, AUKUS is a serious threat not just to Australia, but also to New Zealand… There must be many better ways of spending $360 billion.”

John Blaxland: “Support Should Not Mean Giving the Program a Free Pass”

Professor of International Relations, ANU

“I support continuing with AUKUS, but support should not mean giving the program a free pass. Australia has a serious workforce challenge to be sure. Greater alliance integration brings, however, capability and influence, but also dependence and entrapment risk.”

Peter Briggs: “We Absolutely Do Need a Capable Submarine Force”

RAN Rear Admiral (Retired)

“I want to talk today and make the point we need submarines. We absolutely do need a capable submarine force. They provide an asymmetric, an uneven advantage to us. And if you're dealing with an elephant, that's what you need, something that makes him take care. They should absolutely be nuclear powered.”

Digital Rights Watch: “A Lot of Consumer Tech Companies Are Also Military Contractors”

Peter Lewis & Lizzie O'Shea, Digital Rights Watch

“In June this year, we saw an example of what our future might look like under this arrangement, which was where the United States government issued an export control directive to shut down use of [advanced AI] models… and to restrict access to all foreigners… Australia got no particular special card to be able to continue accessing these models. That wasn't even on the table.”

Col. Neil Greet: “AUKUS Eats Everyone Else's Lunch for the Next 30 Years”

Australian Security Leaders Climate Group

“AUKUS eats everyone else's lunch for the next 30 years. It dwarfs every other defense capability… And it becomes even more worse because there is no national security strategy. So because of the weight of AUKUS in the defense strategy, it becomes a de facto national security strategy… It distorts our understanding of national security.”

Sue Wareham: “This Is Wrong. We've Told Them It's Wrong and They Keep Saying It.”

Medical Association for the Prevention of War

“Government representatives consistently state that even the low-level waste from AUKUS is just like hospital nuclear waste. This is wrong. We've told them it's wrong and they keep saying it. Unlike hospital waste, even low-level reactor waste must be isolated from the environment for around 300 years.”

Al Palazzo: “The Stupidest Defense Policy Australia Has Ever Enacted”

Adjunct Professor, UNSW Canberra

“AUKUS is not about Australia. It is a one-sided pact that greatly favors the United States and American policy goals. Australia's requirements are tangential to the pact's primary rationale. The United States pursues AUKUS because it will help the United States achieve its goal, which is the retention of primacy in the Western Pacific.”

Mike Pezzullo: “The War Machine Is the Thing That Prevents the War”

Former Senior Public Servant

“The war machine is the thing that prevents the war, and that's the risk-reward calculation that you're running. But no prediction about the future can be perfect. So you're going to take risk either way.”

Chris Gardiner Says “AUKUS Represents a Rational Response”

CEO of The Institute for Regional Security

“My judgment is that AUKUS represents a rational response to these realities, these interests, and these questions. The United States remains the only power capable of balancing and deterring China at the regional level.”

Senator David Pocock: “We're Not Even Guaranteed the Nuclear Submarines”

Independent Senator for the ACT

“There should be a pause in all AUKUS spending until the people have been consulted, questions answered, and it's been established whether or not it's in Australia's interests.”

Andrew Isfree-Irvine: “AUKUS Equals Intergenerational Disadvantage”

Concerned Citizen, Member of the ETU

“As a parent and grandparent, it is my job to leave the next generations a country that is independent, prosperous, peaceful, and confident enough to make its own decisions. Not leave them with a military entanglement with a massive bill and a toxic radioactive future they never had a meaningful say in. AUKUS is bad policy.”

Prof Charles Sampford: “We Need to Be Able to Speak Out”

Professor of Law, Griffith University

“What we need in addition to a parliamentary vote is to actually have a sub-committee of the parliament… which includes the ministers in the security subcommittee of cabinet, their shadows… and a couple of crossbenchers who would need high security clearance and should be given independent and professional advice.”

Mike Henry: “The Priceless Sovereignty of This Country”

Just Peace

“AUKUS will tie Australia morally, conceptually, and in practice into the defence — in other words, the military objectives — of the United States… The cost to Australia of AUKUS is not only billions and billions of dollars, but the priceless sovereignty of this country, which Australia must never ever relinquish.”

Adrian Pisarski: “That Sort of Money Would Solve Our Housing Crisis”

Executive Officer, National Shelter

“If we compare that to a reasonable submarine program from another partner… those would probably top out at $120 billion. Now there's a big difference between 120 billion and 500 billion. And it's what we are foregoing with that kind of money that I really want to focus on… The sort of money that is the opportunity cost of AUKUS would solve our housing crisis. It's as simple as that.”

Adjunct Prof Warwick Powell: “AUKUS Is a Mirror Held Up to the Nation”

Adjunct Professor, QUT

“AUKUS tells us that Australia is small, vulnerable, frightened, and incapable of surviving in its own region without huddling beneath an overseas nuclear umbrella. I reject that idea of Australia… We do not need to choose between being a vassal state or shutting ourselves off from the world and building a fortress. We need the courage to be a sovereign middle power.”

Claire Moore: “Why Aren't People Talking With Citizens About What the Impact's Going to Be?”

Former Senator for Queensland

“We need to have a government that, having made the decision — and I challenge the way the decision was made — but that is for a lot more debate and discourage and encouragement of getting people involved. But seeing that we have bought into AUKUS as a country, what about the social licence? … Why aren't people from the government… talking with citizens… about what the impact's going to be?”

Margaret Pestorius: “AUKUS Is Like a Multi-Billion Dollar Feast”

Wage Peace

“Morrison's signing of the AUKUS agreement marked a shift in the meaning of submarines. The meaning and purpose of submarines changed at that moment from submarines with a defence purpose to US submarines with a vast export supply chain and related nuclear waste purposes. The acquisition was no longer for defence, but to obfuscate other activity. And I think every time we talk about it as a real thing, we reinforce this confusion.”

Barbara Hartley: “National Security Should Be Understood Through Human Security”

Independent and Peaceful Australia Network

“National security should be understood through the principles of human security, common security, and a self-reliant, non-aligned foreign policy. Australia's security will be better served by diplomacy, peace building, regional cooperation, and nonoffensive territorial defence rather than militarisation and any dependence on nuclear submarines.”

Cameron Leckie: “A Maladaptive Response to the End of the US Empire”

Former Member of the ADF

“AUKUS and the deepening reliance on the United States empire as it is visibly in decline says far more about the insecurities of our defence and political class than it does about any actual threat that Australia faces… I actually see the debates triggered by AUKUS… as being a once-in-a-century opportunity. It's actually an opportunity for serious debate in Australia about what sort of country we want to be.”

Charli Brand: “$58.99 Billion on the Military. A Mere $1.76 Billion on Diplomacy.”

Peace is Union Business

“Funding is a choice. The budget is a choice. When the government tells workers that they can't afford to spend money on basic social safety nets for its citizens, while spending hundreds of billions of dollars on the military, we need to think about the choices being made here and what is being prioritised — and it's not workers.”

South Coast Labour Council Calls to Rule AUKUS Out

Arthur Rorris, South Coast Labour Council

“AUKUS is not a settled necessity. It is a reckless policy choice. Facts must prevail over slogans, sovereignty must prevail over dependency, and the interests of our community must prevail over a foreign military establishment. The people of the Illawarra will not become a nuclear target.”

Malika Reece: “A Community That's a Target Isn't More Secure. It's Less.”

Previous Citizen of the Year

“Modern conflict is increasingly fought with drones and cyber and autonomous systems. Cheap, fast, deniable. So three secondhand Virginia-class submarines arriving decades from now are a Cold War answer to a problem that's already moved on. We're spending $368 billion for the last war, not the next one.”

Aunty Barb Nicholson: “This Area Is a Prime Target for Enemy Attack”

Previous Citizen of the Year

“The fact that you got an American oil tanker being torpedoed off our shores, is evidence enough that this area is a prime target for enemy attack, and that can only [be] exacerbated with the installation of a nuclear base here… I think it's stupid of us. It's stupid of everyone concerned not to acknowledge the grave risks that this proposal will bring about to this city — not just Kembla, but this whole city.”

National Union of Students: “We Can Build Universities or Bombs”

Daniel McClelland, National Union of Students, First Nations Officer

“Australia faces a choice. We can build universities or bombs. We can tell a struggling generation that hundreds of billions of dollars cannot be found to transform their lives. Or we can recognise the value of housing, humanity, and education. The National Union of Students chooses education over militarism. We choose professors over generals. And we choose textbooks over submarines.”

SCLC Youth Action Council: “AUKUS Isn't Preventing the Arms Race. It Is the Arms Race.”

Antony Tzamouranis, South Coast Labour Council Youth Action Council

“Young workers do not want to be forced to choose between feeding their families and participating in the production of weapons they may believe will be used to destroy other human beings. The labour movement has always understood that workers are not simply units of production. Workers have families. They have values. They have consciences. And our industrial future must provide not only employment, but dignity.”

Wollongong Against War and Nukes: “Will AUKUS Keep Us Safe? Our Answer Is No”

Melanie Barnes & Nick Southall, Wollongong Against War & Nukes

“We are concerned that the presence of nuclear submarines would make the Illawarra a high priority target for conventional or nuclear attack. We are concerned that US submarines carrying nuclear weapons could dock in Port Kembla. We are concerned about the risk of nuclear accidents. We are concerned about becoming a site for the storage of nuclear waste… We are concerned that even in a best case scenario, a nuclear submarine base would have a highly detrimental impact on our community.”

Sally Stevenson: “Women Will Pay the Silent Price of AUKUS”

Previous Citizen of the Year

“A 2013 social impact study prepared for the Department of Defence by Deloitte Access Economics, drawing on the Okinawa data, estimated that a six-month rotation of about 1,000 Marines carried roughly a 1-in-8 chance of sexual assault occurring, reported or unreported.”

Rowan Huxtable Calls AUKUS “An Appalling Failure of the Government's Duty to Apply Due Diligence”

Electrical Engineer

“The government itself says that we're not at risk from invasion by China or anybody else for that matter. And neither would AUKUS help us if it was a threat, because AUKUS does not commit the USA to come to Australia's defense if Australia is attacked. And without the US, a couple of secondhand non-nuclear submarines is a very, very non-optimal way to defend this country.”

Kellie Tranter: “More Money Than There Are Stars in the Milky Way”

Lawyer and Human Rights Activist

“Article 11D precludes Australia from enriching uranium or producing nuclear fuel, and requires it to use only fuel transferred under the nuclear propulsion agreement. This means we are locked into the availability and price set by the United States or the UK, notwithstanding us having domestic supplies of uranium which we sell to both nations. So we can build nuclear submarines here but can't use our own fuel.”

Theo Bougatsas: “The First Victims of War Are Always Children. Always.”

Hunter Peace Group

“There are better jobs, more secure jobs that we can be investing in, and are necessary. They're not tokenistic jobs. They're things we need. We need health. We need the public provision of education. We need those things. They provide peace. They provide stability. They provide an opportunity to defer war.”

James Whelan: “Australian Voters Are Not Willing to Accept the Impacts and Risks of Nuclear Power”

Climate Action Newcastle

“Imposing a nuclear submarine base on Newcastle or another Australian coastal community where social license has not been established will create division and erode trust.”

Doug Hewitt: “Every Gun That Is Made Signifies the Theft of Food From the Hungry”

Christians for Peace

“We find it ironic that the member for Shortland, Pat Conroy, is both Minister for the Pacific and therefore expected to be an advocate for the policies of Pacific nations, which are all committed to the region becoming a nuclear free zone, but at the same time he's the Minister for Defence Support and active in promoting AUKUS.”

Cr Charlotte McCabe: “Our Silence Is Being Treated as Consent”

Deputy Mayor of Newcastle

“If we are forced to accept the AUKUS submarines in the port of Newcastle, all of this will be impossible with the extensive security exclusion zone that would be required… Our economic diversification opportunities will be cut off, and in its place we will be forced to co-locate our community with a military target.”

Cr Siobhan Isherwood: “With No Consultation, No Conversation, No Cabinet Brief”

Greens Councillor for Newcastle

“By the time we get there, our governments will have invested so much money and energy into the militarisation of our region, it will be too late to hit reverse. And I put it to you that by the time Labor's militaristic future is realised here, we will have lost our identity as a city that fosters peace.”

John Queripel: “The Wrong Weapon for the Wrong Purpose at the Wrong Cost”

Concerned Citizen

“Australia can be the bridge between east and west in the Asian century, or the tip of the spear projecting Western power into Asia… We need to find security in Asia rather than from Asia. AUKUS is perhaps the most powerful wrong sign of the decision direction that Australia has chosen.”

Michael Sanderson: “Australia's Compulsory Superannuation Pool Is Now Equivalent to 12 AUKUSes”

Concerned Citizen

“Australia's compulsory superannuation pool is now equivalent to 12 AUKUSes. Just let that sink in. But that money was earned and taken from Australian workers… Much of that money is spent offshore. Australia does not lack money. It lacks private direction and public understanding.”

Marcus Mariani: “To Be an Enemy of the United States Is Dangerous, But to Be a Friend Is Fatal”

Former Deputy Director, Royal Australian Navy's (RAN) Engineering Division

“The acquisition and sustainment strategy for AUKUS was not simply flawed. It was non-existent. I have not found any publicly released assessment that makes the case for nuclear submarines over the prior careful analysis of the capability development group approved by cabinet.”

Prof Liam Phelan Says AUKUS “Is Morally Reprehensible”

Associate Professor, School of Science, University of Newcastle

“AUKUS is diverting essential government attention and other resources away from the energy transition to increasing militarisation. In short, AUKUS threatens the transition from coal to renewables in our region. AUKUS risks supplanting the energy transition with a transition from coal to weapons, weapons manufacturing and weapons exports.”

The Hon. Bob Carr: “The Biggest Transfer of Wealth Out of This Country in Its History”

Former Foreign Minister

“This is the biggest transfer of wealth out of this country in its history. Don't forget that, that $368 billion.”

Maritime Union of Australia: “Australia Needs Jobs and Health, Not Nukes”

Warren Smith, Maritime Union of Australia

“Hundreds of billions of dollars committed to nuclear submarines cannot also be spent on the things that create security in people's daily lives. Public housing, hospitals, education, climate resilience, renewable energy, civilian manufacturing, commercial port infrastructure, and strategic shipping.”

NSW Teachers Federation: “A $368 Billion Disgrace That Benefits Nobody But the United States”

Natasha Watt and Kelly Marks, NSW Teachers Federation

“More than 90% of teaching positions across the state are in areas where housing is unaffordable on a teacher salary… Spending our taxes not just on nuclear-powered attack subs, but on building homes for American naval personnel and their families — is this what it means?”

NTEU: “Universities Are Pitching Themselves for AUKUS Money”

Dr Lachlan Clohesy, National Tertiary Education Union

“NTEU opposes AUKUS and accompanying agreements and military spending for several reasons. NTEU supports peace and we believe AUKUS increases the likelihood of war. NTEU is concerned about risks of nuclear proliferation and long-term nuclear stewardship obligations.”

Sydney Anti-AUKUS Coalition: “AUKUS Does Not Have a Social Licence”

Peter Murphy and Pip Hinman, Sydney Anti-AUKUS Coalition

“While the major parties refuse to hold such a parliamentary inquiry, this one is already sending a very important message…and that is that AUKUS does not have a social licence. The major parties, in our opinion, know that most people object to billions of taxpayer dollars being spent on what is essentially a preparation for war on China dressed up as deterrence.”

Dr Alex Byrne AM Says AUKUS Is “The Same Cost as World War II”

Professional Librarian and Researcher

“There seems to be considerable evidence that our defence establishment has been captured by the US military environment, not just the US military, but all the defence procurement and manufacturing organisations, the whole environment that we speak their language, we turn to them. Are we in a position to make a separate judgment about the efficacy of these decisions?”

Prof Toby Walsh Says AUKUS Is “A Platform That Will Be Obsolete by the Time It Arrives”

Scientia Professor of Artificial Intelligence, UNSW

“The commitment of over $300 billion over three decades for eight nuclear submarines carries extreme financial and strategic risks. As the submarines won't be delivered till the 2050s, Australia's buying a platform that will be obsolete by the time it arrives. I believe in the short term simply basing US and UK submarines at HMAS Sterling offers a more prudent and immediate deterrence capability, and in the longer term Australia should be looking to develop its own much cheaper autonomous capabilities.”

Prof Jocelyn Chey: “Without Any Reservations, I Think AUKUS Should Be Scrapped”

Adjunct Professor, Australia-China Relations Institute, UTS

“To scrap AUKUS is not about abandoning security. It's about reclaiming it. It would allow Australia to develop independent strategic initiatives that really safeguarded our interests, and to rebuild the relationship with our largest neighbour based on trust and mutual respect. So let's move away from the rhetoric of war and let's choose cooperation over containment.”

Richard Yuan: “China Is Not an Enemy, But AUKUS Will Eventually Force It to Become One”

Founder and Chairman, ABC World Group

“China is not an enemy, but AUKUS will eventually force it to become one.”

Andrew Fowler Says AUKUS Is “A Truly Brutal Act of Self-Harm for Australia”

Author and Former Journalist of ‘Nuked’

“This was a truly brutal act of self-harm for Australia in my opinion…both populations have been betrayed — France because of the disgraceful way in which the Morrison government deceived and lied to the French, and Australia because they were never asked whether or not they wanted to spend $368 billion.”

Peter Hayes: “I Do Not Support This Acquisition Without Prior Validation”

Former RAAF Group Captain

“ADF force structure and capability development is a complex process, and capital equipment acquisition is an outcome of that process. The manner in which the AUKUS submarine acquisition was announced clearly revealed the absence of a deliberate, prior analysis of threat, strategy and capability development needed to inform the preferred equipment and source.”

Ian Dunlop Says AUKUS Is “One of the Greatest Strategic Mistakes Australia Has Ever Made”

Member of Australian Security Leaders Climate Group

“It's one of the greatest strategic mistakes Australia has ever made. It's the most costly, complex, and risky project I think ever undertaken. But a project developed as far as one can tell with a complete absence of strategic analysis for our real defence needs.”

Christopher Pyne: Why AUKUS is worth the cost and the delays

Former Australian Defence Minister; Strategic Advisor, Lobbyist and Company Director, Pyne & Partners

“AUKUS is not just a submarine procurement. It's also a new United States submarine base in the Indian Ocean — the US doesn't have one. In the Second World War, HMAS Stirling hosted 140 submarines. For the Americans, being able to have a submarine base in the Indian Ocean is a massive strategic advantage.”

Rex Patrick: “We’re staring at a serious capability gap”

Former Senator for South Australia (2017–2022); Former Royal Australian Navy Submariner; Transparency Advocate

“There's also an opportunity cost. $368 billion — if you think about what you can spend with that amount of money on defence and, indeed, other things, we wouldn't be worrying about fuel security.”

Andrew Gaczol: “AUKUS Pillar One is a delusion”

Senior Researcher in Federal Parliament; Former Intelligence Analyst, Department of Defence

“There must be some serious questions asked as to whether this is value for money…I note that the International Space Station's cost is approximately 150 billion, and that's a multinational project spanning decades. AUKUS was negotiated in the highest secrecy between the UK, the US, and Australia.”

ETU: “Australians are being asked to pay more and accept less”

Matt Murphy, National Assistant Secretary; John Adley, Branch Secretary — Electrical Trades Union

“Every dollar committed to AUKUS is a choice. The same investment could accelerate the clean energy transition, build renewable energy industries, fund housing and healthcare and support the industrial workforce of the future.”

Steve Glasgow: “You cannot guard Australia with legacy steel”

Strategic Analyst

“The current AUKUS Pillar One framework fundamentally fails Australian sovereign requirements. It does not give us an independent capability. It shackles us to a deeply transactional foreign supply chain. It hands us a maintenance leash tied entirely to American and British engineering yards, and it strips away our independent military decision-making.”

Richard Whitebrook: “We Spend $368 Billion, Maybe, and We Get Three Used Subs”

Concerned Citizen

“Most of the rationale for the subs suggests that they will be used to support US operations. Our own government attempts to avoid admitting that. But the Americans seem happy to argue the point that giving us any submarines at all is in their interest, as we become a force multiplier. This means the project is being funded by Australians essentially so we can participate in American military adventurism rather than any operational need of our own.”

Chris Schacht says “The AUKUS deal is terrible”

Former Senator for South Australia and Former Minister in the Keating Government; Former Chair, Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade

“All I want to say is that the AUKUS deal is terrible. It's terrible for the cost of money. It's terrible for what it does to Australian sovereignty. And in the end, our future in the Pacific is to have, as Kim Beazley would call, our own defence — self-reliance.”

David Orr: “AUKUS Has Turned Out to Be a Trojan Horse”

Independent and Peaceful Australia Network – South Australia (IPAN-SA)

“Will Australia ever receive the submarines? Answer: later, fewer, and over budget, if at all. It is highly likely Australia won't receive nuclear submarines. What Australia will get is US nuclear submarine bases that will take us to war.”

Eileen Darley & Sandra Dann (PACOA): “AUKUS is a war pact”

Port Adelaide Community Opposing AUKUS (PACOA)

“They're building nuclear submarines here in our community, not to defend our coastline, but to patrol the South China Sea thousands of kilometres away, so the US can prepare a war with its greatest economic rival… Our lives, the lives of our children and their futures, and the devastation of our urban and natural environments for generations to come are what's at stake.”

Jack Thrower: “$18.4 Million Per Job — That Isn't a Great Cost-Benefit”

The Australia Institute

“Money that we spend on defence doesn't have those other uses, and it doesn't help increase the productivity of the economy… The fact that we're diverting resources away from productive uses to military spending is sort of strictly unproductive.”

Al Rainnie: “It's Highly Unlikely They're Ever Going to Get Any of the Jobs”

Adjunct Research Professor, University of Adelaide

“It's highly unlikely that they're ever going to get any of the jobs… mostly because they simply do not have the training or the skill set or the education that's required to work in something like a nuclear submarine base. In fact, the Australian Strategic Policy Research Institute has said we're going to need a new special visa to import people, because we do not train the people in this country who we need.”

MOSSA: “It's Legally Our Waste Forever”

Tracey Kermond, Maureen Graney, Michelle Parsons & Mary Houlahan, Mothers for a Sustainable South Australia

“Nuclear submarines will not make Australia safe. They will make us less safe. We said no in 2016 to South Australia becoming a commercial nuclear waste dumping ground. We say no again in 2026 — this time to AUKUS.”

Friends of the Earth: “Claims That Nuclear Submarines Are Completely Safe Are Myths”

Jim Green and Dr Philip White, Friends of the Earth Adelaide

“Claims that nuclear submarines are completely safe are myths. There has been no public consultation about the dangers associated with AUKUS. No attempt has been made to openly discuss the risks with the residents of Osborne and the wider Adelaide region. The federal and state governments should be honest with the public about the safety risks facing South Australians due to the nuclear submarine project.”

Kym Davey: “It's One Thing to Build Up Our Defences. It's Another to Be Part of an Aggressive Posture”

Former ALP State Executive Member; Member of Labor Against War

“We've had the narrative. We've had the threat amped up, and we've had a lot of lies told and a lot of skulduggery.”

Dianne Atkinson: “This Is the Biggest Security Threat That We Face”

Concerned Citizen

“The other threat to Australia's security is the danger that wars will be launched from Australian territory by the US, and that Australia will bear the brunt of retaliation against the US. We've seen this happen in West Asia… Based on US threats, this scenario is currently the most likely reason that any country might attack Australia. This is the biggest security threat that we face.”

David Noonan: “An Undemocratic Breach of Trust”

B.Sc., M.Env.St

“I think many people see this as a breach of trust — an undemocratic breach of trust by federal and state governments, regardless of which party may be in office… It's an affront to our civil society sensibilities.”

Linda Reynolds: “AUKUS is necessary but it has not yet hit its stride”

Former Minister for Defence of Australia

“I acknowledge the significance of this hearing being held. It represents exactly what democracies, including our own, fight to preserve…My view is that AUKUS is necessary, but it is not yet hitting its stride…AUKUS is the right partnership, but not the whole answer.”

Jonathan Huston MLA: “HMAS Stirling pens will become a perfect open-air target”

Member of the Legislative Assembly of Western Australia, Independent Member for Nedlands

“The HMAS Stirling pens will become a perfect open-air target for precision-guided munitions…We are building the most expensive, second-hand, provocative, open-air target in Australian history.”

Mick Macfarlane: There are submarines and there are targets

Former Royal Australian Navy personnel and Sonar operator

“The cost of AUKUS is estimated to be in the hundreds of billions… I believe the Australian taxpayer needs to be better informed about the age and service history/life expectancy of the Virginia-Class SSNs we are buying.”

Leo Kerr: Citizen submission calls the $368 Billion deal a strategic blunder

Concerned Citizen

“Australia does not need nuclear submarines to be secure. We need a defence strategy appropriate to our geography, our budget, and our democratic values.”

Dr Mike Gilligan: 20-Year Defence Analyst on how self-reliance died and AUKUS was born

Former Head of Force Development and Analysis Division, Department of Defence; Board Member, Pearls and Irritations

“The Virginia class submarine is not a general-purpose vessel such as our Collins class. It is designed for supreme acoustic invisibility for a specific purpose — to find, doggedly track underwater for months and be able to destroy submarines seen as a nuclear threat to the US mainland.”

Dr Colin Hughes: Former head of Public Health paints a nuclear accident scenario for Rockingham

Former Head of Public Health, Perth Metro; Member, Medical Association for Prevention of War Australia

“Even a low level nuclear accident would have devastating environmental and health effects on all living things in the immediate area including humans.”

Mark Beeson: “It would be madness for China to even contemplate such a thing”

Adjunct Professor, Australia-China Relations Institute, University of Technology Sydney

“We could fix free education for higher education, we could fix the social housing problem, we could fix remote community problems with their housing, and, of course, make the green transition.”

Jasmin Diab: “The True Measure of AUKUS Won’t Be the Submarines Themselves”

Partner and Managing Director Australia, Global Nuclear Security Partners

“One of the challenges facing AUKUS is that capability development has progressed faster than public understanding. This has created an information gap that risks undermining public trust.”

Ivy Lee Patrick: “I was not only grieving AUKUS itself”

Concerned Citizen

“I remember the horror of watching Scott Morrison, Joe Biden and Boris Johnson standing together as AUKUS was announced on TV, of realising that such a significant decision had already been made before Australians had any opportunity to participate in the conversation. That moment has never left me.”

Stop AUKUS WA says AUKUS “debases our democracy” and “threatens our sovereignty”

Leonie Lundy & Sam Wainwright, Stop AUKUS WA

“AUKUS poses a public health and safety, environmental, security and social cohesion risk to the Cockburn Sound communities. It lacks social licence and a cost benefit analysis.”

Mia Pepper: AUKUS “really spells disaster for some of the ecosystems”

Conservation Council of Western Australia

“We have very little confidence about how seriously the public will be engaged and how seriously the radioactive elements of this project are being assessed in environmental terms… As far as we can tell, there is nothing in the EPBC Act that ensures that the nuclear components of this project will be assessed at any point in the process.”

Sophie McNeill: Pensioners in tents while $100 million goes to housing US troops

The Greens (WA) MLC, WA Parliament — Fremantle / Walyalup Hearing, 29 June 2026

“It creates a devastating opportunity cost for our state if our leaders choose to invest $375 billion on AUKUS rather than address the growing housing crisis in this state, or the worsening climate emergency.”

Dennis Rumley: “We, the Australian people, have not agreed to this”

Emeritus Professor; Political Geographer

“AUKUS is an Anglospheric-imposed arrangement… imposed by two broken Anglo-Great Powers. Because it is a regional attack policy and because it is imposed, AUKUS makes Australia less secure.”

KA Garlick: “AUKUS asks Western Australians to accept radioactive waste without a permanent solution”

Nuclear Free WA

“The impacts of the nuclear industry are not shared equally. They fall disproportionately on First Nations people, lower income communities, workers, women, and children.”

Gareth Evans: AUKUS was “misconceived from the outset”

Former Minister for Foreign Affairs in the Hawke and Keating Governments (1988–96); former President & CEO, International Crisis Group

“Australia is spending an eye-watering amount to build a capability to defend us from a military threat which in fact is most likely to arise because we have that capability and are using it to fight alongside the US in a conflict in which it is not in our interest to engage, without any guarantee of support in return should we ever need it.”

Tilman Ruff: Australia would be “the first non-nuclear state to acquire nuclear-powered submarines”

Co-founder, International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN); Nossal Institute for Global Health, University of Melbourne

“Australia will be the first state without nuclear weapons to acquire nuclear-powered submarines under this plan.”

Richard Tanter: Australia’s nuclear permissiveness is “something we should not be tolerating”

Senior Research Associate, Nautilus Institute; Honorary Professor, University of Melbourne

“To talk about nuclear deterrence is utterly misleading. Nuclear deterrence would be a very good idea if it would work. But for all governments of major nuclear weapons powers, their first consideration is not so much deterrence — but what happens when deterrence fails. And no government of a nuclear weapons state proceeds on the assumption it will fail…”

John Leslie Lander: Australia is paying $35 Million a day for a fictional threat

Former Deputy Ambassador to China and Head of the China Section, DFAT

“$368 billion. That's $35 million per day for 30 years — for weapons of war, rather than weapons of welfare. Security is not only a defence against possible military attacks. Security involves security from the effects of climate change, and many other developments right across society that are impacting ordinary people all the time.”

Joseph Camilleri: “One of the saddest decisions ever made by an Australian Government”

Professor Emeritus, La Trobe University

“The decision to become a party to the AUKUS security agreement stands as one of the saddest decisions ever made by an Australian government. It was a decision made for the wrong reasons, in the wrong way, with unfortunate outcomes in the last five years and dire consequences looming in the years ahead.”

Rod Campbell: “There’s just no case to be had here”

Research Director, Australian Institute

“If you’re interested in creating jobs, you fund health care, you fund education, you fund regional development. From an Australian perspective, or even a South Australian perspective, this is not an employment issue. In terms of jobs per dollar, there’s just no case to be had here. There are so many better options.”

Dave Sweeney: “We don’t ask, they don’t tell”

Anti-Nuclear Campaigner, Australian Conservation Foundation

“AUKUS was developed in secret and announced to the world one morning by three leaders who have all since lost power. Morrison, Johnson, Biden are all long gone. AUKUS is still with us.”

Barbara Jackson: AUKUS has “quietly traded away” Australia’s democracy and sovereignty

Concerned Citizen

“Our democracy is precious. Our sovereignty is precious. And right now, both have been quietly traded away in an arrangement that serves American strategic interests far more than our own.”

Jack Howard: “It's Never Too Late to Step Away From a Dangerous Path”

Labor Against War

“It's never too late to step away from a dangerous path and to pursue a better and safer course of action. There are fundamental principles at stake — our commitment to peaceful conflict resolution, to nuclear non-proliferation, and to regional cooperation and diplomacy.”

Melbourne 5-Minute Community Voices

Strobe Driver, Robert Barwick, Anthony Hing, Renae Carvana, Apollo Yiyani & Con Pakavakas

Six community members addressed the AUKUS Public Inquiry's Melbourne hearing in a series of five-minute presentations, bringing perspectives ranging from war studies research to lived experience in education, business, and activism.