A public inquiry into AUKUS has described the nuclear-powered submarine agreement as the worst, riskiest and costliest defence decision the country has made, according to findings released this week. The deal, valued at $368 billion in Australian dollars, is the subject of the inquiry's conclusions, which were led by commissioner Peter Garrett.
Commissioner Leanne Minshull, who is co-CEO of The Australia Institute, said the deal was kept secret from the public for much of its development. Her comments add to a growing call from Australians for greater transparency about the agreement and how it was reached. Minshull's position places the question of secrecy at the centre of the inquiry's public reception, rather than treating it as a side issue to the financial and strategic questions.
The findings were reported after an interview between The Wire and Mr Garrett. The original reporting was provided by The Wire, and the story was produced for Radio Adelaide by Lucy Grant. The inquiry's conclusions therefore reached the public through a chain of reporting that began with the commissioner's own account of the process, rather than through a formal government statement.
The inquiry's central judgement is that the combination of cost and risk makes AUKUS a defence decision that warrants scrutiny at the highest level. The figure of $368 billion is the single most prominent number attached to the agreement in the material available for this report, and it frames the inquiry's assessment that the decision is the costliest the country has taken in this area.
The basis for the inquiry's conclusions on cost and risk has not been set out in the material available for this report. The detailed reasoning behind the figures and the risk assessment therefore cannot be confirmed here, and readers seeking the full analysis will need the inquiry's complete findings. Without that reasoning, the distinction between the financial exposure and the strategic risk cannot be drawn with precision from this reporting alone.
The government's response to the findings is not reported in this piece. The inquiry's conclusions are likely to feed into the continuing debate over whether Australians have been given enough information about a defence commitment of this size, and over whether the process by which the deal was negotiated and concluded allowed for adequate public examination.
5
