Peter Garrett to head independent inquiry into the Aukus submarine pact

Lead

Australia's A$368bn ($239bn; £176bn) Aukus submarine deal — the country's largest ever defence project — is set to face scrutiny through an independent inquiry led by former environment minister and Midnight Oil frontman Peter Garrett. The inquiry, announced Tuesday, will hold public hearings and deliver a report by 30 October, according to multiple sources including the BBC and The Guardian.

Garrett, who served as environment minister from 2007 to 2010, said the review was "long overdue," noting that the deal is the "most expensive" defence project in Australia's history and that the chance to "question, debate and decide has been taken out of the hands of the parliament and the people," as quoted by the BBC.

The inquiry is being convened by the not-for-profit group Australian Peace and Security Forum, with support from trade unions, retired military officers, and independent MPs David Pocock and Andrew Wilkie, per the BBC and The Guardian.

Coverage comparison

Reporting from the BBC and The Guardian broadly agree on the core facts: the inquiry will examine whether the submarines can be delivered on time and on budget, how nuclear waste will be managed, and whether the deal serves Australia's defence and strategic interests. The Guardian's coverage also highlights that Australia has not identified a permanent storage site for the nuclear waste generated by the submarine fleet — a point not mentioned in the BBC's report.

A second Guardian article focuses on critical evidence given to the inquiry by Gareth Evans, a former foreign affairs minister in the Hawke and Keating governments. Evans argues the deal is deeply flawed, while the BBC's piece does not include his testimony. The Guardian's tone is notably more critical, using phrases like "ludicrous delusion" — attributed directly to Evans — whereas the BBC maintains a neutral framing, emphasising the deal's rationale of countering China's presence in the Indo-Pacific.

Key claims

• Deal structure: Australia will acquire three second-hand Virginia-class attack submarines from the United States, with deliveries expected to begin in 2032, as reported by the BBC and The Guardian. The US and UK will also base a small number of nuclear submarines in Perth, Western Australia from 2027 — a claim carried by a single outlet (BBC) and not yet independently verified.

• Inquiry details: Peter Garrett will lead the inquiry alongside four other commissioners, including Admiral Chris Barrie, former chief of the Australian Defence Force, and Carmen Lawrence, a former premier of Western Australia, according to the BBC. Karen Lester, whose father was affected by British nuclear tests in South Australia in the 1950s, will also serve as a commissioner.

• Cost and scope: The deal is worth A$368bn and is Australia's biggest ever defence project, as stated across multiple sources.

• Nuclear waste concerns: Australia has not yet identified a permanent storage site for the nuclear waste generated by the submarine fleet, according to The Guardian's reporting.

• Gareth Evans' testimony: Evans, who served as foreign affairs minister from 1988 to 1996, told the inquiry that the delivery of the Virginia-class submarines is unlikely due to construction delays and shortages in the US fleet, and that the second phase of Aukus — involving five new-design SSN-Aukus submarines to be jointly built by the UK and Australia — will be extremely difficult. He described the UK's defence-industrial base as under "extraordinary stress," with schedules tightening and costs increasing. These claims are based on a single source (The Guardian) and have not been independently verified.

• Government response: A spokesperson for Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the government welcomes "appropriate oversight and transparency" of the submarine deal, as reported by the BBC.

Perspectives

Government and proponents: The official position, as articulated by the prime minister's spokesperson, is that oversight and transparency are welcome, implying confidence in the deal's merits. The deal is framed as necessary to counter China's growing presence in the Indo-Pacific region.

Inquiry organisers and critics: Garrett and supporting figures argue that proper parliamentary scrutiny has been lacking, and that the deal's costs, risks, and strategic implications have not been adequately debated. The inquiry aims to answer whether the submarines will be delivered as promised and whether they will enhance Australia's security.

Sceptics like Gareth Evans: Evans represents a more forceful critique, calling the deal potentially "one of the worst defence and foreign policy decisions ever made by an Australian government." He questions the viability of the submarine deliveries and the assumption that US extended deterrence would protect Australia in an existential crisis. His evidence highlights concerns about the US and UK's industrial capacities and the speculative nature of the government's price tag.

Civil society and independent voices: The inquiry's supporters, including independent MPs and non-profit organisations, underscore broader public concerns about nuclear waste management, regional security implications, and the lack of a permanent waste storage site.