Inquiry Urges Australia to Scrap $500B AUKUS Deal in 2026

Key Points

• Immediate Scrapping Recommended: A five-month independent public inquiry led by former Labor minister Peter Garrett has called for the immediate termination of the AUKUS nuclear-powered submarine deal, labelling it the “worst, most costly and riskiest defence decision ever made by an Australian government”.
• Half a Trillion Dollar Projections: While official projections estimate the trilateral agreement at $368 billion, the inquiry estimated the true expenditure could approach $500 billion ($0.5 trillion) when incorporating an additional $180 billion required for radioactive waste management.
• Call for Royal Commission: The inquiry made 17 distinct recommendations, prominently calling for a Royal Commission to investigate how Australia entered the agreement under former Prime Minister Scott Morrison and to identify the decision-makers involved.
• Lack of Sovereign Protections: Commissioners highlighted that the agreement contains no enforceable obligations on partner countries, no refund mechanisms, and no legal recourse if technological or delivery milestones fail.
• Waste Management Concerns: Former Chief of the Australian Defence Force Chris Barrie and Peter Garrett condemned the absence of a permanent high-level radioactive waste storage facility, pointing out that neither the US nor the UK has completed such a facility after 60 years.
• Demands to Halt Infrastructure Projects: The report recommended suspending AUKUS-related infrastructure developments at naval bases, including HMAS Stirling in Western Australia and the Osborne Naval Shipyard in South Australia.

Canberra (Australia News Today) November 4, 2026 – An independent community-funded public inquiry has called for the immediate cancellation of Australia’s AUKUS nuclear-powered submarine agreement, warning that the project’s true cost could approach $500 billion. Unveiled during an address at the National Press Club, the five-month inquiry panel—headed by former federal minister Peter Garrett and former Chief of the Defence Force Chris Barrie—described the trilateral deal with the United States and the United Kingdom as the riskiest defence decision in national history. The panel’s final report delivered 17 recommendations, urging the federal government to establish a Royal Commission into the decision-making process under former Prime Minister Scott Morrison, suspend construction at key naval shipyards, and withdraw from the acquisition of nuclear-powered vessels.

Why Did the Public Inquiry Recommend Scrapping the AUKUS Submarine Deal Immediately?

According to news reporting by journalist Tegan George of The Illawarra Flame (covering a report for The Point), the independent inquiry concluded its five-month investigation by recommending that notice be given immediately to terminate Pillar One of the trilateral AUKUS security pact.

As reported by Tegan George of The Illawarra Flame, former Labor minister Peter Garrett stated in a speech at the National Press Club that the project suffers from critical structural flaws and escalating risks. “There is next to no hope of the AUKUS submarines ever being delivered on time,” Garrett stated, as cited by Tegan George. Garrett further highlighted the complete absence of contractual safeguards within the international framework, adding: “There are no refunds, no enforceable obligations on partner countries and no recourse if things go wrong. We therefore recommend that notice should immediately be given to scrap AUKUS before more money is wasted, and the many risks inherent to the project continue to escalate.”

The inquiry was initiated to examine the broad strategic, financial, and societal implications of the security pact. Over five months, the panel conducted 10 full-day public hearings across eight Australian cities, gathering more than 1,000 written submissions. Witnesses included prominent political and military figures such as a former prime minister, three former defence ministers, two former foreign affairs ministers, retired submarine commander Rear Admiral Peter Briggs, as well as academic experts and community organizations.

How High Could the Total Financial and Environmental Costs of AUKUS Rise?

As detailed by journalist Tegan George of The Illawarra Flame, the financial figures presented by the inquiry significantly exceed previous official government estimates. While public projections have consistently framed the acquisition cost at approximately $368 billion, Peter Garrett explained that the inquiry’s financial analysis indicates the overall outlay could approach half a trillion dollars ($500 billion).

This massive increase accounts for an estimated $180 billion in supplementary funding required to manage, store, and decommission the high-level radioactive waste generated by the nuclear reactors. As reported by Tegan George of The Illawarra Flame, Garrett criticized the government’s approach to nuclear waste management as a “galling” oversight.

“After 60 years, and with more money and nuclear expertise than Australia, neither the UK nor the US has managed to develop and construct a permanent below-ground, high level-radioactive waste storage facility,” Garrett stated, as quoted by Tegan George. He questioned how Australia was expected to establish a safe disposal solution “overnight,” describing the planning process as “Astonishing, reckless, cavalier, wilful blindness.”

Former Chief of the Australian Defence Force, retired Admiral Chris Barrie, underscored the unprecedented regulatory position Australia faces. As reported by Tegan George of The Illawarra Flame, Barrie stated: “We are grappling with what it means to become the first non-nuclear-weapon state to operate nuclear-powered submarines fuelled with weapons-grade uranium.”

What Key Recommendations Were Made Regarding Strategic Sovereignty and Royal Commissions?

The public inquiry panel presented 17 primary recommendations aimed at reshaping Australian national security and defence procurement. Beyond canceling Pillar One—which encompasses purchasing second-hand Virginia-class submarines from the United States prior to building the SSN-AUKUS fleet—the inquiry advocated for recasting Pillar Two, which governs advanced defence technologies, and immediately freezing construction developments at HMAS Stirling in Western Australia and the Osborne precinct in South Australia.

As documented by journalist Tegan George of The Illawarra Flame, retired Admiral Chris Barrie informed the National Press Club that the current submarine plan was “untenable” and must be ended as soon as possible. “And we should never allow an acquisition program like AUKUS to define our national security,” Barrie stated, as cited in the report.

Barrie explicitly addressed Australia’s geopolitical posture and strategic alliance commitments. As reported by Tegan George of The Illawarra Flame, Barrie remarked: “The only way I can conceive of Australians being involved in a war with China would be by joining a conflict between the United States and China. That may serve the interests of the United States. It would not serve ours. It would be madness for us to take on a great power like China.”

Emphasizing national self-determination, Barrie argued that true sovereignty relies on independent decision-making. As reported by Tegan George, Barrie stated: “Sovereignty is not ownership of a submarine or a flag above a base. It is the ability of an Australian government to decide and act in Australia’s interests – including when our allies would prefer that we did not. The test is not whether we can say yes – that may look easy, but it will be hard. It is whether we can say no – and that is likely to be the toughest decision an Australian government has to make.”

The inquiry also called for a formal Royal Commission to review the original procurement process. This proposed judicial body would investigate the specific circumstances under which former Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s administration entered into the agreement and determine which officials were key participants in approving the deal without prior public or parliamentary consultation.

Background of the Particular Development

The AUKUS agreement was unexpectedly announced in September 2021 by then-Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison, US President Joe Biden, and UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson. The trilateral pact represented a major geopolitical shift in the Indo-Pacific, leading Australia to cancel a pre-existing $90 billion conventional submarine contract with French shipbuilder Naval Group. The decision provoked intense diplomatic friction with Paris and initiated a complex, multi-decade transition toward acquiring nuclear-powered attack submarines (SSNs).

Under the structured plan unveiled by the Albanese Labor government in 2023, Australia committed to a three-stage procurement pathway. The initial phase involved establishing rotated visits of US and UK nuclear submarines to Western Australia, followed by the purchase of at least three US Navy Virginia-class submarines in the 2030s. The final phase envisioned co-designing and constructing a new fleet of SSN-AUKUS vessels in Adelaide, leveraging British design and American technology. However, the plan has consistently faced criticism from policy analysts, environmental groups, and former political leaders regarding industrial capacity constraints in US shipyards, the absence of domestic high-level nuclear waste facilities, and the potential erosion of Australian sovereign control over its military forces.

Prediction: How This Development Can Affect Australian Taxpayers, Defence Contractors, and International Alliances

The findings and recommendations of this high-profile public inquiry will generate substantial debate across political, industrial, and diplomatic sectors, triggering direct consequences for multiple audiences.

Impact on Australian Taxpayers and Federal Budget Allocation

If the federal government responds to public pressure or parliamentary scrutiny by reviewing the financial commitments of AUKUS, Australian taxpayers could see major adjustments in long-term fiscal planning. Continued adherence to the project requires committing hundreds of billions of dollars over four decades, inevitably competing with federal funding allocations for healthcare, public infrastructure, national disability support, and renewable energy transitions. Conversely, an abrupt cancellation or restructuring of the contract would likely incur substantial break-fee liabilities, diplomatic penalties, and immediate sunk costs, presenting complex budgetary choices for current and future treasurers.

Impact on Defence Contractors and Regional Industrial Hubs

The inquiry’s explicit demand to halt infrastructure projects at HMAS Stirling in Western Australia and the Osborne shipyard in South Australia introduces immediate uncertainty for defence prime contractors, engineering firms, and industrial supply chains. Thousands of prospective manufacturing jobs, specialized trade apprenticeships, and civil construction contracts tied to shipyard expansions could face delays or structural cancellations. Australian shipbuilders may be forced to pivot back toward conventional diesel-electric submarine maintenance or alternative surface fleet construction programs to protect regional employment.

Impact on Strategic Alliances and Diplomatic Relations

The inquiry’s forceful push to abandon AUKUS risks creating friction within Australia’s primary diplomatic partnerships. A decision to scrap or significantly alter the agreement would strain military and intelligence relations with Washington and London, raising questions among allied partners regarding Australia’s long-term policy consistency. Domestically, however, the report provides substantial momentum to anti-nuclear advocates, policy reform groups, and political figures seeking to assert independent foreign policy directives in the Indo-Pacific region.