The Coalition has seized on growing divisions within Labor over AUKUS, arguing recent criticism from senior party figures has created uncertainty around Australia’s landmark submarine agreement.
The renewed debate erupted after former cabinet minister Ed Husic questioned whether the pact should be reconsidered following changes to the submarine acquisition plan. While the Albanese government insists it remains fully committed to AUKUS, the Opposition says dissent from within Labor’s own ranks is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore.
Coalition voices concerns
Shadow Defence Industry Minister Phillip Thompson said concerns were no longer confined to a handful of backbench critics. “You’ve got Ed Husic, a power broker within the Labor Party, a former senior cabinet minister who also doesn’t support it,” he told Sky News on Wednesday. “It holds a lot of concern within the coalition of the direction of AUKUS, because, you know, at the moment, we’re seeing a fracture within the Labor Party itself.”
The comments come as pressure grows on the government from sections of the Labor movement who want the agreement reviewed amid concerns about cost and delivery timelines. Mr Husic used a caucus meeting this week to question whether Labor should revisit its position after it emerged Australia would receive three second-hand Virginia-class submarines rather than two used and one new.
Wider dissent within Labor
Mr Thompson said the concerns extended beyond Mr Husic from within the government. “Josh Wilson is an assistant minister... he’s a minister in the government and he doesn’t support AUKUS,” Thompson said. Former ministers Peter Garrett and Carmen Lawrence are among those backing a separate public campaign calling for a reassessment of the agreement. “We’ve got former senior Labor ministers, Peter Garrett, out there saying that there should be a review and he doesn’t support it,” Mr Thompson said. “All the Labor party people are the ones that are coming out saying that they don’t support AUKUS.”
The Queensland MP said the Coalition remained committed to working with the government to deliver the submarine program but argued Labor needed to demonstrate greater unity on the issue. “We want to work with the government collaboratively to make sure that AUKUS gets rolled out and gets done in a timely manner,” he said.
Government defends AUKUS
Defence Minister Richard Marles has argued the revised arrangement will simplify maintenance and operations while reducing costs. The Coalition, however, says questions remain about how the change was reached and what it means for Australia’s long-term capability. “I’m glad that you know that it’s the Americans that changed the rules because we’ve been sitting in the dark here going from who’s made this decision, or requested where we’ve gone to when it comes to getting used submarines,” Mr Thompson said. “We do have questions around certain funding and about how there should be a bit more spent in certain areas, but we want to work together in our national interests.”
Uncertainty around AUKUS has become a political flashpoint beyond the defence portfolio. Shadow Treasurer Tim Wilson said the growing internal debate was undermining confidence in a project the government itself describes as central to Australia’s future security. “The Defence Minister’s out there quite justifiably acknowledging we’re in the most dangerous geostrategic and political environment since the Second World War,” Mr Wilson told Sky News. “And he’s got his own backbench, Ed Husic, and of course some of his frontbench, undermining his position and the government on AUKUS.”
Mr Wilson said Australians deserved greater transparency about where the project was heading. “They need to explain to Australians what’s happening, when it’s happening and actually take them into their trust.”
International implications
Shadow assistant minister for international development Dave Sharma said the growing criticism from within Labor risked sending the wrong message to Australia’s AUKUS partners. While noting Coalition support for the pact remained unchanged, Mr Sharma argued Labor needed to demonstrate greater unity. “Labor needs to get its own house in order and its own troops in line and reassure not only the public but, importantly, the US and the UK that this commitment on Labor’s side, which has always been a little fragile, is rock solid,” he told Sky News. “We’re getting to the pointy end of arrangements with AUKUS.”
Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles this week described the agreement as being “unambiguously” supported by the government and noted it had received overwhelming backing from Labor’s national conference. The Albanese government has repeatedly rejected suggestions it is wavering on AUKUS. Defence Industry Minister Pat Conroy has defended Labor’s position, saying the AUKUS pact has been repeatedly endorsed by the party and remains central to Australia’s strategic direction.
Speaking to Sky News, he said the policy had been formally backed through multiple party processes and remained unchanged in its objectives. “It’s been confirmed by the caucus in 2021. It’s been confirmed by the Shadow Cabinet in 2021, the actual cabinet in 2023 and an overwhelming endorsement at our national conference,” he said.
Labor frontbencher Mark Butler also downplayed suggestions of division within Labor ranks. “There’s one backbencher out of a caucus of about 120 who’s raised some questions,” Mr Butler said of Mr Husic’s intervention. “The government is very happy with the way in which this project is tracking. The three defence ministers of the three countries met earlier this week … and came to the view that this is on track. Come down to my electorate in Port Adelaide and you’ll see the things starting to be built. We’ve got hundreds of workers who are training at Pearl Harbor and in the UK.”
Australia is due to receive its first Virginia-class submarines from the United States in the 2030s, under the revised arrangement agreed with Washington and London. The AUKUS plan has so far cost taxpayers about $9 billion, with the first nuclear-powered submarine still at least six years away.
