Former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull warned on Thursday that Australia faces a "very real risk" of ending up with no new submarines if the AUKUS procurement programme does not stay on schedule. The comment came as the defence department confirmed that the first nuclear-powered submarine is unlikely to be delivered before the early 2030s, well beyond the original target of 2027. Turnbull, who championed the AUKUS partnership in 2021, said the delay threatens the nation’s maritime security and could leave the Royal Australian Navy reliant on ageing Collins-class vessels.
The AUKUS agreement, signed by Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States in September 2021, commits the three allies to provide Australia with at least eight nuclear-powered attack submarines. The plan replaces the previously announced conventional submarine deal with France’s Naval Group, which was cancelled in 2021. Construction is to be carried out in the United States, with technology transfer and local industry participation promised under the deal.
Economic and Market Impact
The submarine programme is projected to cost up to AUD 150 billion over its lifecycle, making it one of the largest defence investments in Australian history. Delays could increase costs through inflation and extended project management, while also affecting Australian firms that were slated to receive contracts for components, training and maintenance. The Australian defence industry has prepared for a supply chain that includes local shipyards and engineering firms, but the timeline uncertainty hampers firm commitments.
Political and Community Impact
Turnbull’s warning adds pressure on the current government, which faces criticism from opposition parties and some defence experts for perceived slow progress. Regional allies, particularly Japan and India, monitor the situation closely, as the submarines are seen as a key element of a broader Indo-Pacific security architecture. Communities near planned shipyard sites have expressed both anticipation of jobs and concern over environmental and safety issues associated with nuclear technology.
What Happens Next
The defence department has scheduled a review of the submarine acquisition timeline for early 2025, with a parliamentary committee expected to report on cost overruns and risk mitigation. The government has indicated it will seek additional assurances from the United States and the United Kingdom to keep the project on track. Until those assurances are secured, the risk of a capability gap remains, and Turnbull’s warning is likely to shape public debate in the months ahead.
Potential Benefits / Supporting Perspective
Supporting View: AUKUS Submarines Strengthen Australia’s Defence and Regional Role
Proponents argue that, despite the current schedule setbacks, the AUKUS submarine programme remains essential for Australia’s long-term security and its contribution to a stable Indo-Pacific. Nuclear-powered submarines offer greater range, endurance and stealth than the aging Collins-class fleet, enabling the Royal Australian Navy to patrol vast maritime zones and respond to emerging threats more effectively. The partnership also deepens strategic ties with the United States and the United Kingdom, reinforcing a shared deterrence posture against potential aggression in the region.
Economic analysts note that the programme, while costly, creates high-skill jobs across shipbuilding, engineering and maintenance sectors. Local firms are slated to receive contracts for components such as hull sections, combat systems and crew training, fostering a domestic defence industrial base that could generate export opportunities. Moreover, the technology transfer provisions are designed to build Australian expertise in nuclear propulsion, a capability that could have civilian spin-offs in energy and research.
From a geopolitical perspective, the submarines are viewed as a counterbalance to expanding naval capabilities of rival powers. Allies such as Japan, India and the United States have repeatedly highlighted the importance of a credible Australian submarine force to maintain freedom of navigation and uphold international law in contested waters. By completing the AUKUS project, Australia would signal its commitment to collective security arrangements and reassure regional partners of its reliability.
Supporters acknowledge the timeline challenges but contend that they are manageable through intensified project management and stronger oversight. They recommend that the government secure firm delivery milestones from its US and UK partners, while leveraging the upcoming 2025 parliamentary review to address cost controls. In this view, the benefits of a modern nuclear submarine fleet outweigh the short-term delays, delivering lasting strategic and economic gains.
Potential Drawbacks / Critical Perspective
Critical View: Risks and Costs Undermine the AUKUS Submarine Deal
Critics caution that the AUKUS submarine programme poses significant financial, strategic and operational risks that could outweigh its promised advantages. The projected AUD 150 billion price tag already strains the defence budget, and repeated delays risk further cost inflation, potentially diverting funds from other critical defence priorities such as air defence and cyber capabilities. Skeptics point out that the reliance on US and UK shipyards reduces Australia’s control over the construction process and may limit domestic industrial participation despite promised technology transfer.
Strategically, the introduction of nuclear-powered submarines raises concerns about Australia’s nuclear non-proliferation commitments and the need for robust safety and environmental safeguards. Communities near proposed shipyard sites have voiced opposition over the handling of nuclear material and the long-term waste management responsibilities. Additionally, the shift to nuclear propulsion could complicate Australia’s diplomatic relations with neighbouring countries that are wary of nuclear technology proliferation.
From a capability perspective, the extended timeline means the Royal Australian Navy could face a prolonged gap between the retirement of the Collins-class fleet and the arrival of the new submarines. This gap may erode maritime security and reduce Australia’s ability to project power in the Indo-Pacific, contrary to the strategic intent of the deal. Some analysts argue that investing in advanced conventional submarines or alternative platforms could deliver comparable deterrence at lower cost and with fewer political complications.
Critics urge the government to conduct a rigorous independent review of the programme’s cost-benefit balance before committing further resources. They recommend exploring options to renegotiate delivery schedules, increase domestic construction share, or consider alternative defence solutions that align with Australia’s fiscal constraints and non-nuclear policy framework. Until such measures are taken, the risk of a capability shortfall and public backlash remains high.