Will AUKUS keep us safe — at what cost?
Click each card to read their full biography.
The AUKUS deal was conceived in secret and with deception — and continues to be shrouded in secrecy despite the incredibly high stakes and massive cost. Our government has already spent $10 billion of our taxes on US and UK shipyards at a time when much of the world is in conflict and Australians are suffering from a cost-of-living crisis.
A group of former MPs, retired military and naval officers, leading strategists and academics, human rights lawyers and union leaders are committing to an independent Public Inquiry into AUKUS. This Inquiry is coordinated by the Australian Peace and Security Forum (APSF) — ensuring it is grounded in expertise, independence, and a commitment to serious evidence-based examination.
"So many questions, so few answers. The Australian public deserve more than Cold War rhetoric to justify the mind-boggling expenditure associated with acquiring second-hand, and yet to be designed attack class, nuclear propelled submarines."— Doug Cameron, former ALP Senator
"AUKUS represents the worst defence decision since we relied on Britain to protect us in World War II."— Major General Michael G Smith AO (Ret'd)
"Australia is spending an eye-watering amount to build a capability to defend us from a military threat which in fact is most likely to arise because we have that capability."— Prof. Hon. Gareth Evans AC KC FASSA FAIIA, Former Minister for Foreign Affairs
From financial accountability to nuclear risk — these are the critical areas under review.
Is the $368B+ price tag accurate? What are the opportunity costs for national security, housing, jobs, healthcare, education, climate action, and Closing the Gap between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and non-Indigenous Australians?
Does AUKUS genuinely enhance Australian security, or does it increase our exposure to great-power conflict with China?
Is AUKUS locking Australia further into the US war machine at the expense of our independence as a middle power?
Does the transfer of nuclear technology set a dangerous precedent? What are the implications for our existing nuclear non-proliferation treaty commitments? Where and how will medium and high-level nuclear waste be stored? What are the long-term environmental risks of operating nuclear-powered submarines in Australian waters?
What is the impact of AUKUS on Australia's tertiary sector, research institutions, and universities? How is the expansion into AI, autonomous weapons, and emerging technologies reshaping Australian defence, and at what cost to sovereign capability? Why must technological advancement be progressed primarily under the AUKUS banner?
Were credible and less costly alternatives to AUKUS properly assessed before the decision was made in secret?
We invite written, oral, and video submissions from Australian citizens, organisations, and those in the Pacific and wider region with an interest in the AUKUS security partnership. All views are welcome and anonymous submissions are accepted. Submissions close September 1st, 2026.
Please use our online form to make your submission. This is our preferred method and ensures your submission is received and recorded correctly.
Make a Submission →If you do not have a Google account and are unable to access the online form, you may submit by email. Please indicate the following:
Note: you do not need to provide the above information if you are submitting anonymously.
publicinquiryintoaukus@gmail.comThe following written submissions were received ahead of the Melbourne/Naarm hearing on 11 June 2026.
Public hearings are scheduled across Australia. All are welcome to attend in person or observe online. Locations include:
Presentations will be delivered by invited submitters and Commissioners will engage with the evidence provided. Short presentations are also welcomed on the day without a prior submission, subject to time and availability. To express your interest, nominate yourself during registration.
Register to Attend →Fremantle / Walyalup — Full Hearing Livestream
Fremantle Public Hearing — 29 June 2026
University of Notre Dame Australia, Fremantle WA
The second public hearing of the AUKUS Public Inquiry was held in Fremantle/Walyalup, WA, with witnesses including former Defence Minister Linda Reynolds and Dr Colin Hughes, former WA Director of Public Health.
Featured Witness
The Hon. Sophie McNeill: AUKUS’s Hidden Cost — Housing US Troops While Pensioners Sleep in Tents
The Greens (WA) MLC, WA Parliament — Fremantle / Walyalup Hearing, 29 June 2026
Sophie McNeill gave evidence at the Fremantle hearing, drawing a stark contrast between the cost of housing US and UK troops under AUKUS and the housing crisis devastating communities around HMAS Stirling.
“Right now, West Australia is in the middle of the worst housing crisis that we have ever seen. In the last five years the average rent in WA has gone up by more than 60 per cent. The average house price in Perth has doubled. It’s now more than a million dollars for a house in Perth. And Federal Labor has already committed more than $100 million of our money to housing US and UK troops under AUKUS in Perth. Meanwhile, on Memorial Drive and Safety Bay in Rockingham, dozens of pensioners sleep in tents on the side of the road, unable to afford a home.”
Melbourne / Naarm — Full Hearing Livestream
Melbourne / Naarm — June 11, 2026
The first public hearing of the AUKUS Public Inquiry was held at the Victorian Trades Hall in Melbourne. Commissioners heard from a range of expert witnesses, academics, former defence officials, and members of the public on the strategic, financial, environmental, and sovereignty implications of the AUKUS deal.
Watch the full hearing above or view on YouTube →
Featured Witness
"AUKUS was misconceived from the outset — and the case for it has never been properly made to the Australian people."
Gareth Evans: AUKUS Was "Misconceived From the Outset"
Former Minister for Foreign Affairs in the Hawke and Keating Governments (1988–96); former President & CEO, International Crisis Group
Former Foreign Minister Gareth Evans argued that the AUKUS submarine deal was fundamentally misconceived from its inception, questioning whether the agreement serves Australia's national interest and warning of the strategic and financial risks of locking Australia into US military ambitions.
"The cost is mind-boggling, the delivery timeline is fanciful, and the strategic rationale has never been honestly debated."
Featured Witness
Assoc. Prof. Tilman Ruff AO: Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Co-founder, International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN); Nossal Institute for Global Health, University of Melbourne
Associate Professor Tilman Ruff AO presented on the nuclear non-proliferation implications of AUKUS, warning that Australia acquiring nuclear-powered submarines under this plan sets a deeply dangerous precedent for global disarmament efforts.
"Australia will be the first state without nuclear weapons to acquire nuclear-powered submarines under this plan."
Featured Witness
"Our democracy is precious. Our sovereignty is precious. And right now, both have been quietly traded away in an arrangement that serves American strategic interests far more than our own."
Barbara Jackson: AUKUS Has "Quietly Traded Away" Australia's Democracy and Sovereignty
Concerned Citizen — Live from Melbourne's Public Hearing, June 11, 2026
Barbara Jackson spoke as a concerned citizen at the AUKUS Public Inquiry's first public hearing in Naarm/Melbourne, delivering a powerful submission on what AUKUS means for Australian sovereignty and democratic accountability.
"This is not a defence policy. This is an entanglement. And it has been made without the consent of the Australian people."
Featured Witness
"There is no legal or policy impediment to nuclear-armed submarines operating from Australian waters. By 2032 — about two normal elections away in Australia — this is something we have to face."
Richard Tanter: Australia's Nuclear Permissiveness Is "Something We Should Not Be Tolerating"
Senior Research Associate, Nautilus Institute; Honorary Professor, University of Melbourne
Richard Tanter addressed the inquiry's first public hearing in Naarm/Melbourne, arguing that Australia has subordinated its strategic policy to American alliance politics with no serious public accountability for the consequences.
"To talk about nuclear deterrence is utterly misleading. For all governments of major nuclear weapons powers, their first consideration is not so much deterrence, but what happens when deterrence fails — and that is called nuclear war fighting."
Featured Witness
“$368 billion. That’s $35 million per day for 30 years — for weapons of war, rather than weapons of welfare.”
John Leslie Lander: The Constitutional Case Against AUKUS
Former Deputy Ambassador to China and Head of the China Section, DFAT
John Leslie Lander presented a detailed constitutional and strategic critique of AUKUS at the Melbourne hearing, arguing that the agreement lacks lawful domestic authority and that the strategic rationale for treating China as a threat is fundamentally flawed.
“The constitutional challenge to AUKUS is not anti-American. It is pro-Australian. It is a demand that decisions of this magnitude be made by the Parliament of Australia, in public, with accountability to the people who would bear the consequences.”
The Hon Peter Garrett AM FTSE — Lead Commissioner
The Inquiry's full Terms of Reference — including objectives, scope, methodology, timeframe and governance — are now publicly available.
The Inquiry will commence early June 2026 and produce a final report by 30 October 2026. It will be directed by five eminent Australians as Commissioners, convened under the auspices of the Australian Peace and Security Forum.
We need funding for travel for commissioners and expert witnesses, event spaces for public hearings, accommodation and logistics, and documentation and public reporting. Every contribution helps bring accountability to the largest defence decision in Australia's history.
All contributions will be regularly audited.