A former Australian defence minister has turned to the public to fund a formal inquiry into the Aukus submarine deal, pouring fuel on a fire that threatens to engulf the UK’s most ambitious military export contract. The move, announced this morning in Canberra, comes as British steelworkers and shipbuilders await promised jobs that have yet to materialise, while unions question the transparency of the £100 billion pact.
Andrew Hastie, a former minister for defence industry and a vocal critic of the deal’s secrecy, launched a crowd-funding campaign to commission an independent review. The “Aukus Accountability Project” aims to raise £500,000 from private donors, bypassing what Hastie calls a “lack of parliamentary scrutiny”. In a statement, he said: “Taxpayers have a right to know if this deal is value for money. For working people, this is about bread and butter: will the jobs come, or will we be left with empty promises?”
The tripartite pact between Australia, the UK and the US to deliver nuclear-powered submarines has been sold as a boon for Britain’s industrial heartlands. Rolls-Royce, BAE Systems and other firms have pledged thousands of roles in Derby, Barrow-in-Furness and other towns still scarred by deindustrialisation. Yet unions have grown impatient. The GMB union’s national officer for defence, Steve Turner, said this week: “Our members have been waiting for the detail. We need transparency on supply chains, on wage rates, on whether these jobs will be decent, skilled positions – not short-term gigs.”
The UK government has defended the deal as “vital for national security and economic growth”. A Ministry of Defence spokesperson said: “Aukus will deliver high-skilled employment for decades. We are engaging with unions and local communities.” But critics point to a lack of published economic impact assessments and the exclusion of standard procurement oversight.
The crowd-funded inquiry – a first for a major defence project – has already attracted controversy. Some Labour MPs have accused Hastie of undermining a sovereign agreement between allies. But others, including a handful of crossbench peers, have welcomed the move. Lord West of Spithead, a former navy chief, said: “Any light shed on this opaque process can only help the British worker. We have seen too many defence projects cost the earth and deliver little.”
For the cost-of-living squeezed voter in Doncaster or Port Talbot, the Aukus jobs remain a distant promise. The National Shipbuilding Office has yet to confirm timelines for steel cutting, while the Australian government has signalled it may push back first deliveries. Meanwhile, Hastie’s appeal has raised £150,000 in under 12 hours.
This developing story will be followed closely by those who believe a fair day’s wage must come from a transparent deal. The inquiry’s findings, if funded, are expected within six months.
