A former Australian minister has fired a shot across the bows of the AUKUS submarine agreement. The crowd-funded inquiry is a direct challenge to the trilateral pact. But insiders in Whitehall are sanguine. They insist the UK's role is rock solid.
The inquiry is being led by Andrew Hastie, a former Liberal frontbencher. He has raised over 100,000 Australian dollars from private donors. His target is the cost, capability and sovereignty implications of the deal. He wants answers the government is not providing.
Westminster sources are watching closely. They note that the inquiry is not official. It has no parliamentary backing. But it taps into a growing unease in Canberra. The Australian public is questioning the price tag. 368 billion dollars for eight nuclear-powered submarines. That is a lot of zeros.
Downing Street is relaxed. A senior government source told me: "The deal is done. The contracts are signed. The British role is to provide the design and the technology. That is not changing."
The UK is building the submarines alongside the US. Australia is paying. The Royal Navy will get its own boats from the same production line. The MoD sees it as a win-win. Economies of scale. Deeper integration. A hedge against the rising power in the Pacific.
But there is a political undercurrent. The inquiry could stir up the left flank of the Labour Party. Jeremy Corbyn's allies are already hostile to AUKUS. They see it as a provocation to China. and a drain on the defence budget.
So far, the Labour frontbench has stayed silent. They do not want to rock the boat. But if the inquiry gains traction in Australia, the mood could shift. Backbenchers here are watching the figures. 368 billion dollars. They will do the maths. That's a lot of schools and hospitals.
For now, the UK position is secure. The deal is too big to fail. But the crowd-funded inquiry is a reminder. The politics of submarines are never simple. The key players should not be complacent. The game is still in play.
