David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Defence. The Albanese Labor government has just signed the AUKUS 2.0 agreement. One of the many issues under the agreement is that allows for the US to provide one-year's notice and walk away from the deal if it thinks it would be detrimental to the US military to provide Australia with nuclear submarines or materials. Keeping in mind that the US does not make enough submarines for its own needs and won't for the foreseeable future, why did your government sign up to an agreement that will allow the US to walk away at any moment and take all their stuff with them?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Firstly, I would make the point that, while he is entitled to hold this position, we disagree with the fundamental position of the Australian Greens and with Senator Shoebridge in the Defence portfolio, because they are not supportive of AUKUS. I'm sorry?

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You need to say it more often.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

 I need to say it more often—that the Greens don't support AUKUS? I know that you don't support AUKUS. Obviously, the question is motivated from the perspective of someone who doesn't actually think that this is a good thing for the country. We do. There has been a lot of work that has been undertaken, including in the US. I acknowledge the work of Ambassador Rudd in working with both sides of politics in the US to ensure that domestic legislation was passed in really quite extraordinary time frames to try to lock in as much progress as is possible.

The reason we support AUKUS is that we think it is central to the protection of the nation. Of course, it would be good to live in a world where we didn't need these sorts of hard decisions.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Shoebridge, on a point of order?

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's on relevance. My question was about the one-year, get-out-of-jail-free clause.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Shoebridge. That was part of your question, and I remind the minister of that part of your question.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In relation to the terms of the agreement, which will go through the normal parliamentary process, obviously, that was negotiated between the parties. There will be aspects of it no doubt that will attract scrutiny. I would make the point that no government can ever assure forever that a future government will do something, and that is unsurprising. I am pleased to report to the Senate the extent of bipartisan support for AUKUS for the strategic reasons that I know you don't accept, but the extent of bipartisan support which was very clear to me in the recent AUSMIN meetings— (Time expired)

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Shoebridge, first supplementary?

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, under this agreement, if the US ever sells us a second-hand submarine and then that breaks down and the reactor starts leaking radioactive waste into Australian waters and harming sailors and the environment, it's Australia, not the US, that has to pay the damages under this agreement. Why would you agree to indemnify the US in this way?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In relation to the first point about the year's notice, I would again reference the fact that that assertion ignores the progress and architecture in place to deliver AUKUS, including a bipartisan support in the United States—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister Wong, please resume your seat.

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We've had a minute for the minister to answer the question I that asked—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister is being relevant. You referenced the agreement, and the minister is answering in relation to the agreement.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was referencing the year's notice that formed part of both the first and the second question. I would note the bipartisan support in the US for the passage of important provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act in the US Congress by December 2024 to enable the transfer of the Virginia class and the transfer of skills and knowledge already underway. The Australian industry and the RAN, the Royal Australian Navy, are already engaged in how to build, operate and sustain nuclear powered submarines. Senator Shoebridge, I know this is not something you agree with, but this is a project which we do regard as important for Australia's national security.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Shoebridge, second supplementary?

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Perhaps we'll get this answered. Why is there no mechanism in the agreement for any compensation to Australia by either the US or the UK? If the US does walk away, Australia has no clawback mechanism to get the billions and billions of dollars we've already given to the US. How could your government have signed this?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Fundamentally you don't agree with it, and you're asking me a question about a hypothetical. We are focused on delivering it.

Larissa Waters (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's not a hypothetical.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a hypothetical. I'll take the interjection from the Leader of the Greens in the Senate. It is a hypothetical. 'If this doesn't happen, then' is by definition—

Honourable senators interjecting—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Shoebridge, I call you to order.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

By definition it's a hypothetical—'if this doesn't happen, then'. My point is: the reason that the Australian—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister Wong, please resume your seat. Senator Shoebridge.

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If I had asked a hypothetical, it would have been out of order. My question was directed to what's in the agreement.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Shoebridge, that is a debating point. Please resume your seat.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I again make the point that this treaty will go through the normal processes before ratification, go through the normal process of scrutiny within the parliament. I'm sure Senator Shoebridge will be very active through that process.

But I again make this point: the Australian Greens do not support the acquisition of a new submarine capability, so we all know why these questions are being asked. (Time expired)