Radio Interview, ABC Melbourne

SUBJECTS: AUKUS.

RAF EPSTEIN, HOST: Tell me if you think it's worth it and tell me if you are confident we'll get submarines. The Australian down payment helps to increase– crank up the production of nuclear-powered submarines in the United States in the hope that we'll get some of the secondhand ones in the 20– in the start of the next decade and then eventually we'll be building our own. That's the plan. It is now being reviewed though by one of Donald Trump's people, someone who has said in the past that he doesn't want to give away these crown jewel assets. So, where does it leave Australia? Richard Marles joins you. He is Defence Minister and Deputy Prime Minister. Good morning.

RICHARD MARLES, DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER: Good morning Raf, how are you?

EPSTEIN: I'm ok. Can you guarantee that we'll get submarines out of this deal?

MARLES: Well, I'm very confident this is going to happen. There's a treaty level agreement between our three countries. It's an agreement that we have been pursuing at a pace with the government in the United Kingdom and with now successive administrations in the United States. Look, I think the review that's been announced is not a surprise. We've been aware of this for some time. We welcome it. It's something which is perfectly natural for an incoming administration to do. The United Kingdom undertook their own review when the Labour government was elected there in the middle of last year – and that's reported and is in fact very positive about AUKUS. In many ways we did the same thing when we came to power back in 2022 when we undertook the Defence Strategic Review, which amongst many thing looked at AUKUS as well. And I think as AUKUS goes forward over many decades, and governments come and go, I think what you'll see is that incoming governments quite reasonably look at reviewing how they can best engage with what is a multi-decade arrangement. But in the meantime the arrangement proceeds.

EPSTEIN: You said you are very confident this is going to happen. Can you guarantee we're going to get them and are we going to get them on time– in time?

MARLES: Well, the agreement is for the submarines to come in the early 2030s and that is what we are all working to and I'm very confident that that is what is going to happen.

EPSTEIN: But the agreement also says they don't need to give them up if they haven't got enough. Like that is– it's written in the deal if America doesn't have enough submarines, they don't have to give some to us. So, why are you so confident if they've got a big get-out clause?

MARLES: Well, there is a challenge in terms of getting the production and sustainment rates of the United States submarine industrial base up. We do need to be achieving that. That is a really critical component of it and that's why we are working very closely with the United States on seeing that happen. But that is improving. And one of the important points to make is that the whole architecture of AUKUS in establishing the Submarine Rotational Force–West in Western Australia – HMAS Stirling, south of Perth – all of that and having more Australians being trained to maintain and sustain Virginia class submarines, all of that in fact increases the sustainment base which allows that production rate, that sustainment rate to be increased. And that's why it's in the interests of the United States to continue to work with Australia. Because you know, a key element of AUKUS is actually to see an increase in the production and sustainment rate of American Virginias and that's what they need.

EPSTEIN: Richard Marles is who you are listening to, the Defence Minister and Deputy Prime Minister. It's 19 minutes to nine on 774. Richard Marles, there’s a good question here on text. Can you please ask what is the backup plan? If it doesn't happen, what's the backup plan?

MARLES: Well, I think, you know, I often get asked this question. It's really important we stick to a plan. And you know, what we saw under the Coalition government was a whole lot of chopping and changing– 

EPSTEIN: I don't want to know about the Coalition, I just want to know what plan B is.

MARLES: Yeah, but you're going to need to let me finish the question, Raf. What we did see under the Coalition was being in and out of a deal with Japan and then in and out of a deal with France. To acquire a nuclear-powered submarine capability, in fact, to acquire any submarine capability is something which takes decades. If you don't stick to a plan, actually the decision in that moment that you are making is not to have the capability. Because if you chop and change every three years you will never in fact build a submarine–

EPSTEIN: So you're saying we only need plan A? We don’t need– you're saying plan B is a problem?

MARLES: What I'm saying is that we will only acquire a future submarine capability if we stick to a plan. That is actually– when you think this thing through, that is what becomes manifestly clear given that what we're talking about is something which takes 20 years before you're able to build it. These are the most complicated machines, the most complex machines that humanity have ever built. If you keep–

EPSTEIN: So we don't have plan B then? That means you don't think it's a good idea to have plan B? 

MARLES: Again, if you just let me answer the question, Raf. If you don't stick to a plan, you will never acquire the capability. I mean that is axiomatic. And so our focus is on sticking to this plan and on seeing it through because that's the way in which we get the capability. If we keep chopping and changing, we need to fundamentally understand that that is not a decision to change, that is a decision not to do it. Because chopping and changing guarantees you will never have the capability. And you just need to look at the map to understand that Australia absolutely needs to have a long‑range submarine capability. So, there is a plan here, we are sticking to it and we're going to deliver it.

EPSTEIN: So, these are really important questions. I did have a chat to the former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull. It won't surprise you, he is not a fan of the plan. But he thinks we need a plan B. If I can just play you this, Richard Marles. This is how Malcolm Turnbull relays or relates his conversations with defence bureaucrats in Canberra.

EXCERPT OF MALCOLM TURNBULL, FORMER PRIME MINISTER: There is literally a denial of reality in Canberra. So, this is like saying, you know, I'm going to have a party in the garden on Sunday and you say to me what will you do if it rains? And I look back at you and say it won't rain.

EPSTEIN: What do you say, Richard Marles?

MARLES: Well, I mean what we saw under the former government when Malcolm Turnbull was the prime minister was the very chopping and changing that I've described, which guarantees you'll never have a capability. I mean to equate it to a party, which is something that you do in an instant, is obviously wrong. I mean, what that analysis completely misses and frankly has always missed is the fact that what we're talking about is something that takes 20 years to do. And so unless you are willing to stick it out, you'll never have– you'll never get the capability. And you know, that means that you've got to keep pursuing what the plan is on occasions even if it does rain, because otherwise you won't get the capability. So, you know, we are focused on delivering this and we are working very closely with our partners in doing so. It is in the strategic interest of the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia. And, you know, all the meetings that we've– and certainly mine with my counterpart have been positive about AUKUS. The Americans seeking to do a review is something we welcome, is perfectly natural on the part of an incoming government to do that– 

EPSTEIN: Can I ask you about that then? As Deputy Prime Minister and as Defence Minister, you keep on saying it's natural to have a review. Why haven't we had one?

MARLES: We did. We did the Defence Strategic Review. I mean, Raf, that’s literally what– 

EPSTEIN: But that’s not the same– the House of Commons reviewing it and what's happening in America, they're not like the Defence Strategic Review. Those two things are specifically looking at this program. The Defence Strategic Review is literally everything we do in defence. They're very different, aren't they?

MARLES: I disagree. I mean, when you look at what we did with the Defence Strategic Review, it did look at all of our defence settings, but this is utterly central to it. And where AUKUS sat in terms of our defence posture was central to the Defence Strategic Review. I mean, it's exactly what we did and it's exactly what an incoming government is likely to do. And part of it is because, you know, quite understandably, defence does sit behind a veil, meaning that there is a lot of activity which happens in the realm of defence, which by its nature needs to be classified. Incoming governments therefore do need the opportunity to, you know, look under the hood and actually understand what's going on and to work out how best to move forward in coming to government. That's what we did, that's what Britain's done and that's what America is doing. And we see this as a perfectly natural step to take. We look forward to working with the administration in relation to it. And as I say, this is a multi decade plan. There will be governments that come and go and I think whenever we see a new government, a review of this kind is going to be something which will be undertaken.

EPSTEIN: The guy leading the review is Elbridge Colby. He has said about AUKUS, “why are we giving away this crown jewel asset when we most need it?” Do you really think this is someone who thinks this is a good idea?

MARLES: Well, I think the review is something that is going to be done by the Pentagon. Yes, Elbridge Colby will be playing a key part in that. You can look at his testimony in the Congress as well when he was being affirmed and actually he spoke about AUKUS there in positive terms. Look, we're confident about the process of the review and we look forward to engaging in it– 

EPSTEIN: You can't guarantee what they're going to say, though, can you? That's the problem.

MARLES: Well, I don't think it's a problem that an incoming government seeks to examine a major initiative of this kind, as we did, as the UK government did. But what I would make clear is that we have an agreement with the United States which they will understand. The meetings that we've had with the United States have been very positive in respect of AUKUS and, you know, that dates back to my most recent meeting with Pete Hegseth in Singapore. We understand how important the steps that we are taking right now are for what America needs, which is an increase in the production and sustainment rate of its Virginias. And real progress is being made in relation to that. It is important that those production and sustainment rates are improved, and that is part of the pathway which leads to Australia acquiring our own Virginias in the early 2030s. But I am confident that that will happen because of the progress that we're making. And all of that will be examined in the context of the review and we'll work with them on it. And again, I am confident about where this all goes.

EPSTEIN: Really glad you could join us. It's a really significant and important conversation, so thank you.

MARLES: Pleasure, Raf.

ENDS