Doorstop, London

SUBJECTS: Australia-UK relationship; AUKUS; Defence spending; US force posture. 

DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER, RICHARD MARLES: It's fantastic to be here in the UK yesterday and today. Yesterday I met with Wes Streeting, the UK's new Secretary for Defence. This was in fact Wes's first incoming bilateral meeting with an international counterpart, and it was really pleasing to be able to do that meeting with him. Over my time as the Minister for Defence. I've had a really close relationship with successive UK Secretaries of Defence, and in fact, those personal relationships are really important. What they allow is for us to move the dial much more quickly in relation to the projects that we are working on so closely together- AUKUS being the most obvious, and I'm really looking forward to working with Wes. That's really been the main point of being here today and yesterday is to begin that personal relationship with him, and I very much look forward to the opportunity that will come over the coming months and years of working with Wes. We spoke about AUKUS, of course, which is moving at a pace, the Submarine Rotation Force-West is due to begin from the end of next year. Earlier this year, HMS Anson was at HMAS Stirling, and the maintenance that we did on HMS Anson was really extensive- was building our capability. It was fantastic to have that submarine in Australia. In Adelaide, we continue to build the submarine construction yard to build SSN-AUKUS, which of course will be the same class of submarine that will be built and operated by the United Kingdom. At Barrow, they are on track to cut steel next year with the first of their submarines coming off the production line in late twenties. So all of that is moving in the way that we would want it. And in respect of Pillar II, we have our signature project in place that we announced in Singapore, providing payloads on underwater autonomous vessels. What we spoke about yesterday was the need to have a pipeline of signature projects, so that we really maintain momentum around Pillar II. I thanked the UK for the leadership that it has shown in the Middle East through the MMM, and of course with Ukraine. Next week there is the next Ukraine Defence Contact Group. We really appreciate the leadership of the UK and Germany in convening the Contact Group. We are committing $100 million this year in two tranches of $50 million each, and we will continue to make that contribution on an annual basis in support of Ukraine until this war is over, because we are utterly committed to supporting Ukraine as for as long as it takes to resolve this conflict on their terms. And I know that this is a real focus for Wes and for the Burnham government, with the Prime Minister having visited Ukraine in the last week or so. I think more generally, we both commented on the fact that there is a strategic dimension to this, our oldest relationship, in a way that we've not seen really in decades, and it is so important for us. We are incredibly grateful for it. It is underpinned by a complete sense of trust, and being able to come here and talk about the projects that we're working on together, but also the very complex world that we are seeking to navigate together, is something which is hugely beneficial from the point of view of Australia, and I know it is from the UK as well. 

JOURNALIST: So you've just been in the U.S. You know the increased force posture of the Americans are suggesting that we agree to is that going to mean more troops in Australia, more U.S. troops? 

MARLES: Look, it's not really about the number of troops. I mean, the significant number of troops in respect of U.S. force posture in Australia is really contained in the marine rotation in Darwin, and of course the Submarine Rotation Force-West, which is all decisions that have been previously made. What we were really talking about was extending the breadth and the complexity of force posture that is already underway, and that's following- 

JOURNALIST: What does that mean? Like, is it more capabilities? Does it mean different sorts of bombers? Like, what will the US be able to do on our soil that they can't currently do? 

MARLES: Well, what we've seen over successive AUSMINs over the last few years is greater cooperation, not just in respect of the marines and obviously submarines, but in relation to the cooperation between our air forces. But then, in areas such as cyber and space, in logistics, you know, there is much more American equipment now, which is staying in Australia, Bandiana which is near Albury. The US has a logistics base there, which we [inaudible] presence, which we has formed part of course posture announcements in the past. All of that speaks to a much more broader and deepening course posture across all of our services- 

JOURNALIST: So will we have more things like airfields? Will we have more things like intelligence-? 

MARLES: What we're talking about is extending the breadth and the complexity of what we are already doing, and you know, this was the conversations I had in the U.S. were obviously in the lead up to AUSMIN later in the year and we’ll have more to say about the detail then - 

JOURNALIST: Is it just logistics? 

MARLES: But I appreciate your desire to press me on the specifics now. That we will be talking about the specifics coming out of AUSMIN, but I guess the thing I am wanting to just clear up in my first question: it's not really about more personnel. I mean, because the significant numbers of personnel which are attached to U.S. force posture are specifically in relation to marines and the Submarine Rotation Force-West, and that is already force posture, which has been announced. 

JOURNALIST: Will the American be able to use SRF-West in a wartime situation? Is it only a peacetime arrangement? 

MARLES: Well, the Submarine Rotation Force-West, is a really important rotational presence that we are establishing with the United States. It is anticipated that this is going to be an enduring presence, just as the Marine Rotation Darwin has been. What, in respect of Submarine Rotation Force-West, and the Marine Rotation Force-Darwin, and in fact, every aspect of American force posture in Australia, and for that matter, any other country's force posture in Australia, all of this is undertaken under full knowledge and concurrence rules. All of it is undertaken under very extensive sovereignty arrangements, which make sure that the Australian government of the day and certainly our government now is empowered in respect to the activities that are undertaken. 

JOURNALIST: Does it mean the US can field nuclear weapons on Virginias in the future from Stirling? 

MARLES: Well, I mean, so firstly, the United States has a policy of not confirming or denying the various- 

JOURNALIST: No. but they have said they're going to put nuclear capable weapons back on Virginia's from 2032, I think it is. 

MARLES:  As I say, their policy is one that we understand. We have the Treaty of Rarotonga, and that is a treaty that we abide by, and America understands that as well. 

JOURNALIST: So, what does that mean, thought?

MARLES: It means- 

JOURNALIST: It means that we the two things are-

MARLES:  It means that we meet our obligations under the Treaty of Rarotonga, and that's something that America understands. 

JOURNALIST: So they won't be doing- 

MARLES: Well, I answered the question- 

JOURNALIST: But you haven't really, because I still don't understand it. 

MARLES: America has their position. We abide by the Treaty of Rarotonga, and we'll continue to do that. And that's something that America understands. 

JOURNALIST: From what you see here, do you think the UK's industrial base is capable of producing the first AUKUS class submarines by just a little over a decade now? Is it capable of doing that, From what you understand?

MARLES: Yes, I mean I think it's highly capable. And what I see, I mean the facility at Barrow is a really impressive facility. That's where the SSN-AUKUS will be constructed. That's obviously where the UK currently constructs submarines. I mean it's a world leading facility, and it's been constructing submarines over a long period of time, and specifically in relation to the construction of SSN-AUKUS, as I said, they are on track to cutting steel next year, and to seeing that first submarine- by the late 2030s, which is the time frame that was anticipated when we reached the optimal pathway for us acquiring our own nuclear power submarine capability. And the importance of this, of course, is that it positions the building of our submarine in a really contagious way because we need it after them, and that means we get to learn all of their lessons, and that was always the idea here. So that the first of class is produced here at Barrow for the Royal Navy in the late 2030s, and the first of ours will roll of the production line in Adelaide the 2040s.

JOURNALIST: So, are you satisfied that the current level of defence spending in the UK is added to our last defence [inaudible]?

MARLES: Yes, I am. And obviously, the UK's defence spending is about the UK… 

[inaudible]

MARLES: Defence spending in the UK is 

[inaudible]

MARLES: Well, I saw what you've written in your commentary. I mean, it is wrong, actually wrong. We increased defence spending in terms of capability by $40 billion over the forward estimates by $53 billion over the decade in the National Defence Strategy this year alone over the decade. That is a $53 billion injection, and that's in terms of capability. Other stuff that you're talking is the single biggest injection in terms of Australian defence spending in decades, more than anything that occurred during the Coalition period. And in total, in terms of capability increases, we've increased spending on capability in the ‘23 budget, in the ‘24 budget, with the 25 MYEFO, and in the ‘26 budget. A total of $117 million dollars- 12 times as much in as what the Coalition over a period of time- 

JOURNALIST: But my question was about when you will-

MARLES: So, that is the focus of how we account for defence spending. Actually, we've always felt that the best measure is through the actual dollars that are being put in. Now, if you're going to do international comparisons, which is where the percentages of GDP come in, it makes sense to do it on the basis of the international standard, which is NATO. In terms of how NATO measures core defence spending, we are at 2.8 [per cent]. It's the only point that we're making. 

JOURNALIST: But are you including in your defence accounting is like numbers – [inaudible] 

MARLES: What we're including in that is what is included in the NATO standard. If you are comparing like-for-like, Australia versus other countries in terms of the NATO standard, we are at 2.8. And if you're comparing about what Australia is doing today versus what Australia has been doing over the last, you know years-

JOURNALIST: No, I’m comparing what we're doing in the future. 

MARLES: Well, or what we're doing in the future over the next decade, what we are doing is injecting $117 billion more over the planning ten year period, which is how the next spending is planned, which of itself represents the biggest increase in defence spending in peacetime Australian history. It's actually the facts, and that's not talking about all the other issues that you've mentioned. It is talking about bricks and mortar actual capability- 

JOURNALIST: So what would help everyone is if you actually released what you've calculated. 

MARLES: Well, I mean, we've done that, and it's there for people to look and analyse, and we do plenty of briefings on all of that. And we're happy to do briefings for you if you want, Latika. But we do we release all of that information. In fact, if you look at what we release, in the IIP and the National Defence Strategy in April this year, it is absolutely extensive in terms of the information.

JOURNALIST: Okay, so given all that, when will you get to 3.5? When will you get to five? 

MARLES: Well, in terms of the core spending, we are at 2.8 now. The point that I made- 

JOURNALIST: When will you get to 3.5?

MARLES: And we’re at 2.8 right now. If you look at that, relative to countries in NATO, it's at the upper end. If you look at that relative to countries in the Indo-Pacific, it is almost at the top. So compared to other countries in the world, compared to other American allies, we are spending more in respective defence, and almost any other American ally. We have made it clear that we get to 3 per cent by 2033. Now that's not a commitment that’s in press release that is actually in the Budget, which has gone through the Parliament. And the point I'd make- 

JOURNALIST: 3.5- the question I ask?

MARLES: The point I'd make again, is that if you look at what we have done in respect of increasing defence spending, you have seen successive increases in each of the last four years. That's never happened before in Australia. Like it's never happened before. I mean, during the entirety of the Coalition government, they increased defence spending once, and then you know took the $20 billion of the $30 billion they put in out of defence spending two years later- they went to it once. We've done it in each of the last four years, and the accumulated total now is the biggest peacetime increase in defence spending in Australia's history. 

JOURNALIST: Minster, there is a survey out – that only 23 per cent of Australians [inaudible] are you concerned about maybe they're moving about it to improve communication? 

MARLES: Look, I mean, I think it is important to be talking about AUKUS. Obviously, I spent a lot of time doing that.

JOURNALIST: It’s not cutting through, though. 

MARLES: I mean, if you go to South Australia and Western Australia, I mean, there is an enormous amount [inaudible] I think we will continue to speak about as the biggest industrial project in our country's history, but also most significantly this represents the biggest impact in Australia's military capability since the establishment of the Navy in the first century. 

ENDS