Radio Interview, ABC Sydney Breakfast

SUBJECT: Defence Estate Audit

CRAIG REUCASSEL, HOST: Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Defence Richard Marles, who announced the plan to sell the Barracks and HMAS Penguin back in February, remains in support of the sale. He joins us now. Morning, Deputy Prime Minister.

RICHARD MARLES, DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER: Good morning, Craig. How are you?

REUCASSEL: Yeah, good. Now, you've brought together a huge coalition of people against this sale. Liberal, NSW, Labour, Greens, Independents, One Nation. Why are you pushing ahead with this sale given all these objections?

MARLES: Well, we undertook an audit of the whole of the defence estate a few years ago, back in 2022/2023. Defence is the largest landowner in the country. And what was clear is that we owned a lot of properties that we were not using and that there needed to be a look at how we could make sure that our defence estate was the proper platform for the defence of the country. It recommended the disposal of a number of sites. We have pursued those recommendations and in respect of Victoria Barracks, Sydney, I mean, what we're talking about there is obviously a magnificent site. We understand there's a lot of emotion attached to it. The cost of maintaining Victoria Barracks Sydney as a defence site over the next 10 years runs into the tune of $200 million. I mean, it's an enormous amount of money. And the functions that are carried out at Victoria Barracks Sydney can very easily be carried out at other places. Randwick Barracks, Defence Plaza Sydney. Defence Plaza Sydney was a site that was set up by the former Coalition government. Not bad policy, but it's sitting there 60% empty. Now, you've got to manage your estate, you've got to manage your land holdings efficiently. If we want to make sure that we're getting value for the defence dollar and given the strategic landscape that we face, I mean, my job is focusing on the defence of the country. We simply have to be focused on that.

REUCASSEL: Let's talk about the strategic defence because there's really two issues here. There's people that talk about the military significance and people that talk about the historical significance. So, on the military significance, the RSL claim the location close to Sydney gives it continuing strategic value. We spoke to Liberal Senator Jess Collins, who's chairing the Upper House inquiry into the defence site divestment. She said this about the site.

START EXCERPT 

SENATOR JESS COLLINS: “You take Victoria Barracks as a secure site out of metropolitan centre, we will no longer be able to have rapid response to terrorist events in the city centre. That is an absolute fact. It's about the security of cities down in Southeast Australia as well that we have to take into consideration.”

FINISH EXCERPT 

REUCASSEL: So, how strategically important is it to keep this site in the centre of Sydney?

MARLES: I mean, that's just not true. I mean, for starters, in terms of the counter-terrorism capability that the Defence Force maintains, none of that is at Victoria Barracks, Sydney. It's at Holsworthy Barracks. So, that's where our people operate, that's where they prepare for contingencies and scenarios. In terms of a landing space for a helicopter, for example, it will still be there, whoever's hands it's in. And Defence can obviously use those open sites when there is any incident. But none of that planning is happening at Victoria Barracks, Sydney. Our counter-terrorism capability on the east coast is done at Holsworthy Barracks. To be clear, I don't think anyone is seriously making an argument that Victoria Barracks Sydney is central to the nation's defence. What this really boils down to is a question of heritage and a sense of connection that this facility has. And we understand that. But the point to be made there is most members of the Australian Army have never been to Victoria Barracks, Sydney. Most members of the Australian Army are not able to go to Victoria Barracks Sydney right now.

REUCASSEL: So, other people have definitely gone there. Just in terms of it, what are your plans if you do sell it? What are your plans for protecting that heritage part? Are you going to sell it with a requirement that, you know, certain buildings are kept? That for instance, there is a military history museum? What requirements are there? Or are you just selling and saying, developer, go ahead?

MARLES: Well, we're definitely not saying that. This site is protected by law. That's the first point to make. Every one of these buildings is absolutely protected. And not just the buildings, the layout of the site. And in fact, for those who've taken the time to read the Defence Estate Report and you look at what is sought to be returned in terms of money to defence from the sale of these sites, it's actually not that much compared to the 67 sites. And that's because there is a significant heritage overlay which must be respected by law in respect of a number of these sites. So, this site is going to be there and it is going to be enjoyed by many more Sydneysiders when the door is open and many more Australians. And the heritage story of this site will be told to a much broader audience, which is a good thing from a heritage point of view. In respect of the museum there and the museum, and there are many museums, in fact, around Australia. Again, those museums are not open to the public on a daily basis. We are talking about looking at all of the museums that are maintained across the various sites and making sure that there is a much better outcome in terms of members of the public being able to access this.

REUCASSEL: Minister, unfortunately, we are about to hit the news. So, I appreciate you coming on and putting your perspective, because we've got a lot of people asking for it. So, thank you for speaking to us.

MARLES: Pleasure.

ENDS