Media
|
Transcripts
July 31, 2026
STEPHEN CENATIEMPO: Pat Conroy, the Defence Industry Minister, says that the Submarine Rotational Force West at HMAS Stirling will effectively phase out from 2027 onwards as Australia becomes what we're calling 'sovereign ready' with our own Virginia-class submarines. Now the opposition has obviously seized on this. Pat Conroy has now released a statement saying, 'in a statement issued by Coalition defence spokesman Senator James Paterson, he falsely claimed that I had said in an interview that US submarines at HMAS Stirling would be gone by 2032. Nothing could be further from the truth. Submarine Rotational Force West is intended to be an enduring element of the US force posture in Australia.' James Paterson joins us now. James, reading his initial statement, it did look like it said by 2032 the US subs wouldn't be there anymore.
SENATOR JAMES PATERSON: Well, not only did he say it once, not only did he say it twice, on three separate occasions during his interview with Sarah Ferguson on the 7.30 report the other night, he said that Submarine Rotational Force West would come to an end in 2032 or in the early 2030s. He effectively issued a public eviction notice to the US Navy before they've even arrived at the HMAS Stirling base in Western Australia and has now been forced into a humiliating backdown, where instead of them ending in 2032, he's now saying they'll have an enduring presence beyond 2032. And it's really been quite an embarrassing spectacle from Pat Conroy. It's even worse that he's done it while in the United States, and he seems incapable of just admitting that he got it wrong.
CENATIEMPO: Because even Mike Pezzullo, their former Home Affairs Secretary, has come out and said that the Pentagon would be surprised by the comments that he's made.
PATERSON: I think everyone was surprised by the comments. When he initially made the comments that it was coming to an end in 2032 and the opposition and defence commentators acted with surprise, his first defence was, well, it's always been clear that this was coming at the end of 2032, no one should be surprised. His second defence was, well, they might continue but maybe under a different name. And now we're on to the third defence, which is actually it's just going to continue as Submarine Rotational Force West beyond 2032. I mean, it's been quite a bizarre spectacle from someone who I know wants to replace Richard Marles as Defence Minister one day, and this has not been a good audition.
CENATIEMPO: Now, the question I have is whether or not HMAS Stirling is going to be ready to receive Virginia class submarines by 2027 or even 2032, the way we're going?
PATERSON: Look, it's a really good question, and by pure coincidence yesterday I was at HMAS Stirling on a visit to inspect the works and the progress, and I've got to say I was actually very impressed with the progress that's been made. Our Navy, our defence department, our submarine agency, has done really good work in building up that base to make it ready for those US Virginia-class submarines to rotate through from 2027. Now there is more work to do, no question, not just on the Island itself where the submarines are going to be hosted and where the US sailors will be staying, but in the community more broadly on things like roads, and schools, and hospitals, and housing, and other infrastructure that's going to need to support ultimately thousands of Americans and British who will be visiting and staying in our community.
CENATIEMPO: The other issue we've got here is our commitments under the agreement we've got with New Zealand not to host nuclear weapons in Australia. Now there was a bit of an ambiguous response to that to saying, well, the US don't tell us whether they've got nuclear weapons on individual submarines anyway. So I mean there's no way that we can ascertain that if we are going to host these submarines, I would have thought?
PATERSON: This is how Pat Conroy got himself into this whole mess in the first place. He was being challenged on whether it was consistent with our Treaty of Rarotonga obligations to potentially allow future US Virginia-class submarines, which will eventually be equipped with tactical nuclear weapons, to base themselves out of HMAS Stirling in Western Australia. And instead of going to the usual answer, which is the US respects the fact that we're a treaty signatory of Rarotonga, we respect the fact they don't confirm and deny which platforms they have nuclear weapons on. Instead, he introduced this new argument, which is, well, it's not going to be a problem because SRF-West is coming to an end in 2032. Now we now know SRF-West is not coming to an end in 2032. There will be US Virginia-class submarines beyond that point at Stirling. So this was never the answer to Sarah Ferguson's question about tactical nuclear weapons. And it was a bizarre thing that was introduced for the discussion, completely unprompted by Pat Conroy.
CENATIEMPO: James, what hopes do you hold for the future of the AUKUS agreement? Because we obviously have challenges here in Australia with the Albanese government, but the UK government's capacity to uphold its end of the deal is now questionable. The US moving away from Virginia-class to a new class of submarine now is also problematic, and they're also struggling to meet their own requirements. Are we ever going to get these submarines?
PATERSON: Look, there are challenges to AUKUS, and I have publicly acknowledged that, and I think it's important we be honest about what those challenges are, but it does not alter in any way my support for AUKUS or the Coalition's support for AUKUS. All it does is demand that we, Australia, do more with what is in our control, like spending more on defence to make sure we have the capabilities we need to make sure we supplementary capabilities if there are any issues with AUKUS in the future. It does not mean abandoning AUKUS. I actually am optimistic. I think we will receive the Virginia-class submarines from the United States in 2032. I think we will be able to eventually build our own submarines with the UK, although that is a hugely ambitious endeavour and there are some real risks in that. I think we should do prudent contingency planning about supplementary capabilities that could exist alongside nuclear submarines if there are any capability gaps that arise.
CENATIEMPO: What do we need to do to be ready for this? Because I mean having, effectively we'll have three classes of submarine at one period because I imagine the Collins-class submarines will still be operating. We seem to be struggling to just keep those on the road, let alone have Virginia-class and AUKUS-class as well.
PATERSON: You're right. That is going to be one of the big challenges. We are seeking to extend the life of the Collins-class submarine well into the 2030s. We're hoping to receive those Virginia-class submarines from the early 2030s from the United States, and then, from the 2040s onwards, get the SSN-AUKUS, which is the joint UK-Australia-made boat, and there may be a period where all three will be operated at once, and that is a complex thing to do, which Australia has never sought to do in the past. But, really, there is no alternative. Nuclear-powered submarines are a formidable capability. They're one of the main things that puts doubt in the mind of a potential adversary to Australia that will cause them to think twice before commencing military action in our region. There's nothing else that can do that quite as well as a nuclear submarine, and so we just really have to put our pedal to the floor and go all in on making sure we deliver it.
CENATIEMPO: I accept that, but do we have to, I guess, shift away from our focus on AUKUS, given what has taken place in both Ukraine and in Iran? The nature of warfare is clearly changing very, very rapidly. We have some of the best technology in the world when it comes to drone and anti-drone technology, but we seem to be selling it overseas, and not using it ourselves.
PATERSON: This is a frustration right across the Australian defence industry that capabilities that they have proven on the ground in Ukraine are not being taken up by the ADF. Now the strategic circumstances of Ukraine and Australia are not exactly the same. The distances for one are different, but I think we should be doing much more than we are. The government likes to boast particularly about two drone capabilities that they are putting into service, the Ghost Bat and the Ghost Shark. And they're good capabilities, impressive capabilities, I think they will make a difference. But they got their start four years ago when Peter Dutton was Defence Minister. They're not brand new capabilities being put to field like the ones we're seeing in Ukraine. And I think we need to see more willingness in the Department of Defence to take risks, to experiment, to buy drones, to give them a chance in anti-drone technology as well. I'm particularly worried about air and missile defence. We need to be experimenting more with those things and more quickly, not going through the same glacial acquisition process we have in recent years.
CENATIEMPO: James, good to talk to you. I appreciate your time.
PATERSON: Thank you for having me.
ENDS