Billions in payments with no accountability

Australia second payment Prime Minister on Wednesday, within the scope of the AUKUS agreement to advance the US submarine construction of the United States $ 525 million ($ 800 million).

Like Crirase The second payment reported in late June is that this year will pay more than US $ 1 billion, and the Trump administration desperately tries to remove the Virginia -class submarine production rate.

Our attempts to obtain information about payments from the Ministry of Defense or Defense Minister Richard Marles were met with silence, and this year, unlike the first payment of the $ 500 million, the defense or Marles announced the second payment.

However, this is really suitable, because this is not an account for US $ 800 million for the installment paid earlier this year or for US $ 1 billion this year. These cash and smaller quantities that plan to be delivered and granted to the British are unusual in government expenditures. Although the idea helps Americans and the British submarines for us, this is not a supply. This is not a grant, although this is the most comparative birth mechanism. It looks like a little foreign aid, but we give money to the two richest countries in the world.

The only official presence of the payments in the AUKUS Agreement is “Australia can make fund payments allocated to other parties for the implementation of this agreement”.

The only guide on how the money that seems to be open to the public is spent is the “Triple Cost Sharing Principles, which is said to be proportional, justified and transparent of the costs shared among the AUKUS partners.

However, none of the rules related to supplies, grants or aids are valid. . Commonwealth Supply Rules Not only emphasizes the need for money value through competition, transparency and accountability, but also emphasizes the needs of the supply to reflect the size of the supply for information about who spends the money and what is spent on what is spent. Considering the risk that Americans may not give us a few virginia class submarines or that SSN AUKUS boats will not come up to the 2050s, it will seem to be extremely relevant than the risk of the most normal supply.

Similarly, grant regulations emphasize the need for risk management and solid -based criteria to evaluate whether the government has received value for money and the performance information required for it. In addition, “grant management should be supported by open accountability for solid governance structures and all relevant parties”. None of these valid for AUKUS financing. And Help Program Directives Furthermore, emphasize how important it is very important independent, expert, high quality, transparent assessment that you are not talking about the centrality of risk management. Again, it cannot be applied.

For any accountability for these expenditures, parliament – in fact, small party deputies and senators, because the big parties on a unity ticket to protect AUKUS from any examination – this financing, the surrounded Australian submarine agency (ASA) must be well spent, the agency responsible for this financing. However, Asa has no direct supervision of expenditures, because we sent the money to another government.

If it is difficult enough to get information about the value for money through Senate estimates, it is difficult to do about the expenditure of another government through a government.

We had an example of this February When the Greater Senator David Shoebridge tried to get an account of $ 285 million paid to the British government so far. We know that money is directed to help the Rolls-Royce structure (or asa upgrade ”), as ASA says).

However, for many years, Rolls-Royce has experienced basic problems in building the facility and in January, the Ministry of Defense of the UK Red FLAG THE PROJECTMeaning “It seems that the project cannot be delivered successfully“.

ASA President Jonathan Mead’s indifference is extraordinary. The United Kingdom government replied, as if it was only interest to assess the most critical component of the SSN-AUKUS design, “it attracted my attention,” he replied. Mead’s response seems to be a part of Asa’s lack of curiosity examined – Crirase He clearly replied to the Minister of Defense to the Minister of Defense on the tempo of the Virginia -class submarine production in the United States through the laws of Freedom of Information. What you don’t know can’t hurt you, is it?

Mead continued to reject the British report without update. “We were assured by the British Government”. Shoebridge asked the British looking for a briefing about the report. No, Mead said. He and Marles took a facility tour. Mead acknowledged that the project would be listed in 2026 as “irrelevant”. Perhaps we can ask for more information about how our money is spent from England.50 -year agreement“Has both governments have just been announced?

And when the US was asked about the fact that more than 1.2 virginia-class submarines per year, it was very short-mead, which was necessary for Australia to take our second-hand bottoms. The US navy told him that he gave him “assurance ..

And the scope of this accountability – “assurances”. Not even the guarantees that can be held responsible to the Australian bureaucrats to them, but the guarantees transferred from other governments. Obscenery square – and in this case is equal to zero.