Updated June 2, 2026 — 7:51pm,first published 3:45pmThe new head of the defence department has insisted Australia always wanted to buy three second-hand submarines from the United States, rather than acquire a new vessel as was originally agreed under the AUKUS plan.The AUKUS defence ministers announced over the weekend that Australia would no longer acquire a new and upgraded Virginia-class submarine from the US, prompting former Labor cabinet minister Ed Husic to break ranks and call for a rethink of the plan.Husic’s intervention in a caucus meeting on Tuesday came as former Labor minister Peter Garrett and former defence force chief Chris Barrie announced they would lead a crowd-funded inquiry into AUKUS, labelling the $368 billion project “controversial and secretive”.Labor MP Ed Husic said of AUKUS: “The reality is, this deal has changed”.Alex EllinghausenSpeaking at Senate estimates hearings on Tuesday night, newly appointed Defence Department secretary Meghan Quinn said: “Australia’s position is that we would always have a preference for three in-service [submarines].”Under questioning by opposition defence secretary James Paterson, Quinn, appointed to the job in April, said: “There are many reasons why three in-service would be simpler [and] lower cost through the training of staff, the sustainment arrangements, the maintenance requirements and all of those considerations.”Paterson expressed incredulity about Quinn’s comments, saying: “Until Friday the Albanese government told us two used and one new Virginia-class submarine was the optimal pathway to acquiring nuclear-powered submarines.“Now we are supposed to believe it was actually always our preference to get three ‘in service’ submarines. This demands serious explanation.”Labor sources, speaking on condition of anonymity, agreed with Quinn that Australia’s original preference was for three submarines of the same type, even if the senior Pentagon official and AUKUS sceptic Elbridge Colby also pushed for this in a secretive review he conducted last year.Earlier in the day, Husic, who served as industry minister until he was demoted to the backbench in a reshuffle last May, joined calls for the government to develop a “plan B” in case the promised submarines do not arrive as promised.The Coalition said the comments revealed division within Labor about AUKUS and called for Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to enforce discipline within his caucus.“You do wonder whether or not we will get the deal, even the reconfigured one that we have got,” Husic told reporters at Parliament House.Earlier, during Labor’s caucus meeting, he questioned whether the original caucus vote on AUKUS was valid given the changes to the scheme.“That deal versus what we’ve got now are different,” Husic said.“I think that it now gives us a moment to think about whether or not the deal should be reconfigured, or what are the contingencies.”Asking “what’s the plan B?” Husic said he was concerned sluggish American submarine production rates meant the US would not have any to spare for Australia.“You’ve seen within the broader [Labor] movement a general disquiet about the nature of the deal itself,” Husic said.“But putting all that aside, there’s an issue about reality confronting us about whether or not we will even get the new deal that has been put to us.”The AUKUS defence ministers announced over the weekend that Australia would now acquire three second-hand submarines from the US rather than two used and one new submarine as originally planned.Defence Minister Richard Marles said the shift would reduce complexity and save money for taxpayers.“I’d imagine that in the circumstances he’s been placed, he would have to say that,” Husic replied.He said he was also concerned about what US President Donald Trump could ask in return from Australia for backing AUKUS.Paterson said Albanese was facing a “full-on Labor revolt” when it comes to Australia’s signature defence policy, accusing Husic of launching “a direct challenge to the authority of the Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles”.“It’s a result of Labor’s mismanagement of the delivery of AUKUS and Richard Marles’ failure, along with the prime minister, to make the case for AUKUS,” Paterson said.Former Labor defence minister Joel Fitzgibbon said the change to all second-hand submarines reinforced that AUKUS was a “big, expensive, challenging project”.“There are going to be bumps along the way and we have to expect that,” he said.Garrett, a long-time anti-nuclear campaigner who has previously blasted the AUKUS pact, said a public inquiry was needed because it is “the most momentous and expensive decision ever made by any Australian government in the modern era”.Peter Garrett during a press conference on a public inquiry into AUKUS, at Parliament House in Canberra on Tuesday.Alex EllinghausenThe inquiry, funded by donations from the public, will hold public hearings and receive submissions.Barrie, who led the defence force from 1998 to 2002, said he had previously supported Australia acquiring nuclear-powered submarines, but he now had “serious concerns” about AUKUS, including that it could draw Australia into a war with China.Independent MP Monique Ryan joined fellow crossbenchers to demand more scrutiny of the AUKUS pact.“It’s a national embarrassment that a former Labor minister is crowdfunding for an independent inquiry into AUKUS,” Ryan said.Perth MP Josh Wilson was previously the only Labor MP to speak out against AUKUS, arguing in the lead-up to the last election that he believed acquiring nuclear-powered submarines was “not in the national interest”.“We have embarked on an excruciatingly long, complex, fraught and costly endeavour that, in my view, remains substantially unexplained and unjustified,” he wrote for the Foreign Affairs journal in 2024.He has since been promoted to the front bench, limiting his ability to speak out.Cut through the noise of federal politics with news, views and expert analysis. Subscribers can sign up to our weekly Inside Politics newsletter.From our partners