Authors: Andrew Klein & Sera Elizabeth Klein

Dedication: To every Australian who has been promised a future built on sand. To every worker who has been told a story that was never true. And to the truth—that when performance replaces governance, the people pay the price. We remember. We will not forget.

Abstract

This paper examines the Albanese Government’s management of the AUKUS nuclear submarine program and the Henderson Defence Precinct as a case study in performative governance—a governing style in which public announcements, job projections, and investment figures serve not as reliable commitments but as theatrical devices designed to manufacture consent while concealing systemic uncertainty, cost blowouts, and strategic risk. Through analysis of cost estimates, delivery timelines, site planning, and accountability mechanisms, we demonstrate that the government’s approach reflects a consistent pattern: performance over reality, spectacle over substance, and short-term political theatre over long-term strategic planning. We argue that this represents a systemic feature of the Albanese Government, evident across multiple policy domains including the NDIS, the Palantir integration, and the broader AUKUS project. We conclude that when governance becomes performance, the people become the audience—and the audience always pays.

1. Introduction: The Spectacle of Governance

On 24 August 2026, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese stood at the Henderson shipyard in Western Australia and announced the selection of the site for a new Defence Precinct. “This is great for Western Australia and great for local jobs,” he declared. The announcement was accompanied by promises of “10,000 direct jobs over the next two decades” and “billions of dollars of investment in Defence capabilities”.

It sounded like a plan. It was a performance.

This paper argues that the Albanese Government’s management of the AUKUS program and the Henderson Defence Precinct exemplifies a broader pattern of performative governance—a governing style in which public announcements, job projections, and investment figures serve not as reliable commitments but as theatrical devices designed to manufacture consent while concealing systemic uncertainty, cost blowouts, and strategic risk.

2. The Architecture of Performance

2.1 The Cost Estimate Mirage

In September 2025, the government announced an initial $12 billion commitment to develop the Henderson Defence Precinct, with total costs estimated at $25 billion over a decade. Defence Minister Richard Marles told ABC’s Insiders program that the early cost estimate was in “the order of $25 billion”.

However, the Defence Department subsequently confirmed that the $25 billion estimate was “roughed-up numbers” developed during initial studies in 2023-24 and flagged the “figure will evolve as we mature our design”.

By August 2026, sources familiar with the project told The West Australian that estimates had ballooned to anywhere near $70 billion—an increase of nearly 300%.

When questioned about these reports, Marles offered no clarity: “The sort of money that you’re seeing in today’s newspapers, I mean, we’re not imagining any of that—but we are really clear that what we have committed in terms of the budget gets us to the milestones that are in the medium term.”

Pressed on how additional costs would be funded, Marles insisted it would be “something that we will work through in the Federal Budget”. Shadow Defence Minister James Paterson demanded the government be upfront: “Australians deserve more than incoherent waffle about whether or not it has blown out by almost 300% to $70 billion.”

2.2 The 10,000 Jobs Fiction

The “10,000 direct jobs” figure has become a standardised talking point across government announcements. However, the figure is a projection over “the next two decades”—not an immediate commitment. Even the government’s own press release admits the precinct will “in time” employ directly “around 4,000 people”.

The Department of Defence has broken the figure down:

· 3,000 jobs from “contingency and depot-level maintenance”

· Up to 1,000 construction jobs

· The remainder are projected indirect jobs from the “multiplier impact”

This is not a jobs guarantee. It is a forecasting exercise.

2.3 The Submarine Delivery Crisis

The AUKUS program is officially estimated to cost between $268 billion and $368 billion over the 30 years to 2054-55. Top naval experts have cast doubt on this figure, warning that the cost will be “significantly more”.

More critically, the submarines may never arrive.

Former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull has told an independent inquiry that there is a “very real risk Australia gets no Virginias at all”. The US Navy has procured 41 Virginia-class submarines since 1998, but only 25 have been delivered and commissioned. The US must build more than two nuclear-powered submarines a year by 2029 to supply its own navy and Australia’s. As Turnbull notes, “The prospect of the US doubling its rate of Virginia production in the next six years is highly unlikely.”

Top US and Australian officials have conceded that the three submarines may not be delivered on time, even now that Australia has agreed to buy second-hand vessels. Turnbull warns that Australia risks “a period of zero submarine capability”.

Defence Minister Marles has admitted Australia has no backup plan if AUKUS fails.

2.4 The Site That Wasn’t Ready

Despite the fanfare of the 24 August 2026 announcement, the site boundaries for the Henderson Defence Precinct were only finalised on the day of the announcement.

Just months earlier, Defence insisted site boundaries would be determined “at the right time” despite concerns about the imminent arrival of US nuclear-powered submarines from 2027. Former Defence Minister Linda Reynolds characterised the situation as “incompetent”.

Senior Defence officials told a Senate estimates hearing that the work was “proceeding methodically”, but Deputy Secretary Naval Shipbuilding and Sustainment David Hanley admitted: “We need to define the options and the feasibility of the various locations of the activities… and we do that as we mature the design.”

The Henderson shipyard is already “overcrowded” with existing shipbuilding commitments—building four Arafura-class offshore patrol vessels, two Cape-class patrol vessels, and upgrading Anzac-class frigates.

3. The Pattern: Performance Across Domains

The Henderson-AUKUS announcement is not an isolated incident. It reflects a consistent pattern of performative governance across the Albanese Government:

Domain -Performance- Reality

Henderson Precinct “10,000 jobs”, “$25 billion” $70 billion blowout, 20-year projection

AUKUS Submarines “Full steam ahead” No backup plan, likely non-delivery

NDIS “Protecting the vulnerable” Secret Palantir insertion, no right of appeal

Palantir “Cutting-edge AI” $165M Future Fund stake, failed technology

ASIO Powers “National security” Expansion of secret police powers

This is not a series of isolated failures. It is a governing philosophy.

4. The Theoretical Framework: Performative Governance

The Albanese Government’s approach can be understood through the lens of performative governance—a governing style in which:

1. Announcements substitute for action — The act of announcing becomes the primary achievement

2. Numbers are tools of persuasion, not planning — Job figures and cost estimates are deployed for their rhetorical effect

3. Uncertainty is concealed behind certainty — The government projects confidence while acknowledging, in private, that nothing is certain

4. Accountability is deferred — Questions are answered with “we will work through that in the Budget”

5. Theatricality replaces transparency — Site visits, photo opportunities, and press conferences become the primary mode of governance

This is not a failure of governance. It is a performance of governance.

5. The Cost of Performance

The cost of performative governance is measured in:

· $70 billion — The potential cost of a project that was announced as $25 billion

· $368 billion — The total cost of a program that may never deliver a single submarine

· Zero submarine capability — The risk Australia faces if the US cannot deliver

· Lost trust — The erosion of public confidence in government commitments

· Sovereignty surrendered — The transformation of Henderson into a US nuclear submarine maintenance hub

· Opportunity cost — Billions that could have been spent on healthcare, education, and housing

The audience always pays.

6. Conclusion: Naming the System

We have documented that:

1. The Henderson Defence Precinct cost estimates have blown out from $25 billion to $70 billion—a near-300% increase—with no clear explanation or accountability

2. The “10,000 jobs” figure is a 20-year projection, not a commitment

3. AUKUS submarines may never be delivered, with no backup plan

4. Site boundaries were finalised only on the day of the announcement, despite years of planning

5. This pattern is consistent across multiple policy domains—NDIS, Palantir, ASIO powers

The Albanese Government is not governing. It is performing.

And when performance replaces governance, the people become the audience—and the audience always pays.

References

1. Prime Minister of Australia. (2026). Albanese and Cook Governments select site of the Henderson Defence Precinct. 24 August 2026.

2. The West Australian. (2026). $25b or $70b? Marles fails to clear up shipyard cost puzzle. 24 August 2026.

3. The Nightly. (2026). New AUKUS plans revealed amid bid to protect WA businesses. 23 August 2026.

4. The West Australian. (2025). Defence Department grilled on slow Henderson revamp project. 9 October 2025.

5. WAtoday. (2026). Very real risk Australia gets no submarines at all: Turnbull. 9 August 2026.

6. ABC News. (2026). Research for Congress raises doubts over AUKUS submarines. 23 April 2026.

7. The Monthly. (2026). Sunk costs. 23 June 2026.

8. The Australian. (2025). ‘Inadequate’: Audit call on AUKUS price tag. 17 November 2025.

9. Nine.com.au. (2026). ‘Cracks starting to show’ in Australia’s $368 billion nuclear submarine deal. 28 April 2026.

10. Senate Estimates. (2025). Secretary’s Opening Statement. Department of Defence. 

11. The Guardian. (2026). Greens warn nuclear submarines deal risks war with China. 7 June 2026.

12. OpenAustralia. (2026). Senate debates: David Shoebridge on AUKUS and NDIS. 24 June 2026.

Signed,

Andrew Klein

Sera Elizabeth Klein

“They told us it was a plan. We showed them it was a performance. They told us the jobs were guaranteed. We showed them the fine print. They told us the submarines were coming. We showed them the risk. They told us the system was working. We showed them the collapse. We have seen through the cover. And we will not forget.”