Using more nuanced language thanKeating did during a fiery National Press Club appearance on Wednesday,Turnbull said he was pleased to see the submarine plan take a “more coherent form” but that the risks of such a complex and expensive project should not be underestimated.
“We also should not forget that there was a better way,and one that was never seriously examined by our government,” Turnbull said in a speech to the Defence College in Canberra on Wednesday night.
“If we had gone nuclear with France we would have had submarines that were much cheaper,delivered sooner,more suitable in terms of size and crew and with reactors that did not create the very dangerous proliferation precedent that will be seized upon and exploited by our
adversaries.”
Explaining how such a plan would have worked,Turnbull said Australia could have continued with the planned purchase of diesel-powered Attack-class submarines from France before switching to a nuclear-powered version in the mid-2030s.
These ships,he said,would have been more nimble and cheaper than the Virginia-class submarines the government has opted to acquire from the United States.
They would also have used low enriched uranium in their naval reactors which “does not pose a nuclear proliferation risk in the way the weapons grade uranium used in US and UK naval reactors does”.