Security and Defence Partnership between the Commonwealth of Australia and the European Union

Venning raised concerns that the agreement might apply strict European energy and compliance rules to local operations, potentially increasing costs for industries like steelworks and smelters. Venning criticised the government for cutting funding to Invictus Australia, a program supporting injured veterans, and argued this showed a lack of care for people. Venning also attacked the EU free trade deal, claiming it provided insufficient access for Australian beef and sheepmeat compared to New Zealand, and cited budget cuts to regional infrastructure, communications, and drought funds as evidence of neglecting regional Australia.

Lawrence described the partnership as practical and structured to increase information sharing and build resilience against global threats. Lawrence highlighted the creation of a new space security dialogue and opportunities for defence procurement cooperation between Australian and European industries. Lawrence pointed to local benefits in Western Australia, citing companies like Hofmann Engineering and Aerospace NDI as examples of the advanced manufacturing capability the partnership supports. Lawrence argued that the agreement strengthens national capability by connecting local expertise with global collaboration and opening new markets.

Wallace acknowledged the importance of strong partnerships with democratic nations in an unstable world, noting that security threats are interconnected across regions. Wallace supported cooperation to counter cyber threats, terrorism, and foreign interference, and recognised the potential for Australian businesses to benefit from defence technology opportunities. However, Wallace emphasised that partnerships alone are insufficient without real capability and investment in sovereign defence industry and industrial resilience. Wallace argued that Australia must strengthen its own house first by securing supply chains and ensuring preparedness, rather than relying solely on announcements.

Soon supported the motion, describing the partnership as a landmark deal that strengthens national security in a changing geopolitical environment. Soon noted that the agreement boosts cooperation across space, cyber, economic security, and counterterrorism, building on existing industrial ties with European defence manufacturers. Soon highlighted that Australian equipment, such as the Bushmaster, already supports European security, and the partnership allows for further exploration of opportunities. Soon argued that the government is acting with purpose to deepen relationships and invest in defence force capability and fuel security.

Zappia commended the motion, arguing that global challenges require collective efforts from like-minded nations due to rising conflict and resource scarcity. Zappia highlighted the historical and cultural bonds between Australia and Europe, noting shared commitments to the rule of law, democracy, and peace. Zappia outlined that the partnership covers defence industry cooperation, economic security, cyber threats, and maritime and space security. Zappia stated that as a middle power, Australia benefits from and contributes to these alliances, allowing for better influence and response to emerging risks such as online radicalisation and supply chain resilience.

Rebello supported stronger cooperation with democratic partners but stressed that domestic preparedness and local defence capabilities must be prioritised. Rebello argued that recent government actions, particularly changes to capital gains tax, are deterring small businesses in the defence space from innovating and investing. Rebello called for the government to translate words into action by supporting veterans, the Defence Force, and the next generation of defence capability. Rebello warned that without genuine support for local industry and investment, partnerships would have limited value in the new multipolar strategic environment.