Veterans from the Australian Defence Force (ADF) have issued stark warnings about the federal government’s proposal to sell off more than 60 historic defence properties nationwide, arguing the process could drag on for over a decade and cost far more than the anticipated return — potentially consigning treasured military heritage, training infrastructure and community value to ruin.
Government’s Defence Estate Overhaul
The Albanese government, led by Defence Minister Richard Marles, has unveiled an ambitious plan to divest more than 60 sites across Australia after a multi-year Defence Estate Audit identified extensive under-utilised and non-strategic assets in the ADF’s portfolio. These holdings, including iconic locations like the Victoria Barracks in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane, military depots, airbases, warehouses and vacant land, are slated for sale or partial divestment to raise funds and streamline defence estate management.
Officials estimate the divestments could generate up to $3 billion in gross value, with around $1.8 billion expected to be realised net of transitional costs such as relocation and maintenance savings. The government has stressed that all proceeds from sales will be reinvested into defence capabilities, backing strategic priorities and modern facilities.
Veterans Warn of Long, Costly Divestment
Despite official assurances, veteran groups — including the Returned and Services League (RSL) of Australia — are urging caution. RSL national president Peter Tinley has described the sell-off plan as rushed and potentially wasteful, highlighting that many former divestments turned into drawn-out, expensive processes. He stressed that remediation, heritage protection and development complexities could stretch work over a decade and substantially erode the headline revenue figures.
“These aren’t empty paddocks on a spreadsheet,” Tinley said, calling for thorough evaluation of each property’s historical and operational value. Veterans fear that removing these sites from Defence’s portfolio could diminish the connection between the ADF and the communities they have served, and risk losing irreplaceable cultural heritage.
Strategic and Heritage Concerns
Critics warn that the sell-off could undermine recruitment, training and retention, particularly if urban bases and reserve facilities are lost without suitable replacements. Retired defence officials and industry experts have echoed these sentiments, arguing that a disconnect between strategic needs and estate rationalisation could hamper readiness and capability in critical areas.
Heritage groups and state leaders have also urged sensitive handling of historically significant properties. In New South Wales, the NSW Premier Chris Minns called for special consideration towards Sydney’s Victoria Barracks, established in the 1840s and deeply embedded in the nation’s military history.
Calls for Broader Public Benefit
Beyond defence circles, community and political voices have pushed for alternative approaches to the sale of these sites. Greens defence spokesperson David Shoebridge has championed using some properties for social and affordable housing while preserving public green space and heritage buildings. He argued that with strategic planning, surplus lands could deliver thousands of homes and new community precincts, without forsaking cultural values.
Similarly, local councillors and planning officials have suggested that former military lands could be transformed into civic amenities, ranging from parks and cultural venues to mixed-use developments that integrate public access and commemoration.
Government Response and Next Steps
The Defence Ministry insists that the estate reform is necessary to address “decades of deferred decisions” that have left many properties vacant, under-utilised and costly to maintain. Officials argue that freeing up these assets will allow Defence to concentrate on modern infrastructure that aligns with evolving strategic imperatives.
Under the publicly released Defence Estate Audit, a total of 64 sites will be fully divested, three will be partly divested, and one will be retained in full. Some locations — such as the famed HMAS Penguin and parts of the Victoria Barracks — may be preserved due to their heritage status, although future use remains under review.
Balancing Defence Needs with Public Values
As the process unfolds, the broader policy debate has sharpened: how to balance fiscal responsibility and defence modernisation with the preservation of heritage, community access and strategic infrastructure. Veterans remain adamant that the government must avoid repeating the mistakes of past asset sales — where projected financial benefits were undercut by remediation and redevelopment costs.
With sales negotiations and remediation efforts expected to span many years, the ultimate economic and cultural impact of this historic sell-off will likely be debated across parliaments, veterans’ organisations and civic forums alike, shaping how Australians remember and repurpose their military legacy.
7 years in the field, from local radio to digital newsrooms. Loves chasing the stories that matter to everyday Aussies – whether it’s climate, cost of living or the next big thing in tech.
