Former Defence Ministers Find Lucrative Roles in Defence Industry Amid Spending Surge


A growing number of former Australian defence ministers and senior officials have taken up roles with defence contractors, strategic advisory firms, and think tanks, positioning themselves at the centre of the country’s expanding military-industrial sector.

An analysis of the federal lobbyists register and corporate announcements reveals that more than 40 defence-related firms have enlisted former ministers as advisers or lobbyists, as the government commits to record levels of military spending.

While there is no suggestion of wrongdoing, the trend highlights the strong connections between government, the defence sector, and private industry, raising concerns about policy influence and access.

Defence Spending Boom Drives Industry Growth

Australia is significantly increasing defence spending, with the Albanese government pledging an additional $50 billion over the next decade. Defence spending is set to rise from 2.02% of GDP to 2.33% by 2033-34, with the upcoming federal budget expected to accelerate this increase.

The opposition is also considering an even more ambitious defence budget, with Coalition figures discussing a potential rise to 2.5% of GDP by 2029, which would equate to an additional $15 billion annually. Some within the Coalition are even floating an aspirational target of 3% of GDP, though this would compete with demands for higher social spending.

With these increases, defence contractors are vying for a greater share of the $56 billion already allocated to defence each year—creating opportunities for former ministers with deep knowledge of the system.



Former Ministers Turn Defence Advisers and Lobbyists

Among the most prominent figures in the defence sector is Christopher Pyne, who served as defence industry minister and later defence minister from 2016 to 2019. After leaving politics, he founded Pyne and Partners, a lobbying firm with 18 defence-related clients listed on the federal government’s lobbyists register.

Pyne, who also chairs Queensland-based munitions company NIOA Group and sits on the board of combat armour producer HighCom, argues that lobbyists play a crucial role in government decision-making.

"Lobbyists ensure that by the time ideas reach ministers, their staff, or departments, they are in a form that makes it easy for government to decide whether to act," he said.

Pyne’s firm is currently handling government relations for South Korean defence giant Hanwha, which is seeking approval to increase its stake in shipbuilder Austal—a move that has faced resistance.

A Network of Influence Across Government and Industry

Australia’s defence advisory landscape is tightly interconnected, with former politicians often working alongside former military leaders and corporate executives.

Joe Hockey, former treasurer and ambassador to the US, founded Bondi Partners, an advisory firm that has brought on former defence and foreign affairs minister Marise Payne as a senior adviser. Bondi Partners does not engage in lobbying but, along with Ellerston Capital, has launched the 1941 Fund, a private investment fund focused on national security businesses. The fund’s portfolio includes The Whiskey Project Group, which builds high-speed tactical watercraft, and Internet 2.0, a firm that has provided cyber warfare training in Ukraine.

Joel Fitzgibbon, who served as defence minister under the Rudd government, now works as a lobbyist for Serco, a company that provides defence base services. He also serves as special counsel to CMAX Communications, a lobbying firm that represents defence giants like Raytheon, Navantia, and Elbit—though Fitzgibbon says he does not lobby on their behalf, instead offering strategic advice.

Fitzgibbon is also co-chair of the AUKUS Forum, a networking group focused on leveraging opportunities from the trilateral security pact between Australia, the US, and the UK. The forum promotes industry engagement in emerging military technologies, including hypersonic missiles, undersea warfare, and quantum computing.

Adding to the bipartisan nature of these networks, Fitzgibbon’s co-chair in the AUKUS Forum is Arthur Sinodinos, a former Liberal industry minister and ambassador to the US.

The ‘Revolving Door’ Between Government and Defence

Beyond former defence ministers, other senior political figures have also taken on defence-related roles.

  • Stephen Conroy, a former communications minister and opposition defence spokesperson, chairs TG Public Affairs, a lobbying firm with clients including Northrop Grumman, Saab, and German shipbuilder TKMS.

  • Kim Beazley, former defence minister and Australian ambassador to the US, chairs the Australian subsidiary of German shipbuilder Luerssen and is an adviser to Lockheed Martin. 

    It may be of no surprise, then, that the Albanese Government has moved quickly towards establishing a local guided missile manufacturing facility through a Defence partnership with Lockheed Martin, initially involving a $147 million investment.
Australia’s ministerial code of conduct requires an 18-month cooling-off period before former ministers can directly lobby government officials. However, some experts argue that this is insufficient to prevent conflicts of interest.

Dr Catherine Williams, executive director of the Centre for Public Integrity, has called for stronger post-separation employment restrictions.

“We have consistently highlighted the concerning ‘revolving door’ between government positions and industry lobbying roles,” Williams said. “These restrictions must be long enough to prevent undue influence, safeguard impartiality, and restore public trust in the independence of government from vested interests.”

A Growing Industry with Questions of Oversight

As Australia increases its defence commitments amid rising regional tensions, scrutiny is growing over how government contracts are awarded and who influences defence policy.

While there is no suggestion of wrongdoing, the deep ties between former ministers and the defence sector raise questions about transparency and governance—particularly as Australia’s military budget expands.

With both major parties committed to higher defence spending, the influence of former officials in shaping military procurement and policy is likely to remain a defining feature of Australia’s defence landscape.

Comments