Richard “Deadwood” Marles: A Liberal Wearing a Red Rosette

Richard Marles (screenshot from Sky News Australia)

A profile of Australia’s Deputy Prime Minister, Minister for Defence, and Geelong’s enduring gift to Australian satirists

Meet Richard Donald Marles. Deputy Prime Minister. Minister for Defence. Member for Corio. Product of the Victorian Labor Right, that curious faction where union roots somehow sprout hawkish foreign policy, big-ticket defence contracts, and a preselection culture that makes branch stacking look like a minor administrative irregularity.

He is, in the most precise political sense available, a Liberal wearing a red rosette. Same tough talk on alliances and deterrence. Same fondness for American hardware and AUKUS largesse. Same instinct to defer to Washington on questions that might benefit from an independent Australian view. Wrapped, however, in just enough factional red to keep the true believers satisfied. All suit, no spark, and a remarkable talent for making national security sound like a mildly confusing numbers meeting that ran somewhat overtime.

Richard Marles is Geelong’s enduring gift to Australian satirists. The question is whether Geelong intended it as a gift or an apology.

The Walking Capability Gap

There is a phrase in defence circles for the gap between what a military is supposed to have and what it actually has. They call it a capability gap. Richard Marles is, in his own person, a walking capability gap: the announced function and the delivered result separated by a distance that no procurement budget has yet been able to close.

The man who fronts up as the steady hand on the tiller is the same man under whose watch the Navy wonders where the hulls went, the budget bleeds billions into procurement black holes, and the ANAO produces findings of ethical and competence failures with the regularity of a quarterly report. He is the stumblebum with the plum in his mouth, projecting authority while the institution he manages projects something considerably more ambiguous.

He inherited the AUKUS nuclear submarine deal and turned it into a rolling saga of delays, cost reassessments, and nervous hand-wringing that would be impressive in its consistency if consistency were the quality being tested. Critics, including people in uniform, people in the audit office, and old Labor warhorses who remember when the party had a clearer relationship with its own principles, point to the endless reviews, the production bottlenecks, the twenty-year capability hole while Australia waits for American goodwill and Virginia class boats that may or may not materialise on schedule.

Marles’s signature response to any question about whether the Americans will actually deliver is that periodic reviews are “perfectly natural.” Plan B questions he dodges with the practised ease of a man who has decided that the question itself is the problem. Billions committed. Timelines slipping. The public left staring at a price tag somewhere between two hundred billion and three hundred and sixty-eight billion dollars, depending on which estimate one consults and on which day one consults it, for submarines that remain considerably more promise than propeller.

The Procurement Masterclass

Procurement under Marles has been a sustained masterclass in what might charitably be called bureaucratic swamp-dwelling.

The armoured vehicle deals have produced headlines about billions wasted. The ANAO has produced findings of ethical and competence failures with sufficient regularity that they no longer surprise anyone, which is itself a finding worth examining. The response to each procurement disaster has been a reorganisation, and the response to each reorganisation’s failure has been another reorganisation. The most recent iteration produced something called a Defence Delivery Agency, which was created to fix the procurement problems generated by the previous structural reform, which had been created to fix the problems generated by the one before that.

Wars do not wait for the next reorganisation. Marles’s briefings, apparently, do.

He has poured extra billions into the portfolio. The department continues to be slammed for shortfalls and blowouts. These two facts coexist without apparent embarrassment on anyone’s part, which is perhaps the most remarkable procurement achievement of the period.

The Washington Incident

Then there is the diplomacy, or the performance of it.

Mr Marles flew to Washington at a moment when AUKUS was genuinely uncertain and American goodwill genuinely required active cultivation. The visit produced a clarification from the Pentagon that the encounter with the US Defence Secretary was, in the Pentagon’s own careful formulation, a “happenstance encounter” rather than a formal meeting.

Australia’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defence had flown to Washington and bumped into his counterpart in a corridor. The image that lodged in the public mind was of Australia’s most senior defence official as the uninvited guest at the cool table, the one who shows up at the party and discovers, from the expressions on the faces of the other guests, that the invitation was more theoretical than practical.

Mr Marles said it went very well.

The Verbal Vapourware Special

In television studios, Mr Marles has developed a signature style that deserves its own name. Call it the Verbal Vapourware Special.

Classic footage shows him in conversation with Karl Stefanovic on the Today Show, a programme not renowned for its forensic rigour, in which Marles produces word salads of sufficient density that Stefanovic, a man not given to extended silences, fills them by playing Trump clips over the minister’s ongoing remarks. The furrowed brow arrives first. Then the careful pause before the answer that does not quite materialise. Then the vague platitude delivered with the gravity of a man who believes that gravity is itself the substance of the answer.

One moment he is warning of the most complex strategic circumstances since World War Two. The next he is “very close, but we’re not saying how close” on flare incidents, or deflecting capability questions with the expression of a man reading the autocue for the first time while simultaneously trying to remember where he parked.

This is not statesmanlike gravitas. This is the performance of a factional numbers man who is considerably more comfortable in a preselection meeting than a television studio, and who has not, in eleven years of public life, fully resolved the tension between those two environments.

The Liberal in Labor Clothing

Here is the thing about Richard Marles that his factional allies would prefer not to discuss in public. On the questions that actually matter in defence policy, he is more hawkish than many in the Coalition. Pro-American to a degree that occasionally makes Liberal defence spokespeople look like peaceniks by comparison. An enthusiast for American hardware whose enthusiasm is not noticeably tempered by the evidence that the hardware in question is, in the case of the F-35, “predominantly unusable” in the year we are being asked to buy more of it.

He waves the progressive flag with the conviction of a man who remembers 1995 very fondly and has not updated the gesture since. The union pedigree produced a defence hawk. The Labor branding covers a set of instincts that would be entirely at home in the moderate wing of the Liberal Party, which is perhaps why the moderate wing of the Liberal Party has largely ceased to exist. Marles ate its lunch.

He has also, to his credit, stripped medals from Afghanistan-era officers pursuant to the Brereton Report, which required political courage of a kind not always visible in his portfolio management. He has criticised Chinese live-fire drills in the Tasman Sea, correctly. He has appointed Lieutenant General Susan Coyle as the first female chief of army, which is a genuinely historic moment.

These are real achievements. They coexist, in the same ministerial career, with the AUKUS cost blowouts, the armoured vehicle disasters, the hapinstance Washington encounter, and the word salads on morning television. This is what a capability gap looks like from the inside.

The Satirist’s Accounting

In a dangerous neighbourhood, with real capability needs and a fuel crisis that has exposed the fragility of everything the defence budget is supposed to protect, Richard Marles is what happens when you take a moderately ambitious right-leaning machine politician, hand him Defence for factional balance, and hope that nobody notices the spark shortage before the next election.

The forehead furrows at pressers. The platitudes accumulate. The procurement disasters generate the reorganisations that generate the next procurement disasters. The submarines remain in the future. The F-35 software remains predominantly unusable. The Geelong refinery burned on Wednesday night, taking with it ten percent of the nation’s fuel supply and fifty percent of Victoria’s, while the minister responsible for the nation’s strategic circumstances was preparing his remarks for the National Press Club.

Mr Marles said it was not only about investing more.

It was about spending better.

He has said this, in various formulations, for the duration of his tenure. The dead wood keeps stacking. The capability gap keeps widening. And Richard Donald Marles, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defence, remains magnificently, unmistakably, and at considerable public expense, wooden.
Australia’s own Liberal wearing a red rosette. All faction, no fire.


Keep Independent Journalism Alive – Support The AIMN

Dear Reader,

Since 2013, The Australian Independent Media Network has been a fearless voice for truth, giving public interest journalists a platform to hold power to account. From expert analysis on national and global events to uncovering issues that matter to you, we’re here because of your support.

Running an independent site isn’t cheap, and rising costs mean we need you now more than ever. Your donation – big or small – keeps our servers humming, our writers digging, and our stories free for all.

Join our community of truth-seekers. Please consider donating now via:

PayPal or credit card – just click on the Donate button below

Direct bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

We’ve also set up a GoFundMe as a dedicated reserve fund to help secure the future of our site.
Your support will go directly toward covering essential costs like web hosting renewals and helping us bring new features to life. Every contribution, no matter the size, helps us keep improving and growing.

Thank you for standing with us – we truly couldn’t do this without you.

With gratitude, The AIMN Team

About David Tyler 153 Articles
David Tyler – (AKA Urban Wronski) was born in England, raised in New Zealand and an Australian resident since 1979. Urban Wronski grew up conflicted about his own national identity and continues to be deeply mistrustful of all nationalism, chauvinism, flags, politicians and everything else which divides and obscures our common humanity. He has always been enchanted by nature and by the extraordinary brilliance of ordinary men and women and the genius, the power and the poetry that is their vernacular. Wronski is now a full-time freelance writer who lives with his partner and editor Shay and their chooks, near the Grampians in rural Victoria and he counts himself the luckiest man alive. A former teacher of all ages and stages, from Tertiary to Primary, for nearly forty years, he enjoyed contesting the corporatisation of schooling to follow his own natural instinct for undifferentiated affection, approval and compassion for the young.

16 Comments

  1. You are far too generous in your description of Retched Mediocrity aka Richard Marles. He is a political scammer who has risen well above the height of his ability ….. and Australian voters are suffering financially because of his ineptitude.

    Perhaps it is time for the LABOR government to hold Ministers responsible for the financial maladministration occurring under their watch. THAT would make the desk jockeys a little less secure and hopefully more interested in promoting the best interests of the voters rather than the procurement scams that appear to overpower common business sense and principled business practice.

  2. Thanks David, laughed my arse off,and always happy to get on the ‘stick it to Dicky’ bandwagon.
    I wonder if he could use this evisceration as a reference for the inevitable job in the ‘murder is money’ industry of the Military Industrial Complex.I believe he made lance corporal in the Geelong College cadets,and I think they wore kilts too.

  3. A curious visitor, quite a pretty lady, asked a kilted Scot if “anything was worn under there,” and he replied with a keen grin, “No, it’s all in perfect working order, ready for use.”

  4. I love a dose of dry humor in the morning, this is an excellent assessment of Richard Marles. Well done, David.

    “The Labor branding covers a set of instincts that would be entirely at home in the moderate wing of the Liberal Party, which is perhaps why the moderate wing of the Liberal Party has largely ceased to exist. Marles ate its lunch.” – delectable.

  5. A summary long, long overdue. Marles joins the likes of Malinauskas and Minns in equalling the efforts of Crisafulli, in directing Australia toward a new authoritarianism.
    Sleepers, awake…

  6. Why “drag” David? Is the implication that “drag” means pretending? Pretending to be a woman? Sorry to go all political correctness on you but l think you might have chosen a better descriptor with your vast vocabulary.
    Also his electorate seems to like him but l think many Aussies can see he is the classic war mongering male “defence” minister. Maybe some one should survey hid popularity?

  7. Clive. My typo. I lived not far from Marles’ electorate when I arrived in Australia. And there’s no confusing the two. I’m sorry about the slip.

  8. Kerri, “In drag” is a well-worn political idiom meaning someone is disguised as something they’re not; a wolf in sheep’s clothing, essentially. In Australian political writing it has a long pedigree: calling a Labor figure “a Liberal in drag” means they’ve adopted Liberal values while wearing Labor colours. It’s not a reference to drag performance culture at all.
    But your discomfort is legitimate in 2026. The phrase has been partially colonised by its association with drag performance and the culture wars around it, and some readers will now stumble on it rather than read through it. That’s a real cost to the clarity of my prose. Point well made and taken. “A Liberal wearing a red rosette”?

  9. Kerri: On Marles’ popularity. How popular would Richard Marles be in Corio if it were known that he is having an each-way bet on supporting Pete Hegseth’s sadistic cruelty and utter contempt for the rules of war which specifically exclude non-combatants? Not very, one suspects. Corio is not a leafy harbourside seat full of people inclined to forgive a Defence Minister who calls a Christian nationalist war criminal “Pete,” gushes about AUKUS over cocktails at the Pentagon, and stays carefully, calculatedly silent while Gaza and Iran burn. These are working people, the sons and daughters of Ford workers whose livelihoods the Liberals destroyed; people who know what it looks like when the powerful abandon the powerless and dress the betrayal up as strategic necessity. Marles knows the rules of war exist. He knows what Hegseth thinks of them. And he has chosen, very deliberately, to look the other way.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ Not a peep of protest from our PM or his deputy at the US bombing of several schools in Iran (with Tomahawk missiles) and the double and triple-tap afterwards? It’s worse than scandalous. Our leaders’ silence means we are all complicit in this.

  10. Agree with you on Marles and Albo’s abandoning of principles. I am unfamiliar with the electorate of Corio other than an Urban Geography unit l used to teach about Geelong. I hope people can see past their racism to judge others for what they are not who they are. And as for the destruction of Australian car manufacturing? Why is that not spoken of more in the mainstream media? (Think l answered my own question there)
    Albo has been really disappointing over Gaza and lsrael. His blanket acceptance of the primary school book report delivered by one of the country’s most blatant zionists was the stupidest knee jerk, own goal in recent history. When he can’t see a way to please everyone he kicks the can and forgets about it. Had he even read the “report”? It seems not, for locking us into the zionist machine. I always figured Albo was tolerating Marles due to factionalism. He is the wrong person to have that portfolio just as Hegseth is to have (his self named) opposite portfolio. Maybe suggesting Marles is Hegseth in Marles clothing? As indeed he seems to fantasise he is.
    Thanks for the article and the learning within.

  11. “…He is, in the most precise political sense available, a Liberal wearing a red rosette….”
    For the timid voter Marles was the cheap bet – 2 bob each way – you can’t lose.
    Geelong was once a vibrant port city with multiple manufacturing industries – now they are all gone – Fords, Alcoa, Pilkingtons glass, Corio Distillery, Donaghy’s Rope Works, the cement works, woolen mills and wool stores, etc . Now Geelong is a welfare city with no industries except for the former Shell oil refinery and that is on borrowed time. Richard Marles represents my electorate however many now realise that he does not represent the Labor vision of old. But then neither does Albanese or Burke.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*