Pause the disposal of Victoria Barracks Sydney
The Australian government should pause disposal for historic Victoria Barracks in Sydney and take time to resolve outstanding questions before the process has gone too far for reversal.
The government needs time to explain why it wants to proceed before a Senate committee completes a current inquiry into management of the Defence estate. It also needs to detail how community concerns have influenced the decision to dispose of Victoria Barracks Sydney and what options will remain if the committee challenges the basis of the decision. None of this means abandoning estate reform.
On the weekend, a rally against the proposed sale brought together political opponents, veterans, serving military personnel and community members. Their objections extend beyond the heritage of a central Sydney site used by the military since the 1840s. They raise questions about how the government decides which parts of the Defence estate it can afford to relinquish, and whether the communities affected have a meaningful opportunity to influence those decisions.
The Senate’s Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee released its interim report on 16 September, recommending an immediate halt to the divestment program. The final report is not due until early 2027, yet Defence is preparing to vacate Victoria Barracks Sydney this year. If the barracks is vacated and transferred to the Department of Finance for disposal before the inquiry is complete, there may be less room for the committee to influence the outcome. Reversing course could become more difficult and costly.
Following a Defence Estate Audit released in February, the government chose 67 sites for full or partial divestment as part of a necessary effort to modernise an ageing and costly portfolio; they included historic assets also called Victoria Barracks in Melbourne and Brisbane. As I submitted to the inquiry and later wrote in a Strategist article, the audit should be the starting point for decisions on divestment, not their endpoint. Each proposed disposal requires further scrutiny to establish whether it delivers the best strategic and financial outcome for Defence.
The process must also allow affected communities to be heard before decisions are effectively settled. In February, I raised concerns that consultation with affected communities, Reserve units and cadet organisations had not been adequately integrated into estate planning. The divestment of a site of considerable strategic, historical and community value such as Victoria Barracks, without meaningful community consultation before the decision was made, before external consultation has occurred, undermines confidence in the estate reform process.
The strength of the public response demonstrates that the site’s significance extends beyond its immediate Defence functions. Community concerns about heritage, public value and the loss of a longstanding military presence deserve consideration alongside operational and financial assessments.
Parliamentary scrutiny and community consultation should inform, not explain them after the fact. If the government is confident that selling Victoria Barracks Sydney is in the national interest, it should be prepared to demonstrate that case and show that it has listened to those affected while there is still an opportunity to reconsider the decision.
Defence has argued that the site is underused and that personnel can be accommodated elsewhere. Yet during Senate committee hearings on government spending estimates in June, Defence said it did not collect data on any one site’s maintenance cost.
That creates a challenge for the financial case. If Defence cannot readily establish the cost of maintaining the barracks, how can the government demonstrate the savings attributable to its disposal? The assessment must also account for relocation, replacement accommodation, fit-out and ongoing occupancy costs, alongside expected sale proceeds and avoided maintenance expenditure.
Defence’s estate supports force generation, training, workforce distribution, mobilisation and operational readiness. A property’s value cannot be assessed solely by its utilisation rate or the condition of its buildings. It also depends on the functions it supports, its location and its relationship with other Defence activities.
This does not mean Victoria Barracks Sydney must remain a Defence site indefinitely. It means the government should demonstrate that relocating functions will preserve the required capabilities and organisational benefits and that disposal will create no avoidable costs or constraints elsewhere.
Heritage is part of this assessment, alongside operational requirements, financial implications and community views. Defence cannot be expected to retain every historic property regardless of cost or military utility. But heritage obligations, planning constraints and potential remediation costs can affect the feasibility and financial return of a disposal. These factors should be considered early enough to shape the decision, not addressed only after a disposal pathway has been chosen.
About Author
