Aukus will prove to be one of the worst defence and foreign policy decisions ever made by an Australian government and is only being permitted by Donald Trump in order to destroy Chinese nuclear threats to the US mainland, former foreign affairs minister Gareth Evans says.

In evidence to an independent public inquiry into the $368bn nuclear agreement with the US and UK on Thursday, Evans, a cabinet minister in the Hawke and Keating governments, warned the transfer and construction of submarines to Australia from the early 2030s is effectively only an extension of the American military fleet. He says a future US administration would not come to Australia’s aid in the event of an “existential attack” and would only assist in a military conflict if its own assets on Australian soil are threatened.

Evans also calls the government’s expected price tag for the deal “wholly speculative” and says the US views the submarines as primarily supplementary assets, effectively embedded into US military command, for the task of finding, tracking, attacking and destroying Chinese submarines seen as posing a risk to the US mainland.

Thursday’s first hearing of the public inquiry – which is not a parliamentary process and is being backed by trade unions and the Australian Peace and Security Forum – will be led by commissioners including the former Labor minister Peter Garrett and former defence boss Chris Barrie. The foreign minister, Penny Wong, said on Thursday she and the defence minister, Richard Marles, had discussed Aukus with their UK counterparts in regular talks overnight. Labor is pushing back on criticism of the plan, including from its own MPs, before the party’s national conference in Adelaide next month.

One Nation says it will undertake a “forensic audit” of the donations it has received in a fundraising drive this week, in a bid to prove to Australia’s political establishment that the contributions are real.

As of midday Thursday, a donation tracker on One Nation’s website claims the party has received nearly $1.9m in contributions for its campaign in Labor-held seats. That figure is unverified though, as the party does not disclose its donations in real time and the website provides no details of purported donations.

Liberal and Labor figures have cast doubt on the veracity of the donation amount. Prime minister Albanese, when asked about the figure Pauline Hanson claims to have raised, even said: “Did she, though? Did she, what evidence is there?”

One Nation figures are furious about the doubt cast on the fundraising drive by Liberal and Labor. A One Nation spokesperson told Guardian Australia the party would undertake a “forensic audit” of the donations to prove they were authentic. The spokesperson said a report would be released publicly in some form, but did not give a timetable.

The spokesperson said the party had received about 28,000 individual donations, with the highest being about $15,000. Each of these donations is below the Australian Electoral Commission’s disclosure threshold for donations, which is set at $16,900, and therefore none of those would be captured or published by the AEC – meaning the only way to verify the donations, or know their source, is if One Nation voluntarily publishes that information.

Victoria Premier Jacinta Allan has rejected renewed leadership speculation within the Labor Party, telling a press conference on 9 June that she has no intention of stepping down. She said that “when times are tough, you should rise to the challenge,” adding that she is fully committed to the upcoming election campaign. Allan said she did not know who was spreading the rumours and argued that Victorian voters are primarily concerned with cost of living, jobs, and the economy, rather than internal party power struggles.

The latest polling shows Labor’s primary vote has fallen to 23%, down four percentage points since March and a steep 14-point decline since the 2022 state election. The Liberal-National Coalition is polling at 27%, while One Nation has surged to 25%, up five points from March, becoming the second-largest political force in the state.

The survey also found that 62% of respondents believe it is time for Allan to be replaced as premier. Even within Labor voters, 39% share that view. Allan’s personal net approval rating has dropped to minus 37, while opposition leader Jess Wilson recorded a positive 15.

For the first time, Allan acknowledged that rising support for One Nation is impacting Labor, as well as drawing votes away from the Liberals and Nationals. She attributed the trend to broader global political and economic conditions, including conflict in Iran and fluctuations in international oil prices, which are driving cost-of-living pressures.

However, internal doubts within Labor remain. The Age reported, citing eight unnamed Labor MPs, that some within the party are concerned about weak polling and One Nation’s rise, with discussions emerging about a possible leadership challenge before the state election on 28 November.

While there is currently no clear momentum for a formal leadership spill, concerns about the party’s electoral prospects are growing. Deputy Premier Ben Carroll is widely seen as the most credible potential successor, although he has not publicly declared any leadership ambitions.

Commentary

The continued decline in Labor’s support, combined with the rapid rise of One Nation, has fuelled renewed calls for leadership change. However, it remains debatable whether the problem lies solely with Jacinta Allan as a leader.

The challenges facing Labor are not only about leadership image, but also broader voter dissatisfaction with the government’s overall performance and policy direction. After years in power, the party carries accumulated political baggage that cannot be resolved simply by replacing the leader.

Even if Ben Carroll were to take over, his relatively low public profile means that with only a few months before the November election, it would be difficult to shift voter perceptions in time.

The rise of One Nation also reflects a deeper shift, with voters showing increasing frustration toward traditional major parties. These sentiments are unlikely to disappear simply through a leadership change.

Unless Labor can directly address key voter concerns such as housing affordability, inflation, and cost of living pressures, a new leader alone is unlikely to significantly improve its electoral prospects.