Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Manufacturing) Share this | Hansard source

Minister, firstly, thank you for your introductory statement. I have noted your response to the questions from this side. As you would probably be aware, manufacturing in this country has fallen in terms of employment percentage throughout Australia from about 26 per cent 50 years ago to around eight per cent at the moment. It is very likely those numbers are going to fall even further as a result of losses in the auto industry over the next few years, losses perhaps in the defence industry if decisions are not made sooner rather than later, and losses that will arise, I believe, from the Abbott government's cut to renewable energy programs in this country.

I note that in this budget there is about $7 billion of cuts in higher education, science and research, industry and innovation, of which about $3 billion comes from your own department. Given that we hope for a successful future in manufacturing—and I think there is a general consensus that that will be underpinned by advanced manufacturing—and given the Prime Minister's recent comments whilst overseas that science and innovation is effectively the key to our future, which I agree with, how can you justify not only the cuts to your own department of $3 billion but the $7 billion in cuts across the science and research organisations, which, undoubtedly, go to the heart of innovation in this country?

I heard your responses to questions from the member for Brand earlier on. In particular, you made the comment that you believe that Geoscience Australia still will have the capacity to function and to carry out its responsibilities. I ask also: with the cuts that that organisation is going to receive, in conjunction with my earlier questions how can you assure us that organisations like Geoscience Australia and other similar organisations that will be subjected to these cuts will be able to carry out the work that they do and support industry in this country as they do?

I particularly also note the programs that the previous government had in the way of direct industry assistance, which amounted to some $800-plus million. Those programs have been cut by almost 50 per cent. I noted your comments about the entrepreneurial funding program, and I understand that, but the bottom line is: how do you justify all of those cuts and still expect that there will be able to give industry the support it needs both in science and innovation and in direct assistance to be able to go into the future and perhaps rather than fall in numbers grow in numbers and grow in capacity?

See this speech in context