Luke Gosling (Solomon, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

My apologies for that interjection earlier, Mr Deputy Speaker. It's just a bit hard to sit here and listen to those opposite, in their eighth year, talking about 12 submarines that they're going to build, but they haven't started one yet. I just wanted to mention that.

I'd like to thank the member for Stirling for bringing forward this motion. It's a good opportunity to discuss such an important issue. He has served. He's a veteran of the Australian Army. I think the member for Stirling is a good person. He's a thoughtful person. I can think of another MP over in Perth who I would love to see out of this place before the member for Stirling. Ideally the member for Stirling would be staying and someone else should be retired and should be investigated. But I digress.

It is true that the government is talking about a big spend in defence industry. As I said, they haven't built a submarine yet. They don't really look that close to doing so. It's fine to talk about a big spend but what are we getting for it? When we're dealing with a pandemic, and the Australian businesses benefitting from this cash splash, I would put it that we've seen very little evidence that $270 billion is going to be spent by those opposite in a way that helps Australian players in the defence industries. There might be some crumbs of that $270 million, but what those opposite are failing to do is realise that SMEs are the backbone of our defence industry, not just back home in Darwin, in my electorate, but around the country. SMEs employ a significant number of people and create jobs through that supply chain.

I think our SMEs work really well with the big players. I think that as those prime contractors get their capability and buy out smaller SMEs they end up doing most of the roles in project delivery. As they do that they involve fewer and fewer Australian SMEs. I guess that's a consequence of the nature of the market. Those opposite are pretty keen to let the market rip, especially if they're getting donations from some of these big primes. But the declared aim of any federal government should be the sovereign capability of the nation and that includes all these SMEs out there who deserve a bigger chunk of the defence industry spend.

I know that our SMEs have a real commitment, because they're local people and local businesses, to sourcing things locally in a way that the prime contractors do not, because of their size and global footprint. Our local SMEs think about local supply chains. During the pandemic, where we have witnessed real disruption in trade, it's really important that we think about those supply chains and support our SMEs as much as possible. It's not only an economic imperative for our nation, but a security imperative as well.

It is true that our SMEs and primes are working together in places like Tindal. There are some good local Territory companies getting work on that project, but I'd like to see it move beyond that. I want to see a situation where Australian owned prime contractors are getting some of these big jobs. There are Australian SMEs that would absolutely be able to step up if they had a federal government that was prepared to invest in them, in Australians, in jobs for Australian companies working on Australian projects. That's what's ideal. That's what's missing under this mob. The question you've got to ask is: out of that $270 billion, how much is going to Australian companies? How much is going to Australian workers working for Australian companies? There's no reason why we can't have more Australian owned primes. That's what we should be aiming for and that is what an Albanese federal Labor government will deliver.

See this speech in context