Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Hansard source

Today, every member of this House has the opportunity to vote for Australian jobs, has the opportunity to vote for Australian manufacturing, has the opportunity to vote for Australian skills and has the opportunity to back up Australian regions. We have an opportunity through the National Reconstruction Fund, and through the National Reconstruction Fund Corporation Bill 2022, to be, once again, a country that makes things here.

During the election campaign, I said over and over again that we need to be a country that makes things and that we need a future that is made right here in Australia. That's because we saw during the global pandemic that Australia is vulnerable if we remain at the end of global supply chains. We didn't have enough PPE, let alone ventilators. What we need to do is make sure that we don't just export our resources—those will continue to be important—but that, where we can, we need to value add. We need to create the jobs here. For too long, the view under those opposite was that you just dig it up, export it and then wait for the value to be added, wait for the jobs to be created and import it back at much greater value. That leaves our economy vulnerable.

Those opposite, for reasons beyond my comprehension, are once again saying no—once again turning the coalition into the 'no-alition'. They're saying no to repairing our supply chains, no to strengthening our economic sovereignty, no to new jobs in our regions and suburbs, and no to a future made in Australia. We, on this side of the House, will stand by our National Reconstruction Fund, and I am confident that there are enough people who are sensible and of goodwill in this parliament—in the House and in the Senate—to ensure that this fund is established.

I announced this policy in March 2021. Those opposite like to talk about election commitments; well, they oppose everything that we have a mandate for. And it can't be clearer, because when I was opposition leader we actually had policies—we actually had positive policies to take Australia forward. This will be one of the biggest-ever investments in Australian manufacturing capacity, and I'll say that 'investment' is the key word. The National Reconstruction Fund is modelled on the success of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, a proven vehicle for driving an enhancement of private sector capital. It's a proven vehicle which those opposite tried to abolish not once, not twice, but on at least three occasions. Through 10 years now, every dollar invested by the CEFC has unlocked $2.60 in private sector investment. The National Reconstruction Fund will be run independently and on a commercial basis, with decisions taken in the national interest and not with the colour coded spreadsheet which is how those opposite decided fiscal and spending priorities. Its investment mandate will work across seven priority areas: renewables and low-emissions technology; medical science; transport; value adding in agriculture, forestry and fisheries; value adding in resources; defence capability; and enabling capabilities—the technologies that support new jobs in manufacturing areas.

These are industries where Australian workers and Australian skills can lead the world. Many of us recall the pressure that we were under in the early days of the pandemic; it did show the vulnerability that was there. But we need not just analyse it as if we were some group of academics. We come into this chamber not only to make a difference to real lives, to respond to evidence or to respond to weaknesses when they're exposed but to strengthen our economy in ways such as this legislation. This is about building a more resilient and diversified economy, with more jobs in regional Australia. It's also about national security through economic sovereignty—our capacity to stand on our own two feet. Our National Reconstruction Fund will help to grow and create industries over the long term, revitalising our traditional strengths and seeking out new ones. It will make sure that when our universities and researchers make a world-leading breakthrough, the technology and skills are here to commercialise that idea and also workers with the right skills to make the product.

As well, the NRF will help protect our economy from inflationary pressures. The Reserve Bank has spoken repeatedly about perhaps half but up to two-thirds of the inflationary pressures being because of supply-side shocks, yet those opposite seem oblivious to that.

The truth is that our world-class universities have made Australia a higher education destination of choice. We can be a leader in skills and technology, and in manufacturing as well. I sincerely want us to be a country that makes things here again, and I want products that are made in Australia to be recognised and sought after around the world. Think about just one product. There is not a solar panel anywhere in the world that does not have intellectual breakthrough and innovation that was invented, much of it, not far from here at the Australian National University, and a lot of it at the University of New South Wales. Yet one country, not Australia, accounts for 85 per cent of the world's solar panels, and that will grow to over 90 per cent over the next decade unless countries make the conscious decision to defend their sovereignty going forward by supporting industrial growth here in these areas.

When I met with the energy secretary from the United States here just a short time ago, this was one of the focuses that she had. It is part of the Inflation Reduction Act that they have in the United States. Countries are moving in this direction to make sure they protect their sovereign economic position, yet those opposite are opposing this legislation that's aimed at doing just that.

We have a coherent economic plan going forward, a plan that's about cleaner and cheaper energy, driven in part by the Rewiring the Nation fund's $20 billion to upgrade the energy grid, backed up by the safeguard mechanism to provide business with the certainty to invest. That's step 1. Step 2 is to use that cleaner, cheaper energy to make sure we manufacture more things here, particularly in our regions. Then step 3 is making sure that we have the Australian jobs and skills to be able to do that. That's why we're creating Jobs and Skills Australia. That is why we have 180,000 fee-free TAFE places. That is why we have 20,000 additional university places. Put together, it's a plan for seizing the opportunity that is there as a result of being in the fastest growing region of the world in human history.

Later today, after question time, I'll start the journey to India via Perth. We have, on our doorstep, in India and Indonesia, what will be the third and fourth largest economies in the world. We need to seize the opportunities which are there. We need to not be frightened of the future but to make sure that we seize the opportunities of the future which are there.

Together, this work, this economic plan and how it fits together—cleaner, cheaper energy; driving advanced manufacturing through this National Reconstruction Fund; creating jobs and skills through Jobs and Skills Australia and fee-free TAFE—is all absolutely critical. But if you take one element away from it, then its coherence breaks down. That is why the National Reconstruction Fund is so important. It is about shaping the future rather than waiting for the future to shape us, and that's why this parliament should all be voting for the National Reconstruction Fund. This is not a radical proposition; it's a proposition based upon what works: the Clean Energy Finance Corporation.

Those opposite, when they couldn't abolish the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, eventually had to acknowledge that it was an effective driver of investment in this country. They made the mistake of daring the car industry to leave, with all the jobs and the innovation that occurred—including at this dispatch box; the then Treasurer daring the car industry to leave. The truth is that they have an opportunity to actually acknowledge that they were wrong. Just like those opposite, including the shadow minister at the table there and the former deputy leader of the coalition—

See this speech in context