Madeleine King (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Northern Australia) Share this | Hansard source

It is my great pleasure to speak about the Future Made in Australia Bill today, but I do want to pick up on a couple of things that the previous speaker and a couple of others have said. The member for Farrer mentioned the Alcoa Kwinana refinery closure, and I know the member for Hume in his speech last night mentioned the temporary suspension of production at BHP's Nickel West refinery. Both are in Kwinana, and both are in my electorate. I emphasise how shameful it is that there is absolutely no matter that the Liberals and the coalition will not politicise in this House. A lot of people have lost jobs at Alcoa and Nickel West. There's no doubt about it. The truth is that those operations have come to the place that they are in now—in care and maintenance—because they are over 50 years old. They have been the backbone of the Kwinana Industrial Area for a long time. They have employed many people. Indeed, my father was employed at the BP oil refinery, which, I might add, those opposite oversaw the closure of with barely a murmur. But what is irresponsible of those opposite is to come in here—and to go elsewhere—and to repeat untruths and misrepresentations about why Alcoa shut down and why Nickel West BHP is going into temporary closure. It is very clear—and those companies have made very clear in all their public statements—that there is no policy of the government that has any effect on these decisions. It is about their ageing facilities. So, if they could stop treating Australian workers in the disgraceful manner in which they do, that would be an entirely good thing.

The Future Made in Australia Bill 2024, at its centrepiece, has emphasised the importance of critical minerals and rare earth elements and their processing here in Australia. A $17.6 billion production tax credit system will create more well-paid jobs, support local communities and build industries right here in Australia that will be critical for the future of the global economy. Underneath our feet and right across the country, we have all the critical minerals and rare earth elements the world needs for the energy transition. You can't have renewable technology like batteries, solar panels and wind turbines without them. There will not be a transition to net zero without the critical minerals of Australia. They are also vital for our defence and national security and for the defence and security of our partners and allies. As the world seeks to rapidly reduce its carbon emissions, the global demand will absolutely increase into the future. It would be a travesty if we didn't capitalise on this historic opportunity to grow this industry here in Australia for generations of prosperity to come.

We should try and do more than extracting critical minerals and exporting them to be refined overseas. Those opposite want an offshore critical minerals sector. This Albanese Labor government will not do that, because we believe in a future made in Australia. We should be processing the critical minerals here because we can do it. We need to create more value in Australia and add to our own supply chains and, importantly, those of our regional neighbours. Our traditional resources of coal, gas and iron ore will underpin the development of this new segment of the sector. All of them are needed, because the road to net zero runs through the Australian resources sector.

The production tax incentive is a game changer that will help achieve that. The investment is a no-risk approach. It is not a cash handout. If companies don't process critical minerals onshore, they don't receive a tax credit. Our critical minerals and rare earth industries will create those secure jobs of the future, but they need our support to get the industry off the ground. It is exposed to global markets. Global markets for critical minerals and rare earths are opaque, volatile and subject to manipulation. As we've seen in recent weeks, these price fluctuations are resulting in job losses, and that is what international market pressures are bringing to bear. But this government is committed to helping the sector weather these difficulties and grow for the future.

But what is standing in the way of this? Well, as always, it's those opposite—the Liberal and the National parties—holding this nation back, led by an opposition leader who's talking out of both sides of his mouth about the production tax incentive. The Leader of the Opposition says one thing in Western Australia and another when he's back here on the east coast. Here in Canberra the opposition leader opposes the production tax incentive outright and turns his back on Western Australia's resources sector. On the night the budget was released, the shadow Treasurer took mere minutes to oppose these credit systems. It was classified as 'welfare for billionaires'. Of course, on one of his rare trips to Western Australia, the opposition leader just last week was saying something else entirely. In Kalgoorlie the opposition leader said he was having respectful discussions with industry about support for critical minerals. But what would really help is if he actually said yes and supported production tax incentives that the industry itself has called for and calls for time and time again.

What we need to know from the opposition is, which is it? You have the shadow Treasurer on one hand saying, 'We don't support it,' and you have the Leader of the Opposition on the other hand having a think about it. You also have Senator Cash talking about some fantastical WA package but refusing to back in the shadow Treasurer and his staggering opposition to this policy that has the widespread support of industry. I look forward to the backflip we can expect from the shadow Treasurer in due course.

I want to talk a bit about what the opposition has proposed and the alternative to the government's proposition for production tax credits for critical minerals. The member for Farrer a minute ago said we need to get back to basics, and the coalition has claimed that all the government needs to do is go back to fundamentals and cut the red tape. So, let's look at their record on red tape. If there were a gold medal for approval delays, we might have propelled ourselves up to third on that ladder, on that Olympics table. If you combined it with the gold medal for backflips that I can expect to hear from the shadow Treasurer, we really would have done well—even better than our great Olympians have already done.

So, what is the truth on the approvals under the coalition, when they were in government? During their decade in power, approvals ground to a halt, because they cut the environment department's resourcing by 40 per cent. That meant there were no people to do the work to go through the approval process. So, that's their fault, and that is what their legacy is in the approvals space; that is their record. This government has spent $239 million in speeding up the environmental approval process. In our first budget we announced $117 million to clean up the mess and speed up approval times, and in our most recent budget we invested nearly $100 million to, again, speed up environmental approvals for renewable energy, transmission and critical minerals projects.

Their record—the record they say they want to use for getting back to basics, or getting back to fundamentals: across the previous Liberal-National government, only 46.6 per cent of decisions were made on time. Our record, under this Albanese Labor government, thanks to Labor's commitments and work on the approval processes: 84.3 decisions made on time. I'm much happier with that record than with their record over there. So, if this is all they've got—that they want to get back to basics on the approval process—well, it's not much, and it's certainly not enough to start the critical minerals industry in this country.

I might add that you cannot simply magic away, cannot just wave a wand at, the international market and geostrategic issues and the extraordinary pressure on this industry and think they will just disappear because you think it can. It goes to show just how out of touch the Liberals and Nationals are and how little they know about the resources sector in this country. I am staggered, time and time again, by their absolute ignorance and the way they take for granted the largesse of the resources industry, the support of them, and it has made them lazy in regard to policy in regard to the resources sector. Well, that is not what I do as the resources minister in this country.

I want to talk a bit about Western Australia, my home state, and the state that has vast deposits of critical minerals. I recommend that the shadow Treasurer might think to talk to some of the people who hold positions of leadership in Western Australia. He doesn't need to talk to the premier, Roger Cook, who of course supports a critical minerals strategy and the production tax credits. But he could speak to Libby Mettam, the leader of the Liberals in WA. She has said, 'We'll support this measure.' The leader of the WA Nationals and therefore the Leader of the Opposition in Western Australia, because of such underperformance of the Liberals, has said, 'It is essential not just for Western Australia and not just for Australia but for the Western world to pursue production tax incentives like this.' But the shadow Treasurer has never listened to anyone before.

We of course have other members in here from Western Australia. Their Liberal numbers are declining, and there's not been a Nationals WA member for a very long time. Maybe they should stand up for their own sectors, their own electorates, as well. I would hope that the members for Canning, Forrest, Durack and O'Connor are now speaking to the opposition leader and the shadow Treasurer to back the production tax incentive and support the sector that drives our state's economy and also drives their electorates' prosperity.

Instead of supporting Lynas, who are building a rare earths processing facility in Kalgoorlie in the electorate of O'Connor, the member for O'Connor has been distracted entirely by the Leader of the Opposition's nuclear sideshow. I see that the member for O'Connor is not on the speaking list for the Future Made in Australia Bill, which would greatly benefit his electorate. Perhaps he will find the time in his busy schedule to come in here and speak against the production tax incentives that the industry that fills his electorate supports.

Of course, there are other members in this House that have interests in the critical minerals sector in their electorates. The member for Durack will be speaking later and I look forward to her support for production tax credits. From New South Wales, the member for Parkes and the member for New England have rare earths and antimony in their respective electorates. They don't support it but they should, because it would create jobs in their electorates.

In Queensland, we have the member for Flynn, where there's a high-purity alumina refinery starting up that would benefit greatly from this production tax incentive. He was in here before saying no to this policy. I haven't heard from the member for Leichhardt but he has a tungsten deposit in his electorate that would be handy. Member for Capricornia, you have molybdenum, which you might be speaking about.

I haven't seen that, but I'm sure you'd want to help them out with the production tax credits.

We're looking forward to the contributions of the member to Gippsland and the member for Mallee. Of course, the member for Braddon will be speaking later too. He has the prospect of having a tungsten refinery in his electorate, and they will be depending on the production tax credit in order to move that along. If all of those members—and there may be some others—want to have a think about what the benefit is for industry right across the country, particularly for their electorates, they could come in here and try to get some support for it or, alternatively, call their leaders.

There are a few other people that have supported the production tax credits. Rob Scott from Wesfarmers has said the credits are a 'smart, targeted use of the tax system to solve big problems, leverage our competitive advantages and enhance Australia's prosperity.' Wesfarmers are of course building a lithium hydroxide plant. Janette Hewson from the Queensland Resources Council—a great supporter of Labor, but who we know is also a great supporter of the coalition—has said:

The Critical Minerals Production Tax Incentive, funding to progress common user facilities and $566 million to Geoscience Australia to develop new data are all important announcements that will benefit our critical minerals industry.

And they are not the only ones. We have AMEC as well, who represent the vast majority of junior miners that are set to benefit from the critical minerals industry. If these three groups are saying it, maybe have a listen to them instead of listening to the Leader of the Opposition and the shadow Treasurer, who have no idea about the resources sector. Sure, you can fly into a private party in a private jet and have a few champagnes. That's jolly good, but it doesn't show your understanding of the industry one whit. It doesn't help this country to progress. It just shows you are ignorant, if you rely on shadowy gifts to make sure that you can keep doing what you're doing, which is create poor policy with poor results, into the future.

Labor understands the resources sector. One of the reasons we have a great advantage in the resources sector is that we represent the workers in that sector. They are the ones that I know stand to benefit. This will benefit generations of workers, moreover, because the production tax incentives will create generations of work in new industries right across the country, so we can have a Future Made in Australia.

See this speech in context