Allegra Spender (Wentworth, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I want to briefly rise in support of several of the amendments moved by the government, particularly those which go to consultation transparency requirements. The government amendments indicate that Treasury will consult with the Productivity Commission and others when conducting sector assessments under the National Interest Framework. This is a positive step, and aligns with the amendments I put forward during the second reading debate, as well as those put forward by the member for Kooyong.

I recognise the government has legitimate reasons for retaining ownership of the sector assessment process within Treasury; however, I'm very glad that the government has acknowledged that the Productivity Commission has deep expertise and experience in conducting similar kinds of analyses. For instance, the PC's annual trade and assistance review covers much of the same ground as the sector assessments proposed in this bill, and the commission have established a robust and road-tested set of methodologies for looking at the consequences of different forms of government intervention. The commission will also, I believe, contribute a healthy degree of independence and scepticism to the process. Again, I note the comments that its chair, Danielle Wood, has made in relation to some of the announcements made regarding the Future Made in Australia legislation so far. The Productivity Commission are experts, and we would be foolish not to consider their views. Embedding consultation sends a strong signal of the robustness and independence of the sector assessment process, and should prevent a situation where this or any future government could bypass their feedback in favour of their own pet projects.

I thank the government and, particularly, the Treasurer and his staff for engagement on these issues, and for a very constructive set of amendments in relation to these areas.

See this speech in context