Maria Vamvakinou (Calwell, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. How will the disciplined and rigorous approach to investments as part of the Albanese Labor government's Future Made in Australia plan ensure the benefits are widely shared? What approaches were rejected?

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We will miss the member for Calwell when she retires at the end of this parliamentary term, and this question shows why. A Future Made in Australia is all about modernising and strengthening our economy in a global economy powered by cleaner and cheaper energy. It's about grasping the vast economic and industrial opportunities presented to us by the world's shift to net zero. The legislation before the House, as the Prime Minister said, provides the rigor and robustness we need to attract more investment in the most cost-effective way. That's why the Ai Group said:

This rigour brings a welcome degree of transparency and accountability … based on clear policy principles …

This is what the coalition are opposing when they say they will vote against our legislation. They are voting against a proper assessment of spending. They are voting against communities benefiting from this investment. They are voting against aligning our economic and national security interests. The shadow Treasurer's bizarre and unhinged speech last night reads like it was cut and pasted from the darkest, strangest corners of the far-right web, and that's because it probably was. He bagged the Treasury department that he wants to lead. He said that prioritising local communities, jobs and skills is 'Orwellian'. He said putting national security and economics together is 'ideological', and he described ARENA as a 'slush fund'. Remember, he was the minister for ARENA for almost four years. It was truly mad and bizarre stuff. It was truly unhinged, and it was factually wrong, as well. For example, he said that the PsiQuantum deal cost the Commonwealth $22.7 billion, when it's only $470 million. He was only $22,230,000,000 off! Then he handed his dodgy maths to the member for Flynn, who repeated his points verbatim and stuffed it up as well. He shouldn't have taken the shadow Treasurer seriously when nobody else does.

This is a contest between the maddies over there and the mainstream over here. We are part of a new global orthodoxy, mainstream and middle of the road, which is all about sharing the views of the investment community here and abroad. We know that it would be self-defeating to let the global net zero opportunity pass us by. It would make our economy weaker, our people poorer and our country more valuable. We know we can be big beneficiaries—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Groom will cease interjecting or he will be warned.

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

of the global shift to net zero if we play our winning hand and if we reject the extreme and divisive and gaffe-prone and unhinged cooker politics being played by those opposite, which sees them in the third year of a three-year parliamentary term still without any credible or costed economic policies of their own.