Brian Mitchell (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This morning I am proud to speak in support of the Albanese Labor government's Future Made in Australia Bill 2024. This bill is a major step in implementing the government's Future Made in Australia vision to deliver our country's next generation of prosperity. A Future Made in Australia is a proactive agenda. It's about creating new jobs and new opportunities for every part of our country, from the cities to regional and remote areas, by maximising the economic and industrial benefits of the move to net zero and securing Australia's place in a changing global, economic and strategic landscape. It will help Australia build a stronger, more diversified and more resilient economy, powered by renewable energy. It will create more secure well-paid jobs and encourage and facilitate the private sector investment required to make Australia an indispensable part of the global net zero economy.

The Albanese Labor government is investing in a Future Made in Australia to unlock private investment in future industries and bring new jobs and opportunities to communities across the country. As the Treasurer was reported saying in the Australian newspaper today:

The biggest part of our plan is tax breaks, because a Future Made in Australia is all about attracting private investment—not replacing it.

We know it's possible because it's already happening. Solar panels are being made with Australian minerals, and Australian research is leading to breakthroughs in medicine and health. If we don't act now to shape the future of our great nation, other countries will shape our future for us.

The coalition is unfortunately opposing this bill and the Greens are playing possum. I implore the Liberals and the Greens to put politics aside and vote for this bill in the national interest. We want more things made here. We want Australians making those things. We want Australians having more control over their own future and more economic security.

This bill is all about realising Australia's genuine natural advantages and recognising that our future growth prospects lie at the intersection of our industrial, resources, skills and energy bases and our attractiveness as an investment destination. The bill and omnibus bill deliver on key elements of the government's Future Made in Australia plan announced by the government in the 2024-25 budget. They impose rigor on government decision-making and help give investors the clarity and certainty they need to invest and unlock growth in our economy.

The Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 includes three key components. It embeds the government's new national interest framework to help identify where Australia has a genuine comparative advantage in the net zero economy or where we have an economic security and resilience imperative. It establishes a robust, effective assessment process to help improve understanding of how government can best leverage private investment in areas of the economy aligned with the framework and help inform rigorous government decision-making. And it defines a set of community benefit principles to ensure that the benefits of a Future Made in Australia support, and the private sector investment enables, flow to local communities, workers and businesses.

The Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 contains amendments to implement key Future Made in Australia initiatives announced in the budget. These include enabling Export Finance Australia to make domestically focused investments under the National Interest Account in alignment with the National Interest Framework. It safeguards $6 billion in funding for arenas, renewables and related priorities, giving industry and investors certainty to deliver sizable, long-lasting projects. And it sets up arrangements for the Future Made in Australia Innovation Fund to accelerate innovative technology deployment in priority sectors and makes necessary adjustments to the governance arrangements of ARENA. Legislation covering additional elements of the Future Made in Australia plan, including production tax credits and a single front door for investments, will be brought forward in future sittings.

This Labor government's vision for a Future Made in Australia is already becoming reality and goes well beyond the strict remits of this bill. We are building infrastructure and support for our manufacturing jobs in the regions to aid them on the journey towards stronger economic security. Our Powering the Regions program offers a big funding boost for clean energy and emissions reduction projects at heavy industrial sites around the country. Earlier this year the Minister for Climate Change and Energy visited Railton in my electorate to announce a $330 million investment in nine projects, four of them in Tasmania, to keep Australian industry not just surviving but thriving as demand for low-emissions products grows around the world. Cement Australia's facility in Railton is more than 100 years old, and funding of $52.9 million will upgrade its kiln and increase the use of alternative fuels, such as waste, to reduce emissions.

Industries like cement, alumina, mining, iron and steel processing, chemicals manufacturing, and food processing are all critical, not just to Australia's past but to our future, which is why we want to invest in them for the long term. Investment in these projects will cut 830,000 tonnes of emissions every year. That's equivalent to taking every single one of Tasmania's cars and trucks off the roads. And our program of investing in infrastructure, strategic transport and net zero will set up our nation and our people for a more prosperous and sustainable future. This government is investing $80 million in the Lyell Highway, which connects the northern Hobart suburbs to the ever-growing Derwent Valley. It's another example of what we're doing to connect our regions. And we've only just started. I'm proud that Tasmanians will play their part in our vision to build a stronger Australia and that we will not forget them as those opposite tend to do.

I was dismayed to hear the comments on this bill by the member for Mallee last night, deriding the development of green hydrogen industries—something the former government supported, by the way. Hydrogen plays a major part in this nation's future, particularly in northern Tasmania. So I was very disappointed to hear the comments from the member for Mallee.

The Labor government's proactive approach to a Future Made in Australia is a far cry from the Liberals' nuclear plan, as they scramble to find a difference in an election year. The coalition's 'future made in plutonium' plan claims that the first two of its reactors can be operational by 2037, a time frame that independent energy experts like the CSIRO have said would not be possible and would cost around $100 billion in taxpayer money. And they have the nerve to accuse this government of unnecessary spending!

I go to the comments of the member for Hume in his remarks to the House last night on this: 'You cannot run an aluminium smelter unless you have affordable, reliable energy. It's the same with an aluminium refinery and with any metals processing or food processing. Affordable, reliable energy is not negotiable.' We agree with that comment from the member for Hume. It's not often that you'll find those of us on this side of the House agreeing with anything the member for Hume has to say, but we agree with that comment. But his idea of affordable, reliable energy is to back in a nuclear plan for seven reactors that is totally uncosted.

The coalition have already said that every single dollar for nuclear energy will be coming from the government—government controlled nuclear reactors and government-paid-for nuclear reactors. They're going to ride roughshod over local communities. The leader of the National Party has said this is part of their plan. There'll be no consultation with local communities. Those seven sites in Australia are getting a nuclear reactor under the coalition come hell or high water. Too bad if you don't want it. Their plan for supposedly affordable and supposedly reliable energy is to back in a nuclear plan that won't be here for decades and that will cost hundreds of billions of dollars—every cent of it from the taxpayer. It's laughable. Absolutely laughable.

There are so many questions that have been left unanswered by those opposite as we stare down the barrel in a few months of going to an election. They still have not provided details on this critical point of how they seek to provide energy security to this country. The Labor government's plan is well mapped out and is there for everyone to see. It's the plan we took to the election. It's the plan we are delivering in government if only we were not being stopped and delayed by an unholy alliance of those opposite and the Greens on the crossbench.

The fact is the Liberal plan—you can't even really call it a plan—the Liberal thought bubble for nuclear lacks detail, is divisive and will cost at least twice as much as the renewable plan that the government is bringing forward for Australia. Under the Liberals, Australians' power bills will go nuclear. They won't come down; they will go absolutely nuclear.

My argument about nuclear is not an argument about the science. Clearly nuclear works, but the economics don't work for Australia. The time to go nuclear in this country would have been at least, if not more than, 10 years ago. But it didn't happen. Certainly during the coalition's time in office they never once raised it as a viable option. They had 10 years to bring forward and did nothing.

By contrast, renewable technology has come a long way, and Australia is a leader in it. Australia has the best natural energy resources in the world. To exploit what renewable energy has to offer has been shown in my home state of Tasmania. We've had hydropower in my state for a century. It works. The proof is in the pudding. Yet those opposite at every turn will deride renewable energy and the great benefits it can bring to this country. Instead they will pursue their nuclear fantasy, and every Australian will suffer as a result.

The golden opportunity in front of us as a parliament will disappear if we don't take the steps to support this bill's passage through this parliament. The Australian people have already suffered enough through a decade of denial and delay under those opposite, and if the coalition had their way there'd be another wasted decade ahead going down a nuclear road to nowhere. This government has chosen a better path—a path to prosperity, a path backed by evidence and supported by science and a path that will be rigorously interrogated and transparently explained to the Australian people. It's a path that uplifts all Australians of every community, not just some. It's a path that leads to a future made right here in Australia.

This is the biggest pro-manufacturing package in this country's history. But what it's going to require to deliver it is Australians working together, including our government, the state and territory governments, councils, big business, small business, universities, research centres, trade unions, workers and everybody else working together in the national interest for a future made in Australia.

The world is moving towards renewable energy. It's not just governments, it's businesses as well. The private sector is moving towards renewable energy and we are the sunniest, windiest continent on earth. It's time we put that to work. The world is changing with or without Australia, and the time to act is now. If we don't shape our own future, others will shape it for us. It's time to invest in a better future for all Australians to fund the apprenticeships, create opportunities in our TAFEs and universities, build the infrastructure and attract new investment that will boost industry and back new ideas. I proudly commend this bill to the House.

Dai Le (Fowler, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A constituent recently visited my office sharing with me the challenges of his manufacturing business in producing tahini. Tahini, for those who don't know, is a Middle Eastern condiment that is served with many dishes from the region. It's made by grinding toasted, hulled sesame seeds to create a creamy smooth paste, which I'm sure many members in this chamber have experienced and tasted. Jamal Elishe, the owner of JR Food Products, shared how difficult it is for his business to grow. He doesn't access government support and wasn't aware that he could.

The challenge for him growing his business locally and internationally is that Australia is importing so much tahini from the Middle East. This simple yet popular Middle Eastern sauce could be freshly made and should have a shelf life of nine months, not the two years that most of the products from overseas are stamped with when they reach our market shelves. Jamal believes the standard of his Australian made product is of high quality because he has to meet the standards set here. However, it's difficult to compete with overseas imported tahini.

We've been hearing and talking about Future Made in Australia here in this chamber. This small manufacturing business is an example of the potential for Australian products to be made here for the future of Australia and to grow our economy, which many members have been alluding to for the last few days, but what support is there for small manufacturing businesses like Jamal's? How can the government assist small food manufacturing businesses with their Future Made in Australia policy?

The government announced this policy earlier with a $1 billion publicly funded initiative to establish an entire solar supply chain in Australia and spun it as a step towards creating a manufacturing base for solar products. But this needs to be questioned. Is such a move prudent or, rather, a waste of funds that could be used elsewhere, such as in food manufacturing? All our current domestic solar efforts are just assembly lines for—guess what—Chinese products. That is not manufacturing. To truly manufacture solar panels, we would need to build an entire solar panel manufacturing value chain or at least meaningful parts thereof, making or participating in the making of polysilicon, wafers and cells and then ultimately assembling the final Australian made panels.

To establish such industrial capability, one would need to invest not just $1 billion but, rather, $10 billion to $20 billion at least. Even then, it would by no means be assured that such capability would be able to stand up against Chinese capabilities and find enough paying customers. The harsh reality is that China leads this sector not only with low costs but high-quality products that are demanded by economically acting customers and that make ends meet. China's solar industry is supported by a robust infrastructure and a large trained workforce. Their total solar investments go into the many hundreds of billions of dollars, with established worldwide sales channels and over 100,000 R&D staff and leadership in all elements of the entire supply chain.

Who do we think we are now in wanting to eventually compete with a measly $1 billion against this established world leader, who already brought Korean, European and US domestic solar manufacturing to their knees? Therefore, I fear that this could end up just being a PR exercise if we don't ensure that it's actually implementable and delivers for small Australian manufacturing businesses.

Let me remind the members of this chamber that my great community of Fowler is the heart of manufacturing in this country. Manufacturing employs 40 per cent of the population in Fowler, compared to about six per cent of Australia's workforce in this sector. Therefore, my community takes manufacturing seriously as it impacts the livelihood of many in Fowler, as in the case of Jamal Elishe and his tahini product.

The Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 has grand aspirations, stimulating the economy with renewable energy manufacturing, promising more secure jobs and even transitioning to a net zero economy. But, as I said, to establish such industrial capability one would need to invest not just $1 billion but rather $10 billion to $20 billion at least. Even then, it is by no means assured that such capability would be able to stand against China's capabilities.

Let's get real. The last few years have been very challenging for all Australians, especially those in low-income areas like my electorate of Fowler. I recently held my second bring-your-bill day, and over 200 people showed up, sharing their struggles with the unaffordable cost of living. Many have lost their jobs, homes and businesses, struggling to keep up with the aftermath of COVID-19, spiking inflation and the lack of affordable housing. Our economy continues to stagnate, and people live with uncertainties. What will help them and all of us now is economic prosperity. So I'm all for a new plan for the future of Australia, but only if it delivers for working Australians—the ones who actually hold up our economy. This new plan is costing $22.7 billion of taxpayers' money. There's no room for error. We can't afford any more expensive mistakes if we are to combat inflation and stimulate growth.

The bill introduces the National Interest Framework, giving the government power to identify and invest in projects of national interest. This means that the government will facilitate private investments to meet these projects of national interest. Priority interest industries will be identified under two streams: the net zero transformation stream and the economic resilience and security stream. The net zero transformation stream will be focused on sectors that make a substantial contribution to achieving net zero, whilst the economic resilience and security stream will centralise on sectors critical to our resilience that need support to unlock private investment.

To obtain Future Made in Australia support, businesses must meet community benefit principles of promoting safe and secure jobs that are well paid, have good conditions and produce more skilled and inclusive workforces that invest in training and skills development and engage collaboratively in achieving positive outcomes for local communities. Those are lofty ambitions, but will small businesses, especially those in Fowler, actually understand what they need to do to qualify for the Future Made in Australia support? Will they even meet the community benefit principles? Will Jamal Elishe meet the community benefit principles with his food production? Do governments have a good track record of knowing how to run or advise businesses or have an understanding of our diverse businesses in this country run by diverse communities?

My concern is that Future Made in Australia will exclude small businesses, like Jamal Elishe's, from obtaining support due to how broad and vague these principles are, especially those of non-English-speaking backgrounds. Family owned manufacturing businesses of culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds are already struggling to navigate the existing legislative frameworks for compliance. I understand that the National Interest Framework goal is to identify sectors that can contribute significantly to emissions reduction and spot areas where Australia could have a sustained comparative advantage, but what role would it play in uplifting the small and local manufacturers already operating to ensure economic resilience and security at the community level?

The government must consult and engage with small manufacturing businesses, especially in areas with high migrant and refugee populations like Fowler, to understand their challenges in navigating through the current industrial relations system, let alone the proposed changes. This engagement will certainly give government and its bureaucracies insights on how to best apply the community benefit principles and to issue guidelines to ensure that these communities have equitable access to the support they need to scale. As it currently stands, the sector assessments may not explicitly consider the unique contributions and challenges of small and local manufacturers within these communities. There is a need for the inclusion of criteria within sector assessments that recognise and evaluate the role of small manufacturers in contributing to the Australian economy.

One of the major components of this bill is the National Reconstruction Fund. This $15 billion fund was announced two years ago, and yet, for reasons I have highlighted in another speech, not one dollar of this made it out to small businesses. The NRF has made a comeback under the Future Made in Australia agenda, and the government is expecting us to hope for better outcomes. The lesson of the NRF failure was that those assessing applications had very narrow expertise and experience. They were mainly finance people. This was of no help when business operators involved in food manufacturing, the tech industry and others made applications. It essentially became the same discussion they would have with their own banks. Simply rolling the NRF into the Future Made in Australia plan, with similarly vague or even scant reference to the tactics of how business can apply, and without a pledge for the reviewing committee to be more widely experienced, will result in the same dismal outcome as the NRF.

I worry about the government's ability when it comes to involvement in the renewable industry. I understand that it may be a no-brainer for the government to invest in the renewable energy sector for infrastructure renewal and economic prosperity. We hope that Australians can expect more job opportunities as a result. I support the intention, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions. We do need to better include small businesses in the big picture. If the bill primarily focuses on larger manufacturing entities and does not provide specific measures to support small and local manufacturers then it fails to address the needs of a vital segment of the industry that is prevalent in Fowler. We are being pushed with the buy-local narrative, but this may be counterproductive and not the whole truth of the process or outcome. To buy local, we must assist businesses like Jamal Elishe to grow and survive.

In the case of solar, we need to invest in the production of the polysilicon wafers and cells required for Australian-made solar panels, for example. We all know that currently there are cheaper solar panels from China that are readily available to meet the net zero objective. How will the government ensure that we can compete in this market?

The bill wants to use public investment to unlock private investments that will act in the national interest, but there is a risk that these investments will prioritise and benefit only larger projects and corporations. This has the potential to overlook the unique challenges faced by small manufacturers and to allow opportunities that they offer to wither. I would like to see the bill amended to more explicitly cater for small businesses, such as a dollar amount allocated to them, so that they don't get left out in the cold as they were under the former NRF approach. I am all for revitalising the manufacturing industry in Australia. If we can do this by incentivising small businesses within clean industries, all the better, but I caution the government: if this leaves small manufacturers out in the cold, like Jamal Elishe, many businesses will fail and the future, rather than being made in Australia, may be quite bleak.

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise in support of the Future Made in Australia Bill. This great southern land is very fortunate. We have the oldest past and the brightest future. We have unparalleled natural resources, a thriving business sector, a diverse economy, a stable government, a skilled and willing workforce and strong trading relationships. With this bill the Albanese Labor government is harnessing these advantages to promote jobs, security, and prosperity for all Australians in this rapidly changing world.

The world is changing owing to a combination of factors—partly because of the transformation of industries in the digital age, complex economies and even our own lifestyles as we transition to net zero. It is also because of the challenging and nuanced strategic landscape that we live in. Right now, not too far to the north of us, we are seeing the largest literary buildup occurring since World War II. However, within this time of change there are opportunities, and A Future Made in Australia ensures that we meet these generational opportunities head-on rather than retreating from change. A Future Made in Australia is a big plan for a big country. It's visionary and it's forward-thinking. It focuses on private investment to drive the development and growth of future industries, accompanied by secure and well-paying jobs all around the country. It demands rigour in government decision-making, which will give investors confidence and clarity. While the plan is comprehensive, it also has a simple aim: to make the most of our resources—the resources that belong to the Australian people—and to make things here. Fundamentally, A Future Made in Australia is an economic action plan for a more prosperous, secure and independent future for all Australians. Who could not get on board?

This planning positions us to build a more resilient and diversified economy—one that is powered by renewable energy. It drives new industries, critical minerals processing, green metals, clean energy technologies and low-carbon liquid fuels. This bill sets out the steps we need to take to achieve a future made in Australia as announced by the Treasurer in this year's budget and as endorsed by the Australian people at the last election.

The bill the parliament is debating has three overarching elements. The first is to ensure that the new National Interest Framework is the foundation for the sector's growth moving forward. It will identify where Australia has a comparative advantage in the net zero economy or where an economic security imperative exist. Legislating the framework will provide the investment sector with clarity and confidence. A key part of the framework is the establishment of a set of community benefit principles, which is the second key component. These community benefit principles make sure that investments work for local communities, for local businesses, for local workers. This reflects Labor's commitment to positively navigating the economic and societal changes on the way to net zero so that all Australians are not only brought along on the journey but benefit as well. This requires a suite of measures, starting with community engagement and collaboration. It is crucial that local communities such as First Nations communities and those directly affect by the transition to net zero are given feedback and consultation opportunities.

A future made in Australia requires investments that provide safe, secure and well-paying jobs with good conditions. This means investing in training to develop a highly skilled workforce and broadening opportunities for workforce participation, particularly for some underrepresented groups such as women, First Nations communities and some remote communities as well. In addition to this, domestic industrial capabilities must be strengthened through more robust local supply chains. COVID exposed this flaw in our economy, so projects need to demonstrate transparency and compliance with tax management, including any contributions received under Future Made in Australia supports. These supports are the government investments to which the community benefit principles apply.

In its initial phase, the bill enables two kinds of support. The first is the Future Made in Australia Innovation Fund. The second concerns investments that are referred to the government for assessment under Export Finance Australia's National Interest Account. Under the legislation, the minister can add more supports in the future. The framework itself has two streams, focusing on the net zero transformation and economic security, balancing both of those. The net zero transformation stream concentrates on sectors that are likely to have an ongoing comparative advantage in the global economy. These sectors are anticipated to need public investment in order for the sector to make a cost-efficient contribution to emissions reduction. The economic resilience and security stream highlights the sectors that require a level of domestic capability, such as for national security reasons, via government support—so that we're not exposed, basically.

The sector assessment process is the third key component of this bill, and this assessment process will be transparent, made at the request of the Treasurer and implemented by Treasury. These assessments will be made public so that Australians can gauge whether an area of the economy is aligned with the national interest framework. The assessment process will also inform government as to any barriers to investment.

The Future Made in Australia (Omnibus Amendments No. 1) Bill 2024 outlines specific changes to enable the measures mentioned. Firstly, the government is amending the Export Finance Australia legislation to encourage and facilitate private sector investment. This includes ensuring the availability of support for existing funds and programs that cannot fully support a project. The bill also enables Export Finance Australia to focus on domestic investments that boost the net zero transformation stream and the economic resilience and security stream. Export Finance Australia will carry out these operations while continuing to bolster other national interest programs such as the Critical Minerals Facility, the Southeast Asia Investment Financing Facility, the defence export facility, and the Australian Infrastructure Financing Facility for the Pacific—all important projects.

The second schedule of this omnibus bill makes amendments to the Australian Renewable Energy Agency Act 2011. These amendments will ensure that the Australian Renewable Energy Agency, known as ARENA, can support the Future Made in Australia strategy. ARENA first received statutory funding way back in 2011. I should acknowledge that back then it had bipartisan support. I think that the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison conga line of LNP governments did attack ARENA—particularly the Abbott government—but it survived and gave those three governments their only claims to have responded in any way at all to dangerous climate change, although, to be fair, I think that Turnbull and Morrison might have chronically neglected ARENA, rather than attacked it like Tony Abbott did.

As a result of these omnibus changes, ARENA will have a limited special appropriation within the legislation. The agency's parameters will be extended to include a fourth objective, which is:

… to contribute to the reduction of global greenhouse gas emissions in accordance with the Paris Agreement.

ARENA will also promote electrification and energy efficiency, given their crucial part in enabling the net zero transition, as well as enable greater integration of renewable energy into the grid. Obviously we all know, especially on this side of the chamber, that more renewable energy equals lower power bills. The equation is simple.

With global greenhouse gas emissions in mind, ARENA will also support the development and manufacture of Australian renewable energy products for our trading partners. This will assist our trading partners with their own decarbonisation targets and have a positive effect on reductions globally. After all, there is only one planet. Our neighbour's problem can be our problem to help solve.

These positive changes for ARENA will provide the agency with the foundation it needs to support the transition to net zero and make Australia a renewable energy superpower. Statutory funding means ARENA delivers its Future Made in Australia components, such as the Solar Sunshot program and the Battery Breakthrough Initiative. A snapshot of the Sunshot program shows how it supports a Future Made in Australia. It aims to support innovative manufacturing facilities right across the solar supply chain, and the Battery Breakthrough Initiative promotes the development of domestic battery manufacturing capabilities. We won't just ship off raw materials and buy back—ship in—manufactured value-added batteries. Instead we'll build them here in the first place. We know that it's happening, particularly in rural Australia. In Queensland, old or soon to be decommissioned coal-fired power stations are being reutilised by these batteries and other solar initiatives because of their connection to the grid.

This bill directs statutory funding of over $6 billion of ARENA's existing funding to a limited special appropriation. It gives private investors the security required to support the extensive projects crucial to the transformation to net zero. It also showcases Australia's unwavering commitment to climate targets. Internationally we were fast becoming a pariah when it came to our response to dangerous climate change.

The final raft of reforms to ARENA concern its governance and ensures that the agency has the ability to succeed with its expanded remit. The board will be strengthened and the agency will be able to employ its own staff. It also changes certain ministerial arrangements, including enabling the Minister for Climate Change and Energy to delegate powers to other ministers and establishing the Minister for Finance as a joint minister for ARENA, reflecting the reality that responding to dangerous climate change must be an economy-wide endeavour. All ministers have a role to play.

As the Treasurer has said:

We have a unique combination of geological, meteorological, geographical and geopolitical comparative advantages and we know it would be an egregious breach of our generational responsibilities as a government if we didn't play this winning hand.

Well said, Treasurer. That's why this year's budget directed $22.7 billion of investment into this strategy. We're already on this pathway to change and prosperity. The foundations are in place. Under Labor we are generating 25 per cent more renewable energy. In only two years we've approved enough renewable energy projects to power three million Australian homes. A Future Made in Australia is one that boosts such projects. It harnesses our natural strengths and resources. It positions us for emerging markets. It focuses on communities, technology, jobs and skills and provides the building blocks for cleaner and cheaper solutions to these energy problems. It means that we won't be slugged with carbon input charges by other nations or other blocs of nations. These carbon tariffs are real, they're emerging more and more and they will come.

We are a trading nation. Remember, we grow enough for 75 million people, but there's only 25 million of us. We're a trading nation, but in reality we're far from markets so we don't want to be exposed to extra costs. This is why a future made in Australia remains Labor's focus. We are taking action to deliver Australia's next generation of prosperity. Get on board or get out of the way. I commend the bill to the House.

Michelle Landry (Capricornia, National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Manufacturing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Another day and we have another bill from Labor full of spin, devoid of detail and delivering no immediate relief for Australian manufacturers. The Future Made in Australia Bill—or MIA as it's aptly named—is yet another example of Labor's policies, which are missing in action when it comes to delivering real support for Australian families, small businesses and farmers, who are struggling under the crushing weight of a government that is driving up the cost of living and has no regard for Australians doing it tough as a result. After 12 interest rate hikes, facing some of the most persistent core inflation in the developed world and dealing with higher taxes, Australian families shouldn't have to bear the cost of Labor's re-election strategy.

Despite all of the rhetoric, this legislation fails to address the most pressing needs of those who keep our economy going. When you get into the detail of the Future Made in Australia Bill it is glaringly obvious that Labor has once again fallen short in the fundamentals required to foster business growth and development. Where is the meaningful action to reduce the burden of red tape that strangles innovation and where is the tax reform that our businesses so desperately need? The bill does nothing to alleviate the skilled worker shortages that are hampering industries and it fails to provide any credible plan for driving down inflation, which continues to erode the purchasing power of everyday Australians.

Let's not forget the critical need for clean, affordable and reliable energy, which is a cornerstone for any thriving economy but is conspicuously absent from this legislation. Labor shows their lack of understanding of the business sector and has missed the mark on every account. Instead of empowering our businesses to grow, innovate and compete on the global stage, this bill is yet another missed opportunity and another failure to grasp the basic economic principles that our nation needs to succeed.

The harsh reality is that the bill does nothing to alleviate the immense pressure that manufacturers are facing due to the ongoing economic mismanagement by this government. For far too many Australian manufacturers the damage has already been done. It's simply two years too late. Under the oversight of this government we've witnessed an alarming surge in insolvencies within the manufacturing sector, with numbers having tripled in a short span. Since Labor took office, approximately 19,000 businesses have entered insolvency, marking the highest number recorded since ASIC began collecting this data. Productivity has plummeted and businesses that have been the backbone of our economy for generations are struggling just to keep their doors open and workers employed.

This bill is not an isolated failure. It's part of a broader pattern of ineffective policies that have consistently missed the mark. Take, for instance, Labor's much touted $15 billion National Reconstruction Fund. Despite all the grand promises, this fund is still yet to deliver a single dollar to actually help businesses grow, innovate or develop. This absence of delivery is a stark reminder that under this government bold headlines often failed to translate into real-world action and results. Our manufacturers deserve better. They deserve policies that will genuinely support growth, enhance competitiveness and secure their future. Unfortunately, this government's track record shows a continued failure to deliver on those needs.

It is important to note that it's not just my colleagues and me in the coalition who are sounding the alarm on this desperate and ill-conceived policy. The concerns are being echoed by those on the frontline of our economy, including manufacturers not only in my electorate of Capricornia but also from every corner of Australia. In countless meetings and discussions the message from these industry leaders has been consistent and clear: this policy falls woefully short of delivering the competitive edge that Australian manufacturing so desperately needs. They understand the challenges of the global market and they see that this policy does nothing to equip them with the tools necessary to thrive and compete on the world stage.

The voices of these manufacturers should not be ignored. Their expertise and firsthand experience underline the serious flaws in this approach. Jack Trenaman, a local business owner and manufacturer in my electorate of Capricornia, has expressed a deep concern that echoes throughout the manufacturing sector in Australia. He's witnessing firsthand the devastating effects of rising electricity costs, fuel prices and overwhelming red tape which are driving his business into the ground. According to Jack, manufacturing businesses across the country are watching in dismay as the industry they've built and sustained for years is slowly disappearing under the weight of these crippling expenses. Jack's business, SMW, is now one of only three remaining mining truck trade manufacturers in Australia, a stark indicator of how dire the situation has become. Despite the booming demand in our mining industry, driven by coal exports and critical minerals, Jack finds himself struggling to compete with international markets.

It's astonishing to think that while our mining sector is thriving our local manufacturers are being outpaced by overseas competitors who can produce the same products at a 30 to 40 per cent lower cost. This situation lays bare the glaring disconnect between the policies being implemented and the harsh realities faced by our manufacturers. As Jack put it to me, Labor policies are nothing short of a shackle on the industry's productivity. Instead of enabling growth, these policies are tying the hands of our manufacturers, making it increasingly difficult for them to keep their doors open, let alone thrive. Jack's experience is not an isolated one; it's a reflection of a broader systemic failure that needs urgent attention if we are to preserve a future made in Australia.

Australia has a long and proud tradition of excellence in manufacturing, and the coalition has always been at the forefront of supporting this vital industry. Under our modern manufacturing strategy we didn't just talk about supporting manufacturing; we took decisive action. We were actively expanding and modernising our sovereign manufacturing capabilities, making strategic investments to secure critical supply chains and ensuring that businesses like SMW had access to the skills and world-class research needed to drive further expansion and growth.

Our approach was about empowering Australian manufacturers not only to compete but to lead on the global stage. The results were clear: under our strategy, the industry was thriving, with businesses seeing real, tangible benefits from our policies. This stands in stark contrast to the government's current National Reconstruction Fund, which has thus far proven ineffective in delivering the support our industry desperately needs. While our policies were producing measurable successes, the National Reconstruction Fund is yet to provide the necessary resources and backing to ensure the continued strength and competitiveness of Australian manufacturing.

The difference is clear. Whereas we invested in growth and modernisation, the current government's approach has fallen short. Leading representatives from key business peak bodies have voiced serious concerns regarding the Future Made in Australia Bill, reflecting a growing unease within the industry. The Business Council of Australia, for example, submitted a detailed critique to the Senate inquiry highlighting significant flaws in the bill's restrictive design and rigid eligibility criteria. They warn that these constraints could severely limit the support available for projects. This could have the unintended consequences of pushing valuable opportunities overseas, depriving Australia of critical economic benefits and job creation.

Adding to their concern is the bill's narrow and inflexible community benefit principles, which introduce yet another layer of red tape into the investment process. These principles make it exceedingly difficult for potential applicants to navigate the system, deterring many from even applying. The business council fears that this additional complexity will stifle innovation and limit the bill's overall effectiveness in bolstering Australian manufacturing and industry.

The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry has also raised alarms, particularly over earlier extensive announcements of projects that have already been allocated funding under the Future Made in Australia Bill. Labor has publicly championed a $4 billion investment in the Hydrogen Headstart program, over $6 billion in hydrogen production tax incentives and a $1 billion commitment to Solar Sunshot solar panel manufacturing. However, these precommitments alone total an overwhelming $19.4 billion, leaving just $4.5 billion available for new projects over the next decade. This imbalance raises serious questions about the bill's ability to adequately support emerging industries and new innovation.

The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry encapsulated their broader concerns in their submission, cautioning that 'there is a risk that the bill's focus on new industries might undermine existing sectors that are crucial to Australia's economy. It is vital to support industries where Australia has a competitive advantage.' This statement underscores a profound worry that the bill's current focus could inadvertently weaken established sectors that are essential to our nation's economic stability and growth. These warnings from peak bodies reflect a broader disconnect between the bill's intensions and its practical implications. It is crucial that these concerns are heeded if we are to avoid undermining the very industries that have long been the backbone of Australia's economy.

The Future Made in Australia Bill, while seemingly designed to bolster our manufacturing sector, falls significantly short of addressing the real challenges faced by Australian businesses. This legislation in its current form is a missed opportunity, one that fails to deliver the necessary support for our manufacturers, who are the lifeblood of our economy. The restrictive design, excessive red tape and lack of tangible benefits underscore a disconnect between the government's promises and the harsh realities on the ground. Our manufacturing industry has a proud history and remains crucial to our national prosperity. Yet, under this government's watch, we've seen insolvencies skyrocket, productivity plummet and businesses struggle to keep their doors open. The coalition, through our Modern Manufacturing Strategy, demonstrated what is possible when government policy aligns with the needs of industry. The tangible benefits of our approach stand in stark contrast to the ineffective policies currently being put forward.

Additionally the concerns raised by peak industry bodies should not be dismissed. The warnings from the Business Council of Australia and the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry highlight the real and present dangers of this bill. They have pointed out the flaws in this bill's design, the risk of pushing projects overseas and the potential undermining of existing sectors vital to our economy. These are not just theoretical concerns; they are grounded in the lived experiences of those who are on the front lines of our manufacturing industry every day. It is imperative that we learn from these insights and adjust our course accordingly. The focus must be on creating policies that genuinely support and enhance our manufacturing capabilities. We need policies that return to the fundamentals and set us back on the right path by curbing inflationary spending, reducing bureaucratic red tape, simplifying Labor's complex industrial relations agenda, lowering taxes and implementing a competition policy that truly gives small businesses a fair chance. Most importantly we must ensure the delivery of affordable and reliable energy. We must ensure that the industries where Australia has a competitive advantage are not only preserved but empowered to thrive in an increasingly competitive global market.

Let us not forget that the future of Australia's manufacturing industry depends on the decisions we make today. We owe it to our manufacturers, to our workers and to all Australians to get this right. This bill in its current form is not the solution. It's time for a rethink, a realignment with the needs of our industry and a renewed commitment to policies that will truly drive growth, innovation and prosperity.

Cassandra Fernando (Holt, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Today we face a crucial moment in Australia's economic history. The Albanese Labor government is committed to building a future made in Australia, where local industries and ideas not only survive but thrive. This vision is about more than just economic growth; it's about ensuring that every Australian benefits and about securing our place in the global economy. That's why I am proud to discuss the Albanese Labor government's Future Made in Australia Bill 2024. Our plan, backed by $22.7 billion in investment, aims to unlock the full potential of our resources and transform Australia into a manufacturing superpower. This bold agenda is designed to drive innovation and industry growth, establishing Australia as a global hub for advanced technologies. Our initiatives include the Future Made in Australia Innovation Fund, the Hydrogen Headstart program, the Battery Breakthrough Initiative and the Solar Sunshot program. These programs are all about investing in the breakthrough technologies that will revolutionise our industries.

We are also focused on building strong supply chains and encouraging collaboration between industry and academia to drive research and development. This is not just about securing our economic future; it's about shaping a future where Australian innovation and creativity are celebrated globally. In this future, Australia leads by example, meeting the challenges of the 21st century and thriving in adversity. It's a future where every Australian has the chance to succeed, where innovation flourishes and where sustainability is at the core of everything we do. Labor is dedicated to this vision and is working hard to make it a reality.

Today marks a pivotal point in Australia's economic journey. We must address the consequences of past decisions that have weakened our manufacturing sector. Over the past decade, the previous Liberal governments neglected and mismanaged our industries, leading to the decline of key sectors like car manufacturing. This sector was not just a part of our economy; it was crucial to our national identity and prosperity. Instead of supporting local industries, the Liberal government chose to prioritise cheap imports over domestic production. This short-sighted approach hurt our manufacturing capabilities and sacrificed the livelihoods of hardworking Australians, families and entire communities. The result has been a shrinking industry base, fewer job opportunities and a heavy reliance on foreign goods. Now we have the chance to change the direction and focus on supporting local industries and communities. The Albanese Labor government is committed to bringing manufacturing back to Australia and building a future made right here. Our aim is not only to recover from past mistakes but to secure our place in the global economy and build a stronger and more resilient nation.

The Future Made in Australia Bill is based on three pillars: the National Interest Framework, which helps us focus on sectors where Australia has a clear advantage in the new net-zero economy or where investment is needed for economic security; the sector assessment process, which is crucial for understanding and overcoming barriers to private investment in important sectors; and community benefit principles, which ensure that both public and private investments provide strong economic returns and also benefit our communities. These pillars are the foundation of the Future Made in Australia Bill, guiding us towards a successful, future-ready economy.

Our $22.7 billion investment is not just about infrastructure; it's an effort to drive innovation, support local industries and establish Australia as a leader in the 21st century. The Future Made in Australia Bill represents a bold agenda. It aims to boost industry growth and innovation through targeted investments and strategic initiatives. Our approach builds on Australia's vast natural resources and minerals, which are crucial for our economic prosperity and the global shift towards sustainability. Australia is a world leader in essential minerals like lithium, cobalt, rare earth elements, iron ore, copper and gold. These minerals are key for advanced technologies such as batteries and renewable energy systems. Currently, these resources are exported overseas, where other countries process them into high-value products and capture the full economic benefit. The Albanese Labor government recognises the potential for Australia to process these critical minerals here, adding significant value and creating high-quality jobs. By investing in advanced processing technologies, we can produce high-value products like green steel, biodiesel and advanced batteries right here in Australia. This shift will reduce our dependence on foreign processing and allows us to secure a larger share of the global value chain and create good jobs right here.

Our plan includes the Future Made in Australia Innovation Fund, the Hydrogen Headstart program, the Battery Breakthrough Initiative and the Solar Sunshot program. Each of these initiatives is aimed at making Australia a leader in cutting-edge technologies and industries. The Future Made in Australia Innovation Fund will support emerging technologies and startups, nurturing Australian talent. The Hydrogen Headstart program aims to make Australia a global leader in clean hydrogen production, the fuel of the future, using our renewable resources. The Battery Breakthrough Initiative focuses on improving battery technologies by using our minerals to create crucial components for energy storage and electric vehicles here onshore. The Solar Sunshot program is dedicated to capitalising on our abundance of sun by making renewable energy more accessible and affordable. These programs will create good jobs, high-tech jobs and high-paying jobs.

By investing in advanced manufacturing and digital innovation, the bill will open up opportunities for skilled professionals in engineering, data science and technology development. In addition, we are committed to building a resilient supply chain and promoting collaboration between industry and academia. This approach will drive research and development, ensuring Australia remains at the forefront of technological advancements and can compete globally. For those who question the potential of this bill, consider the success of the US Inflation Reduction Act. This act has created over 170,000 new jobs across 210 projects in electrical vehicles, batteries and clean energy. In the US, manufacturing construction spending has doubled since the end of 2021. It's clear that reviving manufacturing sectors is possible, and I believe Australia has the resources and capabilities to achieve similar success.

The Future Made in Australia Bill envisions a nation that leads by example. It's about not only addressing the challenges of the 21st century but thriving despite them. It's a future where every Australian has the chance to succeed, where innovation flourishes and where sustainability is at the heart of our economy. As we move forward, we must learn from our past mistakes. The previous government's neglect of manufacturing has left us with underinvestment and missed opportunities. But instead of focusing on past failures, we should concentrate on the future we can build together.

Australia is a land of opportunities, blessed with abundant natural resources and a skilled workforce. Our rich deposits of critical minerals, vast renewable energy potential and innovative spirit give us a unique position to benefit from the global shift towards sustainable industries. We have the chance to turn these advantages into economic strength, driving growth and creating quality jobs for all Australians. The Future Made in Australia Bill represents our commitment to seizing this opportunity. By investing in local industries and supporting new technologies, we are not just addressing immediate needs; we are laying the foundation for a prosperous future. This is about more than just policy; it's about building a legacy of strength, resilience and opportunity for future generations.

The Liberal Party's failure to invest in manufacturing has left a gap that we are determined to fill. Their lack of vision has cost us valuable industrial capacity and economic potential. With the Future Made in Australia Bill, we are setting a new course that prioritises Australian workers, supports local businesses and builds a sustainable future. We are committed to ensuring that Australia not only recovers from past mistakes but also emerges stronger and more competitive than ever. I want to thank the ministers who have worked on this bill, especially Treasurer Jim Chalmers and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, for their vision. I commend this bill to the House.

Simon Kennedy (Cook, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Holt was saying that those thinking about voting against this bill should consider the US Inflation Reduction Act. Well, there's one key difference between the US Inflation Reduction Act and the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024. That key difference is that the Inflation Reduction Act is technology agnostic. As the member for Holt exits, I'd just like her to note that the Inflation Reduction Act is investing in nuclear energy. In the US it's bipartisan, unlike the Future Made in Australia Bill, which is picking winners and certain energy technologies to invest in. This act would be unable to invest in nuclear energy, unable to invest in gas or carbon capture and storage and unable to invest in other net zero technologies that the US and many other countries around the world have.

Therein lies the coalition's opposition to this act: it's not technology agnostic and, unfortunately, it's not like the Inflation Reduction Act. It's a partisan and ideological attempt to actually railroad industry into certain ideological priorities that the Labor government is pushing. Unfortunately, Australia is at a crossroads in energy and technology, and they are reshaping our economy. Given these trends, the Future Made in Australia Bill seems to be well timed—it's got a very good tagline—but it is falling short of what it might promise. I think all members in the coalition and on this side of the House would support measures that, as this bill quotes, 'capitalise on the economic and industrial opportunities of the global move to net zero' and 'align its national security and economic interests'. If this were what this bill was truly doing, I have no doubt members on this side of the House would be supporting it.

Unfortunately, this bill is more about marketing than it is about delivery. Economist after economist is lining up to criticise it, and I'm glad the member before me was talking about the Inflation Reduction Act, because that is an act that is not ideologically pushing certain technologies. It's actually focused on outcomes, it's focused on increasing manufacturing, it's focused on jobs and it's focused on doing this with whatever the technology may be—nuclear, renewables and wind—but this is not what we have here.

In this bill we have an attempt to expand the EFA and ARENA and to establish a national interest framework. This expanded remit would fund domestic industries nominated by the Minister for Finance, and, finally, ARENA's functions would expand from pure R&D to deployment. This move to deployment and manufacturing would double up responsibilities for the Clean Energy Finance Corporation. In a cost-of-living crisis, we cannot be wasting taxpayers' money. As we talked about yesterday in the MPI, when we're spending more and more in the government sector, what we're doing is fuelling inflation. We're fuelling inflation and increasing the cost of living for millions of vulnerable Australians. This is not what we need at this time.

Furthermore, the bill gives the minister for climate change the ability to unilaterally boost ARENA's funding with the stroke of a pen. The minister for climate change can roll out up to $4 billion in an election year. This does not sound like a bona fide and genuine attempt to address Australia's manufacturing capability. This sounds like a partisan attempt to pick technologies that suit an ideological agenda, unlike the IRA—this is nothing like that act. The member for Holt could not be more wrong. They are doing this in an election year with an unfettered $4 billion—we don't know where it's going to go—with no parliamentary oversight and with no proper scrutiny. With just some delegated legislation, $4 billion can walk out the door.

This is not acceptable in a modern democracy. Australia's taxpayers are already on the hook from Labor's inflation. We've said this figure many times: $315 billion in the last two years since the election, with $30,000 per Australian household. I can tell you that the households in Cook do not feel $30,000 better off in the last two years. They feel much, much poorer. They don't even feel better off. Putting $4 billion out the door into a slush fund is just going to fuel inflation and make them even worse off again.

Australian families are already paying this price. There have been 12 interest rate hikes since the election, and we have the most stubborn core inflation in the developed world and higher taxes that come with it.

More broadly, why focus on ARENA to support manufacturing? We really should be focusing on things that are technology agnostic. Judgements made on this National Interest Framework will be made on a very narrow and flawed set of criteria. The government has provided evidence to Senate estimates that shows that these criteria will prevent key investments in sovereign capability in net zero technologies—technologies that will reduce the effects of climate change, that will take carbon out of the air and that will lower the cost of energy.

We can't invest in carbon capture and storage. I'd love the next speaker to explain why we are getting rid of carbon capture and storage. Why can't that be invested in? We can't invest in blue hydrogen. We can't invest in uranium and we can't invest in nuclear. The IRA allows these investments. Why is this government deciding not to do that? The IRA was pointed to as inspiration for this bill, but I wonder why that has been left out. The whole point of this bill, I would hope, would be to actually increase the supply of clean energy and lower its cost, but we're specifically excluding technologies.

The Business Council of Australia also do not like this. They have warned this process risks subsidising businesses that will never have a comparative advantage. Bran Black, the head of the BCA, has said all investments must be in areas in which we have a comparative advantage and where the investment helps those projects get to market faster or there is a clear national interest in making that investment.

It's not just Bran Black who's been criticising this. Danielle Wood, the Productivity Commissioner, has said:

We risk creating a class of businesses that is reliant on government subsidies, and that can be very effective in coming back for more.

She goes on to say that alternative policies, including lowering the corporate tax rate, would 'make us internationally more competitive'. Danielle Wood is not alone, with former productivity commissioner Gary Banks describing the Future Made in Australia Bill as a 'fool's errand' and saying it risks repeating mistakes of the past by propping up 'political favourites'. He said:

Seeking to obtain benefits to society through subsidies for particular firms or industries, including in the form of tax concessions, has proven a fool's errand, particularly where the competitive fundamentals are lacking.

Mr Banks somewhat comically likened this scheme to Hotel California, saying many businesses will enter the program 'but few will ever leave'.

One of those that may never leave has been pointed out by the Productivity Commission, which has talked about the $1 billion commitment to make more solar panels in Australia. I've spoken to solar panel manufacturers in the US, who struggle. They tell me it will never be competitive to make solar panels at scale in Australia. I think the Albanese government knows this as well. These programs should be subjected to this National Interest Framework, but they're not going to be. That led the Productivity Commission to say, 'Allowing sectors to bypass the NIF process would undermine its role in disciplining spending.' Yet Labor are already breaking their own rules when it suits them to push an ideological agenda and not focus on outcomes.

I would instead encourage the government to refocus its approach by looking to two key factors that underpin all industry and doing it in a technology-agnostic way. Clean energy: how can we get more clean energy at a lower cost? I would applaud an act that did that. And how can we infuse Australian industry with better technology? Rather than limiting our view to a sector-by-sector focus, we could actually increase capability across all industries—all manufacturing, be that mining, defence manufacturing, agrimanufacturing or food—and really focus on reducing the costs of clean energy.

We need affordable, reliable and clean energy. We need flexible workplaces. We need less regulation. We need to have an incentive based tax system rather than throw $4 billion of slush fund money at a problem, which Labor is prone to do. Without appropriately considered and effective programs that provide long-term solutions to these issues, all we will do is fuel inflation and fuel a cost-of-living crisis. We need a bill that truly addresses the major trends facing Australia.

Consumption of electricity is set to double globally by 2050. Seventy per cent of that growth is expected to come from APAC. Australia's per capita energy consumption is about 25 per cent above the OECD average. We need to push all technologies, not just pick a few winners. We need something that will make Australia more competitive. Governments across the globe are now focusing on strengthening national resilience. The COVID pandemic, the war in Ukraine and geopolitical conflicts have taught us this. The disruption from these events has shown us the impacts on our supply chains. We've also seen tech truly disrupting markets and old manufacturing industries, such as manufacturing, defence and mining. We need something that pushes tech and low-cost energy in all of these sectors.

The coalition in government would do three things: we would steer our nation out of our current domestic cost-of-living crisis and energy crisis; we would not simply talk about changes but meet them head-on with robust action; and, most importantly, we would make decisions that would set our country and nation up for success. We would offer the industry meaningful support before 2027. That won't look like handing out cheques and subsidies to our favourite technologies. Instead, it will be based on improving the operating environment in which businesses work. It will aim to reduce the cost of energy for all businesses. It will be aimed at helping all businesses to reduce the cost of clean energy, not picking our favourites and not picking winners.

This bill ignores some of the biggest enablers of manufacturing. We have a plan to address this. First, in terms of inflation, we would rein in inflationary spending and take the pressure off inflation. As a start, we would not spend billions on corporate welfare for green hydrogen or critical minerals. Even those companies getting production credits are winding up as much as they're investing in it. Second, we would focus on red tape and overregulation. We would prioritise winding back Labor's intervention and regulation, which is suffering our economy, particularly manufacturing.

Third, one of the biggest interventions would be in industrial relations. We would provide the Australian business community with much more certainty and ensure respectful and sector-specific bargains with unions and employers occur. When Labor abolished the Australian Building and Construction Commission, it was telling what their true priorities in this space were. Then, they were shamed into belatedly dealing with the CFMEU while rolling back regulations that added more cost. Fourth, we would reduce the tax burdens on businesses, particularly small and medium businesses. We would reduce the tax burden on smaller and medium businesses by ensuring Australians keep more of what they earn. This is in stark contrast to Labor's party policy of breaking promises on tax and increasing the tax burden on Australians to fund billions of wasteful spending like that contained in this act. We would also ensure an equal tax playing field exists with multinationals paying their fair share of tax, just like small and medium businesses do in my electorate of Cook.

When asked whether Future Made in Australia contained tax reform, Danielle Wood, the Productivity Commission chair, explicitly said this is 'not tax reform'. On alternative policies, Danielle Wood said that she would look at lowering taxes to make us more internationally competitive. Independent economist Steve Hamilton said, 'It's why I tend to favour more neutral investment incentives like lower corporate tax or accelerated depreciation.'

Fifth, on competition policy, we would give consumers and small businesses competition policy that delivers an equal footing. Sixth, on affordable and reliable clean energy, we would ensure manufacturers have reliable and cheap energy that is technology agnostic. Lastly, on technology, we would help industry through initiatives such as the patent box and the additional $2 billion on the R&D tax incentive.

Carina Garland (Chisholm, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 and the Future Made in Australia (Omnibus Amendments No. 1) Bill 2024. Unfortunately, those opposite have no credibility when it comes to talking about manufacturing, considering the shameful decline of the industry that we saw under their watch over a wasted decade, including goading the automotive manufacturing industry to leave Australia. In terms of concrete policies, I think we heard more about the Biden administration's approach to manufacturing than we did about anything that the coalition is prepared to offer. I'm pretty disappointed that once again we're standing here in the chamber debating legislation that is actually going to help drive economic growth in this country and those opposite are just saying no with the most farcical arguments.

I know that building sovereign capability and building good, secure jobs for the future really matter to my electorate of Chisholm. I remember, during the campaign, knocking on doors and speaking to thousands and thousands of voters right across my electorate and having really positive conversations around what it would mean to restore sovereign capability in this country and to build the good, secure jobs for the future that people in my community wanted to see. When I was campaigning and speaking to people initially about what sovereign capability restored in Australia would look like, this was of course during one of the worst periods in the pandemic, when we saw the absolute failure of supply chains—the failure of the previous government to have adequately invested in manufacturing that left us unable as a country to do really basic things, like even just manufacture paracetamol, for instance, and other life-saving drugs.

I am in pretty close regular contact with my local manufacturers in my electorate, and I can tell you that there is real excitement in the community with industry about reinvesting in manufacturing in this country, which of course is something that only Labor governments ever meaningfully do. A future made in Australia is something that we should all be really proud about. It's once again disappointing and unfortunately unsurprising that those opposite have managed to politicise rebuilding sovereign capability and good, secure jobs. Imagine that—imagine standing against sovereign capability when we have just seen a failure of supply chains and standing against good, secure, well-paid jobs. It is unbelievable, but at the same time it is believable because that's who we're dealing with here opposite.

Our government is investing in a future made in Australia because we want to unlock private investment in future industries and bring new jobs and opportunities to communities across the country. I'm an optimist. I'm always hopeful for this country. I'm really ambitious for our country and our communities. This is a really ambitious, optimistic policy that's about building a really wonderful future for everyone in this country. This is about maximising the economic and industrial benefits of the global transformation to net zero and securing Australia's place in a changing global economic and strategic landscape. It will help Australia build a stronger, more diversified and more resilient economy. Powered by renewable energy, it will create more secure, well-paid jobs and encourage and facilitate the private sector investment required to make Australia an indispensable part of the global net zero economy. This is a wonderful chance for us to seize the opportunities presented to us, and I urge those opposite to really reconsider their position on this.

The Future Made in Australia plan recognises that our future growth prospects lie in the intersection of our industrial resources, skills and energy bases and our attractiveness as an investment destination. It combines our comparative advantages in renewable energy with traditional strengths in resources and manufacturing to build new opportunities, including in critical minerals processing, green metals, clean energy technologies and low-carbon liquid fuels. The bill and omnibus bill deliver on key elements of the government's Future Made in Australia plan, which was announced by our government in the 2024-25 budget.

There is rigour imposed on government decision-making here. We're going to help give investors the clarity and certainty they need to invest and unlock growth in our economy. We know that consistency is really important and that clarity is really important. Unfortunately, once again, that's something that was a failure of the previous government, where there were multiple different policies and never enough certainty for investors to really commit to Australia in the way that we would like to see them and are trying to facilitate through this legislation and this vision for our country.

I know from meeting with a number of companies, industry groups and researchers right through my community how excited people are about this. I meet with people in the medical technology manufacturing sector, the pharmaceutical manufacturing sector, the advanced manufacturing sector and people doing work with clean and renewable energies. I meet with the CSIRO. I meet with ANSTO. I've got the Synchrotron in my electorate. I meet with Monash University. I meet with Deakin University. I meet with partnership groups right across my electorate such as the Monash precinct network. I have Moderna building in my electorate at the moment, joining Pfizer, joining Stryker, joining Pyrochar, joining Sorbent, joining Paragon, joining Textron and a whole range of other industry groups and companies doing incredible work. I know that commitment and certainty in industrial policy are things that people have really wanted to see from government and I'm really delighted that finally they will be seeing that.

The global transition to net zero and the changing geostrategic landscape present a significant opportunity for Australia, and people in my community know that. This is about hope for the future: that they are able to see our country transition to net zero while at the same time taking advantage of the opportunities to uplift the economy, to diversify our market and to really ensure that everyone in our community benefits. We know and we've seen—indeed, all of us have seen—that supply chains are under pressure with increasing fragmentation and global competition. New opportunities in clean energy industries are also emerging that will shape the future of the global economy over the next decade and beyond, and our nation, Australia, is ideally placed to benefit from the global transition is underway, due to our comparative advantages, capabilities and trade partnerships. I see that every day in the industrial research ecosystem in my own electorate of Chisholm.

The private sector is responding to these opportunities, but there is also a role for government in creating a positive, enabling environment for investment. This includes where economic incentives are not aligned with broader national interest objectives. This bill provides a framework and imposes rigour on government decision-making on substantial public investment, particularly those used to incentivise private investment at scale. This bill has a number of key components: embedding the government's National Interest Framework, which was announced at the budget; to help identify sectors where Australia has a genuine comparative advantage in the net zero economy or an economic security imperative; to establish a robust sector-assessment process to understand and remove barriers to private investment; and to establish a set of community benefit principles that will make sure Future Made in Australia investments create strong returns for local communities, workers and businesses. It's really important, as we embark on the process of transitioning to a net zero economy, that no communities are left behind, that no individual is left behind and that we are able to realise opportunities presented for everybody.

The new National Interest Framework will help to better align economic incentives with the national interest. Legislating the framework will provide certainty to the investment community which is critical to attracting private funding at scale. We want to partner with private industry here. The legislation codifies the two streams of the framework. The net zero transformation stream covers sectors that could have a comparative advantage in a net zero economy and where public investment is likely to be needed for a sector to make a significant contribution to emissions reduction at an efficient cost. The economic resilience and security stream covers sectors where some level of domestic capability is a necessary or efficient way to deliver economic resilience and security and the private sector will not be able to deliver the necessary investment in the sector in the absence of government support.

Sector assessments are made at the direction of the Treasurer and conducted independently by Treasury. They will assess whether an area of the economy is aligned with the National Interest Framework and will help inform how government can reduce barriers to investment in priority areas. There is rigour in this system and there is rigour in this framework. These assessments are also required to be made public, which brings extra transparency and rigour to government decision-making.

The government wants to ensure that public investment and the private investment it attracts flows to communities in ways that benefit local workers and businesses. That's why a set of community benefit principles will be applied to Future Made in Australia supports identified in this bill. Specifically, we want to ensure that investments promote safe and secure jobs that are well paid and have good conditions, develop more skilled and inclusive workforces—including by investing in training and skills development and broadening opportunities for workforce participation. We want to engage collaboratively so we that can achieve positive outcomes for local communities such as First Nations communities and communities directly affected by the transition to net zero. We want to strengthen domestic industrial capabilities through stronger local supply chains and demonstrate transparency and compliance in relation to the management of tax affairs including benefits received under Future Made in Australia supports.

This legislation is ambitious, and our government is unapologetic about our ambition for this country to seize the opportunities presented by the net zero transition the global economy is going through right now. We can leverage our natural capabilities as a nation here while creating excellent, well-paid and secure jobs right across the country in communities that are going to need government support as we move towards a new global economy. I emphasise once again that this is a global movement and a global economic shift. Australia needs to be competitive here so our communities are able to take advantage of the opportunities presented to us and not be left behind. That is what we would have seen under a coalition government and something we had unfortunately experienced already in the guiding of the automotive industry to leave the country and no preparedness to support good manufacturing jobs in our communities.

The contrast is clear that this side stands for hope, ambition, opportunity, uplifting our economy and diversifying our economy. Once again, unfortunately those on the other side say no to everything that we present. I hope that there is an opportunity for them to recognise the public policy and community benefits that are evident in this piece of legislation and reconsider their position on it.

I know that I will always stand with industry, workers and communities in order to realise the net zero economic transition opportunities here so that we can live on a healthy planet with good, secure and well-paid jobs for all of our communities. Thank you so much.

Colin Boyce (Flynn, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This legislation is called the Future Made in Australia Bill, but what it should be called is the 'Future is Poor in Australia under Labor' Bill. Supposedly, the Future Made in Australia agenda is targeted to address major structural and strategic challenges that the Australian economy faces. The Labor government says support is needed to crowd in necessary private investment to scale up priority industries that will help the Australian economy navigate and prosper through these challenges.

The Australian government's Future Made in Australia plan identifies renewable hydrogen—or green hydrogen—as a priority industry. This will cost taxpayers an estimated $6.7 billion over a decade in production tax incentives alone. In other words, this is just welfare for billionaires. One of the companies and people set to benefit from this welfare of billions is Fortescue, founded by Mr Andrew Forrest, who had promised 15 million tonnes of green hydrogen by 2030. Fortescue opened Australia's largest hydrogen electrolyser manufacturing facility in Gladstone in my electorate of Flynn in April this year, promising thousands of green hydrogen jobs. However, on opening it will employ just 26 people.

Back in July, Fortescue were forced to dramatically scale back their ambitions, unveiling a plan to sack up to 700 workers and postpone their ambitious 15-million-tonne target they had set for hydrogen fuel production by the end of the decade. I recently applied for a right to information access request through the Gladstone Ports Corporation. This RTI found the Gladstone Ports Corporation—the government-owned corporation—has plans for a proposed hydrogen industry and Gladstone which will need 110 gigawatts of renewable energy to produce four million tonnes of hydrogen a year. To be clear, that is approximately double the entire electrical generating capacity of the Australian grid, just for this one proposal. This is economic insanity. The proposal will require 10,000 wind turbines and 2,500 square kilometres of solar panels to be built, and 45,000 megalitres of water each year to reach this target. To produce industrial hydrogen, you need three things: cheap, reliable energy; a huge reliable water source; and a competitive market. At the moment, we have none of these.

I previously asked the following questions that have not been answered—and I will ask again: how much money will be directed to Gladstone? Where will these wind turbines go? Over the Great Barrier Reef? Where will all the solar panels go? On prime agricultural land? Is this funding for hydrogen more money and subsidies for billionaires like Twiggy Forrest? Where will the water come from for Gladstone's hydrogen industry? As the Fitzroy-to-Gladstone pipeline will provide 19,000 megalitres of water for industry at Gladstone, even with the unlikely possibility of the hydrogen industry receiving the full allocation of 19,000 megalitres, where is the remaining 26,000 megalitres of water going to come from?

There has been speculation that large-scale desalination plants could fill the void, and, according to the Water Corporation of Western Australia, seawater desalination is four times more energy-intensive than groundwater collection and more than 40 times more energy-intensive than water sources from dams. This maths just does not stand up. Of the plan to use energy to convert seawater into water and then use more energy to convert the water into hydrogen, my good friend and colleague Senator Matthew Canavan recently said: 'Dig coal, extract natural gas and build nuclear—that is a future made in Australia,' and I couldn't agree more.

Here are some facts about these three industries that those opposite might not be aware of. Coal is used to produce electricity, iron and steel, cement, aluminium, paper, and chemicals, and it is also used as a component in thousands of everyday products, including soaps, aspen, solvents, dyes, plastics and carbon fibres. More than 220 tonnes of coal is required to build a wind turbine. Australia exported $127 billion worth of coal in the 2022-23 financial year. The coal industry employed 48,000 people in 2023. The Australian gas industry is a mainstay of the national economy and is an irreplaceable ingredient for our manufacturing base, driving billions in economic activity through its myriad through-chain applications. Gas in Australia generates $121 billion in economic activity, underpinning 5.25 per cent of GDP, up 42 per cent on the previous year. Australia's gas sector and its network support 258,000 full-time local jobs, up 17,000 on the previous year. Gas is vital and irreplaceable feedstock in the making of many things we need for everyday life, including plastics, fertilisers, pharmaceuticals, rubber, propellants, refrigeration, adhesives and cosmetics.

The Productivity Commission says a $1 billion commitment to make more solar panels in Australia under Anthony Albanese's Future Made in Australia program should be retrospectively subject to a tougher Natural Interest Framework test. Allowing sectors to bypass the National Interest Framework process would undermine its role in disciplining the spending, yet Labor is already breaking their own rules when it suits them. Key elements of Labor's Future Made in Australia agenda, including the $22.7 billion PsiQuantum contract, bypassed the National Interest Framework and sector assessments. There are serious questions to answer about the decision to make this investment, with it becoming increasingly clear that Minister Husic decided to invest in this business independent of any department appraisal, analysis or recommendation. Treasury were not consulted prior to the decision to invest in solar manufacturing, and their subsequent analysis has said that this is not a sound investment. The Productivity Commission were not consulted on details of other proposed investments prior to their announcement, and we are already seeing that this policy is not effective. The Solar Sunshot program has been refused backing by the Treasurer's own secretary, with the main proponent of the policy, who stood alongside the Prime Minister as he announced the initiative, cutting back its staff and replacing its CEO.

Labor's production credits are failing to deliver for the struggling nickel industry, with the promise of future subsidies not holding back the tide of international price pressures and rising domestic prices through energy, tax and workplace laws. This nation is already feeling the effects of their attack on the manufacturing industry. We're seeing a tripling of manufacturing insolvencies under the Labor government. Labor's record on essentials for Australian manufacturing is a disgrace. The cost of energy continues to rise thanks to Labor's renewables-only policy and is only going to keep going up under this Labor government.

Labor's renewables-only plan will impose 58 million solar panels, 3½ thousand new industrial wind turbines and up to 28,000 kilometres of new transmission lines across the country. Energy experts have warned that the cost of Labor's rollout will be between $1.2 trillion and $1.5 trillion. Labor will also require 34 times the current amount of utility-scale variable renewable energy in the national electricity market to meet its hydrogen export ambitions. A recent analysis shows that there are some 17,000 wind turbines proposed to be built across the Australian landscape. Under this plan we're going to see blackouts and brownouts. We don't want a California type situation in our country where there are scheduled blackouts and brownouts, because businesses simply will not stay here. High-energy-use businesses won't compete; they can't manufacture in an environment like that. You can't run a full-time economy on part-time power.

Like the other 19 of the G20 countries, the biggest economies in the world, Australia needs to take the decision that is right for our country, and that is nuclear energy. There are around 439 operational nuclear plants in the world. Australia hosts 33 per cent of the world's proven uranium deposits and is currently the third-largest producer of uranium after Kazakhstan and Canada. In 1958, Australia opened its first nuclear reactor, Lucas Heights, in the southern suburbs of Sydney. We've seen this government introduce overbearing industrial relations laws, which are making life tougher for Australian businesses by increasing costs, complexity and red tape and will likely lead to job losses. We've seen a Labor-Greens government introduce safeguard mechanisms, which represent one of the world's most disgraceful carbon taxes and will only see prices soar even further for struggling businesses. Every time they are in government, Labor make sneaky deals with the Greens against the interests of families, businesses and our manufacturers. It is as simple as this: no industry and no manufacturing means no jobs and no future for making things in Australia.

The coalition is not the only one raising serious concerns with Labor's plan. Danielle Wood, who is the Chair of the Productivity Commission and the government's key economic adviser appointed by Jim Chalmers, has said:

If we are supporting industries that don't have a long-term competitive advantage, that can be an ongoing cost. It diverts resources, that's workers and capital, away from other parts of the economy where they might generate high value uses.

We risk creating a class of businesses that is reliant on government subsidies, and that can be very effective in coming back for more.

She said:

… your infants grow up, they turn into very hungry teenagers and it's kind of hard to turn off the tap.

When asked whether Future Made in Australia contained tax reform, Ms Wood explicitly said, 'This is not tax reform.' On alternative policies, including lowering the corporate tax, Ms Wood offered, 'It would make us more internationally competitive.'

Danielle Wood is not alone, with former chair of the Productivity Commission Mr Gary Banks describing the FMIA as a 'fool's errand' that risks repeating mistakes of the past by propping up 'political favourites'. Indeed, he said:

Seeking to obtain benefits to society through subsidies for particular firms or industries, including in the form of tax concessions, has proven a fool's errand, particularly where the competitive fundamentals are lacking.

Mr Banks likened the scheme to 'Hotel California', saying many will enter the program but few ever leave. In response to this, the Prime Minister called Mr Banks a flat-earther.

Another eminent economist, Professor Richard Holden, defended Mr Banks, saying the Prime Minister's insult was wrong and uncalled for. Professor Holden said:

The PM says all the wrong things. … And his main argument for subsidies is that other countries are doing it. Like a primary school kid telling a teacher: "but he started it!"

Steven Hamilton, an independent economist, has said:

There are many problems with industry policy, and this is a big one. It's why I tend to favour more neutral investment incentives like a lower corporate tax rate or accelerated depreciation.

He also said:

I thought we'd learned these lessons, but apparently not. The bad old days are back.

When comparisons with the US IRA were drawn, Hamilton said:

With this scale, it can produce at reasonable cost. [That] is a totally different proposition to doing so in Australia.

Without a large domestic market, exports are the only way for Australia to achieve scale. But we are so far away from the kinds of markets we could sell into that shipping costs put as at a distinct disadvantage. No amount of government subsidy is going to get around that.

It's not just economists questioning Labor; it's their union backers as well. The Australian Manufacturing Workers Union, reported by the ABC as 'the dominant left faction union and a source of talent for Labor in parliament', don't want Treasury to have a central role in Future Made in Australia. They believe Treasury has limited expertise. Australians want and deserve something better. The coalition government will do three things: we will steer our nation out of the current domestic crisis; we will not simply talk about the challenges of our time but meet them head-on with action to carve out a more secure future; and, more importantly, we will make decisions that set up our nation for success for generations to come.

The Flynn electorate is a largely blue-collar electorate, consisting of diverse industries such as mining and resources, agriculture, and heavy industry, with many small and medium-sized businesses. However, every single one of these industries is under attack from the Labor government. I will continue to fight for these hardworking men and women who pay Australia's bills and fund Australia's schools, hospitals, roads and so on. That is why I oppose this Future Made in Australia Bill. In other words, the future is poorer for Australia under this bill.

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

In spite of that contribution by the member for Flynn, we are maintaining our support for this legislation and for Australia's future. I say to the member for Flynn that he should go to the high-purity alumina factory in his electorate, which is employing hundreds of workers who will benefit from production tax credits. He should go and tell the workers there that it's a waste of money and that they should just be shut down.

At the heart of this Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 are objectives that are at the very heart of the government that I'm proud to lead: making more things here in Australia; making our nation a renewable energy superpower; making our economy more resilient and more secure; making it easier for companies to invest in new projects and create new jobs, particularly in regional Australia; making the most of our natural resources and making the most of our people's potential; and making sure that we seize those opportunities and share them with people and communities in every part of our nation.

Today, and every day, our government is working to help Australians who are under financial pressure. There's everything we are doing on cost of living. We are boosting wages at the same time as we are delivering tax cuts, making sure that Australians can earn more and keep more of what they earn. We are making sure that they benefit from energy bill relief. We're making sure they benefit from cheaper child care, cheaper medicines and fee-free TAFE. What we have been about is delivering economic security for people in the here and now.

But, because we are a Labor government, in the finest of Labor traditions we always have our eye on the medium and long term. How do we secure our future economic development? How do we anticipate the big changes ahead and shape them in the interest of Australians? We're building economic security for the long term by investing in the next generation of jobs and opportunities. We're delivering reform that holds no-one back and driving progress that leaves no-one behind. That's what our vision for A Future Made in Australia is all about.

And this bill doesn't stand alone. It builds on the work we've already done with our National Reconstruction Fund, investing in manufacturing across our economy and our 500,000 fee-free TAFE places building up the skills of our workforce. There are our investments in universities, science and cybercapability. There are the new jobs and expertise in our defence manufacturing program, which will particularly benefit South Australia and Western Australia. And there's our comprehensive plan for cleaner, cheaper energy for all Australians, driving advanced manufacturing and opening up opportunities.

Making our future here in Australia depends on our workers, skills, education, research and infrastructure. Government has a vital role. We also have an important responsibility in all of this. Private investment is absolutely essential too. What we are about is: how do we facilitate maximising private investment in job creation in industries of the future in order to benefit our economy? That's where our new investment framework in this legislation is so important. It's something that those opposite don't seem to understand. Production tax credits pay on success. If you don't succeed, there is no cost in a reduction of revenue. That is why it has the support of everyone in Western Australia, it would appear, except for the Liberal members over there in the federal parliament. Certainly the state of WA Liberal Party support it. I know the Nats do as well.

Keith Pitt (Hinkler, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We're not the majority.

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

I know that the member for Hinkler, in his heart of hearts, will support production tax credits as well. That's because he understands more about industry than the people who sit on their front bench who say no. That is probably why he sits up the back—because he has some knowledge of industry.

But it is quite extraordinary that the Leader of the Opposition went to Western Australia a short time ago and hinted that maybe there might be a bit of movement there at the same time as the shadow Treasurer was saying, 'No, this is billions for billionaires as far as we are concerned,' having no understanding of the benefits that this could give. This is about government not replacing private investment; it's about government being a catalyst for investment, unlocking the private capital to build new projects, create new jobs and drive growth and prosperity and doing so in a way that better aligns our national security with our economic security, just as the US, the UK, the Republic of Korea, Japan, Canada and so many nations around the world are doing, safeguarding themselves against the next global shock, whether it's conflict, a pandemic, a cyber attack or another international energy crisis.

This bill recognises the global economic reality, the investments other advanced economies are making in their industrial growth and the commitment that 92 per cent of the world economy has made to net zero, including 97 per cent of Australia's trading partners. In order to reach their goal, these countries will need more clean energy, more solar power, more wind power, more batteries and storage, and more of the resources—critical minerals and rare earths—that all this technology depends on. In other words, the world needs what Australia has.

That presents our nation with a choice that will define the future of our economy. We can choose to carry on as we are, to stay in our lane and be satisfied with our lot and watch the world move past us, or we can actually move forward. We, of course, can continue to extract our resources. We'll continue to export them. But, where possible, why wouldn't we want to add the value and create the jobs and make the products before others sell them back to us at a premium price? How is that controversial in this parliament in 2024? We can remain the last link in the global supply chain, with all the risks that carries in a more uncertain world, or we can aim for something better. We can make things here. We can add value here. We can turn the resources that the world needs into the products that the world wants. We can build an economy where manufacturing is every bit as strong as mining and where Australian researchers and innovators can commercialise their ideas here and turn discovery into industry. In doing so, we can bring a new generation of secure, well-paid jobs to our regions and our suburbs alike.

If you look back to the creation of the car-manufacturing industry under John Curtin and Ben Chifley and their vision for national reconstruction after the Second World War, you see there is an economic multiplier effect. But, importantly, Curtin appointed Chifley as the Minister for Postwar Reconstruction at the height of World War II. That's vision. That's making sure that you look forward and plan for it and invest in it, because the truth is that there is an economic multiplier effect with all of this. It's always more than the sum of the parts. It's an ecosystem of jobs, skills, innovation and small businesses. This is where we want a more diversified and more decentralised economy, where workers and communities in every part of the country share in this opportunity. That's the purpose of the community benefit principles in this bill—making sure that new investment in new projects flows into local jobs, apprenticeships and supply chains, strengthening regional centres and, as I said at Garma earlier this month, bringing new economic empowerment to remote Indigenous communities so that new energy projects and new defence and security projects across northern and central Australia bring new careers in construction, renewable energy, the care economy, technology, infrastructure and resources to First Nations people, overcoming entrenched disadvantage, delivering new self determination and creating intergenerational opportunity.

Our vision for a future made in Australia is about every part of Australia: securing Gladstone's future as a global hub for clean energy and green industry; expanding medical manufacturing in Victoria; revitalising the Upper Spencer Gulf in South Australia as a producer of green iron, steel and cement; re-energising the Hunter Valley with new jobs in technology and manufacturing; and enabling workers across WA to extract critical minerals but also process and refine them and turn them into products—because that's what Australia can do that other countries can't. We have that combination of resources, skills, workers, space and sunlight to co-locate those links across the value chain, cutting transport costs, cutting energy costs, cutting emissions both here and abroad, and creating a new comparative advantage that gives Australian manufacturing and Australian workers the capacity not just to compete but to succeed. We are in that position.

Those opposite want to just talk Australia down. I want to build Australia up, to seize the opportunities which are there. This bill is at the heart of our government's vision for a stronger, more prosperous, more resilient and more diversified Australian economy. It reflects our confidence in Australian workers; our respect for Australian scientists and innovators; our belief in the boundless potential of our regions and our resources; our support for the Australian private sector; and our determination to work with business and industry to bring jobs and opportunity to every part of our country, to make the most of this moment and to make more things here. Above all, this bill speaks to our unwavering determination to shape the future, not wait for the future to shape us. That is where the choice for those opposite is crystal clear. You can't build a future with negativity. You can't shape change if you're afraid of it. You can't create good jobs if you're opposed to fair pay and conditions. And you can't pretend to be for Queensland or Western Australia or growth or investment if you're against the jobs and investment this legislation will deliver.

Over the past two years, it's become clear that the biggest threat to Australian jobs and investment is not international uncertainty nor changes in the global economy. The biggest threat and the greatest risk to Australia's future are the Liberal and National parties. They voted against the National Reconstruction Fund. They voted against energy bill relief. They say that fee-free TAFE is a waste of money. They attack the CSIRO. They call Australian manufacturing a graveyard. They bag production tax credits as corporate welfare. And, a decade after the then Liberal Treasurer stood at this dispatch box and dared Holden to pack up and leave, they still brag about driving the car industry out of Australia, and now they want to sacrifice a new generation of manufacturing jobs all in the name of their obsession with nuclear power.

Consider the contrast. This legislation is about unlocking private investment in jobs and industry and energy around our nation. On that side, the Liberals can't find one single investor for even one of their nuclear reactors. They talk about picking winners; they're going to pick the winners to have nuclear reactors. This is about driving the private sector. They're going to charge the whole lot to the taxpayer even while refusing to tell people how much it will cost to build these reactors or how long it will take—at least 20 years! And, if all that is done, it will deliver a measly four per cent of the energy that Australia needs, costing at least three times over the cost of construction and the cost of higher energy bills but, importantly, the opportunity cost as well—the jobs, investment, energy and certainty that Australia would miss out on right now. That is the price our nation would pay for turning away from our unbeatable natural advantages to instead go chasing after something that takes longer, costs more and delivers less.

Let there be no doubt about it: this is a decisive decade for our nation's future. We are in our moment right now, and we must seize it. We have everything that the world wants. There is nowhere you'd rather be than us with the space that we have, the best solar resources in the world, the best wind resources in the world, the best scientists in the world and the best resources under the ground that the world needs—the resources that will drive the global economy in the 21st century. The only thing that Australia does not have is time to waste, so, with optimism, with determination and with purpose, I commend this bill for a future made in Australia to this House.

Keith Wolahan (Menzies, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I note that I rise to speak after the Prime Minister, who's leaving the chamber, as are those behind him.

You'll stay? Thank you. I listened carefully to what the Prime Minister said. He spoke about hope and optimism for this nation's future. The title of the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 is telling. It's a title that reasonable people might agree on, but it's the content that matters. Too often in this parliament we've seen a cute title with something that has broad appeal that we all want, but then when you peel back the actual document and the actual policy, it has nothing to do with the title that is there.

Australia is a great nation. It is a prosperous nation. It has a history that it can be proud of, and it has a future that we look forward to—in fact, a future that drives other people from around the world to this nation because we are optimistic about our future. The Labor Party has a great tradition. It has been around for many decades. The Liberal Party, another party of government, has a great tradition. And one of the things that divides us is a philosophical view on the role of government.

I want to give a practical example of that. In my electorate, there is a small Italian family-owned business called Fratelli Engineering. It actually makes things in Australia now. It makes things in Australia right now. And that manufacturing facility is on its knees. One of the reasons it's on its knees is because it is trying to compete with the inflated costs and prices from big government projects in Victoria. It can't compete with that. When we talk about the role of government and the intervention of government having an actual practical effect, that's happening right now. For example, the North East Link, which was originally budgeted at $10 billion and has now blown out to $26 billion, has inflated costs. When you look at big construction projects, there is a 30 per cent premium of doing business in Victoria. There isn't a 30 per cent premium on doing business with Fratelli Engineering, a private family-owned company; there's a 30 per cent premium on doing business with the state. As soon as the state is the one that is signing the cheques and deciding what is to occur, all contractors know it is a free for all. All know.

At the heart of this bill is arrogance from the government—they know better; they know best. The Prime Minister finished on a claim to optimism. There's nothing optimistic about your view of the capacity of companies like Fratelli Engineering to build things here, when you think that you know better. So that philosophical difference on the role of government is not just an academic exercise for political science classes at universities. It matters to this nation and to the future of this nation. The heart of this bill is that it's driven by a different view of government. It's about who decides. Of course we want more things made in Australia. Of course we need more resilient supply chains. War and pandemic have proven that. The question is: who is better placed to decide that?

There are members on the other benches that know this to be true. I'm on the House Standing Committee on Economics, and here is that committee's Better competition, better prices report. The chair of that committee is the very competent member for Fraser, who has an actual PhD in economics from Yale, no less. The foreword to that document says this:

Competition and economic dynamism underpin everything we do in our daily life—

that's the first sentence; 'everything we do in our daily life,' so this bill actually matters—

whether it is shopping at the local supermarket; using our credit card to make a payment; using an app on our mobile phones to buy an airline ticket or obtain the latest news; and much more.

He goes on on the second page of the foreword to say this about government spending and government interference:

Government now plays a major role in the economy, providing health care, education, social welfare, infrastructure, defence and more. Improving the effectiveness of government services is critical to long-run productivity growth. … Market design and market stewardship are key.

Finally, the member for Fraser says, 'Australia is at a crossroads,' and refers to low productivity growth. No government could cover themselves in glory on Australia's productivity growth, but we know that it is on life support under this government.

Why does productivity growth matter? Well, Deputy Speaker, I would like to take you to another document, the Intergenerational report. The 2023 Intergenerational report has some alarming calls to action for both sides of this chamber. On page 144, it has the projection of total spending for this nation. Chart 7.2 shows real Australian government spending per person, in 2021-22 dollars, so we're adjusting this for inflation. On current spending, after a peak in the pandemic, we are at about $24,000 per person in Australia of Commonwealth government spending. That is projected out to 2062-63 to be $40,000 per person. That's in today's dollars. If there are no improvements in productivity, the average wage is about $95,000 and the median wage is about $65,000. And there we are, spending $40,000 per person at a Commonwealth level.

The key lesson in the Intergenerational report is that, if we are to be a prosperous nation, we have to bring government spending under control. As the member for Fraser noted, competition and dynamism are everything. They link to national defence, to job security and to a sense of ourselves and whether we can afford to pay for the schools that we have, the infrastructure that we speak about and all of the things that the Prime Minister spoke about with great bluster and enthusiasm. The clear lesson from the Intergenerational report is that government is not the answer. Government should be there to help private sector companies like Fratelli Engineering. So who is the person who knows better than the private sector? Who is the person who knows more than Sam Leo, the owner and founder of Fratelli Engineering? Well, it's the Treasurer.

Unlike the member for Fraser, whose praises I sung about his qualifications and expertise in economics, the Treasurer's expertise isn't in economics. His thesis wasn't on economics; it was on politics. I won't bore the House with the contents of his thesis, but here are the chapter titles. 'Brawler statesman' is chapter 1, with a subchapter on 'Revisiting prime ministerial power'. Chapter 2 is 'Prime ministerial leadership'. 'Leading Labor' is chapter 3. Chapter 4 is 'Controlling cabinet'. On page 119 there's a subchapter called 'Picking winners'. That's interesting. When you go to that subchapter, it's not a warning against the government picking winners; it's an example of how the Prime Minister can deploy, exercise and wield power. Chapter 6 is 'Throwing grenades', and there's a subchapter there called 'Us and them'. That's what I heard in the Prime Minister's speech. It wasn't a speech about hope and optimism for our nation's future. It wasn't a speech about building more Fratelli Engineerings. It was a speech about us and them, and 'us' is not the Australian people; 'us' is the Labor Party and its affiliated unions. That is the measure of success: us and them. There's another chapter on 'Pressing the flesh' and other lessons in how to obtain, deploy and hold on to power. We hear a lot of talk about principles, but what we see in practice more often from this government and this Prime Minister is an exercise in protecting power.

The bill that's before us has had significant and important criticism placed upon it, including from no less than the government appointed head of the Productivity Commission, Danielle Wood, who said:

We risk creating a class of businesses that is reliant on government subsidies, and that can be very effective in coming back for more.

I just took you to the projected government spending. On that projection, there won't be any 'more'. But what we do know is that, when the North East Link is finished and the 30 per cent premiums on salaries and conditions are over—I wish those on those projects the very best; that's great for them and their families. But when that's all said and done and there's no capacity to move on to the next project and they turn to companies like Fratelli Engineering to get a job, they won't exist anymore, because they will have left. That's borne out now. That's not a projection into the future when this project is finished or the SRL is finished. That's happening now.

We are seeing in Victoria a flight of small and medium businesses out of the state. Every other state in the last financial year saw an increase in the aggregate number of small businesses. Queensland saw an increase of 11,000 in the last financial year. Victoria saw a decrease of 7,400. Many of those shut down never to open again. Many of those took off and went to an area that had perhaps slightly better conditions. But it is an important lesson to this Labor government to look at another Labor government to see how your well-intentioned projects and government interference drive private capital away. It's a warning, and it's not being heeded. There are many Victorian Labor member sitting on those benches over there, and they see it—they see companies like Fratelli Engineering closing their doors and moving off.

It has been pointed out by respected economists, including the Productivity Commissioner, who said what you should be doing is tax reform. Tax reform is how we can get off the private sector's back and actually encourage the proper investments we need to make things in Australia. Other economists like Professor Richard Holden noted that there are significant concerns in this about encouraging rent seeking. In the media and in this House we'll often hear the government members say, 'What are you going to do about it?' Well, the first thing we will do is bring humility to this debate. We will bring humility to say that we don't know better. I'm not an engineer. I haven't built things in Australia, but I know many people who have. The first thing we'll do is listen to them. When you listen to them they will tell you that they just need some breathing space to compete properly—not with government but with the rest of the world. When Australians do that, there is no limit to what they can achieve. We've seen that in many other enterprises.

The coalition is committed to getting back to economic basics, and at the heart of getting back to economic basics is an acknowledgement of and self-reflection on humility. We might have big egos in this place, but building things in Australia is not what we are good at. But there are many people in this country who are, and they deserve us to have their backs and not be on their backs.

We will also rein in inflation. When I spoke about that increase in government spending, the Reserve Bank had been very clear that that is a key contributor to inflation. It is important that we rein government spending in. We will wind back the regulatory layers of red tape that have been added by this government. I want to give an example of where red tape has a real-life consequence, and it's in the area of national security. At the moment if a young person applies to join the Defence Force, some of them aren't hearing back for a year or 18 months later. That has directly contributed to one in 12 full-time Defence Force personnel being absent. We're short 5,000 members of the full-time Defence Force. Red tape isn't an academic line that we throw out that has no meaning or purpose; it has consequences, in national security as well as the economy.

We will also introduce lower, fairer and simpler taxes for all Australians. They won't be about the government picking winners and saying, 'We know best.' It will be principled across the board and it will allow those that will succeed to do their best and those that won't to have those resources diverted elsewhere. That's the very essence of a free-market economy—it is what has served this nation well and it is what will provide the future prosperity so that we're not putting the burden of $40,000 per person on government spending into the future.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The view from Newcastle could not be more contrasting. I rise to speak in support of the Albanese Labor government's Future Made in Australia Bill, and this is a very important and, indeed, most significant step in implementing the government's agenda to help build a stronger economy as well as a more diverse and more resilient economy powered by renewable energy.

Members opposite might wonder why the people of Newcastle, who have a heavily carbon-intensive economy, might be so supportive of this. We'll come to that, but we're not a people who put our heads in the sand and pretend that change isn't underway. This bill, we know and we recognise, is about creating more secure and well-paid jobs, and encouraging and facilitating private investment when required. It is going to be required to make Australia an indispensable part of a global net zero economy. Put simply, we want Australians in secure jobs and we want Australians building things here.

I listened carefully to the speech before me. I must say that when I was growing up, manufacturing was probably the biggest employer in my community. I've observed neglect of that sector now over a period of time, to the point where it is dropping down to the fourth or fifth of employers in my community. That's a sign of things changing in Newcastle, and it is absolutely indicative of the profound neglect of that sector over a long period of time and not understanding the real needs of the manufacturing sector. When I talk to manufacturers in my electorate about the intent of this bill and how it can support them, they are very excited. I want to assure members opposite the manufacturing sector in Australia is very keen to see the passage of this bill through this parliament.

It's no secret that the world is changing. Australia needs to move with t, because we don't have an option to stay stuck in the past—well, we do have an option but it takes us to a very bad place. Members opposite seem to think that it is going to be okay if we somehow ignore the entire transition of the global economy to net zero. This is our opportunity to respond. This is part of the big agenda of this government to undertake what is our greatest challenge. We've heard the Prime Minister say that this is the biggest transformation in the global economy since the industrial revolution. This is our generation's industrial revolution, and Australia needs to get on board. We need to adjust to the changing global economic and strategic landscape. This bill aims to do just that by capturing our unique combination of geological, meteorological, geographical and geopolitical comparative advantages. The legislation will encourage private sector investment to build a stronger, more diversified and more resilient economy powered by renewable energy that creates secure, well-paid jobs around the country.

I'll speak to some of the detail later, and I also want to focus on what it means to Newcastle. But what people need to understand about this bill is that it's built on three pillars. The first pillar is the National Interest Framework, which helps us to identify the sectors where we have sustained competitive advantage. We heard the Treasurer speak about that earlier on and what those sustained competitive advantages are in a new net zero economy. The National Interest Framework is also about our economic resilience and security imperatives to invest.

The second pillar is a robust sector assessment process that gives us a better understanding of how we might break down some of those barriers or obstacles that are currently in the way of private investment in key areas of our economy.

The third pillar this legislation rests on, which is a very great interest to peoples and communities across Australia, is a set of community benefit principles. Those principles will ensure that public investment—and the private investment that the public investment is going to generate for us—leads to strong returns but also leads to strengthening our communities, because those returns and benefits have to come back to our greatest assets, which are our communities and our people. So these three pillars will work together to help us build a more diverse and more resilient economy, as I said, that is powered on renewable energies. That's the intent of this legislation.

This is great news for our region, as well as the people that I represent in Newcastle, who are in the most fantastic position to take full advantage, really, of the opportunities presented by the Albanese Labor government's Future Made in Australia plan, because a future made in Australia means a future made in Newcastle. We understand that and we understand that well. We have a deepwater port and we've got vast lands surrounding that port, which are really important for renewable energy. We've got a highly skilled workforce with experience in the generation and storage of energy. We've got a world-leading university, high-quality TAFE and a thriving and highly collaborative business community. We're an attractive place for investment, for clean energy and for the clean, high-value manufacturing industries of the future.

We really want to take full advantage of all the talents of our people of our region and of all those amazing benefits—our incredible natural resources—to not only make things here in Australia but also, certainly, make things again in Newcastle and our region. We're not interested in just simply shipping things overseas and then importing them back as more expensive finished products. So it is absolutely in our national interest to be passing this bill here today.

I want to talk about a few great examples in Newcastle and the Hunter region where we can see the real benefit of private investment. It is most certainly in our national interest to diversify the manufacturing of solar panels and batteries here in Australia and improve those supply chains. We're investing in these areas under the economic resilience and security stream of the future made in Australia act.

In the Hunter region, the site of the former coal-fired power station Liddell Power Station will be transformed into a solar manufacturing hub as part of our federal government's $1 billion Solar Sunshot program, which will help Australia capture more of the global solar manufacturing supply chain through support, including production, subsidies and grants. Capturing more of that supply chain is important for many reasons. One in three Australian households have got solar panels, which is the highest uptake in the world—and that is great—but only one per cent of those panels sitting on roofs today are made in Australia. We want to fix that. Nationally, the Solar Sunshot program is going to create hundreds and hundreds of secure, high-paid, high-quality, high-skilled jobs in regional Australia.

That's just one example of how the Albanese Labor government is not just talking the talk here but actually making sure that we are not only putting investment in ourselves but also signalling to the private sector that we're serious about this business. This is a government that went to an election with an energy policy. We've stuck with that policy. We're not seeking to move to 22 different versions of some policy along the way, and that gives investors confidence. We acknowledge the role we need to play in the transition of our global economy to net zero, and we want our people and our communities to take full advantage of that.

I'm also excited that Newcastle is destined to be part of large-scale renewable hydrogen production in Australia as well. Last year the Albanese Labor government unveiled the $2 billion Hydrogen Headstart program to support new large-scale renewable hydrogen projects in Australia. Newcastle is very fortunate to have two projects that were shortlisted nationally. There is a group of six that were shortlisted; two of those come from Newcastle. There is $70 million being invested to develop a hydrogen hub in Newcastle to create good new local jobs, standing up a new industry, boosting our renewable hydrogen industry here in Australia. Origin Energy, in collaboration with Orica, is progressing development in the Hunter Valley Hydrogen Hub, which will produce renewable hydrogen and create around 100 jobs. The funding put on the table by the Albanese Labor government is building the infrastructure needed to produce up to 5,500 tonnes of renewable hydrogen each year. That will be used by Orica in their ammonium and ammonium nitrate facility to help make their products emissions free. These are hard, tough-to-abate industries, and they need something like renewable hydrogen to enable them to make that transition. There is also refuelling hydrogen buses and trucks; we know that the heavy transport sector is also one of those hard-to-abate sectors. Additionally we've KEPCO pushing ahead with its plans to commence hydrogen and ammonium production in the Port of Newcastle's clean energy precinct thanks to a further $100 million investment from the Albanese Labor government. Large-scale production of renewable energy is critical to our nation becoming a global hydrogen leader, and these products reflect the many hydrogen opportunities in Australia.

There is much more to be said. I've heard a lot of disparaging remarks from those opposite about the benefits of offshore wind, but I want to put on the record the strong support of Novocastrians for this new industry. We're in the process of establishing an offshore wind industry in Newcastle. The Albanese Labor government is paving the way for new forms of energy and job security in our region as one of the many regions that are bearing the brunt of this transition. This government is dead-set focused on helping those regions that have been part of a carbon-intensive economy to date to make these important transitions. And that's why I say, when we talk about a future made in Australia, this legislation is squarely focused on regions like mine to ensure there is a future made in Newcastle, in the Hunter and in those regions that are powered this nation for generations. We intend to be powering our cities, our heavy industries, our people and our communities for generations to come, but we will be doing it with new forms of power.

That's why I am very confident about Newcastle's future. When I think about our capacity to generate renewable hydrogen, to stand up a remarkable new offshore wind industry, all of the jobs that are going to come from that—it's phenomenal—the role of solar not just in our region but across the nation and the low-carbon manufacturing that's coming out of industries, I know there's a bright future for our people. This legislation makes sure of that. (Time expired)

Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We've got a huge opportunity in this country right now. Australia has a lot of the critical minerals that the rest of the world is going to need, but, critically, we've got the critical minerals that we can turn into products that the rest of the world is going to need as we move towards a zero-pollution society. We've also got a massive opportunity to learn the lessons of the mining boom—the squandered opportunities there that saw Australia not capture and save for the benefit of the Australian population the massive wealth that it created in the way that other countries did with their sovereign wealth funds and their proper taxation arrangements. But we have the opportunity here, on the cusp of a new mining boom, of actually ensuring that it helps set our country up for the future financially, in the way that other countries have done.

To make all of this happen, we in the Greens think government support is absolutely critical. As to this idea that somehow a government cannot play a role in shaping the future industry of this country to ensure that it's the kind of industry that creates secure jobs, gives a lasting return to people and helps tackle the climate crisis, all of those things are going to require government assistance. When it's well spent, that is a good place for government money to go. That's the principal approach that we take to measures that apparently, on the face of it, are about securing a better future for Australia.

What we don't support, and are concerned about, is legislation that is about creating an election slush fund for more coal and gas. There's a real question mark over this legislation, because what we're seeing, at the same time as the government says it wants a future made in Australia, is that it wants a future for coal and gas past 2050. This government has approved 23 new coal and gas projects. Its Future Gas Strategy says it wants gas out past 2050, and the environment minister has been approving projects that run to 2080. When we're meant to be at net zero, Labor is approving coal and gas projects to run out to 2080. We are in a climate crisis now. The scientists are crystal clear when they tell us—and they are ringing the alarm bells as loudly as they can—that, to have any chance of having a safe climate, we can't open a single new coal or gas project. And yet Labor have approved 23 already, and they're asking the public to pay for it; in fact, they're making the public pay for it.

Look at the Middle Arm development up in the Northern Territory, where Labor is building a massive new hub that's based on extracting gas from the Beetaloo. They have public money, again, subsidising a climate-destroying project that First Nations owners don't want and that scientists have said to us cannot go ahead if we're to have any chance of meeting the climate crisis. So, for Labor, A Future Made in Australia is a future for more coal and gas. There's nothing in this legislation that rules out public money going to more coal and gas or to the infrastructure that supports it—nothing. Given that we know Labor now believes that somehow you can cut pollution by increasing it, by opening and approving more coal and gas projects, there's a very real question mark over this legislation as to whether it could be turned into another election slush fund for more coal and gas.

The Future Made in Australia (Omnibus Amendments No. 1) Bill 2024, the second bill that forms part of this package, contains some more support for ARENA, and we support that. The Greens were instrumental in establishing ARENA back in 2010. Because of the design of it, it has survived, it has thrived and it has helped grow renewable energy, so more support for ARENA is something that we also support. But what is also clear in this legislation is that the government wants to expand the old Efic—now Export Finance Australia—to expand its remit and turn it inwards, and to significantly expand the amount of funding going into Export Finance Australia. Why does it want to do that? Well, unlike other agencies, the agency formerly called Efic is overseen by cabinet. It's not an independent statutory authority that's got its own mandate; it's something where cabinet, or ministers, can have a say.

We fear that we're seeing a big pile of money going into a government election slush fund for more coal and gas. We're seeing gas giants like Chevron and Impex salivating over the government's future gas strategy and saying what a good idea it is for the public to dip its hand into its own pocket and use public money to expand new polluting fossil fuel infrastructure. We have no guardrail in this legislation to stop the government from doing exactly that, giving more public money to big corporations to expand coal and gas. And it's all dressed up under the label of 'net zero', which we now know Labor doesn't believe in because Labor says gas beyond 2050 and approved coal and gas mines to run as late as 2080—2080!

There is nothing in this package of bills to ensure that the public gets a fair return from all of this investment. In this country, we have government owned corporations in our markets. For example, Sweden owns steel companies. Japan, China and South Korea own Australia's gas export terminals. Canada owns the Bank of Canada, Finland owns its gambling monopoly and Singapore owns Optus. Australia already has publicly owned corporations in its markets. It's just that none are Australian government owned, and the profits of Australian resources go overseas. We have an opportunity to fix that, to stop it before it starts, by ensuring that, if public money is going to these big new investments, there's some public return and some public ownership. Other countries do that, and they do it in Australia. They ensure they benefit from it, so why can't we do it ourselves?

We also have an opportunity now, as we are drafting legislation and looking ahead to this massive potential mining boom 2.0 that could set Australia up for the future, to avoid some of the mistakes of the past that the government has made with the gas industry. To be very clear, the Greens have a very different approach to gas than Labor and Liberal. We want to stop opening new gas projects. Gas is not part of the solution; it's part of the problem. Gas is as dirty as coal. And the system has plenty of gas to help us make the transition. The problem is that Labor handed everything over to the big gas corporations, including overseas gas corporations. As a result, Australia is awash with gas, yet they claim there's a gas shortage for Australian manufacturing and households. How has Labor allowed a system to arise where we have Australian owned resources but end up exporting four times as much as is used domestically and then claim there's a shortage? The reason is that Labor just did whatever the big corporations wanted. As a result, everyone else was left to suffer.

We have the capacity to stop repeating the same mistake. We need to ensure that, of these critical minerals, enough are reserved for Australian needs, and on top of that, we also invest in ensuring we're processing them here. But there's nothing in this bill that stops a repeat of the debacle of the gas industry. Under Labor's plan, in 10 to 20 years, we could find ourselves worried about a shortage of these critical minerals in the same way Labor says there's a supposed shortage of gas—even though Australia is awash with the stuff. If you hand it all over to big corporations and let them send the resources offshore together with all the profits and put no restrictions around it, then you're setting yourself up for exactly the same situation in 10 or 20 years. It will be robbing the Australian people.

We've got four concerns about this package that Labor is putting forward. As I say, these aren't concerns based on what the coalition was saying—that the government shouldn't be getting involved in setting up industries of the future. Of course, it should. We took a very clear position to the election of expanding significant public investment in exactly this kind of area of critical minerals and manufacturing and, because in many places the best job for a coalminer is another mining job, ensuring that there is a transition made so that workers get well-paid, secure jobs in industries that are going to last. But that's not what this package is.

Firstly, the government has to stop opening new coal and gas projects, because otherwise their 'future made in Australia' will just become a future for more coal and gas. They have to stop funding more coal and gas projects and the associated infrastructure. There are better things for public money to go on than helping big gas corporations to wreck the climate, but that's what the government wants to spend money on. That needs to stop, and it needs to stop in this bill.

Secondly, we also need to ensure that this country gets a fair share of its mineral wealth. We can't miss this mining boom 2.0. A big way we can do that is by looking at public ownership when we have public investment and a public return in the way other countries do. This is our chance to do that. But that's missing from this bill.

Thirdly, we want to avoid a repeat of the situation we find ourselves in now where Australia is awash with resources and yet apparently there aren't enough to use domestically. We have to avoid that. The way to avoid that is to avoid letting the big corporations write the rules. But that's what this bill does. It still allows the big corporations to write the rules.

Fourthly, there is something that's absent from this bill. That's an answer about what happens with First Nations owners under whose land many of these minerals sit. We've seen First Nations people claim, rightly, that they have a claim to this and a right to be involved in what happens. It's not just about, as the Prime Minister's been saying, that First Nations people can go and work for Rio Tinto. It's about what rights the First Nations people, whose sovereignty has never been ceded, have over this country. We know at the moment that in many places there is litigation going on about this very question about the rights First Nations people have on what is happening on their land and on the land under them. That needs to be addressed as well. If we are talking about a future for Australia, then, critically, we need to resolve that question as well.

These bills are working their way through a Senate inquiry at the moment. That will go for a few months. We will reserve our position on these bills until we see the outcome of that inquiry and we see what the government's response is to these very real issues that we have raised.

It's not enough to just set up big buckets of money to use during an election with little to no oversight. This is about whether we can set Australia up for the future, whether we can get a fair share of the minerals and resources and whether we say that the public is entitled to a return on the minerals and resources that we all own.

Matt Burnell (Spence, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This legislation, the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 and the Future Made in Australia (Omnibus Amendments No. 1) Bill 2024, represents a defining moment for our nation. It's driven by the Albanese Labor government's commitment towards revitalising Australia's manufacturing sector and, in turn, creating secure, well-paying jobs and building a resilient, sustainable future for all Australians. The Prime Minister, in the lead-up to this year's budget, visited my home state of South Australia and spoke of the vision behind A Future Made in Australia: investing in our people, our infrastructure and our future. This bill is the embodiment of that vision, ensuring that our future is made right here in Australia.

The Future Made in Australia Bill is presented here as more than purely legislation. It is a core component of our government's blueprint for securing our place in a clean energy future. We can be at the forefront, or we can be bystanders. The Albanese Labor government would rather see us leading the way, using the advantages we possess as a nation to, in true Aussie fashion, punch well above our weight on the world stage. It is about investing in our local industries, boosting productivity and ensuring that secure jobs are accessible to all Australians. We believe that every Australian deserves the opportunity to work in a job that provides stability, fair wages and the chance to build a better future.

The Future Made in Australia Bill forms part of that commitment, as it focuses specifically on revitalising the manufacturing sector, a sector that has historically provided some of the most secure and well-paying jobs within our economy. For decades Australia's manufacturing sector has faced significant challenges: global competition, economic shifts—and of course those opposite. In the present, Australia needs a government with the determination necessary to bring manufacturing out of dormancy, decline and, in some parts of the country, the realm of myth and legend. And it does, in the form of the Albanese Labor government.

Those opposite only know how to divide and disrupt. Our government has worked from day one to bring stakeholders of diverse and often competing interests together, putting the national interest above self-interest, because this is a government that's determined to ensure that Australia builds its future upon its own soil, with its own hands and with its own raw materials. It is a government unafraid to invest in critical industries and Australian workers, who will reap the benefit of having government and industry directing them toward jobs that are in demand today and will be in demand tomorrow.

The legislation before the House today is to a certain extent a response to the vulnerabilities exposed by global events, particularly the COVID-19 pandemic, when companies and governments scrambled to try and upscale manufacturing capability and to convert the structure and equipment of factories to be able to mass produce medical masks, which were in short supply. This is not unheard of. Australia and indeed many countries during wartime converted car manufacturing plants and similar sites to produce vehicles and weapons for their militaries. Both examples serve as a reminder that it is a matter of national importance to have well-maintained industrial manufacturing capabilities within your own borders.

The Future Made in Australia Bill addresses these risks by enhancing our domestic manufacturing capacity, ensuring that Australia can produce what it needs when it needs it. This is a cornerstone of the Albanese Labor government's broader economic strategy, one that revitalises local industry, supports innovation and builds a more self-reliant and adaptive economy. These investments, channelled through the National Reconstruction Fund, target key industries, such as renewable energy, critical minerals, defence and advanced manufacturing. The bill itself particularly provides for substantial investments in renewable energy projects by funding the development of solar, wind and hydrogen energy projects, positioning Australia as a global leader in clean energy technology.

As highlighted by the Climate Council, Australia has the potential to become a renewable energy superpower, driving economic growth while protecting our environment. Moreover, the bill sets out clear criteria for assessing sectors and investments through a National Interest Framework. The NIF is crucial in identifying and prioritising sectors for investment under the Future Made in Australia plan, aligning them with national priorities such as decarbonisation and economic resilience. This framework ensures that investments not only support key industries but also deliver broad-based benefits to the Australian community. It is designed to safeguard our economic sovereignty and reduce dependency on foreign supply chains. The framework includes rigorous assessment processes to ensure that every investment is strategically sound and beneficial to the nation's long-term interests.

Furthermore, the Future Made in Australia Bill prioritises local procurement. This is not a new idea that the Albanese Labor government has started to embrace. This has been a constant and consistent approach we have taken since forming government. This policy supports local businesses and utilises local raw materials and critical minerals. It stimulates economic activity and ensures that the benefits of public spending are felt across the country. Even more importantly, it is hard to encourage the Australian people to make a priority of buying Australian made goods unless we practice what we preach. The bill also addresses the need for technological advancement in our manufacturing sector. By investing in advanced manufacturing technologies, we are ensuring that Australian businesses remain competitive in a global market. This includes financial and regulatory support for research and development, technology adaptation and innovation. Advanced manufacturing capabilities will enable us to produce high-quality goods efficiently and sustainably, positioning Australia as a leader in a portion of the manufacturing sector.

The Future Made in Australia Bill, along with the framework and policies underpinning it, have garnered widespread support from a number of key stakeholders, including many leading figures within our business community, from the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry to the Business Council of Australia, an organisation representing some of the nation's largest companies, who are strong supporters for this bill, stating, 'The Future Made in Australia bill is a critical step towards rebuilding our industrial base and ensuring Australia's long-term economic security.' The Australian Industry Group, another key player in the business landscape, has also expressed their robust support for the bill, praising the strategic investments in advanced manufacturing and technology. They noted, 'This legislation provides a clear framework for enhancing Australia's manufacturing capabilities,' praising the strategic investments in advanced manufacturing and technology.

Future Made in Australia provides us all with a Groundhog Day-like experience. Much like the National Reconstruction Fund Corporation and the Nature Repair Market framework, to name a couple of examples, it would appear those opposite would rather fiddle with their isotopes in the corner than work together with a government that had joined with numerous business groups, industry groups, unions, and higher education and vocational training providers. The support of these groups reinforces the bill's focus on boosting Australia's industrial capacity and securing a strong position in a global economy that is pivoting toward a clean energy future.

It is important to note that environmental and economic sustainability are not mutually exclusive goals. The support from the Clean Energy Council underscores the bill's forward-looking approach in this regard. The council remarked, 'The Future Made in Australia bill is a landmark policy that will place Australia at the forefront of the global renewable energy market, and by investing in clean energy projects we are setting the stage for sustainable economic growth and energy security.'

Additionally, the role of the Australian Renewable Energy Agency, ARENA, has been expanded under this bill, supporting industries through the Future Made in Australia Innovation Fund. Export Finance Australia has also been granted new functions related to supporting projects in line with national economy and net zero priorities. These expansions demonstrate our government's commitment to leveraging existing institutions to drive the Future Made in Australia plan, ensuring that the bill is part of a cohesive and well-coordinated policy approach. Educational institutions and vocational training organisations have also endorsed the Australian Skills Guarantee, recognising its importance in addressing the skills gap and providing young Australians with valuable opportunities. TAFE Directors Australia commented: 'The Skills Guarantee is a crucial step towards building a skilled workforce that can meet the demands of a modern economy. It ensures that our education and training systems are aligned with industry need.'

These endorsements from key businesses and industry groups reflect a broad consensus on the benefits of the Future Made in Australia Bill. It is a policy that addresses the needs of workers, businesses and the environment, aligning with the values and goals of the Albanese Labor government. In my electorate of Spence, we have already seen the positive impact of targeted government investment. Take the example of the defence industry precinct in Edinburgh. This initiative has not only created hundreds of jobs but also fostered a thriving ecosystem of innovation and collaboration between local businesses and educational institutions. As a result, that precinct has become a hub of both community and commercial activity, attracting talent and investment from across the region.

As the Prime Minister has previously stated, these investments are about creating opportunities for Australians, ensuring that our regions thrive and that every community shares in our nation's prosperity. This highlights the transformative power of strategic investment, demonstrating how government support can drive community growth and development. The Future Made in Australia Bill builds on this success, ensuring that these benefits are expanded and sustained no matter what the world throws at us. Furthermore, the bill's emphasis on local procurement ensures that government spending directly benefits Australian businesses and workers. This policy support local economies, creating jobs and stimulating economic activity in communities across the country. By prioritising Australian-made goods and services, we are strengthening our domestic supply chains and supporting the growth of our manufacturing sector.

I anticipate that some members opposite may argue that this bill is too 'big government' for their liking. However, I don't take lectures on the free market from a party that has one policy written up, in their finest Crayola, that would have the government build, pay for and maintain several expensive and risky nuclear power plants. Really, was a planned economy in their plans? It took them a few decades to transition from Menzies to Marx—horseshoe theory eat your heart out! I think the invisible hand of the market is scratching a lot of the heads when you try to find what a real Liberal is these days.

Global trends show that strategic government investment is crucial for both economic resilience and competitiveness. Countries like Germany and South Korea have successfully revitalised their manufacturing sectors through targeted government support, and there is no reason we cannot do the same. The argument to not support the industry relying on subsidies was thrown around constantly by the media in the months leading up to the last handful of automated manufacturing plants closing their doors. Strategic investment in key industries is not a radical idea; it is a proven strategy for driving economic growth and stability.

Critics may also claim that the renewable energy investments are too risky or that they divert resources from traditional industries. To this, I say the future of our economy depends on our ability to innovate and adapt. The transition to renewable energy is not just an environmental imperative; it is an economic opportunity that will create jobs, drive growth and position Australia as a leader in a global industry. Furthermore, the National Interest Framework ensures that all investments are carefully assessed and aligned with national priorities. This is not about reckless spending; it is about making strategic decisions that will benefit all Australians. The framework provides a robust mechanism for ensuring that every dollar invested delivers maximum benefit, supporting economic growth and resilience.

It is also important to address concerns about the cost of these investments. The reality is that the cost of inaction is far greater. Failing to invest in our manufacturing sector or workforce, and in our renewable energy capabilities, would leave us at a significant competitive disadvantage and undermine our economic security. But the Future Made in Australia Bill represents a government taking that necessary action—a step towards rebuilding our manufacturing sector, creating secure jobs, and ensuring a resilient and sustainable economic future, with a Made in Australia logo on top. That symbol, when placed on an item, is something coveted, and not just by the people across the globe—because one thing we can all agree on is that if something is made here, it is worth buying.

We would argue that ensuring things continue to be made in Australia is not just in our national interest—at times it can be a matter of national security to maintain this capability. 'Made in Australia' was a big part of our past as well, particularly in my electorate of Spence, but also across so many parts of this country. Our proud history of manufacturing should not be relegated to the past, because the Albanese Labor government—much like most Australians, much like institutional investors, business groups, unions, universities and TAFEs—want to see one thing moving forward into the future: a future made in Australia, a future made in South Australia, a future made in the northern suburbs of Adelaide, a future made in my electorate of Spence. I commend this bill to the House.

Barnaby Joyce (New England, National Party, Shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This obviously is a well-meaning thought, but it's complete and utter fantasia. It's fantasia dressed up as a policy. If you want to create manufacturing, we all support that. There are three fundamental components of it. The first one is wages and labour relations. No-one is advocating for lower wages. With our competitive nature, we are at a disadvantage to India, Bangladesh and China, nor do we ever want our wages to be where theirs are. There is no competitive advantage in wages. Resources are the next component. Resources are at a global price. There is no advantage in resources. They're at a global price, less transport; that is it. The price of coal is the price of coal, and the differentiation is transport.

But there is one thing that we used to have an advantage in—and it's gone—and that was energy. Power was the mechanism that got us in the game. You can have as many subsidies as you want; it is not going to last unless you get your energy process under control. This idea that you're going to drive the Australian economy on a windmill is complete and utter fantasy, yet you're religiously attached to it. You're almost pathologically attached to it. If we got all the speakers up and asked, 'But what's your position on trying to drive Australia on swindle factories, painting the fields a photovoltaic black and covering us with 28,000 kilometres of new transmission lines?' and then they sat back and said, 'Oh, we want a manufacturing industry,' it'd be just childlike and illogical.

Let's look at your most recent one: you're going to set up a solar panel factory for Liddell. What's it called? Sunsol or something?

Tony Pasin (Barker, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Sunshot, I think. I don't know.

Barnaby Joyce (New England, National Party, Shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Whatever it is. You've got Mike Cannon-Brookes and Malcolm Turnbull swanning around saying how wonderful it is. They're putting people off. It's going well, but they've just retrenched 35. This goes to show you the fantasia of it. Going out like this is the height of naivety. It means that you've never actually been in business yourself, and that is a crucial difference.

Business is an interesting concept that, unfortunately, is rarely experienced on the other side of this House. If you're in business the first thing you've got to do is make a buck. There's got to be a difference between your costs and what you get, and in this global economy, what you get is overwhelmingly determined by the global price. I'll give you a few instances of where we actually do go alright in Australia: beef, wool, mutton, lamb, cotton, grain, iron ore, coal, gas, gold, copper, bauxite and education. When we look at these industries and we ask: 'Is the government helping them?' the answer is: no, you're working at odds with them. You've just brought in the Nature Repair Market. You want to turn 30 per cent of Australia back to scrub. How on earth does that help the cattle industry?

I was out the other day and had a whole heap of farmers on a front verandah. These are some of the things they've got to put up with. Do you know that, if a bushfire goes through plains country and all of a sudden, where there were no trees, gum trees come back—because bushfires germinate seeds—you're not allowed to clear them? You've got to leave them there. As a result, the land becomes completely and utterly unproductive. You will actually send people to jail if they clear them. Do you know now that, to get firewood from dead trees, people have to get a logging permit? This is the sort of Kafkaesque socialist insanity that has now become part of our economy.

Do you know that, if there's a drought and you go to dig a hole in a named creek—not dam the creek—you can't? So where you've got sand, you're left with nothing for stock to drink. This is how insane it's become: there is an area, Emu Swamp Creek, which is just a dry gully. The only time it ever runs is if there's heavy rain, and then it does so very temporarily, and it's a flood. There are 650 people who work at a blueberry farm on the other side of this creek, and they've got to move product out. The bridge goes; it just runs out. So they said, 'We'll just put in a temporary bridge of dirt,' and people came up, outraged. Why? It was in breach of fish legislation. Fish legislation! What fish was going up there? A grass fish? A flying fish? That'd be about the only fish that would have got up there.

Nonetheless—this is Kafkaesque; this is how it happens; this is what the Labor Party does—they came back and they said, 'Okay, you have to put in pipes.' And I said, 'Pipes! For what?' Nonetheless, they'd asked for it, so they put in pipes—big round ones for the pretend fish on the grass to somehow get through—so the fish could go up. Even if they do go up, I don't know what they're going to do. Are they going to go up and eat rocks? There's nothing there. So they put in the big round pipes. The officials came back. Outrage! They're the wrong type of pipes. They had to be square ones. They needed square ones for the invisible, pretend fish to go up a dry gully that never had fish to go to goodness knows where to do I don't know what. Then they say, 'But we believe in a manufacturing industry and we're completely sensible and this is all going to work.'

The coal industry is almost being thought of as evil. It's the evil coal industry. They can't mention it—'Don't mention coal! Don't mention the coal industry!' The fact is that it's the only reason we've got a surplus. They forgot about that part. All the investment houses are starting to say, 'Actually, the coal industry makes a lot of money,' and their shareholders and the people who are part of it say, 'Why aren't you investing in coal. My friends who are in the coal industry are making a bucketload of money and we're not?' All of a sudden they're changing a little bit, because people inherently, with their super fund, want to have some money at the end of it, and this is a great place to invest. Do you know why? It is because the world is buying coal. I hate to say it, but the world is buying coal—an awful lot of it, more than has ever been bought before, and at a higher price. But, of course, no, you can't have that. It's evil.

There's the cotton industry—yes, evil cotton. It drinks water. So what are they doing? They're taking water out of the Murray-Darling Basin. This is completely counterintuitive. These are the areas where, actually, if you were to invest and if you just let these people alone and you stopped putting your foot on their throats, they would employ more people.

Go to a boning room of an abattoir and you will see that it is the industrial Olympics as they go flat out. There are hundreds of people flat out working, and it's great. You get to see people hard at work. It's about going out there, listening and saying, 'We're going to help those in the meat-processing sector.' Are you doing that? No. Everything you do is about putting more caveats on how people produce beef. In fact, people and banks out there now have to have a net zero plan. Of course, this is inspired by government policy. Even farms have to have net zero plans. That puts so much pressure on small farms.

Do you know what? People now can't be a boilermaker or a fitter and turner or an electrician if they work in a coalmine, because they won't get insurance. Yet you say, 'We believe in jobs.' It's garbage. The last speaker talked about our universities and TAFEs, and these are great institutions, but they're not creating manufacturing jobs. These are not manufacturing jobs. They are the service sector, and they do a great job.

There's this counterintuitive Peter Pan fantasy, and we see it in its absolute, black-and-white form in country areas. Areas around us are looking like hell now. Complete fields of what was farming country are completely black with photovoltaic panels. It's being destroyed, as is the farming produce that came out of there. They say you can graze underneath these photovoltaic panels. Have you gone out and had a look at them? There is no grazing under photovoltaic panels, except by rats or maybe a couple of rabbits. There is no grazing going on there. What type of cattle would graze under there? Dexters? And they would starve to death. That's the fantasia of this policy. It's an absolute fantasia.

If we want cheap energy, we could go to water. Okay, we've got to comply with the fantasy. Let's look at baseload. Right, hydro—we're going to have to build ourselves some dams. No, we can't dam the creeks. Why can't we do that? It comes back to the fish. Apparently fish don't live in water! Let's come back to the real fish that actually do live in water. You can't do it. There's not a plan for a dam in the Labor Party—not one. If you want hydroelectricity, you've got to have a dam, and then you've got baseload power.

Ultimately we think, 'Where do we go?'

Let's think about where the rest of the world has gone and how they're doing it, how they're getting cheap power like the Fins, the French, the Chinese, the Indians and the Indonesians. Basically, every country in the OECD either has it or uses it, except us, and that is nuclear—nu-cle-ar; three syllables. So we say, 'Okay, let's go nuclear,' and they say, 'Oh, no, no, no, we can't do that.' Why? 'Oh, that's just thinking too much; we can't do that.' Why? Because they're happy in the cave of 1986! It's secure in the cave of 1986.

They have this vision that every nuclear plant is somehow Chernobyl, and they're not. That was a Soviet plant built in the late 1960s. It was a boiling-type plan. It was a graphite-moderated, dual-purpose reactor for the creation of, amongst other things, plutonium for atomic weapons. The enrichment percentage was 98 per cent. We're talking about three to five per cent enrichment, a different rock to boil water, to create steam, to turn a turbine. Black rocks, but you don't like them. So we're going to another rock, uranium, but apparently, that rock is immoral. It's immoral, like the black rock. What other alternative do you put up? Are we going to do it on windmills and solar panels?

Look at the power price. Forget about what the minister says; forget about what I say. The only truth you need to take comes in an envelope with a little window in it, called your power bill, and it is going through the roof. In the last quarter, it went up by six per cent. And they say, 'But it would have gone up by more without our subsidies.' Quod erat demonstrandum, QED, which means the power price is a fiasco. It would have gone up by over 12 per cent. And you reckon that's going to run a manufacturing industry. On what planet in the solar system can you possibly run a manufacturing industry with an energy crisis like that? We are out of control. I'll tell you the proof of how you're going with your manufacturing plan. This is simple. With all the dancing and prancing as the minister comes to the dispatch box, with his rather tight shirt and glamorous ties—

I know, I have no fashion statements. I've got no fashion. I don't pretend to have any. That's the difference. This is the thing. If your plan was so good, there are some very big companies out there, multiple billion-dollar companies, and these people would be lined up at the door to come to Australia. Siemens, BMW, Hewlett-Packard, Rolls-Royce, General Motors and General Electric would be lined up saying: 'We're going to Australia. They're so clever; they've got it all worked out. Go now because Mr Bowen's saying the power prices are going to go through the floor. Let's line up now!' Not one of them wants to come here. In fact, they're all running for the door. They've worked out that this place is a basket case under the Labor Party. It's a complete and utter basket case! How do they solve it? They say, 'Oh, we'll have a piece of legislation and throw a bucket of money.' It would be better to get in your Comcar and, as you're driving home, pour it out the window. That would have more efficacy than this policy, which we just can't support.

Anne Stanley (Werriwa, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On change, Walt Disney once said, 'Times and conditions change so rapidly that we must keep our aim constantly focused on the future'. This quote is relevant to the bills before us today. In fact, we were talking about Fantasia not long ago. For certain, governments must meet today's challenges. The Albanese government, most recently in the 2024 budget, did this by outlining a suite of announcements to address the cost-of-living pressures faced by Australians everywhere. Tax cuts, energy relief and capping the cost of PBS medicines are just part of that suite of policies. As Walt Disney said, governments need to look beyond the horizon. They need to see beyond immediacy and cast forward to the future. It is called leadership, and this bill is an excellent example of just that.

The bill of course has its origins in the recent budget delivered by the Treasurer, but it also has origins in Labor's very own DNA and ethos. In Bowman Hall in Blacktown, back in November 1972, Gough Whitlam famously said:

The decision we will make for our country … is a choice between the past and the future, between the habits and fears of the past, and the demands and opportunities of the future.

Labor is never afraid of looking at the future. We've been the government of vision and change: think Medicare, think superannuation, think the NDIS. These have built and shaped our nation for the better, and, for certain, we will never be constrained by the habits and fears of the past like those opposite. They are paralysed in the past, looking for answers in old encyclopedias and almanacs in an age of broadband and wireless connectivity. Indeed, the very title of the bill before us displays the confidence of the Albanese government and its confidence in Australians and Australia's future.

Australia can't rely on the actions of other countries to secure our future. We must do it ourselves. We will do it ourselves. This bill will help Australia to do just that. Labor's plan for a future made in Australia is simple. We want Australia to be a country that makes more things here, because making things here will grow our economy and create good jobs. We'll put the talents of our people and our incredible natural resources to work, making things here so we are not simply shipping everything overseas and importing them back as finished products. We know this is possible, because it's already happening.

The measures outlined in this bill will ensure that Australia benefits from the global transition to net zero, that Australia can unlock private investment in the industries of the future and that Australians benefit from the new jobs and opportunities that that brings. This bill contains several components to help implement the Albanese government's Future Made in Australia plan. The first will be to embed the government's National Interest Framework, helping to identify sectors where Australia has a genuine comparative advantage within the net zero economy and helping to better align economic incentives with the national interest.

By legislating the framework, the investment community will have the certainty they need to invest in scale in future industries. The framework includes two streams: the net zero transformation scheme and the economic resilience and security stream. The net zero transformation scheme will cover those sectors where Australia could have a comparative advantage in a net zero economy and where public investment is likely to be needed for the sector to make significant contributions to emissions reduction. The economic resilience and security stream covers the sectors where a level of domestic capability is necessary for Australia's economic resilience and security but where the private sector will not provide the necessary investment without government support. Both of these streams are critical, and legislating them will ensure that there is certainty for the communities investing in these issues.

It is vital there is a legislated framework to help identify those critical sectors Australia can excel in. It will ensure not only that Australian communities can benefit from the transition to net zero but also that our economic resilience can. At the direction of the Treasurer, the Treasury may also conduct independent sector assessments to assess whether areas of the economy also align with the National Interest Framework and how government can reduce barriers to investment within those sectors. These assessments will also be made public to ensure proper transparency in government decision-making. And to ensure that both public and private investment benefit local workers and businesses in our community, a set of community benefit principles will be applied to the Future Made in Australia supports.

The Albanese government wants more safe and secure jobs that are well paid and have good conditions while investments are made in more training and skills development for the Australian workforce. These principles will promote better collaboration with local communities, such as First Nation communities and those directly affected by the net zero transition, and will strengthen Australia's local supply chains and industrial capabilities.

The bills will establish the Future Made in Australia plans as an avenue to implement the community benefit principles, with further details to satisfy these plan requirements subject to consultation on a program-by-program basis. Additionally, the bills identify the Future Made in Australia supports which community benefit principles apply to. These include initial supports such as the Future Made in Australia Innovation Fund, as well as certain investments which are considered for funding under the expanded National Interest Account of Export Finance Australia. The minister will be able to add other supports which will be subject to the community benefit principles.

These bills also make amendments to the Export Finance Australia legislation to allow EFA to make domestically focused investments to fund projects that align with the Future Made In Australia framework streams. Amendments will also be made to the Australian Renewable Energy Agency Act, ensuring that ARENA can support sectors that are critical to net-zero transition. ARENA's funding will be futureproofed by creating a limited special appropriation within its legislation and an additional fourth object that will be added to the ARENA Act, which is to contribute to the reduction of global greenhouse gas emissions in accordance with the Paris Agreement. This explicit reference to global emission reductions will enable ARENA to support the development and manufacture of renewable energy products for export that will contribute to the decarbonisation of the global economy and also the Australian economy. Further amendments to ARENA will enable it to meet its increased responsibilities and role as part of the net-zero transition already taking place in the Australian economy.

This chamber will have noted that at times I invoke the words of my predecessor in Werriwa the 21st Prime Minister. I do so for good reason, for Gough was first and foremost a proud Australian. He was a prime minister unashamedly confident about Australia's place in the region and the world. Further, he had an unshaken confidence in the ability of all Australians. He didn't live in the past. His maxim, 'contemporary relevance', dictated his life's work and the direction that he saw for this country. This bill before us reinforces the confidence of our latest Labor government and our latest Labor Prime Minister. It does not look back, and it doesn't shy away from future challenges. It sets out a broad and ambitious agenda in a manner that is achievable.

We cannot and must not look over our shoulders, because we don't have time to waste. Right now, the world is moving forward to renewable energy, and for us, as the sunniest, windiest continent on the earth, this is our moment. More than anywhere else on the earth, Australia is set to gain new jobs, new industries, and new skills. Our future is made in Australia. That's what A Future Made in Australia is all about—a stronger economy made right here. But we need a government prepared to step up and do its part to fund apprenticeships, attract investment, build infrastructure, boost industries and back the ideas. That's what this bill does. I commend the bill to the House in the full confidence it reflects the confidence we should have in ourselves as a nation.

Luke Howarth (Petrie, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The coalition will oppose Labor's Future Made in Australia Bill 2024. The more we hear about this plan, the more it does not stack up. This is a plan for pork-barrelling, not a strong economy. This is a plan for more government, not more business investment.

Australia, of course, has a proud and strong manufacturing industry, and the coalition has always supported it. In fact, the industry was a lot stronger just two years ago under the coalition government. We know that because during the COVID-19 years there were over one million jobs in manufacturing, and right now we hear the Albanese Labor government minister say there are 900,000 jobs in manufacturing, so that's a 10 per cent fall in manufacturing jobs in two years alone. Yet the government have this new bill. They somehow want to make a future around it and get it going, but they forget to tell people that 10 per cent of the jobs have already gone in the last two years. How many more of those 900,000 jobs are currently struggling because of the inflationary environment and the decisions that the Albanese Labor government have made over the last two years. In order for manufacturing to continue to grow, and for those businesses that are currently engaged in manufacturing and the people that they employ, requires strong economic management, which is not what we're seeing from the current Labor government. It requires economic management that gets back on track in getting the basics right.

When I talk to manufacturing businesses in my own electorate—and I do get around and talk to quite a few in Narangba and Clontarf—they tell me that the No. 1 issue in order for them to be competitive is affordable and reliable energy. The Prime Minister promised before the last election in 2022 that energy would be cheaper and lower under his government. What's happened is we've seen anything but that. He particularly made the commitment to consumers—to mum and dads and to households—that their electricity bill would fall by $275. That has been completely abandoned by the government. We never hear the Prime Minister or the Minister for Climate Change and Energy talk about that at all anymore. They've completely abandoned it, despite promising it almost a hundred times publicly before the last election.

What's even worse than the fact that for most households energy has gone up by a thousand dollars, is that for businesses it's completely doubled in many cases. For manufacturing business in particular, their energy bill in the last two years under the Albanese Labor government has doubled. In some cases it hasn't quite doubled, but it has gone up very significantly. So it doesn't surprise me at all that if 10 per cent of manufacturing jobs have gone in the last two years under this government, that would be one of the main reasons. Yet the government come in here, and say that, 'We've got a plan to make energy more affordable.'

One of the first things the Prime Minister said today in his speech on this very bill was that Australia is going to be 'a renewable energy superpower'. What does that mean? The government continually says, 'We're going to be a superpower. We're going to be up there with the United States or perhaps China.' People think a superpower is generally a military term, but Labor say we're going to be 'a renewable energy superpower'. How come businesses' bills have doubled? Some superpower. All we're doing is putting employees out of jobs and manufacturers out of business. We've lost 10 per cent of them under the Albanese government. So it's a throwaway line that the Labor Party and this Prime Minister use around being a renewable energy superpower. It means absolutely nothing.

Their plan around being renewable energy superpower is buying Chinese manufactured solar panels and Chinese manufactured wind farms, and closing down Australian mined coal and gas and not considering the option for Australian mined uranium, when other countries around the world are considering that as well.

When they were in opposition, this government came in here and banged on for 10 years that, 'We've got to do more for climate change.' Yet they won't consider modern nuclear power. The Deputy Prime Minister had the audacity to come here yesterday and act like the class clown when he said, 'The coalition in relation to AUKUS was a thought bubble.' Give me a break. It was the Leader of the Opposition and the former Prime Minister who got AUKUS running.

So we're going to have eight modern nuclear powered submarines around the country, but we can't have seven modern nuclear power sites on land. And they say they're for climate change, yet modern nuclear power has zero emissions. It's alright to buy Chinese-made wind farms and it's alright to buy Chinese-made solar panels. According to this Prime Minister—for the kids in the gallery—we're going to be a renewable energy superpower. It's just outrageous and it's not truthful.

He also said we're lowering the cost of living, when the manufacturers that I speak to tell me anything but. The cost of doing business is going up considerably, and when the cost of doing business goes up, have a guess what happens. It's all passed on to the goods and services that every one of us goes out and buys. The people I represent in Petrie and people in other electorates around this country go out and buy these products that businesses sell. It's all passed on. It doesn't matter if you're ordering a parmigiana down at the local tavern, buying clothes for work or a car, paying your power bill at home or whatever it may be. If the cost of doing business goes up, which is what we're seeing under the Albanese Labor government, the cost for consumers goes up. We're not a renewable energy superpower, whatever that means. This government is not lowering the cost of living. Australians know that in the last two years the cost of living has gone completely through the roof—completely. So, when you hear the government speak, you're got to take what they're actually saying with a grain of salt, because this government has broken election promises and can't be trusted.

In order to get manufacturing going well and to reverse the 10 per cent of job losses that have already happened in the last two years under this government, we need affordable and reliable energy, and the coalition has a plan for that. That includes renewables as well as modern nuclear power and gas.

You also need a plan to make sure that workplaces are flexible. The difference between us and the government is we don't govern and make legislation for our union donors, because they don't donate to us. Unions represent about eight per cent of the private sector, yet the government—particularly the Leader of the House in his new role and his previous role—legislates for unions and what they particularly want. When you're doing that, you're only legislating for eight per cent of workers in the economy. What about the other 92 per cent? They've just got to wear the extra cost, because not every workplace has the same rights that some of the unions operating within the Labor Party have.

We also see opposite a government that increases regulation. Right now, the Assistant Treasurer, the minister that I shadow, by regulation, is about to put more regulation on accountants and bookkeepers right around the country. That's just one example. At the stroke of a pen, there will be a whole lot of new regulation, so when people are doing their tax or whatever, once again, that's additional cost. It's the same with manufacturing. In order to improve manufacturing and to get it back, we need affordable and reliable energy, which the coalition has a plan for; flexible workplaces, so not just legislating for unions; less regulation, which is absolutely key; and an incentive based tax system.

In my electorate, a lot of the manufacturers are small and family businesses, middle-sized businesses, perhaps with 50 employees or 100 employees. They're businesses like Packer Leather. It's a family run business, pretty well the only manufacturing business left in Australia that manufactures kangaroo leather for RM Williams boots, Sherrin footballs, kangaroo cricket balls and Akubra hats. They also do a bit of work with rabbit leather and cattle. What happens there? They're being taxed more, so their costs have gone up.

It's even simple things. Often family businesses have super funds, self-managed super funds. Perhaps they've put money into it, and now the government's come in and said, if you've got $3 million in your super or if your business premises is owned in your super—they promised before the last election they wouldn't tax it. Now they're going to double the tax rate on super funds over $3 million and put in unrealised capital gains. There might be a building that this manufacturer owns within their self-managed super fund that they bought 30 or 40 years ago for $2 million. It's now worth $10 million. It's a family owned business. This government is saying, 'We want to tax you on everything over $3 million.' So, if the building is worth $10 million, $7 million will be taxed—and not when it's sold but right now, so it's an unrealised capital gain. So you get manufacturers that have been in business for a long time asking: 'Why do I bother? Why am I here working hard, when the government just wants to hit me?'

That's what this government is doing, and a lot of Labor governments have done this over the years. It often takes the Liberal-National coalition to come back in and reduce regulation, reduce tax, make sure workplaces are flexible and not just governed for unions, and make sure energy is affordable. If the government is completely serious about making sure manufacturers do well, that's an agenda they could implement.

Soaring energy prices are a pain for manufacturers all around the country. I mentioned Packer Leather, but it is also the case for other companies, like East Coast Bullbars in Clontarf, in my electorate. For everyone out there who has a Toyota HiLux, a Mazda BT-50, an Isuzu D-MAX, a LandCruiser or a Land Rover: often the manufacturers will sell you a steel bullbar imported from overseas. In my electorate, in Clontarf, you can buy an aluminium bullbar that's manufactured in Clontarf. Again, they've told me that their energy bill has gone up under this government—not good for manufacturing.

For AJ Plastics in Geebung, in the federal seat of Lilley, since December 2022 their electricity bill per month has increased significantly. It hasn't quite doubled, but it's gone up significantly. They're a small manufacturing company, and the bill had been about $460 a month but is now $750. That all adds up. It's all additional costs. That's an increase of around $3,600 per year for another manufacturer up in Brisbane. And this small plastics manufacturer said that they've noticed the hit. This is happening all around the country. It's not just in my seat and the neighbouring seat up in Brisbane; it's all 151 seats around the country.

Productivity is at a 60-year low under the Albanese government, too. And you wonder why your prices have gone up! It's because productivity is down by almost six per cent under the Albanese Labor government. And when productivity is down, if the wages are up—wages are going up, because people can't cope with the cost of living—here's the business ticking along, and wages are up and productivity is down, and we're producing less at a higher cost. And we're wondering why we're all paying more! That is what is happening, in reality, under the Albanese Labor government.

Often that's the case, because we have a Prime Minister and a Treasurer with very little experience in the private sector. I mean, before I came into this place, I'd never had a government job, never worked for a politician. But in the case of the Treasurer and the Prime Minister, all they've had is government jobs—that's it. I think the Prime Minister worked in a bank for 12 months. So, how would he know or be able to consult on what's best for manufacturing? He gets all his information from union donors, and they're writing the rules, and under this Future Made in Australia Bill, they'll be the ones who win.

Zaneta Mascarenhas (Swan, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a pleasure to stand here as the proud Labor member for Swan, as someone who has probably more than 15 years of experience working in the corporate sector and as someone who started her career in steelcap boots on a mine site. And I would say that the Albanese Labor government fundamentally understands what we need to do for our country, what we need to do for organisations and companies, and what we need to do for workers—and that is exactly what the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 does. So, I am thrilled to be talking here, not just as the daughter of a metalworker, not just as an engineer, but as a proud Australian. And I'm a proud Australian who knows what we are capable of.

This bill is not just about vision; this is about tangible actions, and we have the ability to seize the moment right here. Our goal is clear. To put it simply, we want Australians in good, secure jobs building things right here in Australia. This is not a dream. This is the cornerstone of Labor's Future Made in Australia Bill. This is a pivotal moment in our history. The world is undergoing the biggest industrial transformation it has seen since the industrial revolution, and this comes with both opportunities and significant risks.

It is important for this parliament to recognise that the global movement towards net zero is part of a changing world. We have the ability to either seize the moment and embrace the opportunities or, alternatively, be left behind. By building a more diverse and strong economy powered by clean energy and by creating secure, well-paid jobs, Australia can stay an important player in the global economy during this transition. If we do nothing, Australia risks being left behind. Australian workers will lose, and Australia will lose, but, let's be honest, the world will lose. The pathway to net zero emissions runs right through our backyard.

As the Prime Minister said back in April, there is a race on for jobs and opportunity, it is a global race and Australia must be in it to win it. We must be in it to win it, because, if we don't—if we fail to act now—we won't even reach the finish line. The race will be over before we get started, and that's exactly what would happen if we left it to the coalition. For a decade, when it came to manufacturing, we stood still and then we started moving backwards. We are bearing the cost of that lack of vision and the lack of action by the coalition. We need to seize this moment.

We can lead the charge, ensuring that our industries thrive and that secure, well-paid jobs are created, not just in our big cities but also in our regional and industrial heartlands. Australia can't have a resilient economy if we only rely on sheep, wheat and dirt. By going up the value chain and when we sell our exports for more, we also increase the complexity of our commodities and our export markets. What this also means is that we have more secure jobs and we are less vulnerable to the changes in commodity prices. Let's be honest: this has real, tangible impacts in people's families and in their homes. What it is about is job security.

My dad was a proud fitter and turner. He probably picked up his trade when he was 16 years old. He worked for more than four decades as a proud tradesperson. My parents, out of all the countries in the world, moved to Australia and ended up in Kalgoorlie. My dad ended up at Kambalda, a nickel mining town. The thing that I know we've seen is that, when commodity prices go down, people lose their jobs en masse. My heart goes out to the nickel workers that are experiencing this right at this moment.

What we need to do as a nation is actually increase the value of what we sell so we can actually sell our products for more and have more secure jobs. This is something that's really important to people all across Australia, including the people in my electorate of Swan. These are people who rely on manufacturing for their livelihoods. A secure job for them and their children is what is important to thousands of people who work in manufacturing in my electorate. The 2021 census data revealed that over 4,000 people are directly employed by manufacturing in Swan. That's workers and their families who are reliant on a thriving and prosperous industry for their security and their future.

These are workers like the steel fabricators who work at Phoenix Metalform in Welshpool, an industrial suburb in my electorate of Swan. Phoenix Metalform is one of Australia's leading providers of sheet-metal building products and sheet-metal fabrication in Perth, in Western Australia. The team at Phoenix Metalform use innovative technologies to manufacture high-quality products in the heart of Swan. These are the bread and butter of our manufacturing base, and I am here to support them.

This government believes in a future made in Australia. That belief drives us to act swiftly, putting in place programs and reforms that will diversify our economy, build sovereign capability and create a pipeline of well-paid jobs now and into the future. The focus of the Albanese government is on supporting more businesses like Phoenix Metalform to invest, grow and innovate. We have faith in Australian ideas, Australian workers, Australian scientists and Australian businesses. We need to make more things here. We know that we can make more things here. We are a smart country. We are also a hardworking country. We know that we have all the right ingredients that we need right here—our people, our capability and our natural resources—to compete with the best in the world.

The Future Made in Australia legislation is designed to unlock private sector investment, building a stronger, more diversified and resilient economy, powered by renewables. The bill represents the largest pro-manufacturing package in Australian history. It has been crafted to ensure that Australia captures the benefits of the massive shifts happening globally. At the heart of this package is the new National Interest Framework, which is a robust sector assessment process. It's in the bill in order to help the Australian government make smart public investments that trigger large-scale private investment for the benefit of the country. It is designed to evaluate industries that can significantly cut emissions at good costs where Australia could lead the way in the long term. It also focuses on sectors where building up local expertise is the key to keeping our economy strong and secure.

Also, at the heart of this bill is the establishment of the community benefit principles that will guide all Future Made in Australia initiatives. These principles will be used to boost investment in local communities, support Australian industries, strengthen supply chains and develop skills. They also aim to promote diverse workforces, secure jobs and ensure that tax laws are indeed followed. Decision-makers will apply these principles to every Future Made in Australia initiative and make sure that they are enforced properly, including those detailed in the plan. These measures will ensure that our investments align with our national interest, particularly in critical areas such as solar panels and battery supply chains. We will invest heavily in these sectors under the economic resilience and security stream of the Future Made in Australia Bill because it in our national interest to do so.

This legislation isn't just about the big end of town; it's about working hand in hand with the supply chain, with small and medium enterprises and with engineering firms that employ apprentices and tradies, the very people who do the hard work in the sector. It's about ensuring these industries have the initiatives they need to deliver good local jobs particularly in industrial centres where resources and energy capabilities are strong. Australia's history as a resource powerhouse gives us a unique advantage as we move into this economy. If you think about it, we have the resources above the ground, with our amazing solar resources and our wind resources, but we also have the geological resources below the ground.

As 97 per cent of our trading partners move to net zero emissions, Australia must adjust or risk falling behind. If we get it right and adopt a Future Made in Australia approach, we can capture this advantage, lift up the value chain and secure our place as a renewable energy superpower. I am excited to see the interest in hydrogen and low-cost renewable energy for the industry. I realise that those opposite think the hydrogen industry is maybe a joke or fake news. Let me tell you that it is not. It is really important that we have a look at this, because what we're looking at is energy density for us to be able to move heavy industries such as mining trucks. Who knows what the possibilities are for this? But we need to look at net-zero emission possibilities to continue our resource sector.

The Albanese government is committed to working with businesses and industry to deliver the best outcome for local communities, starting in places such as Gladstone. Our legislation is clear and carefully outlined. At its core it introduces production tax credits for firms that manufacture within the scope of the scheme. This is actually smart practice. This is pretty exciting. Industry is very excited to hear about it, and I can tell you that Western Australian companies are very excited about it. This is the way the world is moving. Whether it's critical mineral processing, iron processing or steel production, eligible firms will receive tax credits when they produce here in Australia. This is a crucial step in moving Australia up the value chain and creating good jobs in our regions and outer suburbs.

This is a government that believes in a future made in Australia. I think of the history of the resource sector. We have managed to achieve innovation and capability in some of the harshest conditions in the world. Being able to solve technical problems and work out how you liberate minerals in a really remote and isolated community is tough, but we worked out how to do that. And you know what? The complex challenges that we have facing us are tricky, but I have faith that Australia has the capability to solve them.

I commend the government's commitment to build a future made in Australia, a future with a strong and diverse economy and a future that provides greater opportunity and job security for everyone, not just a few. I call on everyone in this House to get behind Australia's manufacturing future and support the creation of more secure, well-paid jobs. Failing to do so means more of the same. It means going backwards, not forwards, where we need to be going. Together we can build a future where our economy is stronger, our communities are thriving and our jobs are secure and well paid. This is why I commend the bill to the House, and I encourage members in the House to all get behind it.

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party, Shadow Minister for Trade and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There are some great cliches just in the name of the bill, the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024. There are great cliches in the talking points for the government as well. Let me open by saying that just about every bill that comes into this chamber from the government makes 'made in Australia' almost impossible, whether it be energy laws, IR laws or the red and green tape that they are adding to businesses in our community every single time they bring legislation in to this chamber.

As shadow trade minister, I want to really focus on some of the changes that will be made to the export finance authority here in Australia. I want to start by saying that the export finance authority here in Australia does an excellent job. They're a great organisation and a great independent part of government. They have had a role to play in our business community and our export markets for a long time, and they get a lot of support from both sides of this chamber. Just to explain to some of the listeners who maybe don't know a lot about Export Finance Australia, what they're about is helping exporters grow in Australia and find markets for their products and their services overseas. It's pretty straightforward. They have a commercial account where they'll go out and look for gaps in the market. They look for people who've got an idea, a product or a service and are struggling to get finance through normal ways, and they will look at gaps within that and help people do that. They have quite a healthy balance sheet. They're of no cost to government. They don't lose money on that. They're skilful at what they do and they've done a great job.

There's also the National Interest Account, which is a different part of the EFA. What does the National Interest Account do? It's more targeted than the commercial account. There are four facilities within it: the Critical Minerals Facility, the Defence Export Facility, the Australian Infrastructure Financing Facility for the Pacific and the Southeast Asia Investment Financing Facility. You can see just from the names of those that there's a focus on that. There's a South-East Asian focus, a Pacific focus or a defence focus. Again, they are looking for gaps that may be important for our national interest or strategic areas of Australia that we need to look at. There are also some transactions that they've done aside from that to New Guinea, PsiQuantum and Digicel.

What this legislation's doing, as a broader picture, is bringing in two new streams. One stream is economic resilience and security, and the other is net zero transformation. I have massive questions about this because—let's take the net zero one to start with—this to me is sounding like the government's going to pick some winners. With all due respect to anyone who may work within government and to the people advising them, I have huge issues with that when there is a competitive market, a private market, already operating in that space. This is one where we might just see a minister go, 'Look, I've got a good feeling about this today; let's throw some taxpayer dollars at it.'

When we talk about net zero transformation, we're talking about moving to net zero by 2050. Every country in the world, every private enterprise in the world and a lot of private investment funds in the world are looking at that transition and investing in technology to do that transition across the field. Whether it be battery technology or industry-specific technologies, they're looking to do that. The fact that we might think there's a bureaucrat somewhere who's got a better idea of how to invest that money—above the skill level within the private sector, who are targeted on this—I can't see that.

I can see that there are gaps. As I said before, there are gaps from the financing world, whether it be venture capital or investment funds. There are gaps when you look at things that we might want to help exporters do in the South Pacific. There might be things exporters want to do within South-East Asia or things we want to do in defence where we need to fill that void, and, again, the EFA do a good job at that. But, seriously, with the net zero transition, the world is focused on it. Every private investor is focused on it. There are no gaps here, unless a minister in the Labor government says, 'I have a funny feeling about this technology or this part of the industry.'

It doesn't seem to be capped. What are the limits to this within the EFA? How will that be reported? How is that going to happen? Again, there are a lot of questions about the net zero transformation. 'Economic resilience and security' sounds great, but what does that mean? What are the caps on that? How much can be spent on that? Again, it looks to me to be a little bit uncapped. I've had a chat with a few people who will be involved in this. I don't see any caps on that.

I want to say again that EFA do a fantastic job. I want to commend them on the job they do. Again, they've had bipartisan support in this chamber for a long time. I know some of the people who work there, and they're highly skilled people and have given great help for export markets within specific sectors, whether it be geographic or specific industry sectors. They have a commercial account that I think is very high achieving, again, helping export markets and exporters in this country. But for this government to basically bring in an uncapped focus for the EFA on net zero transformation, I think, should not be done. It's not a market where there is a gap. The world is focused on it, private investors are focused on it, and I don't see the reason for that.

I also note that it even takes away the export focus of it. Is this fund just going to be focused on Australia's net zero transformation and be put to that? EFA was set up to focus on exporting as its primary motivation. I don't get that within these two new streams of net zero transformation and economic resilience and security. I think it's changing the focus of EFA, too, which is unfortunate. For this reason and many others that members on this side are talking about, we won't be supporting the bill.

To the net zero transformation again, you might say: 'Maybe we should focus on it. Maybe the government should get involved.' We have ARENA and we have the CEFC already as federal government agencies who are focused on that area. To bring in another one, I think, is superfluous. I don't think it's good to bring EFA into it, given it has a non-export focus as well.

Michelle Ananda-Rajah (Higgins, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in strong support of the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 and the Future Made in Australia (Omnibus Amendments No. 1) Bill 2024.. A Future Made in Australia is a blueprint for sustainable economic growth, for reindustrialising our nation and for national security. It is a pushback against the politics of pessimism that has sent our manufacturing sector into meltdown and sent secure, well-paid jobs to the wall.

In order to appreciate the enormity and the impact of A Future Made in Australia, you first have to look at the past. It wasn't that long ago, around 11 years ago, that a Liberal Treasurer stood not far from where I am now and basically said, 'Either you're here or you're not.' Those were the words spoken, and the next day Holden announced that they were leaving Australia, and two months later so did Toyota. That was the end of 69 years of an automotive industry in this country that mass-produced excellent vehicles—boarded up, gone. Thousands of jobs were gone, along with the legacy. We missed the EV wave. We missed becoming a destination for well-paid blue- and white-colour jobs. Knowledge workers had no destination in a high-tech industry like cars. We are now a country that supplies the lithium for the battery cells that power the EV revolution and sells it at around $4,000 per tonne, only to buy it back as a $60,000 to $100,000 EV. It doesn't make any sense.

This decline in our manufacturing sector, however, did not happen overnight. It has been death by a thousand cuts—a thousand job cuts, that is. What we have seen is a decline in the complexity of our economy, and complexity is measured as the sophistication of our exports. Out of 133 countries, Australia ranks 93rd, sandwiched between Uganda and Pakistan. In 1995, however, we were ranked 55th. We've dropped 12 places in the last decade. It's been a gradual decline but a decline nevertheless, and these problems have come home to roost. When we carve out the rich countries by looking purely at the countries of the OECD, the picture is even bleaker. Data from 2022 showed that Australia ranks last in the OECD for sovereign manufacturing capability. We actually win the wooden spoon for that one.

This simply cannot continue. It will condemn us to slow, anaemic growth as demands on our public finances from health, aged care, education and housing only increase. The status quo or more of the same is a recipe for lowering our standard of living, not raising it. It has been accepted that two to three per cent is the most Australia can aspire to when it comes to GDP growth per year, and five per cent or more is for highly complex economies like China. We just accept that that's our lot in life. Well, it's not our lot in life. That's not the future this Labor government envisages for Australia. More of the same is simply untenable.

A Future Made in Australia is about value-adding to our abundant natural resources. Rather than picking winners as some claim, we are picking markets—markets where we have a competitive advantage, an edge, if you like. We intend to turn iron ore into green steel, which is needed for wind turbines, for modernising our energy grid, for the built environment and for making cars, which I hope to one day see again made in Australia. It's about turning sand into silicon ingots, which are then sliced wafer thin to turn into solar panels. Some say that we simply can't compete against China. Well, guess what: Australia actually invented the world's most efficient solar panel. We would be mad to turn our back on an innovation like that, so that's why we backed it in with the $1 billion Solar Sunshot program, to see a coal-fired power station in the Hunter turned into a renewable energy zone where these solar panels will be made. This is not a fantasy. It is not a slogan. It is actually happening right now. We will be taking our lithium ore and our critical minerals and processing them here. We may not be able to process all of it, but we can at least take some of the steps in order to value-add before we ship it off.

We need to make vaccines. If there's one thing the pandemic taught us, it's that we must have sovereign capability in making medicines and vaccines.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour, and the member will be granted leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed.