Zoe McKenzie (Flinders, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The bills we are debating here today—the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 and the Future Made in Australia (Omnibus Amendments No. 1) Bill 2024—really do send a message to the Australian public and our key trading partners that this Albanese government is turning its back on being an open and efficient trading nation. Australia's enduring economic success has been dependent on our openness to global markets, and successive governments have had a light touch, enhancing our competitive advantage in both goods and services. The legislation before us today goes back to that tired, old catchcry that sustains the Labor movement: government good, private sector bad. It picks winners and inserts public ownership into our industrial ecosystem all while solidifying the union movement's centrality and censorship in terms of what gets done in this country and what does not get done. In that, as in so many other respects, it is yet another CFMEU payday.

I want to start with what I consider to be some of the most egregious parts of this legislation, hidden amongst the froth and bubble and self-congratulatory backslapping of those on the other side, who claim to be backing in Australia's strengths. There are substantive changes to the Export Finance Australia body, which has been an essential part of Australia's success as an export and trading nation, whose expert advice and judicious investment have created countless success stories in Australian know-how, goods and services being exported to the world for more than 30 years.

Back then, the Export Finance and Insurance Corporation, or EFIC as it was known, was created expressly to support Australian businesses in their export trade and overseas infrastructure development. It did this by offering loans, guarantees and insurance to help businesses manage the financial risks associated with exporting; by financing infrastructure projects abroad that involved Australian companies; and by working with private-sector banks and other financial institutions to encourage them to finance exports and overseas projects. More often than not, if EFIC, later known as the EFA, agreed to invest in a good or service, it gave the market a strong indication that the project had substance and credibility and was likely to succeed in its target market. In doing so, EFIC did not replace private-sector investment, but its astute decision-making led others to take a risk knowing it had passed EFIC's rigorous assessment.

I'd like to give you some examples of the critical difference EFIC made to Australia's exporting success, ranging from the big to the small. In 2014, through the National Interest Account, it supported PNG's liquefied natural gas project, developing a major LNG project with Australian know-how and investment and ultimately making a huge contribution to the economy of Papua New Guinea and strengthening trade ties between Australia and PNG. But EFIC was equally if not more impactful in the small-business end of the market. By way of example, in 2014, EFIC provided a modest $600,000 to Astec Paints in South Australia to increase its presence in China, Korea, Japan and Middle Eastern markets. But it needed help to meet demand from Japanese clients for its elastomeric coatings, which met Japan's strict building codes at the time. The commercial bank was supportive of plans to increase production, but it just needed additional security, which EFIC was able to provide by way of an export working capital guarantee.

The following is another example. In 2016 an EFIC small-business export loan helped Frankland Islands Cruises increase its Japanese exports, entering into a charter program with a Japanese travel provider bringing people to Australia to enjoy the Great Barrier Reef. The expansion would have meant 30 per cent of their revenue, but they needed new equipment to ensure contract delivery. EFIC's modest loan of just $190,000 under its small-business export loan program allowed Frankland Islands Cruises to tailor the repayment term to meet their needs. This is one of so very many small businesses which EFIC was able to help.

Between 2013 and 2016, concurrently with the Abbott government signing world-leading free trade agreements with Japan, South Korea and China, it provided millions of dollars to small and medium-sized enterprises, enabling them to make early gains under these FTAs, which were best in class at the time of their signing. The special small-business export loan was created in 2014, and between 2013 and 2016 more than $100 million was directed towards the sector. Operating at arm's length from government, the EFA, and before it EFIC, only had occasional recourse to the trade minister. It obviously operated by taking into account the Australian government's trade priorities, ensuring that Australian businesses were able to make the most of new market opportunities that were opened by government secured trade deals.

By golly, the coalition government kept EFIC busy. Between 2013 and 2022, there had been the most rapid negotiation, conclusion and ratification of high-quality FTAs. In 2014 alone, there was a deal done with China, Japan and South Korea and subsequent deal closures were not far off with Hong Kong, Indonesia, India, the UK and finally the CPTPP. I remember it all well because at the time I was the trade minister's chief of staff and we worked at breakneck speed to meet the Prime Minister's demand at the time of getting three deals done within just 12 months. EFIC's work was essential in reaping the benefits of those FTAs, and its focus was singular: build new and stronger markets for Australia's exports, make sure the world has access to the stuff we are good at on our own, without government handouts and interference in picking winners. To enable it to do its work, the former coalition increased EFIC's funding in 2014 by $200 million and then later again in 2019, when it expanded its callable capital to $1.2 billion.

When you look beneath the hood of the industry minister's 'back to the 1970s' industrial policy encapsulated in these bills, you find meaningful, enduring and, may I say, mission-crushing changes to the EFA, giving it the power to make:

… domestically focused investments under the National Interest Account (NIA), following referral to Government and commercial assessment, to fund domestic projects where support is not available through existing funds and programs.

Basically, its remit is now that of a domestic bank, backing government picked projects. The EFA, or EFIC, will now have a somewhat Orwellian termed national economy function, which is to encourage and facilitate eligible activities that support Australia's economic resilience and security. Possibly even more economy shackling is EFIC's net zero function, which should leave us all wondering whether this government values net zero above our achievements as a dynamic, vibrant, successful and enduring trading nation.

The Albanese government does not hide the fact that it's turning its back on boosting our exports through free trade. In section 2.10 of the explanatory memorandum to these bills, it states:

Schedule 1 to the Omnibus Bill allows EFA to disregard two of its primary duties for the purposes of enabling EFA to perform its new national economy and net zero functions. These primary duties—

which are now to be disregarded—

are that it performs its functions in such a manner as will best assist the development of Australian export trade—

remember, that's the part that's to be disregarded—

and that it has regard to the desirability of improving and extending the range of insurance and other financial services and products available (whether from EFIC or otherwise) to persons involved, or likely to be involved, directly or indirectly, in Australian export trade.

That's no longer core business for the EFA.

In making these changes to the EFA, Labor has effectively transformed the EFA's role from an independently managed, outward-facing, export-driving investment vehicle to a domestic bank for domestic projects or to bankroll big-ticket items for reportedly good mates of the government like PsiQuantum. At the same time, Labor has extended the fingers of the government's hand into the decision-making of the EFC.

In a recent podcast by Australian trade experts Dr Pru Gordon, executive director of the Australian Centre for International Trade and Investment, and Professor Peter Draper, executive director of the Institute for International Trade at the University of Adelaide, Dr Gordon said: 'Export Finance Australia has two accounts. One is the commercial account and one is the national interest account. And all of the Future Made in Australia programs will fall under the national interest account. Now, decisions as to whether EFA even considers a project for funding will be a decision made by the minister. It's not a decision made by Export Finance Australia. The amending legislation that comes with the Future Made in Australia legislation in relation to EFA clearly says they have to take a project to the minister for the minister's decision, even if it doesn't meet with any of EFA's criteria as to whether it should be funded or not. So that's the national interest account. EFA, they are not experts on the projects that they fund. They are experts on financing projects but not on the projects that they fund.'

Dr Gordon went on: 'And I know for projects that they've funded on the national interest account in the past they have relied on private sector advisers as to whether the project warrants funding and is going to be a good investment or not.' For those who are curious, I commend this podcast to listeners at home: Trade Policy Decoded Episode 15: the re-emergence of industry policy and a Future Made in Australia. It's dated 7 August. When you take these changes to the EFA and you hold them up to the contributions to this debate from those on the other side, you would be right to ask yourself whether the Albanese Labor government is turning its back on global trade, trade agreements and, indeed, the network of trade agreements, which has made Australia such a strong global economy despite her relative size. It's worth looking at Labor's record in this space as a backdrop to these bills. The Albanese government implemented the UK FTA, concluded by the previous coalition government, and the Indian FTA, equally concluded by the previous coalition government. The only one they really had to achieve for themselves on their own scorecard was the EU FTA, for which—yet again—much of the work had already been done by the previous coalition government and the previous trade minister, who's just come into the chamber.

They started well on the EU FTA, and then progress came to a sudden stop in October of last year. Subsequent opportunities for revival of negotiations such as at the WTO ministerial in Abu Dhabi in February were not seized. The agreement at this point is effectively dead. It is worth taking stock of what this government has lost by deserting well-advanced free trade negotiations with like-minded partners in favour of the picking-winners, Made-in-Australia, protectionist industry policy encapsulated in these bills.

Made up of over 450 million consumers, the EU has a combined GDP of some US$17 trillion. The EU is a vital partner for Australian manufacturing, automotive business, science and research as well as the digital economy and financial services. Last October, there were high and reasonably founded expectations that a deal would be done. The EU had sent its vice-president and agricultural commissioner to run down any final skirmishes in Australia in the very non-European setting of Osaka. Negotiators, business and industry representatives, and our exporters had all turned up in significant numbers to see the Australian FTA flag thrown over the last missing megamarket in Australia's FTA net. In the lead-up, progress had been made in relation to key priorities for Australia—certainly in relation to red meat and sugar. It was of course not as much as our agricultural industries wanted, because it is never enough for what they want and they are right to be ambitious when they produce the best beef and lamb and finest sugar in the world.

However, the EU had found a way to expand their earlier offers two- or threefold, depending on the quota and the cut of meat. The EU's market access offer would have been worth more than $1 billion a year in new agricultural market access and reduced the cost of environmental technology such as wind turbines, which currently attract a five per cent tariff, resulting in Chinese turbines being the cheapest choice in Australia. Tariffs on minerals, metals, wood, paper and chemicals would also have been removed. The deal would have expanded trade in energy raw materials, ensuring Australia was sharing her precious critical minerals and resources with like-minded nations. The EU had given ground on those pesky geographic indicators, agreeing that Australian companies already established in the market will be able to continue using these terms, often reflecting their original European heritage or establishment. But back in October the final negotiations were over before they began, with the trade minister abruptly informing the Europeans on negotiation eve that there was nothing to discuss the next day. The Europeans were stumped. They hadn't seen the about-turn coming. They had been given every indication to the contrary. It was a betrayal of years of progress and, at the time, the Europeans didn't just think they had been deceived by the sudden turnaround; they knew they had been. It was obvious someone had pulled the leash on the Australian side.

One outstanding issue, relating to importing talent, bringing European professionals with discrete skills to Australia, is what most people believe was the sticking point. The abolition of labour market testing in discrete technical industries, so despised by the Australian union movement, had precipitated the Albanese government's turnaround. Few here would remember the vicious campaign run by the union movement against the China free trade agreement, which equally abolished labour market testing for some specialised skills. At the time, the CFMEU and ETU ran full-page ads in the paper, online and television ads and even went as far as robocalls. At the time, those CFMEU-sponsored ads said: 'Do you know what Tony Abbott's free trade deal with China means? Chinese companies can fly people into work without ever having to look around for local staff.' It was a blunt, racist fear campaign which in the end amounted to nothing. The deal was done and there was no flood of workers.

(Quorum formed)

Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) 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. As the House well knows, the Albanese Labor government is taking every measure to seize the opportunities before us and to drive our economy so everyone in our nation benefits, and the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 is at the heart of our government's vision for a stronger, more prosperous, more resilient and more diversified Australian economy. We know how important it is to have that diversity and strength right across our economy, particularly across our regions.

Today and every day, our government is working to help Australians who are under financial pressure. We know people are doing it tough, and that's why we're acting on cost of living and boosting wages, at the same time we're delivering those very important tax cuts to every Australian taxpayer, making sure that Australians can earn more and keep more of what they earn. In my electorate of Richmond on the New South Wales North Coast, more than 70,000 taxpayers benefit from these tax cuts. So we are absolutely making sure that we are doing a number of projects to make sure we can ease some of those cost-of-living pressures. We know there is more to do and we know people are doing it tough, but we have a whole range of measures. The energy bill relief, that $300 for every household, is vitally important as well. Every household benefits from that. We're also making sure people benefit from cheaper child care, cheaper medicines and fee-free TAFE. There are so many more who have been able to access TAFE because of our fee-free TAFE policies.

So the government is delivering economic security for all Australians, and we want, of course, to build on that and continue that by making more things here in Australia. That's what the centrepiece of this bill does: making more things in this nation. It certainly is a call that I hear from people in my electorate all the time: 'We should be making more things here, using our resources and our people, creating more jobs and being able to make a lot more here.' Indeed, as they say to me all the time, we should be making our nation a renewable energy superpower. That's what we are committed to doing. All of that makes our economy more resilient and more secure. We also want to make it easy for companies to invest in new projects and create new jobs, particularly in our regions.

The government's Future Made in Australia plan 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 landscape. It will help Australia build a stronger, more diversified and more resilient economy powered by renewable energy. We know how important that is. It'll create more secure, well-paid jobs and encourage and facilitate the private sector investment required to make our nation an indispensable part of the global net zero economy.

This bill and omnibus bill deliver on key elements of the government's Future Made in Australia plan, which we announced in our budget this year. They impose rigour 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 includes three components. Firstly, the bill 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 also establishes a robust sector assessment process to help improve understanding of how government can best leverage private investment in areas of the economy aligned with the framework. Furthermore, this bill defines a set of community benefit principles, which are so important to ensure the benefits of a future made in Australia and the private sector investment that it enables flow to local communities, workers and businesses. It's vitally important to have that community benefit principle.

The bill contains amendments to implement key Future Made in Australia initiatives announced in the budget this year. Some of those amendments include enabling Export Finance Australia to make domestically focused investments under the National Interest Account in alignment with the National Interest Framework and safeguarding $6 billion in funding for ARENA's renewables and related priorities, giving industry and investors certainty to deliver sizeable, long-term and long-lasting projects. That's what we need to have in this country.

The Future Made in Australia Bill embeds that National Interest Framework, which, as I said, was announced in the budget. The framework will support Australian government consideration and decision-making in relation to significant public investment that then also unlocks private investment at scale in the national interest. This really is a visionary bill and a move by this government to secure that investment for the future. Codifying the framework in legislation will help provide certainty to the investment community and bring additional rigour to government decision-making.

The National Interest Framework includes two streams. The first is the net zero transformation stream, which covers sectors that could have a sustained comparative advantage in a net zero global economy and where public investment is likely to be needed for the sector to make emissions reductions. The other stream is economic resilience and security, which covers sectors where some level of domestic capability is a necessary or efficient way to deliver economic resilience and security. The private sector will not deliver that necessary investment in the absence of government support. That's why it's so vitally important to have this government's support to drive this.

The bill enables sector assessments which assess the extent to which a sector aligns with the National Interest Framework and those opportunities to address some of the barriers to private investment in our nation's interest. These assessments will help inform robust government decision-making on significant public investments that aim to unlock that private investment. The bill allows for the minister to provide guidance regarding matters relevant to the assessments, such as government priorities or net zero transformation or economic security and resilience considerations that have motivated the referral.

Our government wants to ensure that public investment and private investment flow to communities in a way that really benefits the community, provides the jobs and provides the support for those families and workers in those areas. To enable this, the following community benefit principles must be applied to the Future Made in Australia supports identified in the bill. The benefit principles include:

Promote safe and secure jobs that are well paid and have good conditions;

That's certainly what I hear from people in my region and right throughout the country, particularly in regions. They need to have safe and secure jobs that provide for individuals and their families, and that then drives local economies and the national economy.

Another principle is:

Develop more skilled and inclusive workforces, including by investing in training and skills development and broadening opportunities for workforce participation;

That has been at the heart of all of the actions of this government. We are making sure that people are able to access more training and skills and that they have a wider range of opportunities for workforce participation.

The other principles are:

Engage collaboratively with and achieve positive outcomes for local communities, such as First Nations communities and communities directly affected by the transition to net zero;

Strengthen domestic industrial capabilities including 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.

These community benefit principles will be applied on a program-by-program basis. Of course, further details to satisfy these requirements will be subject to consultation.

Above all, this bill speaks to our unwavering determination to shape the future—not wait for the future to shape us—and to drive our economy through this investment. Of course, we do know that those in opposition, the Liberals and the Nationals, don't really support what's at the heart of this bill. We know, because their speakers have come here and talked about this bill, that they just don't want our country to excel in efficient, low-cost, renewable energy. We know how important it is to drive our economy and to address climate change. We know how important it is to provide jobs, which are essential to our economic growth.

What do those on the opposition benches want? They want to hold us back with dangerous and expensive nuclear energy, which we know will also drive up power prices. That's all they have. It is a shame but, indeed, no surprise. They're always doing the opposite of what's actually good for our country and good for our economy. We know that the biggest threat to Australian jobs and investment is sitting across from us on the opposition benches. We know that, because they just aren't interested in programs and policies to drive our economy.

Their record in this House is somewhat atrocious. They voted against the National Reconstruction Fund; that's hard to believe. They voted against energy bill relief and all of the important initiatives to assist Australians. They say fee-free TAFE was a waste of money. Look at the hundreds of thousands of people that have benefitted from it. I speak to people every day who would not have been able to access training without fee-free TAFE. When they were in government, the Liberals and the Nationals gutted the CSIRO. We know that everyday Australians were worse off when the Leader of the Opposition was the Minister for Health. I know, in particular, that elderly people in my electorate were worse off. Who can forget the GP tax? It was horrific. Who can forget when doctors voted the then health minister, now the Leader of the Opposition, the worst in Australian political history. Indeed, those in the opposition just want to hold us back.

In contrast, the agenda of our government—the Albanese Labor government—and our Prime Minister is to hold no-one back and leave no-one behind. The legislation before us today has that principle at its absolute core, because Future Made in Australia is about unlocking private investment in jobs in industry and energy around our nation. It is a unique opportunity to provide for the future of this nation and for future jobs growth through driving our local economy. Of course, it's about making our country a renewable energy superpower. We have the capacity to do that, and that is why this bill absolutely should be passed.

In conclusion, our country has the resources, ingenuity and determination to do that. We have the capacity to do it, and we must do it. We must do it for our economy's future and for the provision of future jobs. We know how important that is. I commend this bill to the House. It is transformative for the future of our nation.

Melissa McIntosh (Lindsay, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Energy Affordability) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If this Albanese Labor government wants to make more products in Australia then I have a big tip for the Prime Minister: our manufacturers and small businesses need cheaper, reliable and secure power. Our Aussie manufacturers are crying out for more gas supply in the domestic market to bring down the cost of doing business. Small businesses want to see their energy bills lowered, not continuing to rise.

Instead, the bills being debated today, the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 and the Future Made in Australia (Omnibus Amendments No. 1) Bill 2024, would enhance the Minister for Climate Change and Energy's ability to drive his all-eggs-in-one-basket, renewables-only approach when it comes to our nation's energy grid. I understand that the omnibus bill expands the Australian Renewable Energy Agency's function from research and development and demonstration to supporting manufacturing, deployment and commercialisation. ARENA has always been an R&D agency, and this is clear in its remit. When the Labor Party was in opposition they opposed expanding the remit to cover sensible net zero related R&D expenditure, including for carbon capture and storage and for blue hydrogen. But now that they're in government and are on an ideological steam train to attempt to power the nation on only renewables, they have changed their minds.

Why not add in uranium and the ability for our country to have 24/7 baseload nuclear power to ensure our energy security? After all, the wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't always shine. The media has been writing constantly about the energy crisis facing this nation because of the government's approach, with wind droughts and potential outages because of a lack of gas. They now want to expand ARENA's powers to incorporate projects they want to see get up—more renewables—rather than having the agency assist with research and development efforts. If this is going to be the case, then what's next for the Clean Energy Finance Corporation? Even further, the Minister for Climate Change and Energy will be able to pump more taxpayer dollars into his reckless renewables-only approach with the stroke of a pen. There will be no parliamentary oversight and no scrutiny, just some delegated legislation and, in an election year, $3.98 billion can walk out the door.

We know that the Productivity Commission recently said the Albanese Labor government's $1 billion Solar Sunshot program should be retrospectively subjected to a tougher National Interest Framework test. Even the Treasurer's hand-picked productivity commissioner knows this government is making up policy on the run. What's worse is that $1 billion of taxpayer money is attached. She also went on to say:

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.

The Treasury secretary has refused to back the project as well.

Why are ministers afraid to put these projects with large sums of public money forward for adequate scrutiny? I thought this was going to be an open government, a government of transparency. This was obviously another broken promise to the Australian people. The Treasury was apparently not consulted on the decision to invest in solar manufacturing, and their analysis afterwards demonstrated that it was not a sound investment. We need to put the public's money towards projects that are backed in by experts with public servant advice and that meet the pub test. Let's help our current businesses continue to stay open and to thrive in an economy that actually works.

The coalition isn't against solar. In fact, we are proud that Australia is the best nation in the world for rooftop solar. We want to see public investment in areas where we can be competitive, successful and rewarded with thriving industries, not propped up ones. Unfortunately, insolvencies have tripled since this Labor government took office in 2022. You could say it's ridiculous, but it's actually heartbreaking. Australia should be a place for the fair go, but, increasingly, the policy settings and bills being put forward by the government are not conducive to this. So many of our domestic manufacturers right across Greater Western Sydney rely on gas to power their businesses. But the government won't invest in more gas or things like carbon capture and storage and blue hydrogen. Our local manufacturers are proud to make Aussie products on a daily basis, but, because of the energy market and industry policies of this government, we're seeing record numbers of manufacturers closing their doors. In turn, everyday Australians are losing their jobs and livelihoods. These small, medium and large-scale manufacturers need cheaper power prices right now to survive in the current economic climate.

In my Western Sydney community, I recently visited a local steel manufacturer in Emu Plains. The manager told me the company's gas bill had risen about 40 per cent since Labor took office. This is extraordinary, but it gets worse. An advanced defence manufacturing industry in Jamisontown told me their energy costs have grown by an astronomical 100 per cent. They looked into the government's solar for business scheme to get government assistance, but it was not feasible for their business. The director told me that it didn't matter about the number of solar panels that they could put on their roof, because the amount of power produced would not be enough to ensure that they could power their business. They could maybe only power the office. Additionally, the structure of the roof would not be able to hold the solar panels. This local manufacturer needs gas, and it needs it at an affordable price.

More supply will bring down the cost of gas, particularly for heavy industry. These are manufacturers that are crying out for good, long-term contracts, but they're starting to get worried about domestic supply due to the lack of approval coming from the Albanese Labor government. Small businesses, particularly in Western Sydney, where the cost-of-living crunch is unbearable, need effective policies—not a small $325 handout, which will realistically go nowhere in terms of paying the real costs of the energy they need to create products, operate their business and employ so many locals.

Last week we saw business closure statistics released. The stats were dire for Western Sydney. CreditorWatch's most recent update of its business risk index noted that 90 per cent of Australia will see an increase in the number of business failures in the year ahead. From this dataset, Western Sydney is one of the two hardest hit regions in our country. Our manufacturers and our small businesses are struggling so much right now. We need good industry policy in competitive industries to get our country ahead. But instead of doing so, and fighting for jobs that will lead us back to the head of the pack, we have a government that is focused on paying for projects that suit their ideological positioning on energy. We need to see real, positive signals from government to ensure private sector support across industry, including gas, resources and renewables. But, when a government is solely focused on renewables and putting public money through these bills' mechanisms towards them, we can fail as a nation. We don't want more blackouts and brownouts. We need to have policies that will stimulate the economy and ensure people, businesses, small businesses and manufacturers right across the country can thrive on their own. There needs to be the right tax incentives in place for business to invest in Australia as well. We are seeing disastrous economy, industry and energy policies that are impacting manufacturers, small businesses and, in turn, the lives of everyday families across this nation. We've seen 12 mortgage rate rises under the Albanese Labor government. Real wages have slumped nine per cent. There has been an eight per cent drop in living standards. Household savings have dipped by 10 per cent. Going to the bowser for petrol and getting fresh food and vegetables have become more expensive as well.

In my patch, as the shadow minister for energy affordability, it's absolutely heartbreaking to hear the stories of families that cannot pay to keep the lights on. Dual-income households across Penrith are asking food banks to help them pay their bills. They are doing that because they are too proud to take food away from the homeless. This is the economy we are living in right now due to the failure of economic, industry and energy policies by those opposite. More than 600 households are applying for energy hardship payments every single week. Industry and households are paying well above 20 per cent more for their power than they did during the last coalition government. To make the energy, cost-of-living and manufacturing crises much worse, we have a Labor government that is currently overseeing 90 per cent of 24/7 baseload power leaving the energy system over the next few years. It's laughable that the Prime Minister, when he was leading the opposition, quipped:

At the end of the first term of a Labor Government, when we reflect on what we have built, we'll see this … an economy that makes more things here at home, powered by cheap renewable energy.

Isn't the opposite of that statement true? Our Aussie manufacturers are paying some of the highest prices on the globe for energy.

If it weren't so sad, it would be laughable that this Labor government think they will power ahead with a future made in Australia without an energy policy that will supply consistent, reliable and secure power for industry and businesses. The government cannot solve the industry issues in this country by continuing to funnel public funds into projects to meet their own interim climate change targets without thinking about the energy, security and costs facing Australia. It's time for the government to admit their faults and step back from these bills as they currently read.

Better industry comes from providing the correct economic policies to provide an environment that will help business flourish. The coalition in government will do three things in this space: we will steer our nation out of our multiple current domestic crises; we'll not just talk about the challenges of our time but we'll meet them head on, with action to carve out a more secure future; and, most importantly, we'll make the decisions that set Australia up for success for many generations to come. There are six core ways to get this done. We will rein in inflationary spending to take pressure off inflation rather than spend billions on corporate welfare for the Labor Party's pet projects. We'll wind back Labor's interventions by removing regulatory roadblocks that are causing harm to the economy and stopping so many businesses from getting ahead. We will condense approval processes and remove red-tape barriers that continue to harm mining, entrepreneurialism and jobs. The coalition will remove the complexity and hostility of this Labor government's industrial relations agenda that is putting imposts on businesses, particularly casual-worker changes impacting our small businesses. Under a coalition government, we will provide lower, simpler and fairer taxes, as all Australians should keep more of what they earn. We need changes to competition policy to give businesses a fair go and ensure projects receiving government funding meet adequate tests, which is of concern in these bills. We will ensure Australians have more affordable and reliable energy. As the bill reads, the coalition opposes them.

We need a government that believes in providing cheaper, reliable and secure energy for this nation. No-one wants to just back in renewable projects. The coalition wants renewables to be built here, and by taking the energy grid, but they need to be backed by 24/7 baseload power that gas and nuclear can provide and which the government does not want to explore under these bills. Only the coalition can truly bring back 'Aussie Made'.

Quorum formed.

Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Environment and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to thank the member for calling the quorum to make sure I had some of my colleagues here. It's wonderful! It gives me the opportunity to tell the chamber some things. I'm sorry that the member for Lindsay has gone. I was going to school her a bit on some of the things that she got wrong. I don't have time to go through all the things that she got wrong. But we on this side know that we inherited a cost-of-living crisis. We know. Everything we've done every day since being elected has been aimed at dealing with that cost-of-living crisis. Is it job done? No way. We don't accept for a moment that it's job done. But, at every step of the way, we have been opposed by those opposite. We have delivered better tax cuts and fairer tax cuts, more for low- and middle-income Australians and less for me. That's fair enough. I'm happy with that. We have delivered real wage rises for the first time in a decade. Those opposite confessed that, under their government, low wages were a deliberate design feature of their economic architecture. They said it. We didn't say it about them; they said it. We know that that's what would happen if they were elected again.

The other thing I just wanted to mention is that the member for Lindsay was talking about, 'These are the things we need to do if we want to blah, blah, blah.' You know what? In typical fashion for the coalition parties, we heard nothing, no detail. Can you believe that almost three years into a coalition opposition, they have not a single costed policy that they will take to the next election? They have no policies to deal with the cost-of-living crisis that we admit and agree is the most important thing facing the Australian people at the moment. Instead of talking about the cost of living in here, every question every day in question time is about visas. They have the opportunity to stand up and tell the people of Australia what they would do to help with the cost of living, rather than opposing everything that we are trying to do to help with the cost of living. They're the people who set the fire and now they've put the roadblocks up so the fire engine can't get there when it comes to the cost of living. If you asked them, 'What would you do to help ordinary people with their cost of living?' what could they say? They have not a single policy to help Australians with the cost of living.

Moving on to this terrific piece of legislation, the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024, this morning was a great example of what a future made in Australia looks like, because we announced the environmental tick-off for Australia's largest renewable energy project and one of the largest in the world. This is something that my colleague Minister Chris Bowen has been working so hard on—to see this energy transition through. The announcement today of environmental approval for SunCable means that the Albanese Labor government has now ticked off enough renewable energy to power seven million homes. The energy transition is real. It's happening now. Cheaper, cleaner, renewable energy for households and businesses will be better for the environment, be better for jobs, bring down prices and increase certainty. We know that the SunCable project will be economically and socially transformative for the Northern Territory. Of course, it's about the power that will be exported in the future from this proposal, but it's also about the power that will be used in Darwin and what it will be used for. SunCable estimates the project will deliver more than $20 billion in economic value to the Northern Territory and support an average of 6,800 direct and indirect jobs for each year of the construction phase, with a peak workforce of 14,300. I think one of the most critical things about this is that we've managed with SunCable to design a product that actually avoids the significant negative impacts on the environment that you would normally worry about with a project of this size. They've designed the project to avoid ghost bat colonies and make sure that protected species like the greater bilby are protected with the rollout of this project.

One of the things that are so exciting about the Future Made in Australia Bill and the plan itself is how critical this renewable energy future is to our economy in the future. From my perspective as environment minister, of course, reducing climate related risks is one of the very best things that we can do to protect our environment. But renewable energy also means that, through our renewable energy resources here in Australia, we are uniquely placed to benefit from a transformation that's not just happening in Australia—although it is happening in Australia—but actually happening globally. There is global demand for renewable energy. We want to be able to export it, through projects like green hydrogen and this cable, in the way that we have exported coal and gas in the past, and we want to export the products that are made with renewable energy because those products will be in increasing demand around the world as economies do their best to decarbonise internationally.

If we want to remain competitive in this changing world, we need to have a plan, and that plan is this Future Made in Australia. It is extraordinary to see those opposite lining up to complain about this transformative opportunity that we have for this country. This plan provides clarity, certainty and a framework for companies that want to invest in new projects that create jobs and wealth, particularly in regional Australia. The only thing that we have heard about regional Australia from those opposite is that they want to build some nuclear reactors there. The idea that nuclear reactors built in 20 years time can do anything for the cost of living now or for—

Anne Webster (Mallee, National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Regional Health) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Twenty?

Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Environment and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member opposite says 'not 20 years time'. Is it 15? When will they be built?

Anne Webster (Mallee, National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Regional Health) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Oh, it's not for me to say.

Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Environment and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Oh, right. Apparently, it's not for the Leader of the Opposition to say either, because he hasn't said it yet! So they've got a nuclear fantasy of energy in 15 or 20 years time—the most expensive new form of energy—and they won't tell us any of the details of that. They won't release the costings. Instead, as I said this morning, we are in a transformation of the Australian economy that can bring cheaper power, the jobs that come with it and the household bill relief that comes with it, and it's happening now, not in 20 years time.

Our plan includes investing in renewable hydrogen, critical minerals processing, green metals, green energy technologies and low-carbon liquid fuels. The example that SunCable gave today was those energy-hungry big data centres that are being built around the world right now, particularly as AI expands. That's exactly the sort of project you would like to see this kind of renewable energy able to power, on an industrial scale, in the Northern Territory.

In this year's federal budget we allocated around $8 billion to scale up green hydrogen that will be used to create green steel and replace gas in other manufacturing processes. We've invested a further $7 billion for critical minerals, the minerals that are used to make electric vehicles and batteries and that go into wind turbines. We've put another $1 billion into solar manufacturing and $500 million into making batteries. Australia can be a supplier of these new technologies. We've got all the raw materials and we've got more than our share of the smarts. Instead of investing here in Australia, we've been waving goodbye to these opportunities for too long. No longer. We have a plan for Australia to benefit from this transition, for the demand for these products, to cleaner, greener energy.

We've already seen, as I said, a substantial increase in renewable energy in the grid. We've seen a 25 per cent increase in renewable energy already, and we are continuing to tick off renewable energy projects at record rates. I have ticked off 55 so far. They are outstripping coal and gas projects, seven to one. Those opposite like to pretend that we're talking about renewables only. Of course, that's not the case. The Greens political party like to pretend that there's nothing happening with renewable energy. Nothing could be further from the truth. We've got record numbers of renewable energy projects in the pipeline ahead of us as well. Frankly, the market has decided that this is where investment in power is going. They've worked out that it is cheaper, as well as being cleaner.

Of course, my water portfolio has a critical role in Future Made in Australia as well. In May, we announced that the Commonwealth will contribute $65 million towards setting up a major desalination and water transport project in the Upper Spencer Gulf as part of the Future Made in Australia plan. That project includes plans for a seawater desalination plant at Cape Hardy capable of processing 260 megalitres a day, and a 600-kilometre pipeline to transport the treated water to Whyalla and to outback mining sites like Carrapateena and Roxby Downs.

At the moment, mining operations in the far north draw on water from the Great Artesian Basin, and, with the sort of scaling up that we want to see, that is particularly unsustainable. The Great Artesian Basin's water covers a large part of Australia, and it's very important for all sorts of uses. The hydrogen power station proposed for Whyalla needs a reliable and abundant supply of water to convert into hydrogen for power generation, and we are very happy to be partnering with the South Australian government to explore that opportunity. We're also providing $4 million to help First Nations communities to engage with those hydrogen project developers to take advantage of the jobs that can be created in regional and remote communities with this investment. Unlocking a vibrant domestic hydrogen industry is absolutely critical to our vision of being a renewable energy superpower and for a future made in Australia.

Of course, our plan doesn't just rely on these direct investments alone. We need a trained and skilled workforce. Those opposite spent years running down skills in our economy. We've invested in TAFE, with 500,000 fee-free TAFE places. I want to give credit to my very good friend Brendan O'Connor, the former minister, who did such amazing work in the area of skills. He will be sorely missed in this place not only as a skilled minister but also, more particularly, as a very, very decent human being.

It's not just the TAFE places. It's the additional investment in universities. It's the regional university centres that we're rolling out because we know we'll need the whole range of jobs, from skilled trades to PhD engineers and scientists, and everybody in between, as we transform our economy and grasp these opportunities that are there for the taking. With cyber capability, the research that universities are doing and the partnerships that we're supporting between private businesses and these critical inputs, you can see that our future made in Australia is bright. We are able to take the opportunities that this global transformation is offering Australia. With our unique advantages—our solar, our wind, and most particularly, our people: our hardworking, skilled, clever people—we can grasp those opportunities for a future made in Australia.

(Quorum formed)

Darren Chester (Gippsland, National Party, Shadow Minister for Regional Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

When it comes to this government, the Albanese government, there are three simple facts you need to keep in mind whenever you examine proposed legislation. You know that blue-collar workers are going to be sold out in a desperate bid to win over Green preferences in the urban areas. You also know that it's always a good idea to read the fine print. We've got a slogan-led recovery. Every bill has a slogan in its title, but, when you start examining the substance, you realise that the bill actually contains something very different to what you'd imagine it might contain. The final thing you always need to keep at the back of your mind on every occasion when it comes to examining the Labor Party's approach to legislation is Labor's track record. Labor cannot manage money and can't be trusted to make good decisions with the Australian taxpayers' hard-earned dollars.

This goes to the heart of this bill. This Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 sounds absolutely wonderful. It sounds great. But, when you start examining it closely, you realise very quickly that this is more of a strategy to win re-election. It is more of a pork-barrelling fund, with Labor trying to pick winners in industries and seats that suit them and playing favourites with certain industry groups with taxpayers' money. Labor is quite happy to gamble with taxpayers' money for ideological reasons.

There is something that really concerns me when I look across the frontbench. I have been here for 16 years now, so I know a lot of the Labor frontbench quite well. I know their career histories very well, indeed, and I like a lot of them—they are good people—but there's no business experience anywhere in that cabinet. Not one person in that cabinet has actually run a small business, let alone a medium sized business. So the biggest skill shortage in Australia today is actually in the Labor Party cabinet. The shortage of people with business experience is quite extraordinary. When you then go and look closely at the legislation before the House, it is exposed to so many risks—a long line-up of corporate welfare recipients trying to get their hands on the money—and is being decided by a cabinet not with business experience but based on ideology. That's what really concerns me.

These bills expand the role of Export Finance Australia and ARENA and establish a national interest framework that retrospectively underpins the government's Future Made in Australia policy. The omnibus bill also expands ARENA's functions, from a pure R&D demonstration to the support of manufacturing, deployment and commercialisation. This is a slush fund, plain and simple, as many on this side of the House have identified very quickly in the debate. When I say it's ideologically driven, what concerns me is that, in my own electorate, we have projects which have been well researched and well considered by the coalition when it was in government and also by the state Labor Party when it has been in government in Victoria—projects like the Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain project. This project, at Loy Yang, in Gippsland, has attracted corporate support and large commitments from the Japanese government, but the federal Labor Party, this government, for ideological reasons will not support the Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain project, in Gippsland, because it utilises brown coal. It's obsessed with destroying the brown coal sector in Gippsland.

Brown coal has been an incredible resource in Gippsland and has underpinned the wealth of much of south-east Australia. Ever since Sir John Monash established the SEC a hundred years ago, the reliable and affordable energy generated from Latrobe Valley using brown coal has been critically important to the wealth of my community and the growth of Victoria more broadly. It's a resource that, using modern technology, research and projects—like the Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain project—will demonstrate that there are alternative uses for brown coal. It doesn't have to be put into a coal-fired power station and burnt purely for energy generation. There are other alternative uses for that product.

But, for ideological reasons, this once-great party, which once stood up for blue-collar workers, is quite happily seeing the demise of the entire sector and the demise of workers and families who rely on the brown coal industry. What we're seeing in my community is that, for ideological reasons, Labor, in pursuit of Green preferences, has forgotten the workers who used to underpin this once-great party.

You don't have to take my word for it; you can just examine the Australian Electoral Commission results during my time in this place, in the last 16 years. At election after election, the vote for me and the coalition has grown in Latrobe Valley, which was once a Labor Party heartland. The Labor Party doesn't even hold the state seat of Morwell anymore, a seat which was once a blue-ribbon seat for that party. It's all because this party, those opposite, have forgotten who they represent and have sold out blue-collar workers, all for Green preferences in the city.

But it's not just the coalition which is raising concerns with the bill before the House. Danielle Wood, the productivity commissioner and the government's key economic adviser, appointed by the Treasurer, Jim Chalmers, has said:

If we are supporting industries that don't have a long-term competitive advantage, that can be an ongoing cost.

…   …   …

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

This, again, goes to the heart of my concerns that a cabinet with no experience running their own business are somehow going to pick the winners through this Future Made in Australia Bill. It concerns me because the lack of business expertise and the risk to Australian taxpayers' money is going to be exposed over many years and at great cost to Australian taxpayers. In the middle of a cost-of-living crisis, Australian taxpayers are going to be footing the bill as the Albanese government tries to pick winners in the corporate sector.

Now, the previous speaker, the Minister for the Environment and Water, talked about energy security, and it is a very important debate to have in the context of this bill. There will be no future made in Australia unless there is reliable and affordable energy in our nation. As I touched on before, in the La Trobe Valley, with the brown-coal-fired power stations, the reliability and the affordability of that resource underpinned great economic wealth for my region and Victoria more broadly. The people in my community are perhaps a little more energy literate than those in most communities because of the fact that they've lived it. It's been where generations of people have gone to work. They understand what I call the energy trifecta, where your energy needs to be reliable, it needs to be affordable and you need to do your share as a nation in terms of contributing to the environmental outcomes the planet is seeking to achieve.

The energy trifecta is a difficult one because reliability and affordability are very pressing concerns for the industry, for the environmental movement and for those of us who care about the future of the planet and what our future generations will get to experience on this planet. We want to make sure we're good environmental citizens. When I look around my community, when I look around regional Australia, all I see is people who are actually passionate and practical environmentalists. It's the people in regional Australia who join Landcare, who undertake the practical environmental work and who are out there doing pest animal control, weed control and replanting vegetation. So to have those opposite come in here and lecture regional Australians as if they don't care about the environment is completely misplaced criticism and unfair to regional Australians.

When I talk about the energy trifecta in regional Australia, I want to make those opposite understand that the people in my community want a balanced approach. They don't want to see a government put all its eggs in one basket on a renewables-only approach. It is madness, at a time when those opposite and, in particular, the crossbench warn about more severe and unpredictable weather events, to then say, 'Let's have a 100 per cent weather-dependent energy system.' It is madness. You have warnings about climate. You have warnings about increased variability in weather events and more severe weather events, and then you put all your eggs in a 100 per cent weather-dependent basket. It is complete madness.

On this side of the House, we believe in a balanced approach. The overwhelming majority of people in the coalition, and certainly in my party room, acknowledge that there is a role for renewable energy sources. But it has to be based on respect for landowners, respect for the communities which will host them and an understanding that you can't put all your eggs in that one basket.

It has been extraordinarily condescending to listen to many of those opposite try to invoke The Simpsons when anyone wants to have a conversation about the future of nuclear energy in this country. It's condescending because it ignores the fact that there are more than 30 countries around the world safely operating nuclear power stations today with modern technology. It's actually quite juvenile. It's juvenile and it's demeaning to have Labor MPs continually joking about three-eyed fish. If that's your reference point for this debate, you really have exited the whole conversation that needs to be had in this nation.

Australians aren't interested in a scare campaign; they want a facts campaign. They want to know how these other countries are running these nuclear power stations safely and how they are storing the waste products safely. They want to know what the cost is to households and the manufacturing sector. And then they also want to know what the lifetime costs of the wind turbines and the solar panels are. Can you recycle them? What is the cost of doing that? Who's responsible for bringing down the wind turbines once they reach the end of their useful life? Well, it appears it's the landowners, at great cost to them personally. Also, what is the return to those regional communities that are expected to host this industrial-scale land use on what used to be prime agricultural land? This is a complex debate, and it can't be dumbed down to stupid references about The Simpsons.

At a time when our nation provides an incredible amount of food to other countries in the world, surely taking away productive agricultural land and turning it into a wind factory or a solar farm needs to have a little bit of a pause for thought. There are people in our near region who don't have access to the same amount of food that we have. Australian farmers, as world-class producers, export two-thirds of what we actually produce. We are great growers of food. We have the benefit of the technology, of the arable land and of the skills in our farming sector. Replacing or displacing that land use for another use—energy generation—needs to be done very seriously with great contemplation, with great respect to landowners, and also involving a mature debate with the Australian population. For those of us on this side of the House, we're up for the debate. We're up for the debate about nuclear, solar, wind, gas and also, where appropriate, prolonged use of some of those coal resources or alternative uses of some of those coal resources.

Now, the two newest power stations in the La Trobe Valley, Loy Yang A and Loy Yang B, were both slated to operate into the 2040s. They could operate safely and successfully in the 2040s in conjunction with more renewables. Gas is incredibly important to overcome the intermittency of solar and wind. Professor Arnold Dix, an expert in this field, commented to me the other day in relation to his desire to see high-speed rail in Australia, 'You don't have an electrified high-speed rail network and set the timetable based on whether the wind's blowing in Bass Strait. You need that reliable, affordable baseload energy source as well.' I continue to have an open mind on the nuclear debate because I believe that, if you are going to have a future made in Australia, as this bill proposes, you need to have a balanced approach to our future energy needs. Securing reliability and affordability and meeting our international targets are actually matters of national security. You have to be in a position to maintain your manufacturing sector with reliable and affordable energy, and I believe we should be taking advantage of a range of technologies to meet the challenge of supplying the energy Australia needs both today and into the future.

For people listening at home—all three of them!—energy security is about keeping the lights on. A country has to have the ability to keep the lights on. The country has to be able to run the public transport network, hospitals and universities, and ensure businesses and farmers can still produce their goods at a competitive price. All those things are needed in a modern and complex society like Australia. We can't do that with a 100 per cent weather-dependent system.

Time has escaped me, but I would make one final reference in relation to the bill regarding this Future Made in Australia and the ideological nature of the modern Labor Party. I can guarantee you that, on this Future made in Australia, when this cabinet is making decisions about what it will and won't support, the native hardwood timber industry will be ruled out. It's been ruled out of the National Reconstruction Fund. They'll rule it out because of their zealotry around trying to secure Greens preferences in the cities. I've already seen in my electorate what's happened since the hardwood timber industry has been run out of business by the state Labor government. When it comes to timber, you can use either your own wood or someone else's wood. Unfortunately, when it comes to the Australian Labor Party, they're quite happy to import timber from countries with poor environmental protocols. I encourage the modern Labor Party to re-establish its connections with blue-collar workers and stop selling out Australians for Greens preferences.

Pat Conroy (Shortland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Defence Industry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's actually quite fortuitous to follow the member for Gippsland, who I will compliment: he has passion for his community. But, as a proud representative of the biggest power-generating region in the country, the mighty Hunter Valley and Lake Macquarie region, which produces 50 per cent more power than Gippsland, I would submit his understanding of energy policy is woefully out of date, does not reflect the current reality of economics or engineering and, quite frankly, is symptomatic of a coalition that, when in government, produced 23 energy policies and didn't land a single one of them. That is why so many manufacturing companies have been dealing with higher power prices than they needed to: the last government was incompetent about energy policy, and their incompetence continues in opposition with their mad nuclear folly, which I will refer to later in my speech. I didn't want to let the member for Gippsland's contribution go unanswered given he made claims to represent an energy region. I applaud the workers in Gippsland and their proud contribution to keeping the lights on, which is very important. Unfortunately, their federal representative doesn't understand energy policy. Having said that, I am pleased to make a contribution on the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 and the Future Made in Australia (Omnibus Amendments No. 1) Bill 2024.

A Future Made in Australia was one of the key policies Labor took to the 2022 election, which Australians voted in favour of, and I know it is going to deliver significant benefits to our country. The legislation 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 sector assessment process to help improve understanding of how a government can best leverage private investment in areas of the economy aligned with the framework and help inform rigorous government decision-making. It defines a set of community benefit principles to ensure that the benefits of a future made in Australia support the private sector investment it enables to flow to local communities, workers and businesses.

In addition, the omnibus bill delivers on key parts of the plan that were announced in the 2024-25 budget. It enables Export Finance Australia to make domestically focused investments under the National Interest Account in alignment with the National Interest Framework. It safeguards the $6 billion in funding for ARENA's renewables and related priorities, giving industry and investors certainty to deliver sizeable, long-lasting projects. It sets up arrangements for the Future Made in Australia Innovation Fund to accelerate innovative technology and deployment in priority sectors and makes necessary adjustments to the governance arrangements of ARENA. I want to acknowledge the work of the Prime Minister, the Treasurer, and many of my ministerial colleagues who have contributed to this legislation.

The Albanese Labor government believes that we need to make more things here in Australia. That's at the heart of our Future Made in Australia plan. Making more things here in our great nation and utilising our resources and skills means our economy will grow and new, well-paid jobs will be created. Making the most of the resources we have will spread opportunities right around our country, making Australia wealthier, more secure and more independent.

A Future Made in Australia is an economic plan for a better future. It will see us maximise the economic and industrial benefits of the global transformation to net zero and secure 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 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 plan builds on other significant measures the Albanese Labor government is delivering, including the National Reconstruction Fund, fee-free TAFE, our investments in defence, and our plan for cheaper, cleaner energy for all Australians.

The Hunter and Central Coast regions are well position to reap the benefits of a Future Made in Australia. We have a proud manufacturing history. My first electorate office in Cardiff bordered the Downer train yards, which manufactured trains and rolling stock for decades. Unfortunately, that work and the associated jobs were lost and sent overseas by previous New South Wales Liberal governments. There is still a Downer facility, but it is not as big as it could be if we had visionary state governments, which we now have.

Today, Cardiff is still a thriving manufacturing hub, ranging from defence industry businesses like 3ME Technology and Nupress to sustainable cosmetic manufacturer Imaginelle. Workers in the Shortland electorate have powered our nation for generations. I've spoken many times in this place about how grateful I am and continue to be for the sacrifices coalminers and energy workers have made and the economic prosperity their hard work has provided and continues to provide. I have also been upfront and honest about the fact that a lot of our power stations are reaching the end of their technical life. They were built in the sixties, seventies and eighties and are reaching the end of their natural life. The question is: what replaces them? The fact is that we need to capitalise on the opportunities presented by renewable energy, which is the cheapest replacement for those power stations when they reach their natural end of life.

We don't have time to waste. We need to act now so that we're not left behind, including the workers and communities of the Hunter and the Central Coast. The Albanese Labor government knows that. That's why, earlier this year, at the Liddell Power Station, we announced our $1 billion investment in the Solar Sunshot program. This will help ensure that more solar panels are made in Australia, including in the Hunter, creating jobs for generations of people in my community. It will create hundreds of new well-paid energy jobs in advanced manufacturing. In fact, there will be more jobs created as a result of this one announcement of one project than what existed at the former Liddell Power Station at its peak. That is what a future made in Australia is all about: making more things here and creating new secure, well-paid jobs.

I think it's important to contrast this investment and foresight with an example of what happens when you've got a government that doesn't have its act together and refuses to take advantage of the opportunities presented by renewable energy. About 90 per cent of the world's solar cells on people's roofs are based on technology developed out of the University of New South Wales, but how many manufacturing jobs have we got out of it? Zero. Why was that? Because we had a Liberal-National government led by John Howard with their heads in the sand who were happy to let these jobs and opportunities go overseas.

And clearly they haven't learned from their mistakes. Instead of seizing the opportunities of cleaner, cheaper renewable energy to power a new generation of secure, well-paid manufacturing jobs in places like the Hunter and the Central Coast, the opposition leader, the Liberals and the Nationals are going down the path of hugely expensive nuclear energy that won't be a reality for decades. The Leader of the Opposition's farcical nuclear policy will cost us billions of dollars and sacrifice the jobs, investment, energy and certainty that we need now. His policy is for hundreds of billions of dollars to be wasted on nuclear power stations that won't be built for decades and will only produce a fraction of the energy we need while driving off investment in other sectors.

If his plan ever comes to fruition, you will have two results. Firstly, we'll see nuclear power stations in the Hunter Valley and in Lake Macquarie that our community is dead opposed to. Let me repeat that: my community does not want nuclear power stations next to our kids' schools, next to playgrounds, next to sporting fields or next to aged-care homes. That is what the Leader of the Opposition is arguing for, and that is what every single Liberal Party member in this House is arguing for. My community doesn't want it, and my manufacturers and businesses don't want the massively increased electricity prices that would go with such a farcical plan. His plan is a recipe for manufacturing devastation, not revitalisation. Don't take my word for it; ask every independent economist, particularly specialists in the power sector. Nuclear energy is the most expensive form of energy around, and it's a recipe for deindustrialisation.

As the Minister for Defence Industry and Capability Delivery, it would be remiss of me not to take the opportunity to talk about what a future made in Australia means for our local defence industry. I'm proud to be the minister for defence industry, and I'm proud of the Australian defence industry that supports around 100,000 jobs—100,000 well-paid, high-skilled jobs that help provide national security for our nation. As I told the House last week, the government has increased the defence budget by $50 billion over the decade and $5.7 billion over the forward estimates, something those opposite are refusing to match. In fact, they're arguing for a $50 billion cut to the defence budget. That is their stated policy.

The government is accelerating the delivery of defence capability, which is having direct benefits for Australian industry compared to the so-called plans of the previous government. Under them, the first infantry fighting vehicle was to be delivered in 2029; under us, it will be in 2027 and made in Victoria. Under them, the first heavy landing craft was to be in 2035; under us, it will be in 2028 and made in Western Australia. Under them, manufacturing missiles, at best, was to start in 2035; under us, we start manufacturing missiles next year.

We're making record investments in the Australian defence industry. The last government only produced one thing in regard to the defence industry, and that was press releases. They had media statements, Top Gun music and a red carpet, but they betrayed the Australian defence industry when they made $42 billion of spending commitments without adding a single cent to the defence budget, without rescoping any other programs and without changing the schedule of anything else. They perpetrated a fraud on the Australian people and the Australian defence industry. Just look at their most symbolic project: the construction of two supply vessels for the Royal Australian Navy. Under the Leader of the Opposition they were built overseas, not in Australia, and under the Leader of the Opposition they were not even able to provide safe drinking water for our sailors. Now we're fixing it, but that's the sort of support for the Australian defence industry that we see under the coalition.

In contrast, the Albanese government's focus on speed to capability will not only result in advanced equipment for the ADF being delivered sooner but will also create more high-skilled, well-paid jobs in the Australian defence industry. This approach is also opening up global opportunities for Australian industry. Under this government, we've negotiated the single largest defence export deal in our nation's history, to supply armoured vehicles made in Queensland to the German Army. This deal is worth over $1 billion and will secure more than 600 direct jobs in Queensland alone, with even more through the supply chain. Through stable leadership and unity of purpose, we are bringing capability forward while supporting a defence future made in Australia.

This debate really does reveal the choice the Australian people have at the election next year. You've got the vision of the Albanese Labor government—a vision to transform critical minerals, like lithium, to support solar panel manufacture in this country. We've been blessed with some of the greatest reserves of critical minerals, rare earths and other inputs into the net zero economy around the globe. The choice is simple: do we transform and value-add them here, or do we continue to be a farm and quarry in respect of those and send them offshore to be value-added in other countries and sent back here? That is the choice. We're all in favour of value-adding. We're all in favour of adding high-skilled, well-paid jobs that also contribute to national security and independence for this country, while those opposite are very content for that to be offshored—to be sent overseas.

That's not a surprise when you look at the appalling history of the coalition when in government. I was here—I was present—for what I believe was the greatest betrayal of the Australian manufacturing sector in the history of the nation. That was when the then Treasurer, Joe Hockey, goaded Holden to leave this country. Their election policy in 2013 was to cut $500 million from the very successful Automotive Transformation Scheme. They cut that $500 million. When they were told that that would lead to the devastation of the auto industry, did they change their policy? Did they resile from that future? No, they embraced it. I saw Joe Hockey stand in this exact spot and glory in telling Holden to leave the country—glory in consigning to the unemployment queue 200,000 workers, when you consider the direct and indirect employment. He gloried in the devastation that wreaked upon Elizabeth in South Australia and in Fishermans Bend in Melbourne. They gloried in destroying manufacturing jobs, and they'll do that again if their nuclear folly is allowed to actually be implemented.

By contrast, the Albanese Labor government believes strongly in a future made in Australia—a future where we value-add, a future where we grow the manufacturing sector, and a future where well-paid, high-skilled Australian manufacturing workers can plan a future, raise a family, buy a house and have a great future in this country. I commend the bill to the House.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024. I only hope I've got some time to address some of the issues that the member for Shortland raised while on that absolute frolic, but I do want to get my speech out. I encourage him to listen on as he's driving home tonight.

I've worked really hard in Fisher to bring back small business and manufacturing since my election in 2016. I've championed local makers and creators through my #MadeInFisher and #SupportSunshineCoast campaigns. I've celebrated leading innovators and businesses through the Fisher Community Awards, and I've worked with local, national and global businesses to cultivate a defence industry on the Sunshine Coast. Unfortunately, the defence industry minister has just walked out the door. Eight years on, the Sunshine Coast is emerging as a high-tech, high-value manufacturing hub, contributing to crucial supply chains in defence, health, food and beverages. I want to take a moment to highlight them for their grit, determination and ingenuity. We've got craft brewers like Your Mates Brewing in Warana, Brouhaha in Baringa and Moffat Beach Brewing in Caloundra. We've got distillers like Stillmaker and Sons in Montville, Beachtree Gin in Caloundra and the brand-new Rare Orchid Distilling in Landsborough. Unfortunately, I don't drink so I can't partake in any of those goods.

We've got other companies like GreaseBoss, who are absolutely transforming the way that large-scale mining and manufacturing equipment is greased—it's very important to have regular greasing. We've also got HeliMods, run by Will Shrapnel, which is a great local business in Caloundra. They do some fantastic work with their mission config systems turning helicopters into mobile intensive care ambulances. They are doing that around the world, and they are based in Caloundra. They're also playing a vital role in the former coalition government's Ghost Bat program. Eniquest is another local manufacturer in my electorate. They create diesel generators for our Australian and New Zealand armies and provide auxiliary power units to forward operating bases, to Bushmaster vehicles and to Hawkei vehicles. A big shout-out to Don Pulver and his team for the great work that they do there.

Leakster is using AI to monitor and condition water assets. I see the member for Blair has walked into the chamber. While Kilcoy Global's abattoir might be in his electorate, the head office is in mine. Kilcoy Global is a tremendous business, employing thousands of people around the country, and they've just gone and built a very extensive food manufacturing facility where they manufacture and package food up. If you're like me and you keep some of those meals in the freezer or your fridge at home for when you don't have time to cook something and you can whack it in the microwave, chances are they've come from Kilcoy Global. It's a great local business, and I'm going to claim them, member for Blair, as being a Sunshine Coast business rather than a Blair based business. It's just the abattoir in Blair, but the brains of the operation and the manufacturing plant are in Caloundra.

King Truss is creating building and hardware supplies, and is a great local truss and wall manufacturer. I've been out to visit the team there. First Light Fabrication is creating and fabricating marine equipment. Nybro is manufacturing disability-accessible vehicle modifications. In fact, a big shout-out to the Nybro team, who did the modifications to my own daughter Sarah's car. Wherever you turn, from the shores of Alexandra Headland to the foothills of Mount Mellum, you'll find Fisher manufacturers, primary producers and creators putting the Sunshine Coast on the map.

It's for those local manufacturers and small businesses that I stand today in opposition to this bill. The more we learn about this bill, the more we see the blatant truth, which is that this Labor government has no plan for our economy, nor do they have a plan for our manufacturers or for sovereign capability. This legislation is nothing more than plain, old-fashioned pork-barrelling. It's a framework for big government and big bureaucracy. It's a proposal to increase the cost of doing business with Labor's big, red stamp of approval.

This is another instance of this Labor government trying to spin their way out of trouble. It's a bill which demands that Australian families and their businesses look past the last two years of absolute chaos and trust Labor to make the right calls. That's what they're asking. They say, 'Don't worry about what's happened over the last two years. Trust us. We'll get it right.' Well, last time a government said, 'Trust us', I think most Australians would say, 'No, thank you.' After a litany of broken promises and a catalogue of crises, one thing is absolutely crystal clear: Australians do not trust this Prime Minister or this government to do the right thing.

The bill provides for a national interest framework, which would consider where government investment—that is, taxpayers' money—should go, based on a very narrow set of criteria. It expands the remit of Export Finance Australia and the Australian Renewable Energy Agency to fund domestic industries. Worse still, it puts the Treasurer and the Minister for Finance in charge of decision-making. Let me put this very simply: these laws will give the Treasurer the power to decide where to spend Australians' money. It is a slush fund, plain and simple, with nearly $4 billion in its coffers. This is the same Treasurer and the same government which have directed $13.7 billion and more into green energy pipedreams while ignoring the rising cost of energy, water and utilities. They poured millions of dollars into the Environmental Defenders Office, funding lawyers to sue the government. Green corporate welfare, green tape and overregulation, investing in fanciful projects, which the market is now abandoning, because it makes for a good social media post—all of this is paid for by taxpayers, who are now paying 21 per cent more in their electricity prices. They are now paying 22 per cent more in their gas prices.

Members of the government are living with their heads in the clouds if they think that Australian manufacturers are going to be able to be competitive with other countries around the world whilst this government continues to drive up energy prices with the member for McMahon's wild and crazy ideas. You know, when I was a kid, Deputy Speaker Vasta—and you'd appreciate this; I believe you used to play soccer as a kid. When you're playing soccer and you're on the sporting field, and the opposition is giving you a hard time, what did we used to say if we were up? We'd point to the scoreboard and say, 'Scoreboard, old son; scoreboard.' Well, scoreboard. Look at what's happening to this country. Look at the cost of living. Look at what is happening in no small part because of the government's policies in relation to energy. How in God's name does this government think that our manufacturers are going to compete?

I spoke about all those companies earlier. I constantly get manufacturers saying to me: 'Andrew, I'm just having so much trouble. I am having so much trouble keeping my head above water because of the costs.' You think the costs of running a household have gone sky high? You ought to try the costs of being a manufacturer in Australia right now. And why is that? When you make things, you need to use energy. Let me say that again for those members opposite who may not understand. When you make things, you have to use energy, and that energy has to come from somewhere.

With the folly of this government's rise and rise and push for—what is it—83 per cent renewables in such a short timeframe, our industries, our manufacturers are saying: 'Well, I might as well shut up shop, because I can't do what I have been used to doing and provide it for a similar price. I've got to either increase my prices significantly or stop doing what I'm doing.' That is to the eternal shame of this government.

My side of politics has been derided for this for some time by the Greens and by Labor, but do you know what? It is a truism. You can't run manufacturing with solar panels and wind turbines when the sun is not shining and the wind is not blowing. Even if you have very significant batteries, the sort of industries that manufacturers are trying to run—you try running a steel smelter or an aluminium smelter on renewables or batteries. At the moment, it can't be done. It cannot be done. Wouldn't it be nice? Yes, it'd be nice. It'd be nice if I drove a Maserati, but the reality is that the technology is not there.

The member for Shortland had the audacity to talk about deindustrialisation. This government is doing its level best to deindustrialise this country. It beggars belief that those members opposite still want to talk about the car manufacturing industry when this government is driving local manufacturing into the ground.

The member for Shortland also talked up a big game about defence manufacturing. I'm sure I'm not the only person to say this to the member for Shortland, who's probably on his way home now: local defence manufacturers, member for Shortland, are not happy with you. Every defence industry contractor that I talk to that is based in Australia says the same thing to me, and that is that defence contracting in Australia has stopped dead. It has stopped dead because this government was so immersed in things like the Voice referendum. It was so immersed in doing review after review after review that the money stopped for defence contractors. A lot of these small defence contractors—it's axiomatic—were small businesses. When you choke a small business of cash flow, what happens? The small business dies. It withers on the grapevine. So for the member for Shortland to come in here and start spruiking defence industry manufacturing is patently wrong.

I don't think I have spoken to an Australian defence industry contractor who is singing happy days right now. They are bleeding. They are haemorrhaging money. Some of those businesses, as I indicated, are in my electorate, but it's not just those in my electorate. It is right across this country. It's because of the indecisiveness. It's because power prices are so damn high in this country right now and because this government seems to just do nothing in relation to defence industry that these poor beggars are now having to lay people off. What really concerns me is that they will have lost faith in the Australian government. Whether it's Labor or the conservatives, they will have lost faith in us. But I want to assure them: hang tough. Hang in there till the next election, because hopefully we will retake the reins again and we will restore it.

Jason Wood (La Trobe, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Community Safety, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I congratulate Rob Sitch, who just won another Logie Award for best comedy with Utopia. When it comes to the name of this bill, the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024, it would just be one that they chose in Utopia. It's just a classic. It's got the right name. The public will like the term. The government would love using the term. When all the members send out their emails and make their speeches, it's just such a great name. When you see the final document, it'll be the right weight and the right texture when it comes to the paper; it'll have the correct font. It's such a perfect document. The problem is, though, when it comes to Labor and their commitments to big projects like this, it is a lot of money, and I am greatly concerned by the way it will be delivered.

I will go back a bit in time to when we had Labor's pink batts insulation plan. It seemed like a great idea at the time. They wanted houses right around Australia to have better insulation. I think in total they insulated 1.1 million homes, and the payment to make this happen was $1.4 billion. Sadly, it actually led to the Royal Commission into the Home Insulation Program it was so bad. It followed the deaths of four workers, aged 16 to 25, who died in separate incidents that may have been attributed to the failure to identify and manage workplace health and safety. It was an absolute tragedy. At the time, when the Labor government proposed this, it sounded absolutely great.

We also already have commercialisation grants. This is so important when it comes to new businesses. To be honest, I've always been firm that if you have an existing business that's gone for a number of years that should be supported with commercialisation grants. Then you have research and development export grants. If someone is doing their research in Australia on new products, when they export those, they get a tax rebate on those.

In the south-east of Melbourne, in my electorate of La Trobe, we're looking at building what is called meta city, which will be home to an industrial park and high-tech area. I am going to talk about Labor when it comes to some of the road projects around that area and the way they have been managed by the state government. Just nearby, we have Dandenong, which is in the seat of Holt, next door to La Trobe. It is probably the biggest manufacturing hub in Australia. For those who don't know, the industrial sector in Victoria contributes around $30 billion to the state's economy each year, which is 27 per cent of the nation's manufacturing output, which is quite incredible. Our manufacturing businesses transform a range of materials and new products that cover food, beverages, petroleum, coal, paper, machinery, metals, furniture, clothes, textiles, pharmaceuticals, planes and boats.

The great concern that I have about this government proposal is this. You have those smaller businesses, family businesses, doing well, and they will be competing with major corporations. We can look at it as a $15 billion slush fund when it comes to corporate giants in Australia who may be listed companies and yet be receiving potentially billions of dollars. Rather than the small mum-and-dad businesses, it is going to go to the big multinationals, even when it comes to critical minerals and hydrogen projects. I don't know why the government would want to help those huge organisations when they come into Australia.

I mentioned that locally we have meta city, which is a proposal to have a very high-tech, industrial area. When it comes to Labor at the state level managing projects, I will give you some costings. Back in 2007—obviously it was a number of years ago—in the electorate of La Trobe we committed $10 million to the Bryn Mawr bridge. That goes over the packing train line. Labor came out at the time and committed, I think, $30 million. It was 2004. It was built in 2007. It was actually built by Casey council for less than $10 million. Then we come to the Clyde Road, which is right beside this meta city I was talking about before. The cost when we were looking at this in 2007 was going to be in the vicinity of $30 million, and then it grew to $80 million. We got the project manager who built the Bryn Mawr Bridge in Beaconsfield down, and we said: 'How much do you think this project would cost? It's a grade separation going over Clyde Road, and it's going to be really important for our industrial area. We've got Enterprise Avenue, which has a number of high-tech businesses in that area.' And they said, 'You can get change from $30 million.' We said, 'But it has actually been quoted now as an $80 million project.' The project manager for Bryn Mawr Bridge said: 'That's just the unions. That's what happens when it comes to the CFMEU.'

So then we go further in time, to when we committed to funding for the project to be built. This is, again, in Casey. The Casey council is a large council and has a big team of engineers. When they put the quotes forward again, it was going to be a $70 million project. The road was going over the Monash Freeway, just a duplication going to the grade separation, and the council cost was $70 million. Under state Labor, where the CFMEU tax and all of the union fees got involved, it became a $250 million project, so, basically, every meter of road cost $250,000.

I haven't got much hope when it comes to Labor and when it comes to them managing a $30 billion so-called 'build in Australia' when we can't even get roads built in a manner which would be cost-effective. Again locally, you think about all the workers going from Berwick train station down to Dandenong. We've talked about that huge manufacturing hub. We committed $15 million to build the train station. The city council in Mitcham built a 400-spot carpark. When it came to Berwick, the cost blew out to $64 million, an incredible amount of money. When it comes to the CFMEU tax, the same thing happened with Pakenham Road, Racecourse Road and McGregor Road. They were $80 million and they blew out to $398 million, and the CFMEU flags were out.

The great concern I have when it comes to this bill and this proposal is: who are going to be the winners? How are the unions going to get involved? Again, we've seen this sort of fake uproar about the CFMEU with the Labor Party now saying: 'Oh, gee, they've been really bad. We didn't know about the bikies and everything.' Everyone knew the bikies were involved in the CFMEU. It came out on 60 Minutes, and I want to give credit to Nick McKenzie and the Age for highlighting the corruption and the intimidation.

How is the government going to ensure that this huge injection of money does not go to those who are leftover from the CFMEU, as they go elsewhere, and to the bikies? How is the money going to be managed without ripping off the taxpayer? It's a huge wad of money, and I believe that the Treasurer has some discretionary spending—billions of dollars, I think. Where is that going to be spent? Is this to appease the teals and make sure they get preference deals to keep them in government? It seems to me to be completely unfair and unnecessary.

In fact, I'm all for renewable energy when it comes to solar and wind. But the thing is, when it comes to Labor's renewables-only proposal, in parts of my electorate, in areas such as Emerald, Cockatoo and Gembrook, we are always having power outages. Back in June 2021, I think the power was out for six or seven weeks. There's no electricity and no mains power there. In winter, there's no solar. There is no area in the place that I'm talking about where you can actually have wind as a meaningful form of energy.

The government's 82 per cent renewable target by 2030 requires 4.5 gigawatts of additional large-scale wind and solar every year. Less than one-third of this will be delivered. It's going to take 58 million solar panels and also 3,500 wind turbines and up to 28,000 kilometres of new transmission lines across the country.

I then come to the point which I've always been concerned about: why won't the government even consider nuclear energy? I must admit that in days gone by I was concerned about the use of nuclear energy and about disposal. But in Australia we have the uranium-mining sector and we export uranium around the world. Look at all these OECD countries—places like Canada and France. Even the new Prime Minister of the UK is espousing nuclear power and saying how important it is to have it in the mix. The Labor government will not even consider it. I don't know why you wouldn't even consider having nuclear power as an option. Rather than just saying, 'Yes, let's just do some research and look at it,' they've completely walked away from that idea.

Another aspect of this bill is the cost of living. Australians are really hurting. In my electorate, people are really hurting when it comes to their power bills and their insurance, both of which have gone up, and when it comes to issues such as rentals. When I went down to Casey Hospital and met the nurses there, who are doing a fantastic job, the biggest issue for international nurses was actually finding accommodation. So things have become a lot tougher, not only for people in my electorate and right across the country but also for businesses, which are really hurting. Every time I go and speak to a cafe owner, I find that they're really hurting.

Then we have this Future Made in Australia Bill, which provides billions and billions of dollars in corporate welfare for some of Australia's wealthiest companies and individuals. I know that is not the best way to help mums and dads and singles and students, who are trying to stay at home and get by and are hearing about the amazing amount of money being spent by Labor on a folly to hopefully make sure they deliver something. I believe that in their own minds their intentions are good, but the danger is that this is so much money. It's just going to hurt so many people. We saw what happened with pink batts in the past, and we also remember what happened when Labor tried to have their Fuelwatch and GroceryWatch. We're going to have this amazing amount of money spent, and who are going to be the beneficiaries of this? As I said, I just can't see it being the mums and dads of Australia.

I just finish on this point: the government really should be looking after small business. In Victoria, small businesses are really hurting as a result of the Victorian Labor state government and the land tax. The land tax is killing small businesses. It's killing those mums and dads who have invested in an investment property. Thirty per cent of houses now sold in Victoria are actually being sold by landlords.

So I have grave concerns about the way this massive amount of money will be spent. It won't help mums and dads and singles in Australia.

Julian Leeser (Berowra, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The bill that we have before us tonight, the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024, is, in short, a microcosm of everything that is wrong with Labor's economic policy—a range of bad ideas that have been tried in the past and proved to have failed, yet they're trying them again. We see it in the way which Labor is dealing with the cost-of-living crisis. Orthodox economic policy is that, when inflation is going up and up, you reduce government spending to take pressure off inflation. When we have a productivity crisis, orthodox economic policy says that you liberate the labour market, create greater flexibility and allow employers and employees to work the hours they want or need, to get productivity going and get the flexibility that you need to create more jobs. An orthodox economic policy says that you let markets decide what industries exist in a particular country, and when governments pick winners, you end up with bad results. Yet, here in this bill, we have tried, tested and failed policy being recycled again in this so-called Made in Australia bill. This bill takes that iconic idea of Australian made, with its beautiful—

Debate interrupted.