Tim Ayres (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Trade) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the document.

This afternoon the Deputy Prime Minister made a statement in the House about Australia's sovereignty principles. I commend the statement. In the proper tradition of those kinds of statements being made, it is, indeed, a statement of the government's position, but it's also an opportunity to consider and reflect upon these issues.

Sovereignty, if it has any meaning in in this context, is about the capacity of Australia and Australians to shape our own future and not allow others to shape it for us. The Deputy Prime Minister's speech outlined the situation that Australia is in: a clear-eyed view of the world as it is, not as we would hope it to be. Indeed, our strategic circumstances in the region and at the global level are very complex and challenging indeed. The world that Australia confronts, and the region that we confront today, is the most challenging since World War II.

We no longer live in a benign environment. Complacency is no longer viable. That's why Australia must have a clear conversation, a clear doctrine, about our approach to sovereignty. But we must also work in tandem with like-minded countries and partners who share our democratic values and our aspiration for, in particular in the region, a sense of regional independence, sovereignty and self-determination. That can only be managed through robust policy frameworks and principles that maintain and protect our sovereignty, and today's statement by the Deputy Prime Minister is an important juncture in this approach.

Clarification of the framework is helpful. It's helpful to me in the work that I do in the two junior portfolios I have, in terms of trade and manufacturing. Those principles do inform that work. Minister Farrell again set out today in question time his approach: diversifying our markets, diversifying our products and leaning in hard to multilateralism and functional trading rules around the world. It matters also for our approach to issues like rebuilding industry capability in my own area of manufacturing. It's not just an economic prospect; industry capability is core to any meaningful approach to national sovereignty.

A number of principles were set out by the Deputy Prime Minister. Alliances matter—alliances with partners who share in an enduring way our interests and values and are prepared to take collective action to protect those interests and values. The Albanese government will of course continue to work with our US ally and our key partners to advance our interests, because, as the Deputy Prime Minister stated:

… our sovereignty is stronger when we work with others towards shared goals, in ways that respect each other's national interests.

He said:

… it is more important than ever that we work with the countries of the region to continue to reduce tensions and maintain the peace and security that has underpinned economic prosperity.

And like in the United States, where President Biden has begun the process of revitalising American manufacturing, so too will Australia. In the United States, President Biden, through the CHIPS act and the Inflation Reduction Act, together with House and Senate Republicans and Democrats alike, has grasped that industrial capability, sovereignty, national security and democratic cohesion are all interrelated and require renewal. The Albanese government's package of reforms in my portfolio area of manufacturing speaks to the same vital objectives that are mobilising American institutions, workers and their unions, firms and financial institutions. The US industrial revival is gathering steam.

The Albanese government's National Reconstruction Fund is our opportunity to shape our own industrial future. It is modern, it is mission focused and it is utterly relevant to the sectors critical to our national future, to our future national development and to our national security. Our friends, partners and others in the region are watching to see whether we grasp this national moment for industrial capability and manufacturing revival. There are very significant opportunities in the region—in security terms, climate and energy terms, food security terms and manufacturing terms—to have a shared approach to achieving these objectives.

It's a mystery to me why some people in this place oppose these objectives or, even worse, refuse to engage with them. They abrogate their national responsibility. The National Reconstruction Fund is an economic measure, yes, but it is a national security measure too, consistent with any sensible conception of what our national interest is. Australia's future industrial capability is too important to play politics with. We have to put headway over headlines, and substance before slogans. If President Biden in the fractured, polarised world of Washington politics can unite Republicans and Democrats around these objectives, surely we can do better in this place and back the National Reconstruction Fund.

As the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defence said in his ministerial statement, Australia's frontline will always be diplomacy. He said:

Our primary effort is to use our diplomacy to reduce tensions and create pathways for peace.

Of course, our international security and our shared sense of a global, peaceful future is undermined by those who seek to resolve disputes by power and size rather than by international rules and norms. Russia's illegal and unjustified invasion of Ukraine and its nuclear brinkmanship are a salutary example of this. We remain deeply committed in Australia to working constructively with our partners, notwithstanding our occasional differences—our inevitable differences as sovereign nations—to make the world safe, peaceful and ultimately more prosperous.

It's vital, of course, that the Australian public and the parliament have confidence that, when enhancing our defence capability, we never trade away our sovereignty. As the Deputy Prime Minister said:

… we will not trade sovereignty for capability. To do so would be illusory. For the only point of increased capability is to strengthen sovereignty.

So I say to the Senate that it is well worthwhile reading the statement and considering what it means for our approach here. Our capacity to shape our own future, to pursue the policy objectives that we might differ upon in this place, is going to be very much determined by how we approach these questions of sovereignty and national security in the coming decades and how we lay the foundation for a strong, stable, credible Australian approach to these issues. Enhanced diplomacy, intelligence, economic statecraft, development assistance, trade, democratic resilience and our approach on questions like foreign interference are core to our capacity to keep Australians safe, maintain our national sovereignty and pursue the policy objectives that we think are relevant.

I'll just say in closing that I did see in the last parliament a recklessness about the consequences of hyperpoliticisation of some of these issues and some crass partisan politics undermining the core national asset we as Australians have of bipartisanship on these national security questions. I hope that colleagues in this place and the other place have reflected upon the consequences of hyperpartisanship and undermining that bipartisan national asset. It does damage the national interest. I hope that reflection has caused a fresh approach and that people are seized on these issues with the same sense of mission and urgency that the Albanese Labor government is.