Jacinta Nampijinpa Price (NT, Country Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's clear that the Albanese Labor government loves bureaucracy and waste. It's everywhere you look. Their Future Made in Australia legislation is only going to make the problem worse. We need to be encouraging and supporting the development and growth of business across this country. During the emergency of the COVID-19 pandemic, the coalition acted as we had to and provided all-important relief to Australians. We ensured that business could continue to operate and everyday Aussies could keep their jobs. We knew that desperate times called for desperate measures. As it turned out, we knew a thing or two, because those measures stood Australia in good stead. They ensured that we were able to weather the storm of the pandemic. In fact, we didn't just weather the storm; we came out of it with record low unemployment rates, low interest rates and the biggest turnaround to the budget bottom line in 70 years.

But what we also knew and said from the start was that those measures were only ever temporary, and the fact is we are no longer in that period of desperation. So, just as that period has gone, so too should those temporary measures and the government intervention that was justified for a moment. Serious action needs to be taken to rein in inflation and to ensure we return to a sustainable budget, yet that's not what the Future Made in Australia (Production Tax Credits and Other Measures) Bill 2024 does. So it's no wonder that our economy has slipped from being a world leader to being one that is falling behind the pack. Take any measure—interest rates, inflation, productivity or growth. We don't have much to be proud of under Labor.

The truth is the coalition will not stand for subsidising business because of the actions of a poorly run Labor government. While the coalition undoubtedly believes in lower taxation, this policy from Labor doesn't deliver widespread tax relief. The bill introduces various tax offsets for businesses, but it won't actually provide tax relief for businesses for years. Let's be clear; Labor's policies are strangling our manufacturing and resources industries. Australian miners need a change in government if there is any hope for their sector to grow and thrive as it should. Small businesses in Australia don't benefit a cent from this legislation, yet the policy is costing billions of dollars. Simply applying these tax credits would cost a business something in the realm of $100,000 in the first year, and that's according to Labor's own analysis. Then after the first year there are hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of costs which they would have to foot over the life of operations. It's not cheap for the taxpayer and it's not cheap for businesses. Under this legislation, no-one wins.

There are a number of reasons why that is the case. The red tape that businesses face just to simply access the tax credits is unreasonable. They would have to go through the Clean Energy Regulator; the Department of Industry, Science and Resources; and ARENA—that's all before the business even gets to the tax office. In addition to that, there is the requirement for businesses that want to access the tax credit to meet the community benefit principles. These are the same principles that are littered throughout the Albanese government's Future Made in Australia plan, yet we ask: what are the principles? Right now we don't know, and, worse, we are supposed to be content with the fact that the Treasurer will make them up via regulations. The uncertainty is troubling. It puts the Treasurer at the top of the hierarchy, holding all of the power. They are the ones who get to decide which sector of the economy deserves investment.

Let's just remind ourselves who we're talking about here. Dr Chalmers spent a whopping six months in the private sector and has never run a business in his life. He is the one who we're supposed to trust with setting the conditions for businesses to operate and seek funding. He and the ever-increasing bureaucracy are who we are meant to put our faith in to set the conditions for businesses to operate and seek funding.

We already know from estimates that some of Australia's key investments like carbon capture and storage, gas, blue hydrogen, uranium or nuclear will not be eligible for investment and have not been considered as part of the Future Made in Australia policy. The situation is made more troubling when we look at the way state Labor governments have approached similar situations. When we look at those state Labor governments we see a surreptitious pathway for social procurement and an entry point for the CFMEU. We all know that this means that, in all likelihood, if the unions don't agree then the business doesn't get the tax credit. We know that this is the kind of conduct which takes union involvement in workplaces permanent and enables corruption. It's exactly what we've seen at a state level, and we don't need more ways for these unions to replicate that behaviour. The fact is this terrible policy, and no business would be blamed if they wanted nothing to do with it.

But it's not just me that has an issue with Labor's Future Made in Australia. It's not just the coalition saying this. The fact is there are myriad other stakeholders and voices who are saying the same things. Take the Productivity Commission, for example. The commission has been clear that the Future Made in Australia policy is not tax reform. The commissioner has also noted that, if we support businesses that don't have a long-term competitive advantage, that can create an ongoing cost. She warned that it can divert resources away from part of the economy where they might otherwise generate high-value income. This, she said, risked creating a class of businesses that is reliant on business subsidies and there can be very effective in coming back for more. The former productivity commissioner, Gary Banks, described the Future Made in Australia as 'a fool's errand'. Mr Banks was clear that the scheme risks propping up political favourites. I don't know about you, but that's not the kind of Australia that I want to live in.

In addition to the Productivity Commission, independent economist Steven Hamilton believes Future Made in Australia is one of the big problems with industry policy. Mr Hamilton pointed out that this is a return to unlearnt lessons of the past. Even the union backers, like the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union, aren't happy about the role of Treasury in the Future Made in Australia, because of what they described as limited expertise.

Future Made in Australia was supposed to be the Albanese Labor government's winning economic agenda. Unfortunately for Mr Albanese, it is going no better than their economic plan in the first term. However, there is hope—and thank goodness, because, honestly, Australians deserve so much better than this. While the Albanese Labor government is preoccupied with keeping themselves at the centre of the economic universe, the coalition's plan will get Australia back on track. The coalition will ensure we cut the waste and restore efficient and effective government. We will play to Australia's strengths and ensure that our mining, manufacturing and agricultural industries go from strength to strength. We will get back to economic basics. That means reining in inflationary spending and dealing with the enormous amount of waste that this Labor government has created. The $13.7 billion that this government has wasted on tax production credits is just the tip of the iceberg. We'll decrease regulation and cut the red tape, the green tape and the black tape that is holding back business and, ultimately, keeping our country's economy from getting ahead.

We'll work to remove the burden of Labor's industrial relations agenda from businesses. We'll make sure that there are lower and fairer taxes for all Australians. We'll make sure our competition policy gives consumers and small businesses, instead of lobbyists and big corporations, a decent chance. Finally, we're committed to ensuring affordable and reliable energy—a world away from Labor's failing plan for a future made in Australia. The coalition is committed to implementing these simple and effective economic settings that will get our country back on track.

Dorinda Cox (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to reiterate the Greens' support for the Future Made in Australia (Production Tax Credits and Other Measures) Bill 2024. As the Greens spokesperson for resources, trade, First Nations and northern Australia, I can say that this is at the cross-section of four of my five portfolios and has my support to continue and build on this important work.

I stand here to congratulate the Albanese government today on this work. I want to place on the record that, in fact, we could go further, and, with the Greens in minority government in the 48th Parliament, this could actually be possible and would make a difference to all Australians. I'm a proud Western Australian senator, and I've lived and worked in our regional areas. In fact, during the early 2000s, I worked and lived in the Goldfields. I have friends and family, like many of you, who work in Western Australia or in other regional areas across Australia in the industry or who have done so previously. So my focus is on the cost-of-living crisis and how we can have a plan for the people and the planet by developing and forecasting a transition plan that enables us to seamlessly ensure that workers are not left behind.

Let's talk about public and private partnerships and their role in Future Made in Australia. What does the government actually mean when it talks about partnership between government and private companies? There is a critical need—and I want to say this loud and clear—to avoid the continuation of the 'billions for billionaires' scenario in this country. We need to be talking about community benefits, and we need to be crystal clear about what we actually mean when we talk about community benefits and how exactly the community will benefit from this. It's all well and good to talk about community benefit sharing, but, without the government or the community holding some type of direct interest in that, the benefits tend to be limited to employment or some tax revenue, and even that is minimal when governments are captured by big business in this country.

First Nations communities and regional FIFO towns are already aware of what this looks like. In some Western Australian areas, we are still failing to provide some of those community benefits, such as basic infrastructure needs like adequate schools and hospitals to service those communities. I hope that this bill actually starts to turn that around and fix what we saw under the previous coalition government.

One thing we can do is amend the sections of the current bill that govern the hydrogen production tax offset, or HPTO, and the critical minerals production tax incentive, the CMPTI. I'd like to foreshadow an amendment to these sections, which has been circulated in my name, to ensure that community benefit rules are actually consistent with and designed to realise the community benefit principles as stipulated in the Future Made in Australia Act 2024. As it stands, the way that these incentives actually work is that they don't have to be measured against the stated desired outcomes. I'd like to thank our friends in the union movement—and I have no shame in saying that—for pointing out this problem during the inquiry into this bill.

I'd also like to foreshadow an amendment to this bill to ensure that a recipient of the production tax credits provides regular public reporting on its performance to actually meet those community benefit principles in the original act that is now law. We could also legislate to ensure that the intended beneficiaries of those principles are able to seek and secure a remedy where there is an actual or potential breach of the principles by the recipients of those tax credits. Future Made in Australia has the potential to help us with the climate emergency. We could have reformed this critical minerals production tax incentive to include a gas phase-out mechanism so that the recipients of the tax benefit would also be incentivised to invest in low and zero emissions processes. Over here in the Greens, we will continue to fight to ensure that we can find a means of doing that.

We look forward to working with the government on how we can legislate in the future to ensure that the growth of the critical minerals processing sector is consistent with Australia's climate targets and obligations. This theoretical mechanism could include tiers or a taper rate so that recipients of the tax incentives would receive a portion of the benefit based on reductions in greenhouse gas emissions per unit of production. The mechanism could be designed to be more stringent over time so that the sector would be close to zero emissions, or as close as possible, by 2040.

Aside from the Future Made in Australia being able to help us with environmental issues, we have to make sure that it doesn't contribute to or accelerate those climate issues. Across the country, we are experiencing more floods, more fire and, in my home state of Western Australia, more cyclones right now. For that reason, we need to make sure that the critical minerals that are explicitly listed under this bill—and only those—should be eligible for the tax incentive over the life of that scheme. Being such a wide-reaching and important initiative, Future Made in Australia should include an explicit statutory review process to assess the outcomes from the hydrogen production tax offset and the critical minerals production incentive scheme to enable adjustment of the scheme if necessary. I foreshadow an amendment along those lines.

I also want to foreshadow an amendment to schedule 3 to establish mandatory consultation processes and benefit-sharing agreements for projects operating on First Nations land that receive these tax credits. This would align with the intent of the HPTO's community benefit rules. The consultation processes would have to align with the principles of free, prior and informed consent, as described in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The bill contains provisions for equity partnerships, but it also contains provisions for a large amount of government money ending up in private hands. I can't help but wonder if the balance is, in fact, out of whack.

I hold the First Nations and resources portfolios, as I have already said, and I get to see how these two worlds interact every day—mostly from a negative frame when it comes to the broken cultural heritage laws in this country. This is critical because we need to start thinking about how equity stakes in projects like these can and will actually work. So the red tape, the green tape and the black tape that those in this chamber refer to can all be solved if we have the formula right, giving First Nations people the power to increase their participation in decision-making processes and to benefit directly. Imagine that—First Nations people in this country actually getting themselves out of poverty. Wow!

I have recently learnt that—and this was also part of the First Nations Clean Energy Network work that's being done—in Canada, First Nations people have a 20 per cent stake in the electricity grid. In Australia, their stake is less than one per cent. Future Made in Australia is supposed to supercharge renewable energy in Australia—like it says on the tin—and, if it's going to provide an economic leg-up for First Nations people as we've been told, then that number needs to be a lot bigger. I welcome the extension of the role of Indigenous Business Australia in relation to that and I look forward to seeing how that will come to fruition in the future.

We need big-picture approaches like the Future Made in Australia, but we also need balance to shift more towards community benefit. The idea that more industry automatically means more community benefit is outdated and simply wrong. The era of billions for billionaires, as I have already said, has to end in this country. The literature that occupies the Future Made in Australia bills is all about renewable energy, and we, the Greens, are great supporters of that. But the package does nothing to reduce the subsidies given to the fossil fuel industry, and it may have even provided new investment for gas companies if we hadn't continued to push the government. That's what it means to have Greens in power—it will absolutely stop us from creating those backdoor deals.

The literature talks a lot about benefits for First Nations communities and where the equity is in those projects, but there's also a need for the federal government to increase its own equity stakes in projects. That's the only way to ensure that the Australian community gets its share, apart from more equitable tax and royalty schemes, which seem to be in the too-hard basket in this country. We need to make sure that we are increasing the big stakes in our resources projects, just like they do in Norway and Saudi Arabia. Why is Australia shying away from this? We seem determined to give away our stuff for free.

On a day when we're here to talk about the national agenda on Closing the Gap, First Nations people are the ones who are missing out—or, in fact, being blamed for some of the outcomes. The lack of investment is the thing that I've heard about here. We are holding up projects. But, alongside some of the minority Australians who also live and work in some of those regional and remote communities, they are being overtaken by the extractive industry and simply being left to clean up some of the mess, or even worse. These folks are trying to live through an absolute nightmare. Their water is not swimmable. It is not drinkable. It is contaminated. That includes for First Nations people who are trying to hunt for bush food on their land.

The climate conditions are becoming worse. Some places above the 26th parallel in this country, in Northern Australia, will be unliveable in a decade. The climate crisis will be worse, and these communities are so close to the epicentre of these projects. It is why we should bring all this and the rest of Australia who are missing out when government forget these resources belong to all of us. They belong to all Australians, not to just the few who are banking the billions of dollars that they are making off this.

As I said at the start of this speech, I commend the big-picture thinking of this government, leading Australia to have a plan for future. But I also have to point out the problems that are caused by the outdated mindset of thinking that we are just a quarry—that we can continue to dig and ship. In fact, that concept should be dead. In some ways, Future Made in Australia is a lost opportunity, but we must think past the influence of fossil-fuel producers and extractors in this country. Investment will come if we have the right formula and are placing community at the centre of this work. That's the way we should be moving.

Australians are already doing it tough in this country, and we hear that right around the horseshoe here, where people talk up cost-of-living pressures. But do they know what that really means? It's our job to make sure there is a plan in place so that all Australians can see themselves investing in a future plan—in a future that is truly made in Australia. It will be one that will not compromise the environment that they live in, in which we are consistent with protecting people and the planet and doing all we can to ensure that, for people who are doing it tough, we are trying to turn that on its head.

I move the Australian Greens' second reading amendment:

At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate:

(a) notes the importance of benefit sharing and community consultation requirements for resources industries, including adherence to the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and the principle of free, prior and informed consent; and

(b) calls on the Government to:

(i) establish mandatory consultation processes and benefit sharing agreements for projects operating on First Nations land that receive production tax credits,

(ii) ensure the bill's community benefit rules align with the community benefit principles as stipulated in the Future Made in Australia Act 2024, with clear transparency, accountability and reporting mechanisms; and

(iii) implement a statutory review process to enable assessment and adjustment over the life of these schemes.

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I also rise to speak on the Future Made in Australia (Production Tax Credits and Other Measures) Bill 2024. I think we need to be very clear here because Senator Cox, a member of the Australian Greens, has just well and truly set out what the bill is about and, more than that, the danger that the Australian Greens governing in minority government with Labor after the next election poses to this country. It is very well known that the coalition will not be supporting this bill, and I will take you through the reasons as to why shortly.

But I have to say for anybody listening into this debate, the Australian Greens, in relation to a bill that affects the mining industry in this country, say this—and this is a direct quote from Senator Cox in this Senate: 'I stand here today to congratulate the Albanese government on this work.' What she means there is 'on this bill'. Then she says this: 'And I want to place on the record that in fact—' and this is the dangerous part for any Australians who think that a minority government may in some way benefit Australia. This is what the Australian Greens have said: 'We could go further and, with the Greens in minority government in the 48th parliament, this is actually possible and will make a difference to all Australians.' Senator Cox then went on to say, yet again, 'having the Greens in power'. I hope that is a wake-up call for all Australians, and I say this to the mining companies back in Western Australia: this bill does not do what you were told it would do and you were in fact, yet again, sold a pup. The good news is they've woken up to that fact.

To anybody listening: this bill will go through, but it will not go through with the support of the coalition. Why? Because we bother to read the legislation, we bother to talk to people and we understand that this is merely going to add more red and green tape to the mining industry—as if they need that! But, worse than that, it will go through with the support of the Australian Greens who, let's face it, would like to see the end of the mining industry in this country.

Honourable senators: Hear, hear!

There you go! I just stated that the Australian Greens want to see the end of the mining industry in this country, and there were Australian Greens in this chamber who said, 'Hear, hear!' to that statement.

Let me remind Australians about the mining industry. It is the backbone of the Australian economy. Particularly in Western Australia, it is what kept us going during COVID-19, when we had to make the very tough decision to close our borders. If you like the living standards that we have had, you probably need to say thank you, in part, to the mining industry in Australia, who have paid billions and billions and billions of dollars in both taxes and royalties to governments around Australia. We, as a government, have been able to utilise those billions and billions of dollars in royalties to provide the services that Australia expects.

The Greens have made it clear—and they will vote with the Australian Labor Party on this bill today—they want to see the end of the mining industry in Australia. But, more than that, they're already starting to make threats to the Australian people in relation to the power they will wield. Mr Bandt has already made it clear that they want a cabinet position in the next minority government—why stop at one, I say, when you could have two or three?—under Mr Albanese.

An honourable senator: That's right! You're so right!

You can see now that the Australian Greens are interjecting, 'That's right.' When the Greens and Labor sit next to each other on this bill, I ask all Australians to consider why they would support this bill, given that everything they say and do is to end the mining industry in Australia. Don't kill the golden goose that lays the golden eggs that quite literally sustain the Australian economy.

Let's look at the myths behind this bill, in any event. The production tax credits bill, when you bother to read it and to talk to stakeholders, will not deliver widespread tax relief. It won't do that. In fact, if and when it goes through, it will not provide a cent of tax relief to businesses for years and years. For Australian small businesses, who are being decimated by this government, it will not deliver a cent. In fact, it will cost taxpayers billions of dollars well beyond the 2020s, well beyond the 2030s and into the 2040s. That is a direct cost to the Australian taxpayer—as if you could afford another cost to you at this point in time.

Let's have a look at what Labor's impact analysis says. It says that just to apply for these tax credits will cost $100,000 in the first year. For a business to even apply for these credits, it is going to cost $100,000 in the first year and hundreds of thousands of dollars in annual costs over the duration of their operation. So it's a cost to business, but why is this? Firstly, again, read the bill. The government is tying businesses in red tape just to try and access these credits. For example, just to receive these tax credits, a business has to jump through significant red tape with the Clean Energy Regulator, with the Department of Industry, Science and Resources and with ARENA, and that's before you even get to the Australian Taxation Office.

Secondly, and far more insidiously, it is that businesses seeking to access these credits—they can now actually read the legislation, and this is in the legislation—will be held hostage to the same community benefits principles that are embedded in Labor's entire Future Made in Australia plan. That's there in this legislation. But what are these? What Labor are trying to hide—but, again, they've woken up to this fact—and what they are leaving open is plenty of options for the Treasurer to act on these with merely the stroke of a pen.

What Mr Albanese is also not telling Australians is that access to the production tax credits—which are wrapping you in more red tape, which have several hurdles that you need to get through before you can apply for them and which Labor's own impact analysis shows will cost you around $100,000 just to apply for—means a company may need a union agreement, a reconciliation plan and social procurement agreements. So, yes, it is correct that Mr Albanese, once the Australian Labor Party side with the Australian Greens—those big fans of mining in this country—to vote this through, can use this policy to allow unions to make further inroads into our mining and resources sector. That is bad news for Australia, but it is also terrible news for my home state of Western Australia.

Businesses have appeared before inquiries into this bill, and they have warned that, by having to include union agreements, First Nations involvement, training requirements, environmental and climate objectives and tax requirements, there is a huge risk to productivity and investment. If there is a huge risk to productivity and investment, that is a huge risk, ultimately, to the lifestyle that we lead in Australia and to the Australian taxpayer. Business groups are now likening this bill to Queensland's best-practice industry conditions, otherwise known as BPIC arrangements, and social procurement rules that—it is a fact—allow the criminal elements of the CFMEU to embed themselves in infrastructure and procurement in Queensland. And, as we know, Queensland Treasury modelling has estimated that BPIC's increases to project costs put them up by 25 per cent.

Unions themselves have been very upfront in relation to what they might do with the community benefits principles once this bill goes through. When asked about the community benefits principles, the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union told the Senate Economics Legislation Committee that they think all jobs born from the Future Made in Australia investments must be unionised. That is not me talking. That is not industry talking. That is actually the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union, who are clearly on record stating they think all jobs born from Future Made in Australia investments must be unionised. So, when you hear Mr Albanese talking up his production tax credit policy as a great boost for my home state of Western Australia, keep in mind, in particular, what Mr Albanese is not telling you and what actually is in the legislation.

As I said, a Senate inquiry has looked into this bill, and it has shed even more light on the community benefits principles and the uncertainty surrounding them. In their report, coalition Senators Dean Smith, from my home state of Western Australia, and Andrew Bragg noted that the lack of clarity regarding community benefits principles may significantly increase project costs. How does that help anybody in Australia? In fact, Senator Smith questioned witnesses about their knowledge of a union agreement requirement. This is what Senator Smith said:

The AMWU has told this committee, when it was considering the Future Made in Australia Act, that these requirements—the community benefit principles—would require a requirement for a union agreement. Is that your understanding of the community benefit principles, and would you agree with that?

The Minerals Council of Australia would be alive to the risks of this to the mining industry. They have been very emphatic about the risk that these agreements would pose, but they also noted, on top of that, the duplicative administrative burden in their submission to the inquiry. This is what they said:

The Australian minerals industry produces critical minerals utilising world leading sustainability standards, including best practice environmental management and community engagement.

They then said:

… there are already extensive and rigorous approvals process that mining and mineral processing projects must adhere to makes this an unnecessary and duplicative feature of the CMPTI.

Senator Bragg and Senator Smith, in their report, also noted:

Treasury acknowledged during the inquiry hearing that the lack of detail contained within the bill, leads to high compliance costs for businesses—with as much as … $100,000 in its very first year.

The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry said:

The additional engagement processes required by the community benefits principles parallel existing requirements of the planning and approval processes. This is simply adding a further layer of administration and compliance, without any clear benefit.

The Chamber of Minerals and Energy of Western Australia said that the community benefits principles would provide no benefit whilst providing additional costs to businesses. They said:

Introducing CBPs with separate reporting requirements under the FMA will introduce additional compliance burden and duplication without enhancing the benefits to Australian communities.

There you have it. There is a bill. It will go through the Senate with the support of the Australian Greens. It doesn't do what Mr Albanese told the Australian people it would do. In fact, it does the opposite. There is the additional compliance burden, the additional regulatory cost, which is clearly stated in Labor's own impact analysis. It says you will actually possibly do more to harm our industry, with additional red tape, than you will to benefit it. But I think the most telling part of this is that the bill will go through with the support of the Australian Greens, and they've made it clear that, if there's a minority government in this country, they will make further changes in this regard.

Quite frankly, for a party that is doing everything in its power to destroy the mining industry in this country, God help Australia.

Tammy Tyrrell (Tasmania, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They say good things come in threes, and in Tasmania we have a triple blessing of good things. You might just be thinking of the prize-winning wine that Senator Colbeck spoke of last week, the dangerously good Anvers chocolate and our sensational seafood, and you'd would be right in every way. Our food and wine are second to none. The whole world knows just how good it is.

The world also wants energy that has the same Tasmanian clean and green qualities. So how can we do it? How do you make an energy source that is easy to store, easy to use and safe to ship? For Tassie, it's green methanol— methanol that's made without the use of hydrocarbons. Green methanol is the low-carbon fuel that can replace petrol and diesel in engines, big and small, from motorbikes to tractors and trucks, and bigger things too, like the ships that cross Bass Strait. The engines in these ships can now use lots of different fuels, from natural gas to diesel, and methanol too.

With 365 methanol-powered container ships on order across the world, methanol is the future in shipping. With this shift, methanol is fast becoming an important fuel made and sold around the world. Tasmania can be a player in this growing market. We have a lot in our favour—not just wine, chocolate and seafood but also the three essential ingredients for methanol. To make green methanol, you need lots of renewable energy, lots of water and heaps of biomass. Tasmania is 100 per cent self-sufficient in renewable energy, with a 200 per cent goal for 2040. We have plenty of water and endless biomass from the wood waste from our sustainable forestry plantations—biomass that would otherwise be left to rot or be burned, wasted and lost.

The magic that makes methanol starts with electrolysis, by making hydrogen and oxygen—like we did at school, with wires from a battery and a glass of water. Just like at school, you collect the hydrogen from one wire and the oxygen from the other. The next bit is where the clever stuff starts. The biomass is gasified with a green oxygen to make a syngas, which is then combined with green hydrogen to make green methanol, which can be sold into local and international markets and can make money if the price is right.

Plants that make methanol need easy access to power, water and wood waste and a port to export through. We have two planned green methanol projects in Tasmania—one with ABEL Energy's Bell Bay power project, on the site of the Bell Bay Power Station, where demolition work is underway, and a second with HIF Asia Pacific's project, which is 30 kilometres from Burnie, on the north-west coast. Between them, they will create 500 full-time jobs and many hundreds more during the construction phase. They are jobs that will make a big difference to hardworking communities that have done it tough for many years.

I remember when the pulp mill on the north-west coast closed. The loss of jobs was hard on the community, but the coast also lost some of its identity that day. It was an area that was known for its industry, and I'm not sure the north-west coast ever recovered from that. That's why projects like the HIF e-fuel plant are so important. There's a domino effect on the local community whereby it opens up training opportunities, more money goes to small businesses because more people have better-paying jobs and more kids participate in sport and after-school activities because their parents can finally afford for them to do them. That's what these projects would mean for Tasmania. They can bring new hope to make a real change—the jobs we need in a cost-of-living crisis.

I know what it's like to land a good job—the real change it makes after years of struggling to pay your bills and the way it lifts a weight from your shoulders. It makes people stand a little taller and smile a bit wider. You see the change when people start to believe in themselves. I want that for the people in my communities. That's why investment in these big projects is so important. These companies have committed millions of dollars to the two projects. Both come with a huge degree of risk in both financing and getting the plants up and running. If they are going to compete in the world market, we need the hydrogen production tax offset in place ASAP. The offset will make the difference.

To see Tasmania realise its potential and to support its community and our export earnings, we must also look at the critical minerals production tax offset—it's another part of this bill that can make a real difference to Tasmanian miners. The Dolphin Tungsten Mine, on King Island, has the largest high-grade tungsten deposits in the Western world, and it's one of the largest tungsten reserves in Australia. Reopened by Group 6 Metals less than a year ago, it still has 2.7 million tonnes of its tungsten reserves left to mine. The processing and refining offsets in the bill might just make the difference for Dolphin to reach its potential.

The opposition doesn't support this bill. Why are the Tasmanian Liberal senators afraid of backing something that will keep companies investing in Tasmania? Once again, they're toeing the party line instead of voting for something that will help the people they're supposed to represent. This bill can renew industry and bring hundreds of jobs to Tasmania—jobs that bring much-needed cash into our families, communities and local businesses. I fully support this bill and what it will bring to Tasmania.

(Quorum formed)

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

Today is a very important day for Australia and for our national interests. The passage of the Future Made in Australia (Production Tax Credits and Other Measures) Bill 2024will set in place the final legislative building block in the foundations of a future made in Australia. The Albanese government is focused and determined to build a better Australian economy and stronger Australian industries and to create and protect good blue-collar jobs. The world economy is changing. Countries around the world are grappling with how to move to low- and no-emissions industries. They are playing a more active role in shoring up their manufacturing and industrial capability, and those countries are playing a greater role in attracting and creating the vital and significant investment that is needed in these new and changing times. That's because the nature and the scale of the challenge demands it, as does the nature and the scale of Australia's opportunity.

The reason that we in the Albanese government advance Future Made in Australia and, alongside it, the largest pro-manufacturing package in Australian history is grounded in our security—security for Australia in an uncertain world and in our region, which is now the subject of more contest and more competition than at any time in recent history. For Australia to be secure in strategic and economic terms Australians and Australian firms need to have more capability. Australians and Australian firms need to be able to do more things here than simply be exporters of resources and commodities. They need to make more things here in Australia to build on and back our mining and resources sectors.

The Albanese government's intention, unambiguously is to reindustrialise our regions and our outer suburbs by refining value-added Australian metals here and making more complex manufacturing products in Australia, and to include those former manufacturing strongholds in the task of building Australia's future and, in the process, delivering good jobs in new firms and factories in industrial and mining regions and suburbs across Australia. Recent events demonstrate that the world is becoming a more turbulent place where violence and trade coercion and protectionism mean that Australia's interests and our progress cannot be taken for granted. Complacency is our enemy. Does anyone sensibly think that Australia and Australians can be secure and prosper if we don't seek to reindustrialise and diversify our economy?

Our opponents—Mr Dutton's Liberals and Nationals, who will vote against this vital piece of national interest legislation—are complacent, lazy and partisan. For all their fake patriotism, when it really matters, when the security interests of Australia and the good jobs of regional and outer suburban blue-collar workers are at stake, they will as always put the Liberal and National parties' interests first and the national interest a distant second. These are the Liberals and Nationals who weakened our security interest in the Pacific and isolated Australia in the world, who cheered on the decline of Australian manufacturing in the lost decade of the Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison governments, killing tens of thousands of good Australian jobs in the process, and who now want to undermine the task of national reconstruction in the face of such an obvious national interest imperative. Just when Australia needs politicians to pull together in their interests, you will hear the same old tired, complacent, lazy and reckless lines from these entitled self-centred ideologues. You will hear deliberately misleading slogans like 'Billions for billionaires', gainsaying our national interest for utterly partisan, shallow and self-interested reasons.

Colleagues, this is a simple choice between political interest or national interest. It's a choice between good jobs and economic opportunity in the regions or rust belt decline. Peter Dutton's Liberals and Nationals have become too reckless in their complacency. They are reckless about the security questions that are central to the national interest and central to this piece of legislation. This week's intransigence over A Future Made in Australia is stock standard behaviour for a party that has lost its way. Their only message, whether it's from Senator Cash in her contribution earlier or from Mr Taylor's pronouncements about these questions, is rooted in old ideology of the past. It's basically: 'Pull your socks up and hope for the best.' That's their message for the mining and resources sector. That's their message for the manufacturing sector and for manufacturing workers. That's their message to international investors who want to bring some of the world's best manufacturing capability to Australia: 'Pull your socks up and hope for the best.'

The Albanese government in contrast is focused on backing blue-collar jobs and backing Australian manufacturing in Central Queensland, in the Hunter Valley, in the Pilbara and in Western Australia, in South Australia, in the Upper Spencer Gulf and in Whyalla, in the great industrial regions of Victoria and in northern Tasmania. Australia has a significant comparative advantage that can help us set Australia up for future decades and set up our regional and outer suburban communities for good jobs and a prosperous economic age. In wind and solar, Australia has the world's cheapest and most abundant renewable energy resources, backed by batteries and backed by gas. Australia has every critical mineral that's required and in high demand in this changing global economy—all of the critical minerals in great abundance—like lithium for batteries and the copper that's used in wires in every corner of the world. We have a world-leading mining sector, which is a critical contributor to the global economy and to global supply chains. It is a crucial employer in our regions, one that is vital for our economic and regional security. Australia has a highly skilled workforce and the world-class training institutions to make sure our people are match fit for the opportunities knocking at our door.

With our industrial capability and our business know-how, we have a long history of making great things here, be that aluminium in Gladstone and the Hunter or steel in the Illawarra. Our regional communities are well set up to benefit from this economic change. What all of those communities that I just mentioned need is a government that actually backs them, and that's what Future Made in Australia is about. Strangely enough, our opponents in the coalition love to talk the production tax credit down on the east coast, but, when they go to Western Australia, they go strangely quiet. The Chamber of Minerals and Energy of Western Australia knows how good support for critical minerals would be for Western Australia. In a submission to the bill's Senate inquiry, they called the introduction of this bill necessary.

This is an opportunity that will come only once this decade, a train that will leave the station only once, and it will take Australians and Australian institutions—businesses, investors, governments, unions, workers, communities, First Nations communities and regional communities—working together in the national interest, not wandering around looking for some partisan argument in every corner of the country, to set Australia up for the future. We are in a period in our history when that is what is required.

The Albanese government wants to make sure that communities are hosting new industries and that those communities that host new industries and new manufacturing benefit. That is why a key part of the Future Made in Australia agenda is the community benefit principles. It should be an uncontroversial proposition that, where firms and regions receive investment, regions and regional communities should benefit from that investment. For most Australians, that is not a controversial proposition. But, again, it's something that Peter Dutton's Liberals and Nationals are allergic to. They are allergic to good jobs, allergic to investment in the national interest and allergic to Australian achievement when they're not in government, and I think that's probably what this is all about. Where there are tough times, they're johnny-on-the-spot, but where there is a requirement for Australians to work together, they are strangely absent. You wouldn't want Peter Dutton's Liberals and Nationals to have to be relied upon in the national interest, because they are not up to it, and their intransigence and their opposition to this bill demonstrate it.

The Senate economics committee reviewed the bill and recommended that it be passed. Our Future Made in Australia agenda is all about making Australia indispensable to our partners' net zero transformations. We'll do that by attracting and enabling private investment, not replacing it. Well-targeted public investment is an important and substantial part of our plan, but it is only a small part of what is required. The Minerals Council of Australia understand that. They support the critical minerals production tax incentive, because they say it is a positive step toward attracting investment in the critical minerals industry. We'll continue to consult widely on the design of the community benefit principles to make sure that they meet the needs of regional communities for the benefit of our community.

This legislation is our chance, Australia's chance, to bring these pieces together—our productive workforce, our community needs, our investor community, our critical minerals and government support in the national interest. That's what this legislation and production tax credits are all about.

This bill does three main things. Firstly, it will establish a critical minerals tax incentive worth 10 per cent of the value of relevant mineral processing and refining costs for the production of any of Australia's 31 critical minerals. By adding more value to our critical minerals here before shipping them offshore, we have the opportunity to create tens of thousands of blue-collar jobs, strengthen our regional economies and build Australia's capability in the region.

Secondly, this bill will incentivise the production of green hydrogen—that is, hydrogen made using renewable energy. It's a key energy source to help energy-intensive sectors move away from coal and gas. The hydrogen tax incentive will be worth $2 for every kilogram of renewable hydrogen produced by eligible projects that have reached a financial investment decision before July 2030. The best thing about these incentives is that they will only be paid upon successful delivery—payment by results. It is not a free for all.

Thirdly, it will expand the role and remit of Indigenous Business Australia to help support more investment in First Nations communities. The passage of this bill sets in place the final building block in the foundations of Future Made in Australia. It is the right thing for Australia. It is the right thing for Australia's national interest. I commend the bill to the Senate.

Jess Walsh (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question in front of the chamber is that the second reading amendment moved by Senator Cox be agreed to. So it seems that a division will be required, but I suggest that we defer that division, it being very close to 11.50 am, at which time the Senate will suspend. Senator Smith.

Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm just curious to know when we will have the division. Will it be after the suspension, or will it be at the conclusion of the Closing the Gap statements, which could be much later this afternoon, if not this evening?

Jess Walsh (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You're correct that it will be later if the preference of the chamber is to proceed with the second reading amendment division. We can do that, noting that it's very close to 11.50.

Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm happy to be corrected, but I'm not familiar with this sort of practice having been undertaken before. There's a division before the chair. There is a suspension coming up, but we are not at the suspension, so I suggest that we proceed to the division in the normal way.

Jess Walsh (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

One thing for the convenience of the chamber is that there is an order of the Senate. The order says:

The sitting of the Senate will be suspended from 11.50 am till the ringing of the bells to enable senators to attend the Prime Minister's statement on Closing the Gap in the House of Representatives.

Minister, I'm advised by the clerk that it would suit the chamber to proceed with the division.

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

I suppose the proposition is a series of propositions. I understand what has been advanced about it being convenient for the Senate, given the small amount of time between when this division was first called for and the 11.50 am hard marker that the order provides for. I'm very disappointed that I didn't get to make the rest of my contribution.

Jess Walsh (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Resume your seat, Minister. The sitting of the Senate will be suspended from 11.50 am until the ringing of the bells to enable senators to attend the Prime Minister's statement on Closing the Gap.

Sitting suspended from 11:50 to 12:45