Future Made in Australia
My question is to the Minister representing the Treasurer, Senator Gallagher. My question goes to the definition and application of 'comparative advantage' within the Future Made in Australia bill. Could the minister elaborate on how 'comparative advantage' will be interpreted in the context of this legislation, and outline the criteria and metrics that were used to measure and assess it across priority sectors?
Senator GALLAGHER (Australian Capital Territory—Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Finance, Minister for Women, Manager of Government Business in the Senate and Vice-President of the Executive Council) I thank Senator Van for the interest in the Future Made in Australia legislation. It is important legislation and I'm hopeful that, when it comes to the Senate, we'll be able to convince senators to vote for it. I understand those opposite are not going to support it, but we can add that to the long list of issues that the opposition don't support.
The legislation will be guided by principles. I don't have the legislation in front of me, but it will set out the guidelines, it will build on the advice that the Treasurer has developed—that is on the Treasury website—and look at opportunities where we do have comparative advantage. I think there's been a long discussion about trying to be good at everything and whether that's really an approach we should take, or whether we should assess support and areas for government and private sector investment to be based on the advantages available to Australia—in particular, Australian industries where we have a comparative advantage. It's not about backing every opportunity but about making sure we are using our strengths and the natural resources we have to make sure that we are maximising those opportunities.
That's why it is focused on production tax credits in green hydrogen and critical minerals and some of those other areas that you've seen for investment that are being led by the climate change minister—also, an innovation fund so that we can look at how we can support innovation. That's a big area of interest, I know, for the private sector. There is also the mapping of and understanding the reach of our natural resources, which was also funded in this budget.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Van, a first supplementary?
Should Australia need to depend on foreign controlled IP, skills or manufacturing capabilities in the sectors identified under the bill, how will the government ensure that our national interests and economic sovereignty are not compromised?
Senator GALLAGHER (Australian Capital Territory—Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Finance, Minister for Women, Manager of Government Business in the Senate and Vice-President of the Executive Council) Obviously, our national interest is at the forefront of every decision that we take. I think every government would take that approach. All of the decisions that are made under the Future Made in Australia will first and foremost have our national interest taken into consideration. But this really is about supporting the private sector and leaning in where we can—particularly in the early stages, where other support might not be available—to give the private sector a crack at what they're saying they can do. This comes with some risk to government. We acknowledge that, but we are absolutely focused on attracting investment into Australia, the renewable energy superpower work that Minister Bowen is leading, strengthening and adding value to our resources work that Minister King's doing, innovation in industry that Minister Husic is doing
Senator VAN (Victoria) Can the minister clarify how the government intends to prioritise Australian IP, manufacturing capability and workforce skills against the challenges of lower labour costs in the enormous economies scale of our foreign competitors?
Senator GALLAGHER (Australian Capital Territory—Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Finance, Minister for Women, Manager of Government Business in the Senate and Vice-President of the Executive Council) Yes. Senator Van, in that question, summed up a number of the issues that the government is currently considering around how you link up skills, industry policy and investment policy to make sure that we are maximising the opportunity for Australia. There is obviously the national interest approach and the national security assessment—all of those things that we are looking at to make sure that, where government is going to lean in, there are principles that underpin that and they're clear not only to all of us here but to the investor community as well. This is a challenge—I accept that, Senator Van—but it's an important one. We think that the act, itself, will provide transparency and information about how we will make decisions, and further assessments are being done that sit underneath that legislation. Yes, it is an issue and we recognise that.
