This bill became law on Dec 10th, 2024.
Budget, tax & economy
The Act sets up a national test for major government backing, aimed at steering public money toward projects that can unlock large private investment in Australia's national interest.
Australia lacked a clear national test for major public backing, leaving decisions about big subsidies and finance without consistent checks on national interest, net zeroThe target of cutting emissions so any remaining pollution is balanced out, which this bill treats as a key policy goal for funding decisions., or economic securityThe idea that Australia should back industries and supply chains that make the economy more resilient and less exposed to disruption.. The bill creates that test, lets the TreasurerThe minister who can trigger industry assessments and has a central role in deciding how the framework is used. assess industries, and requires agencies to weigh local benefits and publish who gets support.
Australia’s Future Made in AustraliaThe government policy agenda this bill turns into law, aimed at using public support to help build new industry, clean energy and supply chains in Australia. agenda emerged as the government argued that major public backing for industry lacked a clear national-interest test just as the global shift to net zeroThe target of cutting emissions so any remaining pollution is balanced out, which this bill treats as a key policy goal for funding decisions. and a tougher strategic environment were reshaping investment decisions. The bill responded by creating that test, requiring agencies to weigh local and economic-security benefits and publish support recipients, then moved through Parliament despite integrity criticisms before receiving Royal AssentThe final step that turned the bill into an Act, meaning it became law. in December 2024.
Critics said the bill risks becoming a big-spending, government-picks-winners scheme that adds bureaucracy without fixing the real problems holding manufacturing back, especially high energy costs, weak productivity and business costs. That case was pressed most strongly by Coalition speakers and some crossbenchThe group of MPs or senators who are neither in government nor the main opposition, and who often move their own amendments. opponents, while Kate Chaney backed the idea in principle but warned the framework needed stronger guardrails, transparency and expert checks.
Jim Chalmers MP introduced this bill. In the House final vote, support came from Labor, some crossbenchThe group of MPs or senators who are neither in government nor the main opposition, and who often move their own amendments. members; opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, some crossbenchThe group of MPs or senators who are neither in government nor the main opposition, and who often move their own amendments. members.
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 10 Dec 2024
Final passage
Recorded final vote
3 counted final-passage votes were recorded.
Passage speed
160 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
The Act sets up a national test for major government backing, aimed at steering public money toward projects that can unlock large private investment in Australia's national interest.
The TreasurerThe minister who can trigger industry assessments and has a central role in deciding how the framework is used. can order public assessments of any industry to check whether it fits Australia’s net zeroThe target of cutting emissions so any remaining pollution is balanced out, which this bill treats as a key policy goal for funding decisions. or economic securityThe idea that Australia should back industries and supply chains that make the economy more resilient and less exposed to disruption. goals and where private investment barriers could be removed.
Agencies and government-owned companies must weigh local jobs, skills, community benefits, supply chains and tax behaviour before giving covered grants, loans, guarantees or equity support.
Future Made in AustraliaThe government policy agenda this bill turns into law, aimed at using public support to help build new industry, clean energy and supply chains in Australia. support cannot be used for coal, oil or gas extraction, related extraction infrastructure, or direct financing whose only purpose is using those fossil fuels.
Government entities and companies that hand out covered support must publish yearly reports naming recipients and showing how much support was given or committed.
This Act establishes the National Interest Framework, a framework to support the consideration of, and decision‑making in relation to, significant public investment that unlocks private investment at scale in the national interest.Future Made in Australia Act 2024 final Act text
The Minister may, after consulting appropriate Ministers, direct the Secretary to conduct a sector assessment. A sector assessment is an assessment of a sector of the Australian economy conducted for the purpose of analysing the extent to which the sector aligns with the National Interest Framework in one of those streams, as well as opportunities to address barriers to private investment, in the national interest, in relation to the sector.Future Made in Australia Act 2024 final Act text
A person or body deciding whether certain support (known as Future Made in Australia support) should be provided by the Commonwealth, a Commonwealth entity or a Commonwealth company must have regard to the community benefit principles. Such support may include a grant, loan, indemnity, guarantee, warranty, investment of money or equity investment.Future Made in Australia Act 2024 final Act text
Future Made in Australia support must not be provided by the Commonwealth, a Commonwealth entity or a Commonwealth company for any of the following activities:Future Made in Australia Act 2024 final Act text
(3) A report described in subsection (1) or (2) that relates to a Commonwealth entity or Commonwealth company must include:Future Made in Australia Act 2024 final Act text
Context
Australia’s Future Made in AustraliaThe government policy agenda this bill turns into law, aimed at using public support to help build new industry, clean energy and supply chains in Australia. agenda emerged as the government argued that major public backing for industry lacked a clear national-interest test just as the global shift to net zeroThe target of cutting emissions so any remaining pollution is balanced out, which this bill treats as a key policy goal for funding decisions. and a tougher strategic environment were reshaping investment decisions. The bill responded by creating that test, requiring agencies to weigh local and economic-security benefits and publish support recipients, then moved through Parliament despite integrity criticisms before receiving Royal AssentThe final step that turned the bill into an Act, meaning it became law. in December 2024.
Government introduces a national-interest test for major industry backing
The TreasurerThe minister who can trigger industry assessments and has a central role in deciding how the framework is used. introduced the bill as part of the Future Made in AustraliaThe government policy agenda this bill turns into law, aimed at using public support to help build new industry, clean energy and supply chains in Australia. agenda, arguing Australia needed a more disciplined way to direct large public support in a world being reshaped by net zeroThe target of cutting emissions so any remaining pollution is balanced out, which this bill treats as a key policy goal for funding decisions. and strategic competition.
Hansard ↗Opposition attacks the policy over integrity and subsidy concerns
During the second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle. debate, the opposition sought to block the bill and argued the wider Future Made in AustraliaThe government policy agenda this bill turns into law, aimed at using public support to help build new industry, clean energy and supply chains in Australia. spending program raised integrity concerns and had been criticised by several economists.
Hansard ↗House passes the bill after government amendments
The House agreed to amendmentA proposed change to the bill text or to the motion approving the bill, often used to tighten rules or push a different policy view. packages and then passed the bill, sending the proposed national-interest framework to the Senate.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Senate passes the bill with amendments
The Senate agreed to the bill at second and third reading with government-backed amendments, clearing the way for the chambers to settle a final text.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Parliament passes the bill
The House agreed to the Senate amendments and both chambers finished the bill in the same form, completing its parliamentary passage.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Future Made in AustraliaThe government policy agenda this bill turns into law, aimed at using public support to help build new industry, clean energy and supply chains in Australia. framework becomes law
Royal AssentThe final step that turned the bill into an Act, meaning it became law. turned the bill into an Act, formally establishing the framework for assessing major Commonwealth support against national-interest and transparency requirements.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Legislative route
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle., opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle. moved
Referred to Committee (04/07/2024): Senate Economics Legislation Committee; Committee report (06/09/2024)
Referred to committee
APH bill page notesThe bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Recorded vote: 53 to 85.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle., meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle. agreed to
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Consideration in detail debate
Recorded vote: 82 to 54.
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber. Later message exchanges with the other chamber were still recorded afterwards.
Third reading agreed to
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle., opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle. moved
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Recorded vote: 33 to 23.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle., meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle. agreed to
Recorded vote: 33 to 24.
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Third reading agreed to :
The House dealt with Senate amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the bill in the same form.
Consideration of Senate message
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Finally passed both Houses
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe final step that turned the bill into an Act, meaning it became law., turning the bill into an Act.
Key criticism
Critics said the bill risks becoming a big-spending, government-picks-winners scheme that adds bureaucracy without fixing the real problems holding manufacturing back, especially high energy costs, weak productivity and business costs. That case was pressed most strongly by Coalition speakers and some crossbenchThe group of MPs or senators who are neither in government nor the main opposition, and who often move their own amendments. opponents, while Kate Chaney backed the idea in principle but warned the framework needed stronger guardrails, transparency and expert checks.
Criticism ranged from outright opposition to narrower governance and review concerns.
Government picking winners and wasting money
Opponents argued the bill gives ministers and agencies too much scope to channel public money into politically chosen projects, risking pork-barrelling, inflation and weaker private investment rather than building a competitive manufacturing base.
Does not tackle the real barriers facing industry
Several critics said the bill will not solve the main reasons manufacturers struggle, such as high energy prices, red tape, tax burdens and low productivity, and may direct support to the wrong sectors instead of areas where Australia has a stronger advantage.
Too few guardrails, transparency and review checks
Conditional supporters warned the framework needed tighter rules on how sectors and projects are chosen, stronger reporting, and an independent review so support is guided by evidence rather than broad ministerial discretion.
Further sources
Votes
The chamber-passage votes come first. Expand a vote to see the party breakdown.
Passed 82 to 54. Support came from Labor. Opposition came from Liberal Party and Nationals. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Passed 85 to 54. Support came from Labor, Centre Alliance, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party and Nationals. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Passed 33 to 24. Support came from Labor, Greens, Australia's Voice, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and UAP. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Earlier bill-stage votes
Passed 83 to 52. Support came from Labor. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and Centre Alliance. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Passed 33 to 23. Support came from Labor, Greens, Australia's Voice, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and UAP. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Amendments grouped by chamber. Where APH reports aggregate counts, the package card summarizes the matching public amendment sheets by source theme.
House
Defeated 13 to 55. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Liberal Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Defeating the amendmentA proposed change to the bill text or to the motion approving the bill, often used to tighten rules or push a different policy view. left the bill's original settings in place, including its broader economic resilience and security stream.
Defeated 13 to 54. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Liberal Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Defeating the amendmentA proposed change to the bill text or to the motion approving the bill, often used to tighten rules or push a different policy view. kept the bill's existing assessment criteria and support pathway unchanged.
Defeated 10 to 52. Support came from minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Liberal Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Defeating the amendmentA proposed change to the bill text or to the motion approving the bill, often used to tighten rules or push a different policy view. meant sector assessments were not locked into a five-year review cycle and support was not made conditional in the way proposed.
Defeated 12 to 45. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Defeating the amendmentA proposed change to the bill text or to the motion approving the bill, often used to tighten rules or push a different policy view. left the bill without the proposed express exclusions for those industries.
Defeated 13 to 40. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Defeating the amendmentA proposed change to the bill text or to the motion approving the bill, often used to tighten rules or push a different policy view. left those extra governance, participation, and reporting requirements out of the bill.
Defeated 10 to 47. Support came from minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Defeating the amendmentA proposed change to the bill text or to the motion approving the bill, often used to tighten rules or push a different policy view. kept the bill as a framework that did not require those extra preconditions for support in the way proposed.
Defeated 11 to 54. Support came from Greens and Centre Alliance. Opposition came from Labor and Liberal Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Defeating the amendmentA proposed change to the bill text or to the motion approving the bill, often used to tighten rules or push a different policy view. meant food processing and agriculture were not expressly added as priority sectors in the bill.
Passed 87 to 53. Support came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party and Nationals. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Agreed amendments strengthened the bill's accountability and community-benefit settings before the final passage stages.
Passed 74 to 63. Support came from Labor. Opposition came from Liberal Party and Nationals. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Carrying the motion curtailed debate and moved the House straight to a vote on the remaining business.
Passed 80 to 34. Support came from Labor, Greens, Centre Alliance, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party and Nationals. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The House agreed to the amendments made by the Senate, so the bill could pass both chambers in the same form.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Government amendments tighten the bill by adding a First Nations participation principle, broadening community benefit requirements, and requiring detailed annual reporting and consultation by supported entities and companies.
Passed on the voices
The chamber agreed to this amendment package without a counted vote. APH records the agreed count by amendment, while the source documents are grouped into amendment sheets.
Senate
Passed 33 to 23. Support came from Labor, Greens, Australia's Voice, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and UAP. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Defeating the amendmentA proposed change to the bill text or to the motion approving the bill, often used to tighten rules or push a different policy view. meant the bill was not expanded to include the requested electrification package.
Passed 33 to 24. Support came from Labor, Greens, Australia's Voice, One Nation, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and UAP. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Agreed amendments hardened the bill's fossil-fuel exclusion rules before the final Senate stages.
Passed 33 to 24. Support came from Labor, Greens, Australia's Voice, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and UAP. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Agreed amendments tightened the companion bill's fossil-fuel financing rules and completed the package of government changes.
The APH progress record says three government amendments were agreed on voices in the Senate.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
The Senate rejected this on voices; it would have required an independent review within three years, expanded annual reporting on support for Australian companies, and strengthened consultation and eligibility rules for sector assessments and support.
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
The Senate rejected this on voices; it would have moved sector assessments away from the Secretary, created an independent panel or the Productivity Commission role, directed a defence manufacturing assessment, and required decisions to consider the National Interest FrameworkThe test used to decide whether public support should go to a project or sector, based on whether it helps Australia’s long-term national interests..
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
This list includes amendment votes, procedural votes and votes on the bill itself.
The parliamentary record also shows 3 Government amendments agreed without a counted division.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
Chalmers strongly supports the bill, saying it will put the government’s Future Made in AustraliaThe government policy agenda this bill turns into law, aimed at using public support to help build new industry, clean energy and supply chains in Australia. agenda into law and help attract private investment for the clean energy transition.
Read in Hansard ↗Taylor says the coalition will oppose the bill because he sees it as pork-barrelling that will mean more government, more inflation, and less real investment in manufacturing.
Read in Hansard ↗Steggall supports the bill and says it is a necessary part of Australia’s shift to a net zeroThe target of cutting emissions so any remaining pollution is balanced out, which this bill treats as a key policy goal for funding decisions. economy.
Read in Hansard ↗Spender supports the aim of the Future Made in AustraliaThe government policy agenda this bill turns into law, aimed at using public support to help build new industry, clean energy and supply chains in Australia. bill, but says it needs stronger guardrails, transparency and sector assessments before she can support it as drafted.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
61 speakers · 68 contributions · 59 support · 2 unclear
“I commend this bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This Bill is a major step in implementing the Albanese Labor Government's Future Made in Australia agenda, to deliver our country's next generation of prosperity.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“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.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Future Made in Australia Bill 2024, at its centrepiece, has emphasised the importance of critical minerals and rare earth elements and their processing here in Australia. A $17.6 billion production tax credit system will create more well-paid jobs, support local communities and build industries right here in Australia that will be critical for the future of the global economy.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I speak in favour of the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 and the Future Made in Australia (Omnibus Amendments No. 1) Bill 2024.This legislation is a supportive and measured response to the global climatic and international economic circumstances that the government must respond to. Failure to take action and respond to these circumstances would be a failure to govern.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill is absolutely critical. We had such a wasted decade under those opposite in all the areas I've talked about. They abandoned the field entirely. The Future Made in Australia legislation brings together our policy work in this space. It's an effective, practical strategy for Australia to seize this opportunity in energy transition. This is about unlocking private sector investment to build a stronger, more diversified and more resilient economy powered by renewable energy that creates secure, well-paid jobs. It embeds into law a disciplined and rigorous approach that will govern Future Made in Australia investments.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“A future made in Australia is something that we should be backing wholeheartedly. It's not about politics; it's about backing the Australian workers, designers, manufacturers and entrepreneurs. It's about backing the Australian economy. Rather than sit there and hope for the best, let's put our shoulders to the wheel and get out there and actually deliver what needs to be delivered for a better nation.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“That's exactly what the Future Made in Australia agenda is about—shaping the future and responding to the realities of the world, not the fantasy that we still live in the 1980s and can still run the same economic agenda, when the world has fundamentally changed. It's a very simple plan, in essence. We want Australia to be a country that makes more things here, because making more things here will grow our economy and create good jobs, spreading opportunity around the country, making the most of the natural resources and the advantages that we have—cheap, reliable renewable energy, a skilled workforce and an educated population—making more things here, making us more wealthy, more secure and more independent and building our resilience to future economic and strategic shocks. It's an economic plan for a better future.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The bill and omnibus bill deliver on key elements of the government's Future Made in Australia plan announced by the government in the 2024-25 budget. They impose rigour on government decision-making and help give investors the clarity and certainty they need to invest and unlock growth in our economy.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This Future Made in Australia package—the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 and the Future Made in Australia (Omnibus Amendments No.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“A key issue for me is, firstly, how we de-risk the extraction and production of rare earth elements and also how we think about the processing of rare earth elements, an area where Australia has huge opportunities. When we look at this bill and we look at the development of a national interest test—which I believe is critical and a really important part of this overarching framework, based on comparative advantage and rigorous evaluation of resilience—coupled with sector assessments, this is going to be a significant step forward in Australia's consideration of its future economic development opportunities.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I think Australia is a great manufacturing nation, and under this bill we have a bright future as a manufacturing nation. I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill is crucial to realising this potential. It lays the groundwork for Australia to lead the world in energy production, innovation and exports. By providing a stable, predictable framework for investment, this bill will attract the capital needed to develop large-scale renewable energy projects, advanced manufacturing and, importantly, the processing of critical minerals here onshore.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Those opposite want to just talk Australia down. I want to build Australia up, to seize the opportunities which are there.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I absolutely support a Future Made in Australia. That's why I'm supporting this bill today. It is a game changer for our manufacturing industry, at a time when we really need a government that believes in Australian ideas and gets behind them. This important bill is also designed to ensure transparency and to ensure appropriate decision-making around those two streams, the net zero economy and the capabilities that we need in order to ensure that we are investing in the industries and ideas that will benefit the most from that government investment. That's why I'm supporting this bill today.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I started this speech by outlining some of the key pieces of legislation that I have been proud to witness in parliament, and today I am happy to add another bill to that list: the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024. It's a bill that takes into account the history of this country. It learns from the past to make change for the present and will set us up for the future. Whether it be action on climate, support for working people, energy sustainability or sovereign capability—however you look at it—this is truly a wonderful piece of legislation by the Albanese Labor government, and I commend it to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Let's be clear: the Future Made in Australia bills aren't just about policy. They're about people. They're about those Australians who deserve the opportunity to work in those industries—to make things in this country again, to develop and to work to make sure that we are economically resilient, self-sufficient and self-reliant and that we are not exposed to the risks that are likely over the horizon. That's why I support these bills. It's about the men and women who get up every morning, put on their workboots and head out to those factories, workshops and plants across this country. We will support them with this policy.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“It's important to note that this bill is not about government replacing private investment. It's about government being a catalyst for investment and unlocking the private capital to build new projects, create new jobs and drive growth and prosperity. This government wants a more diversified economy and a more decentralised economy where workers and communities in every part of the country can share in the opportunities that lie before us.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Lisa Darmanin on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Lisa Darmanin strongly supports the bill, saying it is ambitious, long-lasting policy to invest in workplaces and strengthen Australia’s sovereign capability. She backs it as a way to shape a future where more things are made in Australia.
“Today I rise extremely proudly in support of the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 to do exactly that. This bill is ambitious and long-lasting. It is exactly the kind of policy that's crucial for investing in our workplaces and securing our sovereign capability. It's about shaping the future we want for our country—a future where our incredibly skilled workers make more things right here in Australia.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Lisa Darmanin supports the bill and says it will rebuild Australian manufacturing, create good jobs, and back the shift to clean energy. She argues it is needed to repair the damage from past offshoring and to make sure public investment benefits workers and communities.
“I am proud to stand in support of this bill today.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“Our government is investing in a future made in Australia because we want to unlock private investment in future industries and bring new jobs and opportunities to communities across the country.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The golden opportunity in front of us as a parliament will disappear if we don't take the steps to support this bill's passage through this parliament. The Australian people have already suffered enough through a decade of denial and delay under those opposite, and if the coalition had their way there'd be another wasted decade ahead going down a nuclear road to nowhere. This government has chosen a better path—a path to prosperity, a path backed by evidence and supported by science and a path that will be rigorously interrogated and transparently explained to the Australian people. It's a path that uplifts all Australians of every community, not just some. It's a path that leads to a future made right here in Australia.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I'm very proud to be standing and supporting this bill. I challenge those opposite to take their heads out of the sand, look at the world we live in, look at the potential Australia has, and say to every Australian: 'You know what? We believe in you. We believe Australians can really rise to these challenges if they get support from government. Even better, what if they have the support of this whole parliament?' I'm very pleased to see us leading this charge, and I urge them to catch up.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“It gives me great pleasure to speak in support of this legislation'—seriously. Colleagues, this is a bill that will deliver a sustainable future for our resources sector. This legislation delivers on the announcement made as part of the budget last year. The Albanese Labor government's last budget delivered the most significant initiatives for the future of Australia's resources in a generation. This included a 10 per cent reduction tax incentive to drive critical minerals processing in Australia, at an estimated value of $17 billion over the next 14 years. These new production tax incentives are aimed at unlocking private sector investment to build a stronger, more diversified and more resilient economy. They are designed to ensure that local workers, industries and communities around Australia, particularly in my home state of Western Australia that I am so proud of, are the beneficiaries of more investment in resources and jobs.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise in support of the Future Made in Australia Bill. This great southern land is very fortunate. We have the oldest past and the brightest future. We have unparalleled natural resources, a thriving business sector, a diverse economy, a stable government, a skilled and willing workforce and strong trading relationships. With this bill the Albanese Labor government is harnessing these advantages to promote jobs, security, and prosperity for all Australians in this rapidly changing world.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“At the end of the day, the Future Made in Australia Bill will do three critical things. It empowers the government's new National Interest Framework to identify where we have a genuine advantage over other countries as we transition to net zero economy. This ensures that we enter this new economy on the strongest foot possible, playing to our strengths. It 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 and help inform rigorous government decision-making. It defines a set of community benefit principles to ensure that the benefits of the Future Made in Australia support, and the private sector investment it enables, flow to local communities, workers and businesses. We need this bill for our country to grow and our economy to boom in years to come. This bill is good for industry, good for our economy and good for jobs. It's a win for all.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We need to replicate this success, and that's why I stand to support these bills, the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 and the Future Made in Australia Bill (Omnibus Amendments No. 1) Bill 2024, which will make this plan a reality.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“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.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This legislation is brought to the parliament by my good friend and that very significant thinker of economy, and that is our Treasurer, Jim Chalmers. He is very well placed to take Australia forward into the future. This policy delivered under him for our children and for our grandchildren is nation building in scope and scale.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I'm proud to rise and speak today in support of the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024. Australia is a very fortunate country. We have incredible natural resources, a robust economy, a thriving business sector, a highly skilled workforce, strong international trading relations and a stable government. With this bill, the Albanese Labor government will be able to promote jobs, security and prosperity for all Australians in this increasingly changing world.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“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.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We won't do what those opposite did. We know that we need to build resilience in our economy and that we need to diversify our economy, and this is exactly what the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 does. It is a plan to grow Australia's economic future and prosperity. It is a large, ambitious and bold plan, and it needs to be.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“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.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This legislation will ultimately make a huge difference to the long-term prosperity of our country. It has always been Labor governments that have shown leadership and brought major reform to this country. This is reform that is now needed, and, as I said earlier on, it goes hand in glove with our need transition to a lower-emissions energy source.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This Future Made in Australia Bill is about protecting the interests of this country through stronger domestic industrial capabilities, sovereign capability and stronger local supply chains. It's about developing a more complex economic offering in line with our capability and know-how and about taking advantage of our natural assets—abundant renewable resources, solar, wind, hydro and critical mineral deposits. As always with this government, this is also about generating good-quality, secure, well-paid jobs and careers for Australians. I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill is worth voting for, and I dare those opposite to back Australia.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We want people in this chamber to get on board and support this legislation.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I commend the government's commitment to build a future made in Australia, a future with a strong and diverse economy and a future that provides greater opportunity and job security for everyone, not just a few. I call on everyone in this House to get behind Australia's manufacturing future and support the creation of more secure, well-paid jobs.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to speak in support of the Albanese Labor government's Future Made in Australia Bill, and this is a very important and, indeed, most significant step in implementing the government's agenda to help build a stronger economy as well as a more diverse and more resilient economy powered by renewable energy.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Our Future Made in Australia plan is all about building up our capabilities, making more things here and creating good jobs. This is about avoiding the mistakes of the past. That side is about repeating them. We think we can do better.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I know that people in my community are passionate about making sure that our country is doing all it can to tackle the climate crisis. This bill is about us seizing the economic opportunities that have come alongside doing the work to tackle the climate crisis, setting our country up to be a superpower when it comes to renewable energy, to take the opportunities that are there, and to build the jobs and industries of the future. I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“That is why I commend the Future Made in Australia Bill to the parliament.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I speak in support of Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 and the Future Made in Australia (Omnibus Amendments No. 1) Bill 2024. These bills impose rigour on government decision-making and help give investors the clarity and certainty they need to invest and unlock growth in our economy.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“These incentives are what the Future Made in Australia Bill stands to offer, and why Hysata has openly endorsed it in our recent submission.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“It's frankly time for the National Party, particularly when it comes to the pillar of low carbon liquid fuels, to decide where they stand and when they're going to stand up to their coalition partners. The Nationals need to decide whether they're going to stand with our farmers, our grain growers and our regional communities by supporting this legislation.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Jim Chalmers on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Chalmers strongly supports the bill, saying it will put the government’s Future Made in AustraliaThe government policy agenda this bill turns into law, aimed at using public support to help build new industry, clean energy and supply chains in Australia. agenda into law and help attract private investment for the clean energy transition. He argues it is needed to create jobs, strengthen national and economic securityThe idea that Australia should back industries and supply chains that make the economy more resilient and less exposed to disruption., and make sure the benefits flow to workers and communities.
“This bill is a major step in implementing the Albanese Labor government's Future Made in Australia agenda, to deliver our country's next generation of prosperity.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Chalmers supports the bill and says it should be passed because it will lock in the government’s Future Made in AustraliaThe government policy agenda this bill turns into law, aimed at using public support to help build new industry, clean energy and supply chains in Australia. agenda and help Australia seize the economic opportunities of the net zeroThe target of cutting emissions so any remaining pollution is balanced out, which this bill treats as a key policy goal for funding decisions. transition. He argues the legislation gives investors certainty and protects the country’s prosperity and security.
“That's why we need to progress this legislation that is before the House and why I'm proud to commend these bills to the House.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“This bill steps out how we will put the discipline and the rigour established in the Future Made in Australia Bill into practice by expanding the roles of Export Finance Australia and the Australian Renewable Energy Agency. I'm very excited about it. I'm very positive about this bill. We have a government that at last sponsors manufacturing and is doing its best to prepare Australia and future generations for a prosperous future.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 supports Australia's path to net zero. But, more than that, it will help to realise our potential to become a renewable energy superpower, securing Australia's place in a changing global landscape. This bill is about combining the might of Australian industry, energy, resources, skills and investment to build a stronger, more diversified and resilient economy, and a better future for all Australians.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Future Made in Australia Bill is based on three pillars: the National Interest Framework, which helps us focus on sectors where Australia has a clear advantage in the new net-zero economy or where investment is needed for economic security; the sector assessment process, which is crucial for understanding and overcoming barriers to private investment in important sectors; and community benefit principles, which ensure that both public and private investments provide strong economic returns and also benefit our communities. These pillars are the foundation of the Future Made in Australia Bill, guiding us towards a successful, future-ready economy.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In conclusion, the Future Made in Australia Bill is an important part of our plan to make things here, grow our economy, create jobs, join the global energy transition and make real and practical steps towards tackling climate change. This is a bold plan to set our country up for the future, starting today. I couldn't be prouder to be associated with it, and I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill and the Albanese Labor government's commitment to A Future Made in Australia have many in my electorate excited—excited by the opportunities it presents and excited by the commitment of this government to reinvest in and commit to manufacturing and to being a country that makes things again.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“That's what this bill does. I commend the bill to the House in the full confidence it reflects the confidence we should have in ourselves as a nation.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I say again: if we get stuck in the past, this country, our country, will be the poorer for it. I want to see opportunities, incomes and living standards growing on the Central Coast and around the country not just in the short term but over the decades to come. This bill is good for Australians. It's good for the regions. It's good for our economy. I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Nita Green on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Green supports the bill because she says it will drive cleaner energy, local manufacturing, and better jobs for regional communities like Cairns. She frames it as a practical plan to back critical minerals, defence manufacturing, and investment in Australia’s industrial future.
“It is really important that we support this bill, and that's why I'm doing that, to support the local community in Cairns.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Green supports the bill because she says it will bring manufacturing back to Australia, especially regional Queensland, and create more secure local jobs while helping the country transition to net zeroThe target of cutting emissions so any remaining pollution is balanced out, which this bill treats as a key policy goal for funding decisions.. She criticises the opposition for voting against it and says Labor will back manufacturing workers.
“What this bill does is set in place a plan for this country to make more things here at home. We need to bring manufacturing back home to Australia, and we need to bring manufacturing back home to regional Australia. When we had nine years of a Liberal-National government, we saw manufacturing slide and we became more dependent on economies outside of Australia. When COVID hit, we were one of the lowest for sustainability and self-sufficiency in the OECD. We want to increase that. We want to build back up again, and we want to do that as a renewable energy superpower, because we know that that is what the world is looking for from us. We have the opportunity, the capacity, the skills, the workers and the knowledge. In a regional town like Cairns, we deserve an opportunity to compete with the rest of the world, and that's what this bill does. That's why we're supporting a future made or Australia.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Jana Stewart on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Jana Stewart supports the bill, saying it will create jobs and unlock investment by giving the government a clear process to decide where Australia should back industry and attract private capital for the net zeroThe target of cutting emissions so any remaining pollution is balanced out, which this bill treats as a key policy goal for funding decisions. transition.
“This is precisely what the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 is about—providing that clarity and unlocking opportunities for all Australians to benefit from the global shift to renewable energy. This bill does this by giving the government the authority to ask Treasury to evaluate an industry and decide if Australia should invest in it and how to attract private investment.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Stewart strongly supports the bill, arguing it should lock in community benefit principles so the clean energy transition delivers Australian jobs, training and shared benefits. She says it should also ensure First Nations people are genuine partners in the new industries.
“Including the community benefit principles in this bill embeds into law that every Australian is part of this transition to clean energy. It embeds into law that no-one is to be left behind and that the benefits are to be shared by all. New industry means new jobs. Two of these community benefit principles focus on jobs. It's so important that we ensure that these are Australian jobs. These are core principles of the Albanese Labor government—making sure that jobs are secure and fairly paid. We want to make sure that all Australians from all walks of life have a crack at the jobs in these new industries.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“The Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 is all about seizing the opportunities that come with this. It is about securing our place in a global economic and strategic landscape that's quickly changing.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Michelle Ananda-Rajah on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Michelle Ananda-Rajah strongly supports the bill, saying it will back Australian manufacturing, clean industry and new jobs while helping the country compete in a distorted global market. She argues it is needed to use public investment to grow future industries, decarbonise the economy and avoid the mistakes of past Liberal policy.
“The next election will be a choice between a future made in Australia and a future made overseas. Instead of doubling down on the past and more of the same, which, frankly, I think is untenable—it means digging up and shipping stuff out and doubling down on coal and gas—we have an opportunity to value-add to our natural resources and our human capital in this country and turn Australia from the fossil fuel giant that it currently is to the sun king. I commend this bill to the House.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Michelle Ananda-Rajah strongly supports the bill, saying it is a blueprint for sustainable economic growth, reindustrialisation and national security. She argues Australia must rebuild manufacturing and add value to its resources instead of accepting slow growth and further decline.
“I rise to speak in strong support of the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 and the Future Made in Australia (Omnibus Amendments No. 1) Bill 2024.. A Future Made in Australia is a blueprint for sustainable economic growth, for reindustrialising our nation and for national security. It is a pushback against the politics of pessimism that has sent our manufacturing sector into meltdown and sent secure, well-paid jobs to the wall.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“I'm speaking of course of the Australian Renewable Energy Agency. That body has been able to leverage support from government with private capital to generate some wonderful new innovative solutions to the net zero transition and to ensure that in the process we're creating solid, sustainable businesses and jobs for Australians. We've got a history of doing this and doing it well. The Future Made in Australia Bill builds on that tradition and ensures that government partners with industry to trigger that investment in renewable energy, in the net zero economy and in artificial intelligence so that Australia can attract those investors to this country, establish those businesses, establish those industries, create jobs and ensure that we do have a future that is made in Australia.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Jess Walsh on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Jess Walsh strongly supports the bill, saying it creates the framework for an ambitious industrial policy to modernise the economy, attract investment, and back Australia’s net zeroThe target of cutting emissions so any remaining pollution is balanced out, which this bill treats as a key policy goal for funding decisions. and economic securityThe idea that Australia should back industries and supply chains that make the economy more resilient and less exposed to disruption. priorities.
“We're creating the framework for an ambitious industrial policy that will move Australia beyond 'dig and ship', because we can do better than that. This is just the start of our plans. These bills establish our national interest framework—a framework to guide the decision-making of government, that highlights what our national priorities are and that sends a clear signal to investors on where public support will be available to bring forward investments, to grow our critical industries and to deliver a future made in Australia.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Jess Walsh supports the bill and says it is needed to create good, secure jobs, strengthen local supply chains and make sure the benefits of the net zeroThe target of cutting emissions so any remaining pollution is balanced out, which this bill treats as a key policy goal for funding decisions. transition are shared across communities. She argues it is a practical framework backed by industry and workers, and says the coalition is wrong to oppose it.
“These bills are important to Australians now. They are important to creating good, secure jobs across our country and in our regions. They are important to Australian communities harnessing the benefit of the net zero transformation that we are currently experiencing and that we are driving as a government.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“A future made in Australia is quite simple and, frankly, deserving of support from every member in this House if we wish to have a country that has sovereignty and is able to support our own needs in the community.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This omnibus bill will allow key government agencies to put their shoulders to the wheel—to help make investments that put our agenda into action, underpinned by the discipline and rigour the first bill rightly demands.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Joanne Ryan on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Ryan supports the bill as a plan to rebuild sovereign capability, grow good jobs and make more things in Australia, and she attacks the opposition for lacking faith in Australian manufacturing and ingenuity.
“Unlike those opposite, we believe in Australians. We believe in our capacity to innovate. We believe in our capacity to get things done. We believe in our capacity to collaborate, most importantly. We believe in our capacity to collect around an idea and to make things happen, and that's what this legislation is about.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Ryan strongly supports the bill, saying it is an opportunity to drive manufacturing, back apprenticeships and investment, and create jobs and opportunity in the regions. She criticises the opposition for lacking faith in Australia’s ability to compete and for trying to block the country from moving forward.
“The Labor government is about creating opportunity in our regions, and I would think the member for Kennedy would want to talk about our regions and creating opportunities in our regions, because the member for Kennedy represents an incredibly large region in this country where ingenuity has been demonstrated for decades. We need a government prepared to step up and do its part, and this legislation is this government saying that that's exactly what we will do, that we will fund the apprenticeships, attract the investment to build the infrastructure, boost the industries and back the ideas of Australians.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
58 speakers · 63 contributions · 58 oppose
“The coalition will oppose this bill. The more we learn about this plan, the more it simply doesn't stack up. This is a plan for pork-barrelling, not the Australian economy. It's a plan for more government, not more business investment. It's a plan for more inflation at a time when Labor is already making its homegrown inflation worse. This country has a proud and strong manufacturing industry and history, and the coalition has always supported it. Indeed, at a very personal level, I spent much of my career before coming into this place working in our manufacturing sectors—in the steel industry in aluminium smelting, in refining and in food processing. I learned, from working in all of those sectors for decades—”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“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.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“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.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Future Made in Australia bills have lovely-sounding names, and I think all members of this chamber would be interested in a future made in Australia. But the more you read the actual detail of these bills, the more you realise that what's being proposed doesn't stack up. The coalition fears that this is a plan for pork-barrelling, not for a strong economy, and members on this side will be opposing these bills.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Of course, the coalition supports those manufacturers. But, speaking to this bill, the coalition will indeed oppose it, not because we oppose manufacturers, manufacturing or the jobs that they represent but because we oppose bad policy that has not been properly thought out. The role of the opposition is, indeed, to oppose bad policy. That's what good oppositions do. So we are poking holes in the government's legislation to make sure that Australians can see the light on the other side, and this bill has plenty of those holes.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill is wrong. We will not be supporting it. The coalition will not support this madness. This is another bucket of union-run money which should not be delivered by the taxpayer. Once again it is up to the coalition to stand up to this madness being delivered by this Labor government. Unfortunately, it continues. I'm sure there will be a deal with the Greens, and they'll all sing kumbaya and do it anyway.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Like these bills, the headline is so good, but when you go into the detail, that's where the disappointment begins. The headline promises so much, only to be let down by the detail. I hope there can be some common sense put into this. I really hope that the Labor government, for Australia's sake, will go back and take on some of the ideas of the coalition. Let's work together to make sure that we can get it there. I'll tell you now that this bill and the way that it's currently set up and operating will not achieve a future made in Australia. For me, that's very, very sad.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The bill before the House, the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024, really engages on this question: how do we recover a lot of our lost industrial capacity in this country? Our view, my view, is that this bill does not achieve what the Albanese government is setting out to achieve with this bill. To give some background on the bills, these bills expand the role of Export Finance Australia and the Australian Renewable Energy Agency and establish a National Interest Framework that retrospectively underpins the government's Future Made in Australia policy. The accompanying bill expands Export Finance Australia's remit to fund domestic industries and nominates the Minister for Finance as an additional responsible minister. The omnibus bill also expands ARENA's functions from purely research, development and demonstration to support manufacturing, deployment and commercialisation.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In closing, we oppose this bill because it goes against the principles of the free market, the principles of allowing the market to decide what to invest in, the principles of innovation driving change not government deciding what it is. There is a complete lack of transparency about how this money would get allocated and who gets to allocate it. I think government's role is to create the right environment for business around energy, IR and infrastructure and then to just get out of the way. I don't think this bill advances that, and that's why we'll be opposing it.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“So why don't we curtail this bill and come back with some real proposals to actually decrease the input costs for manufacturing in Australia and make it viable and sustainable? That would actually help the manufacturing sector, and that's what they're calling out for. We can do something about their energy costs. We can do something about their regulatory and tax environments, actually sustain the economy and make sure that it would actually go better. That's why I oppose this bill and the coalition is opposing this bill. This clearly does appear to be a ministerial slush fund before an election. It has all the hallmarks of it. It doesn't really matter how it is spent. With a government minister allocating it, the capital is very likely, if not almost 100 per cent certain, to be misallocated in our economy and not spent in a way that will produce a future made in Australia.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“That is why I oppose this Future Made in Australia Bill. In other words, the future is poorer for Australia under this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Therein lies the coalition's opposition to this act: it's not technology agnostic and, unfortunately, it's not like the Inflation Reduction Act. It's a partisan and ideological attempt to actually railroad industry into certain ideological priorities that the Labor government is pushing. Unfortunately, Australia is at a crossroads in energy and technology, and they are reshaping our economy. Given these trends, the Future Made in Australia Bill seems to be well timed—it's got a very good tagline—but it is falling short of what it might promise. I think all members in the coalition and on this side of the House would support measures that, as this bill quotes, 'capitalise on the economic and industrial opportunities of the global move to net zero' and 'align its national security and economic interests'. If this were what this bill was truly doing, I have no doubt members on this side of the House would be supporting it.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We very sensibly oppose this bill. We do so on grounds that are fundamental to our beliefs. I think it's very clear where the government wants to drive this economy: further and further under the dictate of a chosen few.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In concluding, I see that this is in large part Labor's attempt to sell us a pup and to con those of us in regional and rural Australia into thinking that everyone's going to get a prize here, that everyone's going to be better off and that everyone's going to be a winner. But it is specifically designed to force our regional communities—the places where we live, work and retire and the places where our kids grow up—to accept Labor's endless numbers of wind and solar panels and the 28,000 kilometres of transmission lines in our beautiful oceans and on our quality farming land. The green hydrogen superpower plan will compromise our irrigation and water access and assets over time. Unfortunately I see this as a con job for regional and rural Australia and its small and medium family businesses.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Western Australians are not mugs. They understand that Labor will always be more interested in appeasing inner-city voters on the east coast—they know that—rather than securing well-paying jobs in our regions. They also understand that structural reform is required to support all businesses' growth, not just sections of the economy that Labor ideologically obsess over or make snap decisions to get behind. Australia is at a crossroads. We all want a future made in Australia, but this rubbish legislation is certainly not the way that it's going to happen. I do not support this legislation.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Let us not forget that the future of Australia's manufacturing industry depends on the decisions we make today. We owe it to our manufacturers, to our workers and to all Australians to get this right. This bill in its current form is not the solution. It's time for a rethink, a realignment with the needs of our industry and a renewed commitment to policies that will truly drive growth, innovation and prosperity.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Ultimately, the parliament may enact a form of this Future Made in Australia bill. If it does, it will entrench a funding source which will be available for rent seekers, and, as the committee process showed, everyone wants to get access to these monies—the chocolate makers, the dog companies, the caravan companies, the desk companies, the lampshade companies, the flag makers and the camera makers. Everyone with a business in Australia applied to this committee to get access to these funds. To be honest with you, I understand this, but that highlights how dangerous this idea is. It will open the door to the rent seekers.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The coalition will oppose this bill because the more we hear about this plan the more we know it doesn't have any merit. What this plan actually is is a plan for pork-barrelling and more green energy financing, not the making of a strong, diversified and sustainable economy. This is a plan for more government intervention and handouts with strings attached, not genuine business investment.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise today to speak on the government's planned investment in the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024, which is effectively nothing but a pork-barrelling exercise whereby you rob money from Peter and give it to Paul. Effectively, the idea that you can give subsidies to somehow encourage industry in this country is a flawed assumption.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“And this is what has resulted in this bad bill. It is a bill that will only insert government. It is a bill that will result in billions of dollars of waste when it comes to taxpayers' money. This is a bill that has failed to gain any support from mainstream economists and industry itself. Australians want and deserve better. Only the coalition understands our national strengths. We are looking to build a nation which is a mining and manufacturing and agricultural powerhouse and a leader in technology and innovation. As a consequence, I cannot support this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“At the heart of this bill is arrogance from the government—they know better; they know best. The Prime Minister finished on a claim to optimism. There's nothing optimistic about your view of the capacity of companies like Fratelli Engineering to build things here, when you think that you know better. So that philosophical difference on the role of government is not just an academic exercise for political science classes at universities. It matters to this nation and to the future of this nation. The heart of this bill is that it's driven by a different view of government. It's about who decides. Of course we want more things made in Australia. Of course we need more resilient supply chains. War and pandemic have proven that. The question is: who is better placed to decide that?”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The coalition will oppose Labor's Future Made in Australia Bill 2024. The more we hear about this plan, the more it does not stack up. This is a plan for pork-barrelling, not a strong economy. This is a plan for more government, not more business investment.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The opportunity before us today is to speak against this bill and to seek to defeat this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“As the bill reads, the coalition opposes them.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“As I said at the start, this Future Made in Australia policy ticks the four boxes of the Albanese Labor government playbook. It has an impressive sounding name. It has a lot of money over a long time. It's off-budget spending. There's a lack of detail in the bill. And we know that 2½ years in, it ticks the fifth box. It's not actually going to deliver; it's going to make life harder for the Australian people, for Australian businesses, for those who want to have a go and for those who have already invested in business in this country.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The proposition that I want to put to the House this evening is that these are bad bills and bad policies that the opposition is opposing for three fundamental reasons. Firstly, whenever you have bureaucrats, officials and ministers making choices about where to put significant chunks of public money, there's a very good chance that money will get squandered and the outcomes for taxpayers will be dismal.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I do not believe that taxpayer dollars should be used as some sort of government process to pick winners, and I'll tell you why. History tells us that government—and this may come as a great surprise to those listening to this debate—doesn't have a really good track record of picking investors and winners amongst commercial enterprises.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Labor's policies under the guise of their Future Made in Australia campaign have unfortunately and most ironically neglected the suppliers to our largest food manufacturers: our food producers. Labor's neglect has manifested in rising regulations, the unfair biosecurity levy, surging energy costs, industrial relations obligations and increased tax imposts, strangling the very lifeblood of the agriculture industry.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Obviously, the answer to all those questions is no, which is why I am joining with my coalition colleagues in opposing this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“That would have more efficacy than this policy, which we just can't support.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“That is what this whole exercise is about—Labor trying to win an election, not build an economy. That is why the coalition opposes this bill. Labor do not have a proper plan to get the settings right for Australian manufacturers. We will continue to stand up to the false promises offered by this bad Labor government and instead offer a better way with a focus on getting the fundamentals right to get Australia back on track. I thank the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“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.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 3 separate contributions by Linda Reynolds on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Reynolds says the coalition will oppose the bill, arguing it is pre-election spin that adds regulation but does nothing to strengthen manufacturing, investment, or Australia’s national security. She says it fails to build a sovereign industrial base and will make the country less safe.
“For all of these reasons and many more, I do not support this bad bill. (Time expired)”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Reynolds opposes the bill, arguing that its glossy Future Made in AustraliaThe government policy agenda this bill turns into law, aimed at using public support to help build new industry, clean energy and supply chains in Australia. branding does not match what it actually does and that the production tax credits will make things worse rather than fix problems in critical minerals and rare earths industries.
“Future Made In Australia does sound good on the face of it, but this particular bill is about the production tax credits, and that's what I want to spend my time in this place talking about. Sadly, as to this bill, despite all of the rhetoric from those opposite—'This is going to help our critical minerals industry and our rare earths industry; this is going to fix all of the ills that currently bedevil the industries and now make it impossible for an Australian company, even when they find a critical mineral, a rare earth or any other commodity'—those opposite have now made things far worse, including with the Future Made in Australia—”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Reynolds says the bill should be opposed because, while its tax credit may help a small number of projects, it is mostly spin and does nothing to fix the bigger problems holding back mining, oil and gas or to help families, workers or Western Australian industry. She argues the government should be focusing on lower costs, reliable energy and less red tape instead of a narrow pre-election fix.
“So we oppose this bill not because the individual tax credit will help a mere handful into production, although not into development, but because this is all spin and it doesn't do anything to benefit families, workers or Western Australian industry.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“The coalition will oppose these bills, and we encourage all of those in this chamber to oppose them, because, the more we learn about Labor's Future Made in Australia plan, the more clearly we see that the emperor has no clothes on at all. The more we learn about Labor's Future Made in Australia, the more obvious it is that there is no new paradigm, no new economic orthodoxy, as the Treasurer is so fond of claiming and, indeed, penning 6,000-word essays about. No, there is just the same old Labor with the same old industry policy, picking winners, ideologically driven priorities and wrongheaded subsidies, all at the expense of the taxpayer.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Of great concern to me in this legislation is the raid on EFIC, the Export Finance and Insurance Corporation, diverting its focus from driving exports to spreading the love locally. To put that in brackets, it's propping up the Labor vote in their electorates. Worth restating are the original objectives of the EFIC Act: to facilitate and encourage Australian export trade and overseas infrastructure development by providing finance, to encourage banks and other financial institutions to finance exports and overseas infrastructure development, to provide information and advice about finance to help support Australian export trade, to assist other Commonwealth entities and businesses in providing finance and financial services and to administer payments in relation to overseas aid.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Michael McCormack on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
McCormack says the coalition will oppose the bill, calling it a slogan in search of policy. He argues Labor's energy and industry approach is pushing up costs and will not deliver a better future for manufacturing.
“So the coalition is opposing this bill. We've put forward a sensible amendment, as you'd expect. As the shadow Treasurer has just said, this is a slogan in search of a policy: Future Made in Australia. It's an ill named bill, like most Labor policies.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
McCormack opposes the bill, saying it is a dangerous, non-neutral scheme that favours renewables, risks higher power costs and jobs, and could become a broader carbon price. He argues Australia needs affordable, reliable power for manufacturing, farms and food production, not this package.
“But this particular bill and this package of bills are not good.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“I will try to break down into digestible terms what this bill does include and why we in the coalition believe it to be both ineffective and ill conceived. In fact, I will go a step further. To be truly objective, I'll use the words 'economists' and 'industry experts' lest I be accused of politicising the issue. In basic terms, this bill expands the role of Export Finance Australia and ARENA and establishes the so-called National Interest Framework that retrospectively underpins the government's Future Made in Australia policy.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“By all means, we can make things in Australia again, but we have to address the fundamentals. The thing that made us a manufacturer of aluminium and steel and allowed us to develop a car industry was that we had cheap energy that was available all the time because we utilised our own resources. That's what we should be focusing on. So, if you want to make Australia make things again, I wouldn't be supporting this. Look at things in a rational way. At the moment, a lot of these policies are made by political scientists, not by hard-nosed engineers. That's what we need. We need to bring engineers back, and then we'll get a sensible energy policy.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“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.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“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.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This side of the house is not opposing this bill because we don't believe in the stated outcomes; we're opposing this bill because we know this government won't get it right.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill is euphemistically titled 'Future Made in Australia'. I am worried that it won't be a future made in Australia; it will be a future missing in Australia. That is what this coalition is determined to stop.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I want to make a small contribution to the debate on the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 and try and just outline, in the simplest terms I possibly can, why we will be opposing this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise tonight to speak on the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024, and I'll state from the outset that I am opposed to this bill. I've been listening to the speeches, particularly on the other side, and sometimes I think I'm in a high school debating club where you can signal your virtue and talk about wonderful things. The previous speaker, the member for Tangney, talked about high-paid jobs. I'm just wondering how that works when you take an operator off a D10 bulldozer because you've closed down their mine and you give them a bottle of Windex and a soft cloth to wipe the dust off solar panels. How does that actually work?”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“As I've said, this Future Made in Australia Bill is a slogan searching for a policy, but we do know what that policy will be in the end. It will be a heavily interventionist policy, which is governments picking winners, which is the last thing the Australian economy needs. It doesn't need the amount of waste that will be involved in the spending inherent in this bill. It does not need the level of government involvement that is inherent in this bill. And it certainly does not need the first project, the first cab off the rank, of Future Made in Australia being a future made in America, which is what the first commitment was—it was to an American company. It is quite extraordinary, when you hear the platitudes and the motherhood statements coming from those opposite about how this is about promoting Australia, that the first commitment out of this policy was to an American company.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“That is why we are going to oppose this bill—because it does nothing to address the issues which are confronting manufacturing in this country. As a matter of fact, everything it does is going to make things worse. To start with, will this bill help with affordable and reliable energy?”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise today to speak in opposition to Labor's Future Made in Australia Bill 2024. There is nothing wrong with industry policy. The question before the House is whether the policy put forward by the Albanese government is good policy or bad policy, and I stand here today to assert that it is bad public policy. In fact, the Future Made in Australia Bill is a vile ruse. It's trickery, it's deceitful and it will not achieve what Labor purports it to be able to achieve.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Madam Deputy Speaker, it will come as no surprise to you or those opposite or, indeed, those in the gallery that the coalition will oppose the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024. At the heart of that opposition is something that I want to pick up from the contribution of the last government speaker. Those opposite want to paint a picture that, without financial support from government, manufacturing is dead in this country, and I've got to tell you nothing is further from the truth. Those opposite think it is for government to decide which manufacturing businesses should succeed. Those of us on this side of the House think that is a decision best made in a competitive context by businesses themselves. Those opposite want to pick winners; those on this side want to create an economic environment where winners can self-identify and succeed.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill fails at every level. This bill is big government, it is about subsidising industries that are not viable, and it's a complete and utter waste of taxpayers' money.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Julian Leeser on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Leeser opposes the bill, saying it is a microcosm of what is wrong with Labor's economic policy and a return to failed government picking winners. He argues it recycles bad ideas instead of using orthodox policy to cut inflation, lift productivity, and let markets decide which industries succeed.
“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.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Leeser says the opposition will oppose the bill because it is a high-spending form of corporate welfare that picks winners, adds inflation pressure, and uses taxpayer money for politically favoured manufacturing interests. He argues the government should instead rein in spending, cut red tape, and lower taxes to improve competitiveness.
“Our economic plan—unlike Labor's economic plan, which is based on failed policies of the past—is based on tried, tested principles which will restore competitiveness and economic confidence. The policies we seek to implement aren't just about the next electoral cycle; they are about the foundations for the next generation for Australia. That's why today I am pleased to rise to oppose this high-spending bill and to oppose corporate welfare for certain manufacturing interests. That is not in Australia's best interests.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“Businesses around the country have been reaching out to local members saying how tough they're doing it. Just yesterday, I was stopped in the hallway by someone who was a big supporter of the government and the Labor Party and who told me that this bill will cripple them; this bill will not support them. How can this bill do what it claims to do, which is to make the future better in Australia, when it doesn't even look after the industries that we have here? I think that has reverberated around the country in all of our electorates. For that reason and many others, the coalition will not be supporting this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill, the Future Made in Australia bill 2024, and its program are not the way to do that.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“'Future Made in Australia' should be one of the greatest pieces of legislation the government can introduce in the House; however, don't let the title confuse you. This Albanese Labor government continues to confirm day in and day out that it simply is just not up to the job. How can I, in good faith, support this legislation when I know for a fact that the Labor and Greens in coalition with the unions have destroyed manufacturing in this country? This legislation will do nothing for jobs and nothing for the economy. This legislation, put in plain context, is a plan for more bureaucracy, not for business investment. Just last week, the RBA advised the government to stop this fake spending as it is fuelling inflation and hurting Australian. So what does this incompetent Albanese Labor government do? It just keeps spending your money. It would be laughable if it weren't so serious.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Jacinta Nampijinpa Price on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Jacinta Nampijinpa Price says the coalition will oppose the bill because it adds bloated bureaucracy, duplication and regulation, which she argues will worsen the government's waste and economic drag. She says Australia should be backing business growth instead.
“I rise to speak on the Future Made in Australia (Production Tax Credits and Other Measures) Bill 2024. It is no surprise that the coalition will be opposing this bill. Australia finds itself in a position of absolute bloated bureaucracy. The Albanese government seem to have done everything they can to increase the size of this leviathan. There is excess duplication and regulation that is holding us back from our economic potential. We know that the Labor government's increase to bureaucracy has impacted the high inflation that we are seeing—an additional 20 per cent increase in public servants and then 11 per cent pay rises on top of that. The RBA has admitted that the growth of the public sector is a factor that the RBA will have to take into account when considering rate cuts. 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.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Price opposes the bill, arguing it hands out costly business subsidies and tax credits without real tax relief, while adding red tape and giving ministers too much discretion. She says it will not help small business or national productivity and instead reflects Labor's failed economic management.
“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.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“As many speakers before me have made very clear, the coalition will be opposing this bill. The truth is, the more we hear about this bill, the more it clearly doesn't stack up. This is basically a plan for Labor ministers to run around the country pork-barrelling; this is not about a strong economy for our nation or about creating jobs.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“As my coalition colleagues have made clear, we're opposing these bills, and we encourage all those in the chamber to do the same. I say that because these are bills that will not or rather cannot deliver for Australians and Australian business.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We will be voting against this bill. The announcements made around this bill show that this government doesn't really back a future made in Australia. Once again, it is the Prime Minister and his ministers backing their mates, whether they're Twiggy Forrest or Ed's mates in the US. It's definitely not the thousands and thousands of small- to medium-sized enterprises in this country that want to keep manufacturing and want to keep tens of thousands of Australians employed in regional capitals and in suburbs right around this country.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I also note that it even takes away the export focus of it. Is this fund just going to be focused on Australia's net zero transformation and be put to that? EFA was set up to focus on exporting as its primary motivation. I don't get that within these two new streams of net zero transformation and economic resilience and security. I think it's changing the focus of EFA, too, which is unfortunate. For this reason and many others that members on this side are talking about, we won't be supporting the bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
6 speakers · 1 support · 3 oppose · 2 mixed
“In its current form, these bills could just be a slush fund for coal, oil and gas, and we can't stand for that. (Time expired)”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“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.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“When I think of Australia's future, I want a future that all our kids can comfortably live in and I want them to have the same opportunities we did. There can be no doubt that fossil fuel expansion puts the climate, our future and our frontline communities at risk. The jobs of the future are in renewable economies and industries. We need urgent transition out of fossil fuels and into renewables, and that's what industry policy should be delivering. We support government setting an agenda and investment and investment incentives that give that direction to our economy. We've got real concerns that, hidden within this framework and this bill, a future made in Australia's actually a dangerous future of coal, oil and gas beyond 2050.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“If we want a Future Made in Australia, let's have a genuine discussion about what that means and what kind of future we want in this country. The Australian Greens support government intervention in our economy to drive public and private funds into productive parts of our economy and out of parts of our economy that are unproductive and deliver negative outcomes to our people and our environment.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“These bills are working their way through a Senate inquiry at the moment. That will go for a few months. We will reserve our position on these bills until we see the outcome of that inquiry and we see what the government's response is to these very real issues that we have raised.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to speak about Labor's Future Made in Australia Bill 2024. Like my colleague Senator Waters, who spoke before me, I had significant hope that this bill would be an investment in manufacturing in this country, an overdue, positive investment into manufacturing, but, as it stands, this bill would potentially be an environmental disaster. We're in a climate emergency right now. At a time when we should be rapidly phasing out of fossil fuels, this government, via this bill, could potentially be propping them up with even more public money.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
1 speaker · 1 oppose
“One Nation has no confidence this bill will achieve anything positive for Australia. If the government wants to move the provisions around economic resilience and security into a new bill, with Infrastructure Australia in charge, One Nation would be delighted to support those measures.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
15 speakers · 6 support · 2 oppose · 7 mixed
“I support the intent of the legislation, and the submissions to the Senate inquiry show that there is broad support for this agenda from those in the environmental sectors, finance sectors and the business community, including the Clean Energy Council, the Investor Group on Climate Change, the Climate Council, Climate Energy Finance, the Superpower Institute, the Australian Conservation Foundation, the Australian Industry Group, the Australian Aluminium Council, the Business Council of Australia and many, many others. But the submissions also highlight that, as currently drafted, the bill fails to deliver the framework we need to effectively seize Australia's opportunity to become a clean energy superpower.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I am yet to meet with the Treasurer to discuss the concerns I have with this bill and the amendments I'm proposing to improve it, but I'm really looking forward to having that discussion with him. We're getting it in the diary. I will be reserving my position on this bill until after I have that meeting with the Treasurer. In the meantime I want to emphasise to the government that, as we transition to a net zero economy, it is more important than ever to maintain the confidence of the people, including in this bill before us. This bill as currently drafted does not build enough trust. It does not do enough to promote integrity in government decision-making. It leaves way too much still to be determined. And when it comes to $22.7 billion in public funding, that is not good enough. Ensuring that the public can see where and how their money is spent through the measures I just outlined is one critical mechanism to achieving this confidence.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“If these issues can be addressed in some way, I think there's a chance that this could point us in the right direction towards future prosperity. It may not be perfect, but we cannot afford to delay.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The amendment that I move here and further amendments which I will move in the consideration in detail stage of this legislation will address those concerns. I move:”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I commend the bill to the House, I support the government on the Future Made in Australia, I commend the Treasurer, and I ask him to consider the amendments put forward in good faith to make sure that this bill is robust and delivers its purpose.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In closing, while the FMIA legislation presents a positive step forward for our manufacturing and innovation sectors on the pathway to decarbonisation, it is not without its flaws. To truly secure a prosperous future for Australia, we need to address the gaps and the weaknesses that have been identified through collaboration and consultation. By strengthening the focus of this legislation, by creating a clear link between the National Interest Framework and the FMIA funding, by requiring projects and entities to be within the scope of a sector assessment to be eligible for support, by explicitly ruling out the use of FMIA on fossil fuel and carbon capture and storage projects, by tightening up the community benefit principles to safeguard them against future governments, and by including a standalone community benefit principle for First Nations participation and engagement, this bill would be greatly strengthened.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Ultimately, as proposed, the sector assessment model lacks the rigorous safeguards necessary to inspire genuine public confidence in financing decisions made by ministers. I understand the intent of the provisions restricting ministerial influence or interference over the outcomes of a sector assessment are promising, but in practice ministers exercise influence over their departments—both direct and indirect. Sector assessments would be more appropriately conducted by an independent body, one free from the potential political preferences of any government now or in the future. As it stands, the Future Made in Australia legislation risks politicisation. Sector assessments are initiated exclusively by the Treasurer, which allows government to target Future Made in Australia supports towards sectors it determines are of most value. What's to stop the net zero transformation stream being used for financing of carbon capture and storage, or small modular nuclear reactors—despite the evidence that the first has yet to prove to be of value, while the latter have yet to advance far beyond the drawing board? There should be an independent body to scrutinise industry policy and the deployment of taxpayers' money at such scale. There are examples of this already across government—indeed, in the Treasurer's own portfolio. The Productivity Commission conducts assessments at the discretion of its minister but also holds the ability to initiate assessments of its own. This creates an appropriate degree of policy-making independence, and I urge the government to mirror this arrangement in the Future Made in Australia legislation. I'll be moving amendments to this effect.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Thirdly, there is a need to mandate the assessment process. Surely projects should only be eligible for these Commonwealth Future Made in Australia funds if they are part of a sector that has been subject to an assessment which has concluded that it is an appropriate sector for support. This is a necessary guardrail to ensure that taxpayer money is being used only for sunrise industries where it is necessary to bridge the green premium, not for sunsetting industries where government investment will only extend projects' life spans and harmful effects. A reasonable assessment process has been formulated, but, in the current form of the legislation, it is entirely at the discretion of the government as to whether it is applied or not. Surely it would be most appropriate for it to be used every time. So I will be supporting the amendment from my crossbench colleague the member for Curtin, which prohibits Future Made in Australia support unless a sector assessment recommends the relevant sector for that support.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The bill wants to use public investment to unlock private investments that will act in the national interest, but there is a risk that these investments will prioritise and benefit only larger projects and corporations. This has the potential to overlook the unique challenges faced by small manufacturers and to allow opportunities that they offer to wither. I would like to see the bill amended to more explicitly cater for small businesses, such as a dollar amount allocated to them, so that they don't get left out in the cold as they were under the former NRF approach.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“So the answers are there, and you must ask yourself: 'Why won't they go to the answers? Why?' There's just no rational explanation as to why you wouldn't do that. If you say, 'Australia couldn't produce a motorcar,' that's exactly what was said to Laurence Hartnett again and again and again and to the Prime Minister of Australia, Ben Chifley, again and again and again. (Time expired)”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Future Made in Australia framework is a step in the right direction, but, as I've highlighted, I think it's far from perfect. It needs stronger governance, it needs greater transparency and it needs a sharper focus on emissions reduction.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I would urge all members in this House at this time, including the member for Kennedy and the member for Wide Bay—I know the member for Wide Bay has crossed the aisle and, indeed, sat on the crossbench before—to support this bill. I would urge the government to back my amendments supporting food processing and agriculture and all of the hard-working women and men in regional Australia who are employed in those sectors.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise in support of the Future Made in Australia (Production Tax Credits and Other Measures) Bill 2024. However, my support is not without some qualification because, as I said in the debate last year, we need to focus on some key technologies that will assist us to lower emissions, support existing and new industries, and protect our national security. For that reason, I was surprised to see that low-carbon liquid fuels, LCLFs, were not included in this bill as a recipient of those tax credits, especially when many of our international competitors are incentivising their industries to be leaders.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I have wondered if the sectors were chosen due to their alignment with unions, rather than with what is good for the country. We've all read with concern about the increasing flexing of union muscle following the election in 2022. Bolstering industry sectors with natural associations to the strongest of unions reads like a play out of the union playbook. I do not support this bill. I want to support a bill that is going to get behind Australian manufacturing, but it has to be smart. If this government is serious about improving our manufacturing capacity, it would address energy prices and reduce government red tape.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“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.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
House · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
House · Second reading moved
Second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle. opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle., opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
House · Second reading debate
Second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle. debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle. debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle. debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle. debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle. debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle. debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle. debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 53 to 85.
Second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle. agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle., meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
House · Consideration in detail: amendments considered
AmendmentA proposed change to the bill text or to the motion approving the bill, often used to tighten rules or push a different policy view. packages agreed
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
House · Third reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 82 to 54.
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Senate · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Senate · Second reading moved
Second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle. opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle., opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle. debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle. debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle. debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle. debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 33 to 23.
Second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle. agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second readingThe main stage of debate where the House or Senate considers whether it agrees with the bill in principle., meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Senate · Amendments considered
Recorded vote: 33 to 24.
AmendmentA proposed change to the bill text or to the motion approving the bill, often used to tighten rules or push a different policy view. packages agreed
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
House · Consideration of Senate message
House agreed to Senate amendments
The House dealt with Senate amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the bill in the same form.
Parliament · Finally passed both Houses
Passed both houses
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Assent · Assent
Assent
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe final step that turned the bill into an Act, meaning it became law., turning the bill into an Act.
Senate Economics Legislation Committee; Committee report (06/09/2024)
Referred to committee
Referred to Committee (4 July 2024): Senate Economics Legislation Committee; Committee report (6 Sept 2024)
APH bill page notes
