This bill is currently before Parliament.
Government & democracy
Australian manufacturers would be considered before overseas manufacturers when bidding for specified federal projects.
The evidence does not contain a government rationale because this was introduced by independent MP Dai Le. Le said Australian makers struggle to match cheaper imports and receive too little federal work. She noted that 97 per cent of clothing is made overseas, while local clothing manufacturing supports more than 28,000 jobs. She cited modelling that the textile changes could add $641 million to the economy and more than 950 skilled jobs over five years.
Since 2022, the Commonwealth has spent $790 million procuring textiles, clothing and footwear without consistently measuring Australian-made content, while the 2024–25 Budget committed $22.7 billion to Future Made in Australia but did not direct that funding to established manufacturers such as steel, textiles, clothing and footwear. Amid retailer collapses and manufacturers struggling against cheaper imports, Dai Le MP introduced a private member’s bill requiring local manufacturers to be considered first and Australian-made goods to comprise at least 30 per cent of goods used in specified Commonwealth projects.
The supplied debate contains no criticism of the bill itself. Dai Le argued instead that existing purchasing rules disadvantage Australian makers because they cannot match overseas labour costs.
Dai Le MP introduced this bill. Supportive speeches so far have come from some crossbench members.
Did it become law?
Not yet
Final passage
No final vote yet
The bill has not yet completed passage through Parliament.
Days since introduction
39 days
Updated 07 Aug 2026.
Meaning
Australian manufacturers would be considered before overseas manufacturers when bidding for specified federal projects.
Suppliers to specified federal projects would need at least 30 per cent of their goods’ value to come from Australian-made products.
Businesses bidding for specified federal projects could receive limited exemptions. The rules would require these exemptions to be transparent.
Australian manufacturers and workers would gain explicit recognition in federal purchasing policy. Its objectives would include local jobs, manufacturing capacity and supply security.
Federal agencies would apply the new requirements from the day after the law receives formal approval from the Governor-General.
2 After subsection 105B(1) (1A) An instrument under subsection (1) must: (a) provide for domestic manufacturers to have opportunities to be considered ahead of non‑domestic manufacturers when tendering for specified Commonwealth projects; andPublic Governance, Performance and Accountability Amendment (Local Industry Preference) introduced text
(1A) An instrument under subsection (1) must: (a) provide for domestic manufacturers to have opportunities to be considered ahead of non‑domestic manufacturers when tendering for specified Commonwealth projects; and (b) provide that, for specified Commonwealth projects, at least 30% of the total value of goods used in the project must consist of products manufactured domestically; andPublic Governance, Performance and Accountability Amendment (Local Industry Preference) introduced text
(1A) An instrument under subsection (1) must: (a) provide for domestic manufacturers to have opportunities to be considered ahead of non‑domestic manufacturers when tendering for specified Commonwealth projects; and (b) provide that, for specified Commonwealth projects, at least 30% of the total value of goods used in the project must consist of products manufactured domestically; and (c) provide for limited and transparent exemptions in respect of rules made for the purposes of paragraphs (a) and (b).Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Amendment (Local Industry Preference) introduced text
Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 1 At the end of section 5 ; and (e) to ensure that Commonwealth procurement supports Australian industry capability, sovereign resilience, thriving domestic manufacturing industries and local manufacturing jobs.Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Amendment (Local Industry Preference) introduced text
2 Commencement (1) Each provision of this Act specified in column 1 of the table commences, or is taken to have commenced, in accordance with column 2 of the table. Any other statement in column 2 has effect according to its terms. Commencement information Commencement Date/Details 1. The whole of this Act The day after this Act receives the Royal Assent.Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Amendment (Local Industry Preference) introduced text
Context
Since 2022, the Commonwealth has spent $790 million procuring textiles, clothing and footwear without consistently measuring Australian-made content, while the 2024–25 Budget committed $22.7 billion to Future Made in Australia but did not direct that funding to established manufacturers such as steel, textiles, clothing and footwear. Amid retailer collapses and manufacturers struggling against cheaper imports, Dai Le MP introduced a private member’s bill requiring local manufacturers to be considered first and Australian-made goods to comprise at least 30 per cent of goods used in specified Commonwealth projects.
Commonwealth purchasing lacks an Australian-made benchmark
The Commonwealth spent $790 million procuring textiles, clothing and footwear without consistently measuring how much was made in Australia.
Second reading speech ↗Future Made in Australia leaves established manufacturers outside its focus
The government committed $22.7 billion over a decade to the agenda, but Dai Le MP said the funding targeted industries such as green hydrogen, critical minerals and renewable technology rather than steel, textiles, clothing and footwear.
Second reading speech ↗Retail collapses sharpen warnings about local industry
The collapse of Betts, Lincraft and Glue stores accompanied warnings that Australian family businesses faced rising prices, taxes and energy costs while the country became increasingly dependent on imports.
News.com.au ↗Dai Le MP introduces a local industry preference bill
The private member’s bill proposed giving domestic manufacturers first consideration and requiring Australian-made goods to account for at least 30 per cent of goods used in specified Commonwealth projects, subject to limited and transparent exemptions.
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 reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Key criticism
The supplied debate contains no criticism of the bill itself. Dai Le argued instead that existing purchasing rules disadvantage Australian makers because they cannot match overseas labour costs.
Both recorded contributions supported the bill. Andrew Gee said federal projects should back Australian manufacturing, while Le said the 30 per cent requirement would give local businesses greater confidence to invest.
Further sources
Votes
No recorded votes have been found yet for this bill.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
Dai Le urges the House to pass her bill requiring Commonwealth procurementPurchasing by Australian federal agencies. to favour Australian manufacturers for specified projects, arguing that a 30 per cent local-content threshold would protect domestic industry, create skilled jobs and strengthen supply-chain resilience.
Read in Hansard ↗Andrew Gee strongly supports the bill because it would direct Commonwealth procurementPurchasing by Australian federal agencies. towards Australian manufacturers, protect local jobs and strengthen sovereign manufacturing capacity.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
2 speakers · 2 support
“My bill provides the mechanism. It amends the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 to make supporting Australian industry and local jobs an objective of Commonwealth procurement. It requires domestic manufacturers to be considered ahead of non-domestic manufacturers for specified projects, with at least 30 per cent of the value of goods made here—and limited, transparent exemptions, because rules without flexibility are not sound policy. That 30 per cent is a demand anchor—it lets a manufacturer invest in their people and their capacity, knowing a fair slice of the Commonwealth's own market is open to them. RMIT modelling of equivalent reform in textiles alone projects a $641 million economic uplift and more than 950 new skilled jobs over five years for our local manufacturing and our local people.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“As to the Future Made in Australia legislation that went through this House, one of the amendments that I tried to get through was to expand it to food processing and agriculture. Out in the Central West, we make Chiko Rolls in Bathurst, we make Nutella in Lithgow, we make flour and canola oil at Manildra and we make pet food in Blayney and in Bathurst. We're an agricultural food bowl, and we need to be supporting those things that we're good at. So let's get behind our manufacturers, our food processors and our primary producers. I back this bill to the hilt.”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 reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
