9 Sept 2024 · 12:57 PM · Division 5
Future Made in Australia Bill 2024
- Official title
- Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 - Consideration in Detail - Sector assessments
Noes in the majority
This says only which side won the vote, because what Aye and No meant here depends on the exact question put in the chamber.
- Aye
- 10
- No
- 52
- Not recorded voting
- 89
“Not recorded voting” is everyone eligible who isn't recorded as Aye or No, for example absent, paired, or presiding.
What was decided
The majority voted against amendments introduced by Curtin MP Kate Chaney (Independent), which means they failed.
What do these amendments do?
Ms Chaney explained that:
One of the amendments I'm proposing makes it clear that, if support is labelled as being part of the government's Future Made in Australia package, it must be linked to a sector that has actually been assessed as part of the National Interest Framework. In other words, the government can't say, 'We've got this great rigorous sector assessment process, but we don't have to use it.' Currently the bill requires the government to identify sectors that align with the National Interest Framework and would benefit from government investment to address barriers to private investment, but there's no requirement for the government to only provide support in sectors that have been identified in this way. So the government can stick a Future Made in Australia label on anything it wants, even if it's not in a sector that's been assessed as being worthy of government investment.
Allowing government to use taxpayer funds for industry policy requires a leap of faith that the government will make good investment decisions. Unfortunately, governments don't have a great track record of making good investment decisions in situations of uncertainty. I recognise that, with the way other countries are responding to rapid economic transition towards decarbonisation, we do have to take some risks, but this amendment is designed to reduce that risk and prevent stupid things from getting through. If the government backs the process it has designed for sector assessments, it should be willing to commit to using it.
My other amendment recognises that this is a rapidly changing space. In setting industry policy, we need to be acting on the best and most current information we have about where the global opportunities lie. For example, certain critical minerals have a bright future now, based on promising developments in different battery technologies, but in a few years some may hit brick walls and others flourish. I recognise that good decisions made now on the best available information may not look like good decisions as technology changes.
As the bill is currently drafted, sector assessments are conducted on the direction of the minister within a period defined by the minister, and a report is delivered as required by the minister. The sector assessment then remains in operation without recourse to review. My amendment requires that sector assessments be reviewed every five years to ensure that they continue to be the appropriate areas of investment for Australian taxpayer dollars. While regular assessment may be part of the intention of the government, it's not explicitly required in the bill, which may result in one sector being available for investment long after that's appropriate.
Amendment text
(1) Clause 6, page 8 (after line 19), at the end of clause, add:
(6) If a sector assessment has previously been conducted for a sector and Future Made in Australia support has been provided in relation to the sector, the Minister must, by notifiable instrument, direct the Secretary to conduct a supplementary sector assessment for the sector at least once every 5 years.
(2) Page 14 (after line 3), after clause 11, insert:
11A Requirements before providing Future Made in Australia support
Future Made in Australia support must not be provided to a person in relation to a sector unless:
(a) a sector assessment for the sector is conducted in accordance with section 8; and
(b) the sector assessment report recommends that the support be provided.
Summary written by They Vote For You contributors. Read it with the debate
Votes by party
Votes by party as a table
| Party | Aye | No |
|---|---|---|
| Australian Labor Party | 0 | 48 |
| Independent | 10 | 0 |
| Liberal Party | 0 | 4 |
How each member voted
Aye · 10
- Kate ChaneyCurtin · Independent
- Zoe DanielGoldstein · Independent
- Andrew GeeCalare · Independent
- Helen HainesIndi · Independent
- Monique RyanKooyong · Independent
- Sophie ScampsMackellar · Independent
- Allegra SpenderWentworth · Independent
- Zali SteggallWarringah · Independent
- Kylea TinkNorth Sydney · Independent
- Andrew WilkieClark · Independent
No · 52
- Michelle Ananda-RajahVictoria · Labor
- Jodie BelyeaDunkley · Labor
- Matt BurnellSpence · Labor
- Linda BurneyBarton · Labor
- Josh BurnsMacnamara · Labor
- Alison ByrnesCunningham · Labor
- Jim ChalmersRankin · Labor
- Andrew CharltonParramatta · Labor
- Lisa ChestersBendigo · Labor
- Sharon ClaydonNewcastle · Labor
- Libby CokerCorangamite · Labor
- Mary DoyleAston · Labor
- Justine ElliotRichmond · Labor
- Cassandra FernandoHolt · Labor
- Carina GarlandChisholm · Labor
- Steve GeorganasAdelaide · Labor
- Patrick GormanPerth · Labor
- Ged KearneyCooper · Labor
- Peter KhalilWills · Labor
- Tania LawrenceHasluck · Labor
- Jerome LaxaleBennelong · Labor
- Andrew LeighFenner · Labor
- Sam LimTangney · Labor
- Zaneta MascarenhasSwan · Labor
- Emma McBrideDobell · Labor
- Louise Miller-FrostBoothby · Labor
- Rob MitchellMcEwen · Labor
- Brian MitchellLyons · Labor
- Daniel MulinoFraser · Labor
- Shayne NeumannBlair · Labor
Spotted a mistake? Report a correction.