Susan Templeman (Macquarie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the National Reconstruction Fund Corporation Bill 2022. It is extraordinary, standing in this chamber and hearing those opposite give a plethora of reasons for why they can't possibly support Australian jobs in manufacturing and expanding our manufacturing capacity. I appreciate that in the context of an election there's a whole lot of rhetoric that comes around, but I am staggered that those opposite can't see the difference that this can make for our ability as a country to make things here. It's a really simple proposition, and I would really urge those opposite to get on board and come on this journey with us, because our community deserves to have the confidence of all members of this House that we have the capacity to make things. I think what those opposite say really undermines the confidence of our manufacturing sector. But, more than anything, it talks it down, which is the last thing that we need.

We, as the Albanese government, were elected on a mandate to drive the transformation of Australian industry and to revive our ability to make world-class products. In my community, we are already doing that. People are surprised when I say that we make things in the Blue Mountains. We make them on a smaller scale; there are around 500 or so manufacturing jobs in the Blue Mountains. In the Hawkesbury, we have more than 2,000 people working in the manufacturing sector with more than 400 manufacturers. A lot of those are technicians and trade skills people, but there are all the other jobs that go around the work they do. They deserve to be trusted to expand and to do more here—not to be affected by international supply chains that hold up their work and their businesses.

This $15 billion National Reconstruction Fund, which I'm so pleased to be speaking on tonight, is one of the biggest government investments in manufacturing in living memory. This is big, and we do believe that it will drive economic development in the regions and, importantly for me, in the outer suburbs. I think one of the things that really struck me during the pandemic was the shock recognition by people that we don't make stuff here as much as we probably thought we did. There was the inability to get PPE and ventilators for our hospitals. It was things like that, which were actually life-and-death sorts of equipment, which made people suddenly realise through that terrible time that not only were supply chains under huge pressure but that we just simply could not do the stuff here that we needed to. I have to say—I've heard people opposite talk about it—that across my community this was a constant source of conversation during the pandemic. I know that this is a very widely supported initiative of our government.

One of the things that I particularly like about manufacturing is that it creates full-time and meaningful work. My memory tells me about 85 per cent of manufacturing jobs are permanent jobs—secure, permanent work. Knowing that they have ongoing, secure work transforms people's lives. There are a number of benefits that this legislation brings, which is why everyone in this place should be supporting it.

The way this will work is the National Reconstruction Fund is going to provide finance—and that includes loans, guarantees and equity— so that we can drive investments in seven priority areas, areas that we know are key for our economy. But we also know our natural strengths and the things that will help us in terms of global competition. This fund will support the development of these strategically important industries and shore up our supply chains. I think we need to keep in mind that that supply chain shock that we experienced has been one of the things that has been a contributor to inflation. It's led to the price rises. This is one factor we can do something about, not just in the short-term but over a long period of time, and take that out of our economic system.

We've identified seven priority areas. The first is value-add in resources. We know as a country we're great at digging things up and shipping it away and then letting other people do clever things and then we buy it back. But it makes sense to everyone I've spoken to to do more of that value-adding onshore in Australia. We can talk about it at a specific mineral level if we look at high purity alumina from red mud in bauxite processing, for instance, but let's go to something that we equally have a passion for and that is renewable energy and the things that we could do in terms of lithium processing for batteries. The value-adding in resources is a key area, as is value-adding in the agriculture, forestry and fisheries sectors, so that we can unlock potential and value-add to those raw materials.

I want to give you a great example of one of my businesses in the Hawkesbury that's already doing that and that's Kurrajong Kitchen and their world famous lavosh. They looked at it and said, 'We do not want to have Australians buying lavosh from offshore when we can make it here.' Karen and Ben Lebsanft have worked for years to build that business and to turn a product that they could easily have walked away from at various times and said, 'No, this is all a bit too hard,' but they saw the value in creating jobs in Hawkesbury, and, just as importantly, creating a really high-quality product. Food processing is one of the areas we know we can do more in.

Textiles, clothing and footwear manufacturing—and for me this feels a little bit like a full circle, because I was a young journalist in the 1980s when a previous Labor government was looking to make us more efficient and that was an area where changes had to happen. The consequence was that we lost a lot of that capacity. When you look at the ability to manufacture some of those PPE things that we needed the textiles industry and the footwear manufacturing sector were really key. We want to encourage people to look at that sector and see what they can do. We're prepared to do loans or guarantees or equity where people have a really viable idea around that.

Transport is another area. This one is also very close to my heart. Remember, the Blue Mountains is the place where the New South Wales government has bought trains from South Korea that do not fit the tracks. Instead of making them here, they bought trains from another country that literally don't fit the tracks of the Blue Mountains. It's not like they couldn't have worked out the measurements of the platforms, but as it is the platforms have to be shaved. They have to be reshaped. Tunnels have to be widened because of the New South Wales government going, 'We don't make things here.' It should never have been the case. When I looked at the platforms that needed to be changed and thought about the history that they have, I saw that in order to make these trains fit our railway tracks now you have to make adaptions to platforms that have been there for more than 100 years. The Leura Station was built in 1890 and Katoomba was built in 1874, yet no one thought to take the measurements and make sure that the trains fitted those tracks. That $2.3 billion that went offshore could have stayed onshore and provided long-term, secure, high-quality jobs, and they wouldn't have messed with our railway lines and our platforms. This is a classic example of how some misplaced idea that getting it offshore would be cheaper has led to all sorts of consequences. We can stop that from happening anywhere else. Transport is not just about trains and ship-building but also cars. I sat in this parliament when I heard the then government essentially dare the car-manufacturing sector to go offshore. The loss of that sector has had implications across innovation for a whole lot of parts of our manufacturing sector.

Transport was the third area we identified. The fourth is medical science. We know Australia's world-leading research to provide essential supplies such as medical devices, medicines and vaccines can be much better-leveraged than it is. In my community, we had one of the few manufacturers of rapid antigen tests—a scientific innovation—who saw the opportunity there because everyone so desperately needed COVID tests. They have now been able to expand what they do on the back of that. They were willing to take a risk, they were willing to pitch everything in and support the Australian community, and out of it they have now evolved. I look forward to seeing how they continue, and I hope they go from strength to strength. That's an example in the medical science area of things that our National Reconstruction Fund will be able to support.

The fifth area of seven is renewables and low-emission technologies. It does seem completely crazy that we created the photovoltaic technology which is used in virtually every solar cell that sits on peoples' roofs, yet you can't buy one that is made in Australia—they are all made overseas. Eighty-seven per cent of the world's cells are made in one country, and in the next three years the expectation is that will rise to 94 per cent. We need to reverse these trends that see great Australian ideas and innovation simply get shipped offshore.

The sixth area is defence capability, and that matters to the electorate of Macquarie because we are home to RAAF Base Richmond and a large defence industry sector. It provides long-term, good jobs, and it could be providing more, particularly as the needs of the RAAF change. That base may well at some stage in the future have more capacity for defence industries. It's a really key part of the local Hawkesbury economy, and we'll be looking to ensure that we completely secure defence industries there. We know that there are huge opportunities for that on the outskirts of Western Sydney. Under the National Reconstruction Fund, we'll be able to maximise the sourcing of requirements from Australian suppliers. We've got them employing Australian workers, whether it's in technology, infrastructure or skills—there's huge opportunity.

The last category that we want to see investment in is around the enabling capabilities. That means supporting the capabilities around engineering, data science, software development, artificial intelligence, robotics and quantum. When I've done technology visits overseas I've seen incredible things happening and asked, 'Why aren't we doing this in Australia?' It's because there has not been the support required to turn great ideas into great businesses.

As a co-investment fund, the NRF is going to draw in investment support from superannuation, venture capital and private equity sources. It is not just going to be government funds; it is partnering with all those sources of money to grow the taxpayer funded component of it. What's key too is that we have a model that we know works. Modelling it on the successful Clean Energy Finance Corporation means it is administered at arm's length to government by an independent board appointed jointly by the Minister for Industry and Science and the Minister for Finance. I've heard some members opposite talking about how wonderful competitive grants are. For things like this, you want it to be above politics. You actually want it to be done as part of an overarching strategy rather than who happens to write the best grant application, or who can have a word with a minister, which is not the way we are going to be approaching this. The government will provide guidance on expectations and policy priorities through a legislative instrument and an investment mandate, but the NRF will be administered at arm's length to the government. That is really key to its effectiveness.

The board will independently make investment decisions and manage its investment portfolio to achieve both the reconstruction fund's objectives and the positive portfolio rate of return. Free from political interference, there will not be a colour-coded spreadsheet in sight. That's what our community expects—good decisions made by the right people for the best interests of this nation.

See this speech in context