Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I move Green amendments (1) to (2), as circulated in my name, together:

(1) Clause 8, page 12 (lines 15 and 16), omit subclause (2), substitute:

(2) For the purposes of this Act, major project threshold amount means:

  (a) for the period of 10 years starting on the day on which this section commences—$250 million; and

  (b) after the end of that period:

     (i) $250 million; or

     (ii) if the legislative rules specify another amount—that other amount.

(2) Clause 8, page 14 (after line 13), at the end of the clause, add:

Project may be deemed to be major project in special and extraordinary circumstances

(11) The Minister may, by legislative instrument, declare that a specified project is a major project for the purposes of this Act if the Minister is satisfied that:

  (a) project expenditure as referred to in subsection (1) is or will be less than the major project threshold amount; and

  (b) there are special and extraordinary circumstances that make it appropriate to treat the project as a major project.

(12) The legislative instrument may specify that the declaration is subject to any conditions imposed by the Authority, including conditions that the Minister directs the Authority to impose.

Project proponent may request that project be treated as major project

(13) A project proponent may, in writing, request the Authority to treat the proponent's project as a major project for the purposes of this Act, if the project proponent believes that:

  (a) project expenditure as referred to in subsection (1) is or will be less than the major project threshold amount; but

  (b) project expenditure is or will be at least $50 million.

(14) The Authority may:

  (a) reject the request; or

  (b) accept the request and declare, in writing, that the project is a major project for the purposes of this Act.

(15) The declaration may be subject to conditions imposed by the Authority and specified in the declaration.

The Greens are pleased to support this bill and commend the government on taking, at least, some small steps to deal with some of the problems that have arisen and the pressures on industry, especially manufacturing, as a result of the high Australian dollar. Also, we note and commend the emphasis on advanced manufacturing that came as part of the package and the announcement. I have had the pleasure of visiting some of those sites, for example, at CSIRO, where I have seen that advanced manufacturing in action where they are able to save up to 90 per cent of their material costs. As far as general manufacturing goes, had we been in the position to draft this bill we would have gone further and imposed local content requirements on some local projects, something that is done elsewhere around the world and something that has proved to be successful. When we know we have the situation on some resource projects here in Australia that, in addition to 83 per cent of the profits being sent overseas, as little as 10 per cent of the steel used is sourced in Australia, we have a significant problem. There is a real concern that we are essentially playing by rules that we do not ask others around the world to play by at all. There is 20 tonnes of steel, I am told, in the average wind turbine, and yet what we are doing in this country is digging up a lot of the ore and shipping it off and then having it processed elsewhere, and then it comes back to us in the form of a wind turbine which may be erected, or often may not in my state of Victoria, where we face restrictive planning laws that are putting a dent in the clean energy industry as well as domestic manufacturing.

A lot of those renewable energy projects are in the range of $200 million to $300 million. At the moment, they would fall under what counts as a major project threshold amount. Accordingly, one of the Greens amendments would have the effect of lowering the threshold so that the measures in the bill regarding Industry Participation Plans would apply to more projects in this country, particularly some of those projects that I have referred to. Indeed, some of the analysis that has been done by the Manufacturing Workers Union suggests that dropping the threshold to $250 million would increase the number of projects that would be caught by the bill by 25 to 30. The total value of those projects that would be caught by the bill is somewhere in the order of $12 billion. I note the WA state government encourages a threshold of $300 million for its AIP Plans.

There is a second part to the amendments, which is to allow in certain exceptional situations the government to declare a particular project to be a major project. This would also allow the government to identify particular projects as being of national significance and national importance, perhaps because of the region they are located in or perhaps because of the kind of work or jobs that they would attract, to identify those as being major projects. That is entirely appropriate because there may be particular needs for particular regions, particular skills that are being used, particular areas where there is high unemployment or particular areas where one project is coming off the boil and it may be appropriate to designate the next project in the line as a major project.

These are sensible amendments and, although they do not go as far as ultimately the Greens would like with respect to local content and so on, they are sensible amendments that I do hope that the government, and indeed the opposition, will be able to support. They are amendments that come with the strong urging of not only the Manufacturing Workers Union but the Australian Steel Institute. They are considered and they would make a significant difference and enhance the scope of this bill. I commend the amendments to the House.

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the amendments. Probably my only regret is that we are not going down to $50 million.

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak against the amendments. I was not going to but I was moved by the sheer hypocrisy of the statements made by the member for Melbourne. When I hear a member of the Greens talk about Australian jobs in manufacturing I get very angry, because I have seen the result of the Greens blackmailing the other side of the House into supporting the world's biggest carbon tax and I have seen that impact across manufacturing businesses across the country. These amendments make a bad bill worse and they are not genuinely intended for the interests of manufacturers. I tell you what has happened to manufacturing under this regime. We have seen 140,000 manufacturing jobs go—

Dick Adams (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! These are two amendments—

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am speaking to the amendments. The member for Melbourne—

Dick Adams (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The honourable member will listen to the chair. These are two amendments which are limited in their scope. It is not a general second reading debate. I asked the shadow minister to come back to the amendments.

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will come back to the amendments and address the comments directly made by the member for Melbourne. He talked about wind turbines being imported from overseas. You have to ask yourself the question why are so many manufactured products now coming from overseas. It is because they are more competitive against Australian manufactured goods, and a significant reason for that uncompetitiveness of Australian made goods is the carbon tax. So before the Greens try to pretend by moving these amendments that they are actually care for manufacturing, let people on both sides of this House look at the track record of the Greens and look at what they have done to Tasmania, that great state with extraordinary potential, over decades—destroying the economic potential, the manufacturing, the agricultural exports, the timber industry and the mining industry in that state—and ask yourselves whether these amendments are genuinely intended in the best interests of Australian manufacturing. Of course they are not, because if we really followed the Greens' agenda we would have no manufacturing in this country. This is feigned concern for the manufacturing sector. It makes a bad bill worse and the Greens will stand condemned for what they have done to the uncompetitiveness of manufacturing in this country.

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was not going to speak again on the Australian Jobs Bill but I will, as a result of the last speaker. I would agree with everything she said. But when she attributes the destruction of manufacturing in Australia, I would remind her that her Treasurer took the dollar from 52c to 90c, which halved the income for every manufacturer and every—

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The member for Kennedy is not referring to me in the appropriate manner.

Dick Adams (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Kennedy will refer to members by their correct titles.

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think that is the greatest intellectual thrust that she has made in this parliament since she has been here!

Dick Adams (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I ask members to address the matter before the chair.

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member said that the Greens were responsible for destruction in the Australian community, which is a proposition I agree with 100 per cent, but to attribute the destruction to the Greens when her party took the dollar—I am sorry; I will withdraw the word 'her'; when the honourable member's—

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, on a point of order on relevance: this debate has nothing to do with the previous administration and everything to do with the Australian Jobs Bill.

Dick Adams (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I do ask the member for Kennedy to address the amendments before the chair.

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, the previous speaker attributed the collapse of manufacturing in Australia to the Greens. That is what she said. She was entitled to say that. Well, I am entitled to say that under her party—and she does not want me to say it, but I will be saying it in her electorate during the election campaign, the honourable member representing the area near Shepparton—the dollar was driven from 52c to 90c, which halved the income of every single farmer in her electorate. Does she want to deny that—that the dollar being driven from 52c to 90c destroyed agriculture in her region? Does she want to deny that? It would be interesting to see it in her paper if she denies that.

Dick Adams (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I remind the honourable member for Kennedy that we are addressing two amendments. I ask him to address those amendments.

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker—

Dick Adams (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The honourable member will resume her seat.

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Oh, come on, Mr Deputy Speaker! She is just trying to stall for time because she cannot cop the pain.

Dick Adams (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Resume your seat.

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. To be of assistance, it appeared that the member for Kennedy was having some problems identifying my electorate; it is called Indi.

Dick Adams (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The shadow minister will resume her seat. The member for Kennedy: address the amendments before the chair.

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, if she gets up again you know that she is trying to shut me up—

Dick Adams (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order!

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

because she cannot cop the pain.

Dick Adams (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The honourable member will address the amendments.

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, Mr Deputy Speaker, the issue before the House is industry—the construction of industry. And we are not, as Australians, getting a look-in at the tendering process. This is not going to solve that problem. But it will help to at least give us the opportunity to have a go, because we are not getting the opportunity to have a go. This is something, clearly, that the honourable member who spoke previously does not understand, and I hope that someone in her party will explain it to her later on because it requires explanation.

If you are creating a new mine in this country—and the only construction that is taking place in this country is mining—the parts, the components, everything, are being flown in or shipped in from overseas, and then they are being put together by construction crews from overseas. Our local contractors do not get a look-in anywhere along the line. Under the honourable member's government and the previous ALP government, all the great mining companies in Australia were flogged off to foreigners. So now they do deals with their foreign mates at Bechtel and the big international building corporations, and the locals do not get a look-in at any stage whatsoever. It is extraordinary to me that no-one on the right-hand side of the House would be taking the position that Australians should be able to get a look-in at the tendering process, and that is all that this bill is about. I wish it went further, but it really does not do much substantially at all. (Time expired)

Dick Adams (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the amendments be agreed to.

A division having been called and the bells having been rung—

As there are fewer than five members on the side for the ayes, I declare the question resolved in the negative in accordance with standing order 127. The names of those members who are in the minority will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings.

Question negatived, Mr Bandt, Mr Katter and Mr Wilkie voting aye.

The question now is that the bill be agreed to.

Question agreed to.