David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the minister representing the Minister for Resources, Minister Ayres. First off, congratulations on inking this huge $8.5 billion critical minerals deal with the United States. The Minerals Council claims that these deals could add $170 billion in GDP. What mechanism is the government putting in place to ensure that Australians get a fair cut of this potential new boom industry exploiting Australian resources that we own, and how will you make sure that we don't squander the opportunity like we've done with the exporting of gas?

Tim Ayres (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Industry and Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Pocock, for that question and that set of ideas about how Australia ought to make sure that Australia's natural assets are used to the benefit of Australia in our national interest but also that we are not just exporting ore overseas. That we are processing rare earths and critical minerals here for the benefit of our partners who invest in these projects is absolutely what has framed not just this partnership with the United States and our critical minerals approach more broadly but also our broader Future Made in Australia approach.

It is absolutely about making sure that Australia uses the unique advantages that we have. Almost all of these minerals are required as the world shifts its industrial processes, its communications technology, its computational capability and its defence technologies into technologies that require critical minerals and rare earths. Australia is in a unique position. All of the minerals that you'd want to have underneath the ground, enormous amounts of space and enormous wind and solar reserves that mean that, for almost all of the economies who are seeking clean and green production methods—we can deliver them here in Australia. That is what this partnership's about. We are delighted to see that it came with a series of practical investments in real projects.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator David Pocock, first supplementary?

David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, it's unclear from your answer how much Australians will actually get from exploiting our resources. Last time Labor was in power, you signed export gas agreements—multibillion, multidecadal agreements—which have really seen us not benefit that much at all from offshore LNG. Petroleum resource rent tax is set to decline. Japan is making over $1 billion onselling our gas. One in seven Australians now live in poverty. What is the plan for critical minerals to actually ensure that Australians benefit from Australian resources?

Tim Ayres (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Industry and Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The first thing that we want to do is make sure, as you say, that this is not just about extraction of resources. This is about onshore processing and production here in Australia. That means real things in real outer suburban and regional communities that need good jobs and need investment. On the tax front—we see these questions more broadly than just the tax questions, of course. We see them in national interest terms, national security and economic resilience terms, and employment and industry capability terms, but the resources sector does make a very significant contribution in tax terms—$48.5 billion in company tax in 2023-24.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator David Pocock, second supplementary?

David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We've heard the same argument with gas—jobs, jobs, jobs—and yet what I hear from people is that they can't actually find workers to fill jobs. When it comes to offshore LNG, Treasury tells us that we haven't had a single cent of petroleum resource rent tax. We've now got critical minerals. We look at Norway, with trillions of dollars in a sovereign wealth fund, and it sounds like the Albanese government doesn't actually have a plan to effectively tax critical minerals, despite you saying this is a huge part of our economic prosperity.

Tim Ayres (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Industry and Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I said, there was $48.5 billion in company tax in 2023-24. The four companies that paid the most company tax in Australia in 2023-24 were resources companies. Seven of the 10 top corporate taxpayers were from the resources sector. Labor's focus when it comes to tax has included changing the petroleum resource rent tax so that companies pay tax sooner. But our approach on gas is that gas is going to be absolutely central for Australian industry. That's why I think everybody who is engaged in the gas market at the moment, whether it's industry or onshore manufacturing, wants to see change in the gas market settings, and that's the process that this government has embarked upon. (Time expired)