Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026

Ms BOELE (Bradfield) (18:35): This is my first opportunity to participate in a detailed debate regarding Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026, and in fact I was not a member in this place when the bills that are currently being debated were introduced. I approached this debate in the spirit of what the people of Bradfield have sent me here to do, and, very specifically, that is to hold this government to account.

This very debate could not be more appropriate for setting about that task. First, here is a bit about me and where I come from in my line of questioning: I have been appointed to two parliamentary committees because the scope of those committees is so close to my professional work of 35 years and because it's where I believe we can achieve outcomes to strengthen our economy and our national security now and help set up Australia in our region for this century.

Those committees are the Standing Committee on Climate Change, Energy, Environment and Water and theStanding Committee on Industry, Innovation and Science. My professional choices have been based around my learned belief that, with the appropriate government signals, such as what we choose to tax and how we de-risk capital, and appropriate competition and consumer protections, science industry and business can and should be the engine room for our economy.

I want to use this opportunity to commend the government for designing and passing the Future Made in Australia set of laws last term. It was both defensive and opportunistic—defensive because of the actions of the then Biden administration, which sought to retool its economy via the Inflation Reduction Act. The North American act saw businesses from Australia, already in this depleted secondary sector, leave our shores for the United States because the conditions for investment and government offtakes were more favourable there than here in Australia.

The FMIA was designed to help keep our nascent clean industries here in Australia, and, with the Trump administration curtailing the IRA and adding tariffs, the FMIA has proven to be an opportunistic move, where we are now in a position to welcome those businesses back and, indeed, new ones to our shores. I don't have to tell you, Assistant Minister, that the beauty of the FMIA is that, done well, we can build the scale of clean industrial power needed to decarbonise our critical and other mineral commodities ahead of export.

In doing so, we not only deliver ridiculously cheap and reliable energy for our nation; we also help to decarbonise the global resources economy. The FMIA feels to me like the opposite of approving the extension to the North West Shelf gas project. That project will see our nation export decades of unmitigated climate pollution to our region whilst the FMIA in contrast is about substituting the export of raw resources, such as iron ore, to South Korea, China and Japan for boatloads of green iron to those same countries.

This green iron will be built on low-emissions renewable energy, free from the price shocks and supply constraints caused by international conflict and also built by Australians participating in meaningful, clean regional jobs. When I say that I want to hold the government to account on this, what I mean is that I really want to make sure that these good ideas—the FMIA, the Reconstruction Fund, the National Battery Strategy, the Industry Growth Program, the Cooperative Research Centres Program and the Research and Development Tax Incentive—are delivered to the maximum benefit of the people of Bradfield and, in fact, all Australian communities.

That's why I've chosen to ask these questions of you today, Assistant Minister, and there will be many more of these during my remaining term in the 48th Parliament. This question is aimed at understanding how we can utilise the National Battery Strategy and the FMIA to build domestic manufacturing capabilities in cooperation with international partners: Firstly, how can this government use the NRF to partner with world battery manufacturing leaders to build both battery manufacturing and battery recycling capacities here in Australia?

Secondly, how can the government, through increased manufacturing, leverage the massive demand pull for battery electrification of the mining equipment fleet here in Australia? Thirdly, how does the assistant minister plan to work across portfolios, such as with Treasury, to raise awareness and advocate for remedies to current government policies that run counter to the objectives of these otherwise laudable industry initiatives—namely, the $12 billion annual subsidy for expensive, high emissions, imported diesel, where it's used by local and multinational miners in mining equipment?

If the government is to truly deliver on the opportunities that are latent within these industry initiatives, these are the sorts of cross-departmental roadblocks that need your attention and stewardship, Assistant Minister.