ANDY PARKS, HOST: Well, the Future Made in Australia bill is one of the government's biggest selling points, knitting together how Australia builds and produces our economy, our green future and our ambition for a competitive edge on the international stage. The bill is currently before the Senate but there is some criticism that the plan is vague and difficult to interpret and there are calls from some quarters that the Treasury's role in the scheme be limited. Tim Ayres is the Assistant Minister for a Future Made in Australia - a new role off the back of the recent government reshuffle. Welcome back to drive, Senator. 

SENATOR TIM AYRES, ASSISTANT MINISTER FOR A FUTURE MADE IN AUSTRALIA AND TRADE: G'day, Andy. Good to be on the show. 

PARKS: This Future Made in Australia policy, it's like a capital letter policy, if you like. It's a big, bold $22.7 billion plan. But I just wonder that in the kind of writ largeness of this plan, that there is.... that it is too big, it's trying to do too much at once, that it's too vague. How do you respond to that? 

AYRES: Well, it's very clear. Its scope is very carefully set out in the legislation. It is, as you say, the biggest pro-manufacturing package in Australian history from any Australian government. It is, at its heart...the largest measures are very simple, very straightforward to understand. They are production tax credits. That will mean that firms that manufacture within the scope of the scheme will be eligible for tax credits when they produce in Australia. So, if it's critical metals processing or iron processing or steel production in those areas, for example, firms will become eligible for tax credits, and that is an important part of Australia, moving up the value chain and creating good jobs in our regions and outer suburbs. 

PARKS: OK, here's an example of what I mean. Some of these proposed laws and these credits would mean that businesses would have to meet certain, “community benefit principles” to win these Commonwealth industry support measures. But the main group representing the industry has said that it's vague and difficult to interpret. So, my question to you is; does the government need to do better to explain exactly what needs to happen and what the support is? 

AYRES: Well, the bill is before parliament. Now, the government is engaged with business .... particularly on those community benefit principles. I think every Australian would agree if we are investing in the future of Australian industry, reindustrializing our economy, the jobs that we create here in Australia should be good jobs. They should be the kind of good jobs that represent good careers for boys and girls who are studying at school today and are interested in engineering or trades roles. We want them to be good jobs that young people can build a life on. And so, of course, the community benefit principles are important, and they'll be vital for making sure that these are good investments that make a difference in the regions that they arrive in. 

PARKS: If they are so important, Senator, wouldn't they be modelled... wouldn't there be some indication of how many jobs it would create in terms of a direct link from these community benefit principles that you've just outlined and those jobs that you've also outlined? 

ARYES: Well, the first answer, I think, Andy, is what it means is more jobs. It means more good jobs, more investment in manufacturing. 

PARKS: How many jobs, Senator? 

AYRES Let me come to that point. More than the current trajectory has us on, which is - we've become a less complex economy, and we need to build industrial capability to deal with some of the big national interest challenges that Australia confronts now. Often the question about modelling is directed towards an answer that can't possibly be given. The answer really is more jobs, more industrial capability. This starts from the premise [that] we have a moment in history where we can capture our comparative advantage. Our vast mineral resources are below the ground, our solar and wind resources, the best in the world, above the ground. Our industrial capability that exists now, we can choose to capture that for future generations, or we can let the train leave the station. 

PARKS: I'm with you on the vision. I'm just asking about the details. I mean, you talked about the very beautiful vision of jobs for boys and girls in Australia. But how many is the question? 

AYRES: Well, more is the answer. I mean, there will be more industrial capability and of course, the community benefit principles are there because we are focused on making sure that we squeeze the maximum value out of every investment. The National Interest Framework is there to make sure that there is rigour applied. My experience with requests for modelling in these kinds of policy areas is that modelling produces all sorts of results, Andy. But in the end, what do we need? We need investment in Australian industrial capability. This is designed to secure that investment. We'll keep working with our partners in the private sector and with Australian unions and with the industry broadly. 

PARKS: The Productivity Commissioner, Danielle Wood, isn't convinced by the plan. Is that a problem for the government? She has doubts that more government intervention is the best pathway to achieve net zero. Have you or any other Minister spoken to her about these concerns? 

AYRES: I welcome the commentary from the Productivity Commission. They are playing their role and their function. I've read their commentary carefully and they've made some comments about industry policy in the broad. But they have not criticized directly the Australian government's approach here in relation to production tax credits. These are a no regrets measure, that there is a tax credit that is available only if a firm has done all of the investment work and has started to manufacture in Australia. There is, as I say, a no regrets measure. It is a smart industry policy and it's going to produce generations of investment and new jobs in regions and suburbs that have seen investment retreating. 

PARKS: The PC says there... or has warned of the need to subject industrial policy to strict cost-benefit analysis. Isn't that part of this criticism about vagueness? 

AYRES: Well, that's exactly why the National Interest Framework is at the heart of the legislation. The Productivity Commission is right. There should be a proper analysis as each part of the policy and investment decisions are made. We've got to be absolutely rigorous. The National Interest Framework delivers that rigour. I'm very comfortable and confident with that and welcome the role that the Productivity Commission plays in this. It's important to have that voice out there in the policy-making process, but I'm confident the act does that work adequately. 

PARKS: The Future Made in Australia Bill is currently before the Senate, are you confident that you'll get the support you need to get it through? 

AYRES: Well, it's very interesting the opposition's position on this. I mean, they have been opposed to every single one of these reforms. Peter Dutton has said up until today, these are handouts to billionaires. He's used the most negative political formulation when this is about investment in the future of Australian manufacturing. when he arrived in Western Australia, because he doesn't get Western Australia and how important resources, and manufacturing are to the Western Australian economy. I understand that he's changed his tune. He's flip flopped on this question, flapping his gums on the east coast of Australia in one direction. And then when he's arrived in Western Australia, he's singing a different tune. I mean, he's not a serious person on these questions. He's not engaging with what the real national interest questions are here. The Australian Government, like governments around the world, is acting to invest in the future, to invest in speeding up the development of our energy system and the construction of new manufacturing jobs. It is a smart industry and everybody across the parliament should be supporting it. And we'll keep working with colleagues across the parliament as this goes through, particularly on the Senate crossbench. 

PARKS: Well, Senator, I do appreciate you engaging with these questions. With me today, Tim Ayres is the assistant Minister for a Future Made in Australia. Good to talk to you. 

AYRES: Anytime, Andy. Thank you. 

ENDS.