General Debate

United States-Australia Framework for Securing of Supply in the Mining and Processing of Critical Minerals and Rare Earths

House of Representatives · Monday 3 November 2025

Official Hansard for this day (APH) · Read this debate on OpenAustralia

At a glance

The House debated a motion acknowledging the signing of the US-Australia critical minerals framework during the Prime Minister's visit to Washington DC. Government members argued the agreement strengthens supply chain resilience, supports the Future Made in Australia agenda, and complements domestic measures like the Critical Minerals Strategic Reserve. Opposition members criticised the lack of concrete plans for domestic processing, citing high energy costs and regulatory barriers as obstacles to local investment. An independent member warned against repeating past failures in resource taxation and export management.

Outcome

The motion was agreed to without division.

Summary in reported speech - not a transcript. AI-generated, so check the official record before quoting.

How the debate unfolded

Opened the debate

Matt Burnell (Spence) (Australian Labor Party) ALP

Burnell moved the motion to acknowledge the framework as a landmark achievement for economic and strategic security. Burnell argued the agreement supports the Future Made in Australia agenda by boosting investment in new export sectors and creating regional jobs. Burnell highlighted that both nations pledged at least $1 billion each to speed up projects. Burnell noted the framework complements the establishment of the Critical Minerals Strategic Reserve, which aims to manage market volatility and is expected to be operational by the end of 2026.

Opposition response

Melissa Price (Durack) (Liberal Party) Liberal

Price acknowledged the alliance's importance but raised concerns about the execution of the framework. Price argued there is no clear plan for translating the agreement into new processing facilities or regional jobs. Price claimed government environmental laws create red tape that jeopardises critical minerals projects. Price contended that high electricity costs and inflation are harming Australian industry, citing the potential closure of the Tomago aluminium smelter as evidence of government failure.

Luke Gosling (Solomon) (Australian Labor Party) ALP support

Gosling highlighted the Arafura Nolans project in the Northern Territory as an example of successful government and industry collaboration. Gosling stated the project would deliver over 600 construction jobs and 350 long-term operational roles. Gosling explained that the framework provides architecture for accessing US financing and enhancing investor confidence through transparency. Gosling reiterated the commitment to establishing the Critical Minerals Strategic Reserve by the end of 2026 to manage supply chain volatility.
Sophie Scamps (Mackellar) (Independent) Ind mixed

Scamps argued that securing critical mineral supply is essential due to China's dominance in processing and recent export restrictions. Scamps warned against repeating the mistakes of the gas export industry, where high domestic prices and low tax contributions benefited foreign companies. Scamps noted that since 2015, gas firms had shipped out LNG valued at almost $132 billion, with many paying zero company tax. Scamps urged the government to ensure taxpayers receive a fair return on investments in the critical minerals sector.
Tania Lawrence (Hasluck) (Australian Labor Party) ALP support

Lawrence detailed the framework's provisions, including a mining ministerial within six months and a supply security response group. Lawrence outlined the $1.2 billion allocated for the Critical Minerals Strategic Reserve, which will use offtake agreements and selective stockpiling. Lawrence highlighted the $7 billion Critical Minerals Production Tax Incentive, offering a 10 per cent refundable tax offset for processing costs. Lawrence noted broad support for these policies from industry stakeholders and unions.
Andrew Willcox (Dawson) (Liberal National Party) LNP oppose

Willcox characterised the deal as a geopolitical gesture that fails to address Australia's lack of domestic manufacturing capacity. Willcox argued that high industrial electricity costs, up to twice those in Canada and the USA, make local processing economically unviable. Willcox claimed the government squandered leverage to negotiate tariff reductions for value-added exports. Willcox called for affordable baseload power and incentives for domestic smelting to prevent the loss of jobs and profits overseas.

Opened by

Matt Burnell (Spence) (Australian Labor Party)

ALP

Speeches

6 speeches, 4 other contributors

Topics

Gas & Resources Manufacturing & Industry Tax United States

Debate Answers to Questions Take Note Debate, 15 Sep 2026 · Shared topics: Manufacturing & Industry, Tax
Debate Whyalla Steelworks Matter of Public Importance, 15 Sep 2026 · Shared topics: Gas & Resources, Manufacturing & Industry
Question Time Senate Question Time 13 Aug 2026 · Shared topics: Gas & Resources, Manufacturing & Industry
Question Time Senate Question Time 19 Aug 2026 · Shared topics: Manufacturing & Industry, Tax

About House of Representatives debates

The House of Representatives debates bills, motions and matters of public importance in its main chamber. Members from all parties can take part, and the responsible minister usually replies for the government. Summaries are in reported speech, not transcripts; always check the official record before quoting.