Community Benefit Principles 1 and 2 public consultation information webinar
Transcript
The following is a transcript of the above webinar held on Tuesday 13 January 2026 and presented by:
Rebecca Lannen, General Manager for the Future Made in Australia Implementation Branch
Ryan Dawson, Manager Future Made in Australia Implementation.
Errors and omissions excepted. Subheadings added to improve readability.
Introduction
[Rebecca Lannen speaks]
Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to today's public information webinar on the Future Made in Australia Community Benefit Principles 1 and 2. My name is Rebecca Lannen. I'm the General Manager for the Future Made in Australia Implementation Branch in the Department of Industry, Science and Resources.
And I speak with you today, from Brisbane, on the traditional lands of the Turrbal and Yuggera peoples. I pay my respects to their elders past and present and extend that respect to elders of all nations across this country.
Focus of today’s webinar
Today's webinar is the first of 3 webinars on the Community Benefit Principles. Today we'll provide more information on Principles 1 and 2 and their intended outcomes and application. Tomorrow and Thursday’s webinars will focus on Principles 3 and 4, and 5 and 6 respectively.
This webinar is being recorded, and the recording will be made available in the department’s consultation hub web page where you would have seen the public guidance documentation and links to register. For all engagements (this is a bit of housekeeping) we'll be using the Q&A function. There'll be an opportunity to ask questions through that function, which we'll come to as a particular session at the end.
The chat function will not be available for this session. If we don't have an answer to your question, we'll come back with an answer, posting on the web page, in the frequently asked questions document. If, however, your question requires a more tailored response, we'll get back to you via email directly if that's okay. We've allocated an hour for today's webinar, and while there's information I will share, we hope to have allowed a decent amount of time for the Q&A, So, we may finish right on time, but we may finish a bit earlier.
Consultation process
In summary, today's webinar follows from the video presentation and guidance documentation released late last year. You may have also seen a link on the web page to the video presentation. That presentation provided the overarching information in the context of the consultation process.
It summarises elements from the Future Made in Australia agenda, the Production Tax Incentives and the Community Benefit Principles. It also explains the consultation documents and the rationale for the consultation, and it outlines the feedback we're seeking and how to provide that feedback.
Today's webinar will provide a recap of some of that information, but if you wanted more of an overview of the Future Made in Australia agenda, I'd encourage you to have a look at that recording.
A Future Made in Australia
So, a bit of a recap for you. The government's intention for the Future Made in Australia agenda is to leverage low-cost renewable energy, skilled workforce and natural resources. This aims to create new clean energy industries and make a substantial contribution to global emissions reduction and the world's net zero commitments. It's also about strengthening priority supply chains, improving economic resilience and security, and remaining an indispensable part of the net zero global economy.
The Future Made in Australia Act, which is part of the Future Made in Australia agenda, gives effect to the Community Benefit Principles or the Principles which you might hear me referring to them as, and also the Future Made in Australia plans, which are both the subjects of this consultation.
The Act requires recipients of Future Made in Australia support to have a Future Made in Australia plan to explain how a project would provide benefits consistent with the Community Benefit Principles to ensure accountability and transparency.
So, decision-makers must have regard to the Principles when deciding on whether Future Made in Australia support should be provided and project proponents receiving Future Made in Australia support at or above a threshold, must have in place a Future Made in Australia plan which points to how they will have a look at those Community Benefit Principles.
Also, part of this agenda is the Future Made in Australia Production Tax Credits and Other Measures Act, which establishes the modern hydrogen Production Tax Incentive and the Critical Minerals Production Tax Incentive. These incentives will support Australia's efforts to decarbonise our industries and produce and process more of the minerals needed for energy transition. So, this consultation focuses on both the implementation of the Principles of Future Made in Australia support and the application of those Principles to the Future Made in Australia Production Tax Incentives.
Your feedback
Sitting at the heart of this consultation is about hearing from you - hearing from you about the challenges and opportunities associated with ensuring funding from Future Made in Australia projects flows to communities in a way that actually benefits those communities, local workers and businesses. It's about how it will work practically, how it will work proportionally, flexibly, fairly and how it will be balanced.
Through this consultation, we are seeking your views on the implementation of the Principles, which you would have seen in the public documentation, the minimum requirements, which are requirements that apply to all projects seeking Future Made in Australia support, threshold requirements, and there's two bits for the threshold requirements.
This is relates to the requirements that apply to projects seeking Future Made in Australia support at or above a financial threshold, so we're seeking feedback from you about what a financial threshold amount is or could be. And it's also about considerations for Future Made in Australia plans, which explain how a project would provide benefits consistent with the Principles.
It includes how commitments against each Principle will also be monitored and enforced, and in the documentation we have also presented to you a proposed approach to implementing the Principles. These proposed approaches that we've addressed through the documentation are the starting point for a discussion. However, these are the things that we want to hear from you. We want to hear from you, views on how the Principles can be applied in practise so we can make sure the policy framework is practical and effective.
Insights received from the consultation will help editing of the public guidance documentation that will support proponents and decision-makers to apply the Principles consistently and transparently. And the insights from this consultation will also be considered when drafting rules, to be made out of the Future Made in Australia Act. Those rules are the legislative instrument prescribing specific guidance or instructions to implement the Principles, and these rules will help guide how the Principles are put into effect.
The guidance also outlines requirements proposed for inclusion in the rules to be developed by the Treasurer under taxation legislation and insights received from this consultation will be considered when drafting these rules too.
So, before we move to the Principles 1 and 2, there are six Community Benefit Principles and, as you can see, they cover a wide range of policy areas, including employment and skills, supporting the transition to net zero. They talk to traditional industry policy and tax compliance. The Principles are legislated in section 10 of the Future Made in Australia Act, which I referred to earlier. And fundamentally, the Principles are about ensuring public investment in projects delivers benefits to local communities, businesses and workers, including First Nations peoples.
These Principles were shaped by stakeholder feedback when the Future Made in Australia Bill was introduced to Parliament in 2024 and was reviewed by a parliamentary committee. Today, we're focusing on the first two, as you know, and the next set of slides is information taken from the public guidance documentation, which again, is aimed at providing a starting point for our discussions and a starting point for our consultation on these two principles.
Community Benefit Principle 1: Promoting safe and secure jobs that are well paid and have good conditions
So, when we're looking at Principle 1, it's about project proponents providing safe and secure jobs that are well paid and have good conditions. We know that you know the fundamentals of what a safe job and a secure job means. But if we all can start from the same starting point, the government's vision for the first Principle is for a dynamic and inclusive labour market, in which everyone has the opportunity for secure, well-paid work, and people, businesses and communities can be beneficiaries of change and thrive.
You may have also seen that government has committed to establishing a Secure Australian Jobs Code to prioritise secure work in government contracts and ensure government purchasing power is being used to support businesses and engage in fair, equitable, ethical and sustainable practises. To the extent possible, requirements under this Principle will align with the requirements of the Secure Australian Jobs Code. The Department of Employment Workplace Relations is now consulting on the code and a link to that consultation can be found on the Community Benefit Principles consultation page as well.
So, what do we mean when we talk about safe jobs? So, this will be familiar to all of you but safe jobs are those where physical and psychosocial risks to health and safety are proactively managed in alignment with work, health and safety laws and in close consultation with workers and the health and safety representatives were applicable.
The guidance documentation speaks to the benefits of upholding a safe workplace which increases attraction and retention of an appropriate skilled workforce, while reducing the likelihood of negative outcomes for employers and employees. The actions on the screen are some of the actions that have been identified to help make them safe.
When we speak of secure jobs, you'll see in the guidance documentation that secure jobs are those where workers have reasonable certainty about tenure of employment, pay and conditions, and are free from exploitation. It's acknowledged in the documentation that jobs are secure, well paid and have good conditions, benefit the economy by driving consumer demand and helping businesses thrive and grow. And again, the actions listed on this screen are some of the actions that have been identified to help make jobs secure.
So, when thinking about safe and secure jobs, we then think about what would be the minimum requirements for proponents receiving Future Made in Australia support and how they would outline their commitments. So again, you’ll see in the documentation, all projects seeking Future Made in Australia support must meet minimum requirements for each Principle.
So, for this Principle, Principle 1, the minimum requirements we're seeking advice on, are around whether proponents must have a target for the percentage of workers in secure jobs and the target should be negotiated based on the proportion of permanent employees from the relevant Australia and New Zealand's standard industrial classification code of the proponent.
Whether the proponents must outline how they would demonstrate a positive approach to workplace relations, which could include information on policies developed with employees and their representatives for handling complaints and disputes about workplace terms and conditions. Whether they're doing that fairly, transparently and in a timely manner. It could also mean how they will ensure compliance with relevant workplace laws, including the Fair Work Act, whether they have policies to notify relevant decision-makers of any non-compliance with legislative obligations and the proponent will rectify that non-compliance.
In addition, you'll see in the documentation that it talks of whether a proponent must demonstrate support for freedom of association and the role of workplace delegates, by developing policies outlining employees’ rights to choose whether to join or be represented by industrial association, and emphasising employees’ rights to participate in activities related to industrial associations.
It also speaks to whether proponents must also show they are compliant with all obligations under applicable work health and safety legislation and provide a summary of previous health and work and safety incidents in the response.
Our question for you is, are these requirements reasonable? Are there additional or alternative minimum requirements that could be included? And you'll see from the cover note of the documentation that's been released that these are some of the questions that we're asking the public to give us feedback on. We're also asking feedback on threshold requirements.
So, beyond the minimum requirements, are the threshold requirements for projects seeking Future Made in Australia support at or above a financial threshold? So, I mentioned before, what must be met under those requirements? So again, we're seeking your advice on things like whether the proponents must have a hiring plan to identify, attract and recruit potential local candidates and workers.
Should this plan include information on community outreach, such as partnering with local employment service providers, community organisations and educational institutions? Should proponents also be required to have a policy outlining how the project will limit the use of casual, fixed term or contract workers and create a more positive and supportive working environment?
We're also asking, through the threshold question, about the financial amount, as I mentioned before as well, what would be a reasonable amount from your experience? What would be the amount that would trigger from minimum requirements to additional threshold requirements?
So, this concludes the information in a little more detail on Principle 1 in this session. But before I move to Principle 2, because as you will know, the two are closely linked, I want to take a moment to invite you to add any questions you might have at this stage in the Q&A function. We'll address these questions as well as any further questions towards the end of the webinar, which I mentioned in my introduction. But when writing your question, can we ask you please include your organisation that you're from, if that's okay. Alright, thank you.
Community Benefit Principle 2: Promoting safe and secure jobs that are well paid and have good conditions
So, moving on to Principle 2, this is about project proponents developing more skilled and inclusive workforces, including by investing in training and skills development and broadening opportunities for workforce participation. The second Principle focuses on the government's vision for a workforce in Australia that has the skills needed to effectively respond to and benefit from, the net zero transition, while being inclusive and diverse and free from barriers that hinder workforce participation.
It's intended that achieving this vision for this Principle, will equip the workforce, particularly local communities, with the capabilities to work in new industries. The public guidance documentation outlines a skilled workforce to be well equipped to respond to a changing global economy and heightened geostrategic competition.
The skilled workforce in Australia will be able to benefit from that zero transition as well as responding to it effectively. Investing in skilled workforces helps to attract and retain employees with the right skills, particularly when skills shortages exist and competition for the same skills is high, which I'm sure you're well aware of.
The documentation, as you will see, points to promoting skilled workforces. Employees should take action through measures such as training, recruitment, job design, apprenticeships, workforce strategies and targets. Engaging communities and locations in which projects intend to operate is important to understand existing skill levels and gaps in the local area so projects can design targeted training programmes.
And as many of you will be well aware, that doing this fosters cooperation, leading to partnerships with local vocational institutes and training centres. So what the documentation has tried to do is outline the context for Principle 2 - with all of the principles - but let's just recap on the context for Principle 2.
So, when we speak of inclusive workforces - and again, many of you will be familiar with - it's about where opportunities are broadened for full and equitable workplace participation. It goes to much research which indicates, which many of you again will be aware of, around accessibility and opportunity for women, people with disabilities, carers, mature aged people, young people, the long-term unemployed, First Nations peoples and people from cultural, culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. Broadening opportunities for workforce participation is critical to addressing workforce shortages and will help address economic disparities.
So, when we speak to minimum requirements, this information again is taken from the documentation and is providing a starting point for discussion. The minimum requirements for seeking your advice on, are points around whether all project proponents seeking Future Made in Australia support must confirm that they are not on the Workplace Gender Equality Agency’s most recently published ‘named as non-compliant’ list for failing to comply with the Workplace Gender Equality Act, and whether project partners must also not be on that non-compliant list.
The documentation also asked questions around threshold requirements for Principle 2. The documentation outlines what these extra requirements could look like. For example, projects seeking Future Made in Australia support at or above the financial threshold must have an identified target for labour hours that will be set aside for apprentices, trainees and graduates, including female apprentices, trainees and graduates.
This could be based on the current industry or sector averages, or where relevant, sector targets set in the Australian Skills Guarantee, whether the proponent should also have a plan including targets, expected progress and actions on diversity and inclusion and gender equality.
And in addition, proponents requiring a policy outlining how the project will enhance workforce capability, which could include information on the plan for ongoing skills development, training and engagement with local education and training providers. Again, could these work? Are there other threshold requirements that we should take into consideration or could more accurately be applied for Principle 2? These are the types of feedback, and these are the types of questions and responses and advice that we're seeking.
The other part of the consultation, which I'd mentioned earlier, is around monitoring and reporting. So, for all of the Principles, and this is across all six Principles, to achieve the vision and intended outcomes I've just described, how are we going to know and how are we going to effectively monitor? Guidance for processes and commitments will be monitored through reporting and a process of reporting and renegotiating commitments if any issues arise as the project progresses.
So, it goes back to the flexibility of it. We're also proposing there will be consequences if non-compliance is significant and sustained. So, through this consultation we're keen to hear from you about exactly what and how we should monitor to ensure that project proponents meet the intended outcomes of the Principles. We're also interested to hear feedback on the details of the approach to reporting and enforcement.
One of the objectives, as you would have seen too, is around fair and balanced and it's balancing the administration, but also the accountability and the transparency of implementing these Principles.
We've included on the slide, some guiding questions to think about when it comes to providing feedback through this process - questions around:
should monitoring and reporting demonstrate delivery against the two Principles, and how?
are there other appropriate mechanisms to assure commitments are met for these Principles?
what's the appropriate frequency and level of detail for proponents to report against?
Through this consultation period, feedback can be uploaded as an attachment to the consultation page listed on the slide or sent via post. The documentation presents many questions. You can answer some, or all the questions or comment on issues more broadly.
If you have any questions or queries or you wish to send your submission via post, you can email us at the CBP consultation mailbox listed here on the screen and we're accepting submissions until the end of the day on Monday, the 2nd of February.
Once the public consultation process finishes, feedback will inform the rule. As I mentioned before, also finalised in the public guidance documentation.
Q&A
But for now I will pause and we'll go to the Q&A function in the teams chat where I think questions have already started to come in. I'll now invite Ryan Dawson, who's the manager in my team of the Community Benefit Principles. So Ryan, Mr Dawson, I will ask you to join me and we can go through some of the questions. But as I mentioned, we've allowed a healthy amount of time for the Q&A format, so over to you Ryan.
[Ryan Dawson speaks]
Thanks Bec, and thanks for the overview of Community Benefit Principles 1 and 2. So, we did receive a few pre-submitted questions in advance of the webinar registration, so I've put them in the Q&A chat and you should be able to see that on the side there right now. We'll try to go through some of those questions in advance, but encourage you to ask any questions that you have in the in the question function as well.
Question 1
So, the first question was around how the Community Benefit Principles will be assessed for different sized businesses, whether it's ASX 50 versus a startup.
Answer
I think the answer to that is that the threshold is a key focus of this consultation and its purpose is to ensure that threshold requirements in FMA plans not impose unnecessary administrative burden on smaller projects. So, projects below the threshold will be exempt from those threshold requirements in FMA plans, however, decision-makers would still apply the minimum requirements.
I think it's just important to note we're just really keen to hear your views on the threshold, what is a suitable amount to ensure that it fits with the principles that we're trying to adopt the CBPs, and that they are proportionate to the size and nature of the Future Made in Australia support provided.
Question 2
Can go to the next question. So, in relation to Community Benefit Principles, one of the requirements relates to legal minimums rather than the best practise principles. This is in contrast to many state and territory procurement codes such as the Victorian Jobs Code, ACT secure local jobs code, and the now repealed Queensland BPIC that include or included requirements such as a Union Enterprise Agreement, enforceable quotas for women, extensive consultation with unions, et cetera. Why have these stronger enforceable models not been followed, when they are more accurately aligned with the purpose of the scheme to provide secure, well-paid and safe jobs?
Answer
So firstly, thank you for the suggestion about what could be included in the requirements. I think that's why the government is seeking feedback on how the Principles will be implemented under the FMA agenda.
So, we just want to understand the challenges and opportunities associated with ensuring that funding these projects flows to communities in ways that benefit workers. So, I'd point you to the consultation papers and where we ask about possible additional commitments and that proponents may be asked to negotiate with decision-makers, whether or not to introduce these commitments is subject to consultation, so we're keen to hear your views on these topics.
Question 3
Here’s another question. Can you explain the intention for workforce targets and the like? How third-party contractors would be considered or not, for example, as part of construction?
Answer
Yeah, I think, again, these are the key questions that we're looking for your insights to determine what is an appropriate inclusion under each of the principles themselves. So, we're looking to see what are the problems and pitfalls in relation to each of the additions. So, your thoughts on these kind of subjects as the experts in your fields will inform the government to ensure that the principles are tailored and relate to the best outcomes for us.
Question 4
So, a fourth question. Can you explain what health and safety incidents are intended to be reportable, for example, those that are reportable under state laws and the national rationale for including these in a public report?
Answer
We can envision some privacy and other commercial concerns arising from publication of these. I think it's important to note that under (and it's listed throughout the public guidance document about our intention) that under our Future Made in Australia support rule the proponent can request that decision-makers determine that certain information is not required to be included in a published copy of the plan. If that relates to personal or commercially sensitive information, it's important that we receive your feedback to ensure that this is tailored in the best way to manage these outcomes for the communities.
Question 5
Another question. Can you clarify with all the various plans set out as part of the overall plan, is it envisaged that as parts of one plan, reporting seems somewhat onerous otherwise?
Answer
Yeah so, I think in relation to this, you're right like that as part of what we have set out for this public guidance and how we apply the Community Benefit Principles there are listings for such plans. Again, we are looking to hear your kind of views about what is a proportionate amount of reporting and administrative burden that is worth to the size and nature of the Future Made in Australia support provided. It needs to be imposed in a way that's fair and balanced to ensure communities benefit from these investments as well.
I think there's a few other questions now that I've just entered through the Q&A function from this particular session as well.
[Rebecca Lannen speaks]
Okay, great.
Question 6
[Ryan Dawson speaks]
So, we've got a question here. My question is about the availability of a pro forma or format for a response or a Community Benefit Principles plan. Will there be a template provided for proponents to use to ensure that they have addressed each minimum requirement and threshold?
Answer
So, thanks for your question. We will update the draft guidance material over time to provide on how each of the CBPs, and we are keen to see how, from you, whether there is benefit of providing other tools or support to address the CBPs such as a proforma form or a format or a response. So, your feedback on that is much appreciated, if that will facilitate the administration of these to go through the process of ensuring that the decision-maker has regard to the Principles when they're deciding on that FMA support.
Question 7
Another question here. So, we can see that some of the FMIA supports projects might be at the very early stage of development, so difficult to make firm commitments on many of these aspects. What would be the approach for adjusting their requirements to be more appropriate for the nature of the funding and stage of the development?
Answer
So, I think it's important to note that the Community Benefit Principles recognise that investment should support better outcomes for people or the places that live in the services that they rely on, and the regional industries and economies that are core to Australia's prosperity. So, just calling back to the four objectives that are really guiding our approach to implementing the principles being that:
they are proportionate to the size of the support provided
they're robust but flexible, allowing communities and industries to work together to deliver the best outcomes for each individual project
they're transparent, support public trust and ensure public investments are helping achieve desired community benefits, and that they're imposed in a way that's fair and balanced to ensure communities benefit from investments, but not such a cost to applicants that they undermine the primary purposes of the Future Made in Australia agenda.
So yes, keen to hear your views and how we can tailor so that those projects at the very early stages of that development are not adversely impacted in accordance with those the Principles that we're trying to implement - the CBPs.
Question 8
Question. Can you explain further the rationale for making some of these aspects publicly reportable? Or many may already be required, but not necessarily reported publicly? Commercial sensitivities, privacy, et cetera.
Answer
So, publishing FMA plans on websites promotes transparency and trust in the community. It also ensures proponents are held accountable for delivering the actions outlined in the plan. Where plan commitments are not upheld, the decision-maker and support entity may withhold FMA funding.
And I will call back to what I mentioned earlier, there will be a decision that needs to be taken between the decision-maker and the proponent about what is considered sensitive - commercially sensitive information - and could be not released at that time.
Question 9
So, there’s a question from Will Lawrence and the Minerals Council of Australia. So, thank you, Will. Page 19 of the public guidance notes that decision-makers may make the case to waive a specific requirement if it is not applicable to a particular project.
Will this option also be applicable to Appendix E requirements for decision-makers seeking to claim a Production Tax Incentive? Thank you.
Answer
So, I think at the outset to mention that we're happy to take some of these more particular questions related to the tax incentives and answer them directly with you later on. There are some sensitivities to consider in how the Principles are applied to tax versus through financing means, grants and others through the Future Made in Australia Act as opposed to the Production Tax Incentive Act itself.
And just know that while both sets apply the Principles, they do so in a slightly different way and we're happy to kind of come back to this kind of question later on.
Question 10
There's a question around further thinking about a $20 million threshold. Often the funded activities under the Future Made in Australia supports are otherwise commercially challenged. So, we are trying to better understand if these requirements would be a limiting factor in some circumstances.
Answer
So yeah, like I mentioned before, the threshold is a key part of the consultation. So, its purpose is to ensure the threshold requirements and FMA plans don't impose that unnecessary burden on the small projects. And that they will be exempt from threshold requirements and FMA plans under that amount. As for the actual amount of $20 million, that's part of this consultation to ensure that we get these in a way that meets those principles that I kind of mentioned, that we're trying to strive for in relation to the implementation of the CBPs.
Question 11
Another question. I'm ripping through these. So, what definitions of remote areas align with other Commonwealth government areas? I'm conscious of definitions of local, for example for minimum requirements for proponents that operate in very remote Australia.
Answer
So, I think that's something that we're definitely interested to hear your thoughts about, about the differences between and the challenges that are faced by regional, urban and remote kind of areas. So, our intention is to ensure consistency with other Commonwealth government requirements, so happy to hear your thoughts on kind of these points as well.
Yeah, so there are a few questions still coming through and I really appreciate and thank you for your questions. It's probably worth noting that in addition to whatever we respond to right now, we'll take your questions under consideration for publication in a frequently asked question kind of section that we publish on the consultation web page, so that those within this call, but also those viewing it later on, will have access to the information as well.
[Rebecca Lannen speaks]
Do you have a few more questions to come through, Ryan?
[Ryan Dawson speaks]
I can see one that is just coming through now.
[Rebecca Lannen speaks]
Okay.
[Ryan Dawson speaks]
Apologies for the slight delay in some of these given the technology that we're using today, but I really appreciate all of the really thoughtful questions. Thought provoking questions, yeah.
[Rebecca Lannen speaks]
It's good.
Question 12
[Ryan Dawson speaks]
So, this one from Pat, from the Critical Minerals Group. Critical minerals are often extracted in rural settings and often in an isolated place, away from large population centres. Attracting a workforce that can go to mining projects is already a very difficult thing to do without strict quotas associated with demographical delineations. Also, training people away from universities and trade training institutes can be difficult.
Answer
Yeah so, I acknowledge your experience in this, Pat and I'm really keen to hear some of your thoughts around it. So, Jobs and Skills Australia have identified the occupation shortage typically worse and intensified in gender segregation in male dominated occupations. So, obviously creating the opportunity to enhance diversification and inclusivity would contribute to reducing occupation shortages. Jobs that are more secure are characterised, for example:
by stable and certain hours of work and leave entitlements
permanent and direct engagement by the entity conducting the enterprise
undertaking and jobs that are well paid and have good conditions.
So, preliminary modelling by Jobs and Skills Australia suggests that employment growth in regional Australia is likely to be higher than in metropolitan areas. By region under the central scenario, many regions are likely to have average annual employment growth close to between 2% between 2023 and 2030, including in northern New South Wales and southern New South Wales, Victoria and Northern Territory. This growth reflects renewable energy associated construction pipelines. Some of these regions, for example, in northern New South Wales and eastern parts as well.
So, we understand that there are these difficulties in these regional and remote kind of settings and again, we're here to accept your thoughts on and how we can accommodate as much as possible to get the balance right between those proponents and the communities that they are situated within.
[Rebecca Lannen speaks]
Just on that too, Ryan. Pat, I think your comment also goes to the heart of the implementation approach which Ryan has mentioned, and I mentioned very briefly in a roundabout way through my presentation. It goes to the robustness, but the flexibility, yeah?
So, when we think about the implementation approach, one thing that we've been asked to take into consideration, and what the government’s been asked to take into consideration, is the bits around how communities and industries can work together in the locations that they're working in, to account for the situation and the locality of it.
Where projects and, you know, Ryan just worked through, you know, some of the data and research that's been made available to us, which is your lived experience. And a pattern of what you're doing, and many of you who are on the call.
A project in remote, very remote regional Australia, it's going to look very different and have different challenges, different experiences for workforce opportunities, different everything in many ways. There'll be similarities for sure in outer urban or urban Australia, but it's that flexibility that sits at the heart of the approach for implementation. In the old saying of it's not a one-size-fits-all, but how do you give regard to those? How do you give regard to the principles? How does industry work with communities in those locations, to make it the best benefit for the communities and for industry in those locations?
Yeah. So, I think your point just goes to the heart of that, and as Ryan was saying, even if you've got some ideas about how we might want to approach that, then that would be really useful as well. Which also goes to George, what you're speaking about in reducing double up on compliance reporting and the reports that you're already applying to other areas, then feedback we can get from you and others on giving regard to those reports to help support implementation for the CBPs, that's all feedback that we're seeking.
[Ryan Dawson speaks]
Thanks Bec. Yeah. And there were questions as well going around the double-up of compliance reporting. If we supply information for mandatory climbing reporting or to the Workplace Gender Equality Agency, can approved agencies give the FMIA team the green light that we've met the requirements in the area?
I think in short, we consider this to be one way that we can streamline this to the benefit of both proponents and decision-makers to make this the most effective.
So, like listed in the public guidance, where the proponent is already required to have a policy strategy or other document in place to meet a different regulatory or policy requirement at Commonwealth, state or even at local government level, it's our intention that the decision-maker may have regard to that document in determining compliance with the minimum requirements or threshold requirements. So, this is kind of the aim, to reduce that duplication to where existing obligations are likely to achieve a similar outcome.
Question 13
There’s a question here. So, in our research consultation, we've heard from regional communities that fly in fly out workers often take up jobs from new green industries at the expense of local jobs. Regarding Principle 1, will proponents be required to ensure that secure jobs are being taken up by locals and not, say, by fly in fly out workers to ensure the host community is actually benefiting? Thanks, the Climate Change Authority.
Answer
So, as listed in the guidance document, which to extent which is possible, which the projects will use local workers instead of fly in fly out workers. And if they are used, the justification for not using those workers could be considered as an additional commitment. Again, keen to hear views on the minimum threshold and any additional requirements that might deliver benefits to local communities, workers and businesses.
Question 14
There's a question here. Sometimes the material refers to the project and sometimes the company, so the boundary for the scope of this Community Benefit Principles will be important.
Answer
I think the intention for this is that the scope of the Community Benefit Principals applies to the project and the company responsible for the delivery of the project as appropriate. But I appreciate that this may not always be easily possible. So, in these cases it's really important for you to provide your views about how any problems that may be encountered in undertaking this process so that we can go away and give this some thought about how to implement them further.
So yeah, really important to - stepping back to what Rebecca mentioned around applying these in practise - there are likely to be issues that we need to kind of consider when we take these next steps.
Conclusion
[Ryan Dawson speaks]
I think this is coming to the end of the trickle of the questions coming through. Just again, thank you for your thoughts throughout this process. We've got further material to go through over the next coming days through the webinars on Community Benefits 3 and 4, and then on Thursday on 5 and 6 on separate policy areas. So happy to reconvene at that time and hear any of your questions on that as well. I'll pass back to Bec, though.
[Rebecca Lannen speaks]
Excellent. Thanks, Ryan and thank you as well to all of you for your input into the Q&A. If you did have a question but didn't want to put into the Q&A or are still mulling over, that was quite a bit of information. I appreciate not only with the documentation that we've released, but also with what we shared with you today. There's a cbpconsultation@industry.gov.au mailbox that the team is monitoring, if you wanted to contact us directly.
And as Ryan has said, we will gather up all of the Q&A that we are having across all 3 webinars for all 6 principles for a frequently asked questions document, but for now, thank you all for your time. I know your diaries are unforgiving, so I appreciate the 50 minutes that you shared with us today and really appreciate your time and interest and participation in this consultation process.
Hopefully we'll see and hear from many, if not all, of you for the next series of webinars. Well, for now, thank you and enjoy the rest of your day and the rest of your week.
[End of transcript]