Community Benefit Principles 3 and 4 public consultation information webinar
Transcript
The following is a transcript of the above webinar held on Wednesday 14 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 webinar on the Future Made in Australia Community Benefit Principles 3 and 4. For those of you who I've not yet met, my name is Rebecca Lannen and I'm the General Manager for the Future Made in Australia Implementation Branch in the Department of Industry, Science and Resources.
I speak with you today from Brisbane, on the traditional lands of the Turrbal and Yuggera peoples. I pay my respects to the 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 second of 3 webinars on the Community Benefit Principles. Yesterday we went through Principles 1 and 2 and tomorrow we'll go through Principles 5 and 6. So, if you’re interested in those last two, registrations are still open if you wanted to participate in those. The purpose of the webinar today is to provide more detail on principles 3 and 4 and their intended outcomes and application.
Just a bit of online housekeeping. This webinar is being recorded, and the recording will be made available on the department’s consultation hub web page. It's the same web page where you would have seen the public guidance documentation and the links to register for today. For all engagement, we'll be using the Q&A function.
There'll be an opportunity to ask questions through that function, which we'll come to at the end of this presentation. We've allowed about an hour for today's webinar. There are a couple of slides that I'll talk you through, but what we hope we've done is being able to give a fair part of that hour to the Q&A process and thank you, too, to those who've already registered their questions.
As we move through that Q&A, if we don't have an answer to your question today, what we'll do is we'll come back and provide an answer through the frequently asked questions document. Again, uploaded onto that consultation web page that you would have seen. If your question requires a bit more of a tailored response, what we'll do is we'll email you back directly if that's okay.
Consultation process
So, the next few introductory slides are the same across all the 3 webinars. So, for those of you who joined us yesterday, you would have heard this information. But for those who didn't join us yesterday, today's webinar follows from the video presentation and guidance documentation that was released late last year.
Again, you would have seen, or may have seen, the video presentation on the consultation web page. That presentation provided the overarching information and the context for the consultation process. It summarised elements of the Future Made in Australia agenda as well as the Production Tax Incentives and the Community Benefit Principles.
It explained the consultation documents and the rationale for consultation, and it outlined the feedback we're seeking and how to provide that feedback. So, while today's webinar will recap on some of those elements, it won't go into the same detail. So, if you're looking for that, I'd encourage you to go back onto the web page and have a listen to the video presentation.
A Future Made in Australia
So, to recap, the government's intention for the Future Made in Australia agenda seeks to leverage our low-cost renewable energy, our 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, as part of the Future Made in Australia agenda, gives effect to the Community Benefit Principles, or the Principles which I'll refer to them as we move through. It also gives effect to the Future Made in Australia plans which are both part of this consultation.
So, the Act requires recipients of the 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.
Decision-makers must give regard to the Community Benefit 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. Also, part of this agenda, the Future Made in Australia - Production Tax Credits and Other Measures Act, establishes the 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. This consultation focuses on both the implementation of the Principles, for Future Made in Australia support, and the application of these Principles to Future Made in Australia Production Tax Incentives.
Sitting at the heart of it is about hearing from you about the challenges and opportunities associated with ensuring that funding from Future Made in Australia projects flows to communities in ways that benefit those communities, local workers and businesses. So, it's about how it's going to work, how's it going to work practically and proportionally, how's it going to be flexible? How's it going to be fair? How's it going be balanced? It's about giving regard to the locations where the projects are occurring, local workers, local businesses, local communities and local economies.
Through this consultation we're seeking your views on implementation of the principles. And you'll see in the guidance documentation and the cover note, they were asking a whole bunch of questions. These questions go to minimum requirements, which are the requirements that apply to all projects seeking Future Made in Australia support. There are questions around threshold requirements which are the requirements that apply to projects seeking Future Made in Australia support at or above the threshold. There are 2 bits to that.
So, it's not only about what should be those threshold requirements, but when I speak about at or above the financial threshold, we are also asking your views on what that financial threshold could be.
We're also asking questions around considerations for Future Made in Australia plans. So, how a project would provide benefits consistent with the principles. We're consulting on how commitments against each Principle will also be monitored and enforced, so we'll come to that later in the presentation.
You'll see in the documentation, particularly the guidance documentation, we've presented a proposed approach to implementing the principles. It's really important to note that the approach that we've provided in that documentation is a starting point for discussion, yeah? So, it's really important that from the information that's in that documentation, for us to be able to hear from you what that starting point looks like? Is it about right?
Should there be alternatives or different requirements that sit, that we need to be considering when it comes to implementing the CBPs? Insights received from the consultation will help with the editing of the public guidance documentation and that's about supporting proponents and decision-makers to apply the principles consistently and transparently. The insights we gather from the consultations will also help with drafting the rules under the Future Made in Australia Act.
So, those rules are the legislative instrument to prescribing specific guidance or instruction to implement the Principles. These are the rules which will guide how the Principles are put into effect. You'll see also, too, from the guidance documentation, it also outlines requirements proposed for inclusion in the rules to be developed by the Treasurer under taxation legislation, and again, insights from this consultation will be considered when drafting those rules too. So that's a quick and short recap and the context from that video presentation that we released before Christmas, which I referred to earlier.
So, let's talk about today. So, well, today we'll have a focus on Principles 3 and 4. As many of you will know, there are 6 principles in total and those principles as you can see cover a wide range of policy areas, including employment and skills, supporting communities, transition to net zero, traditional industry policy and tax compliance.
For background, the Principles are legislated in section 10, subsection 3 of the Future Made in Australia Act, 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. So, let's get into Principles 3 and 4.
Community Benefit Principle 3: Engaging collaboratively with and achieving positive outcomes for local communities, such as First Nations communities and communities directly affected by the transition to net zero
So, Principle 3. Principle 3 is about project proponents engaging collaboratively with and achieving positive outcomes for local communities, such as First Nations communities and communities directly affected by transition to net zero.
You'll see from the documentation that this Principle focuses on the government's vision for genuine, early and collaborative engagement with local communities, First Nations communities, and communities directly affected by the transition. It's engagement based on the principles of free, prior and informed consent and active involvement of affected communities throughout all project phases. It's about fostering support and securing licence for projects, building trust, addressing concerns, gathering local knowledge to inform project design and ensuring projects align with communities priorities, and the government's Future Made in Australia objectives.
So, what does it mean by collaborative engagement? Now, I appreciate we all have an idea of what collaborative engagement is. So, just so we're all starting from the same place in terms of documentation, the documentation takes engagement as collaborative, with decision-making shared in partnership with communities with a focus on mitigating local concerns and gathering local knowledge to inform project design.
This approach also aims to minimise or remove adverse economic, environmental, cultural and social impacts to communities where possible while reducing unforeseen barriers to project delivery. It also speaks to culturally aware engagement with First Nations communities. It includes understanding local First Nations communities, priorities, identifying opportunities for benefit sharing, and ensuring First Nations agreement, making compliance with relevant legislation.
The documentation also speaks to identifying specific outcomes in partnerships with affected communities, ensuring benefits are aligned with communities’ priorities and are tailored to the local context. And where relevant, collaborative engagement could include participating in targeted programs run by the Net Zero Economy Authority and the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations to help ensure affected communities benefit from net zero transition.
As with collaborative engagement, positive outcomes for local communities are taken to be economical, social and are achieved when benefits align with communities’ needs and priorities, and again, tailored to local context. Outcomes for local communities flowing from projects will be diverse and may include, which won't be a surprise to many, if not all of you, local employment contracting, infrastructure investment, direct community investment or co-ownership, financial support or community initiatives. These types of opportunities for communities can help offset concentrated regional impacts of the net zero transition.
So, with that context we've set out what minimum requirements could look like. Again, this is the starting point for discussion. For Principle 3, proponents must provide evidence on how they've engaged early and identify key stakeholder groups impacted by the project, such as First Nations groups and Traditional Owners. In addition, where the project is in a region where a Net Zero Economy Authority Committee of Interest process is underway, or a Committee of Interest Determination is in force, the employer must express interest to NZEA in being a receiving employer under the Energy Industry Plan, an Industry Jobs plan.
And then we have threshold requirements. Again, you'll see the documentation that beyond the minimum requirements are the threshold requirements for projects seeking Future Made in Australia support at or above that financial threshold must meet threshold requirements. The documentations put forward suggestions around proponents must have a plan, a plan outlining the strategy of collaborative and culturally appropriate engagement with communities. The plan could outline the approach to building meaningful relationships with community stakeholders and creating collaborative mechanisms to consult involving and partnering with stakeholders to ensure the community concerns, needs and aspirations are incorporated.
So, we're checking in with you on whether that sounds reasonable. Are these the sorts of requirements that we should be considering? Are these sorts of requirements, decision-makers and proponents should be considering? Are there alternative requirements that would be more practical in meeting what the minimum threshold requirements are for this Community Benefit Principle?
So, that draws the information on Principle 3 to a close. But before I move on to Principle 4, because all of you will be very aware of how much the two of them interconnect, I wanted to take a moment to invite you to add any questions you might have to the Q&A function which is open.
Again, if we can't address your question today, we'll get back to you either directly, if it's a more tailored response that's required, we'll get back to you directly by email or the contact details that you shared with us, but primarily we'll post our answers through the frequently asked questions document on the web page. I'd just ask if you wouldn't mind when you're posting your questions, if you could provide us with where you're from and the organisation you're from and the community you're representing, that would be great.
Okay, while you're typing, if you don't mind, I'll continue on to Community Benefit Principle 4.
Community Benefit Principle 4: Supporting First Nations communities and Traditional Owners to participate in, and share the benefits of, the transition to net zero
And this one is about project proponents supporting First Nations communities and Traditional Owners to participate in and sharing the benefits of the transition to net zero.
The intended outcomes for this principle, is that it focuses on the government's vision for First Nations people's economic empowerment and self-determination through improved social economic outcomes and development and maintenance of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people's distinct cultural, spiritual, physical, economic relationships with lands, the waters and the skies. This includes improved outcomes on employment, education and strong economic participation in line with the National Agreement on Closing the Gap.
So, what does that support look like? What does that mean? So, the guidance documentation offers some objectives to set the intent around timely and meaningful engagement, based on, as I mentioned before, the principles of free, prior and informed consent with Traditional Owners and First Nations communities which is important in ensuring participation in net zero transition.
It's about timely, meaningful approach to engagement. It's about proponents enhancing their knowledge and skills of the workforce, diversifying the supplier base, improving their understanding of First Nations considerations and integrating these considerations within their project and discover new ways to benefit from the transition to net zero, for the life of the project so. So, it's all phases.
It's also about support to participate - can also include more opportunities to participate in the economy, including through the Indigenous Procurement Policy, which you'll all be aware of. It's also, and importantly about long term planning. It's about generational planning and clear pathways for quality jobs and careers as part of supporting economic development and empowerment through a tailored, place-based approach.
The guidance documentation also talks to practical and generational benefits. The energy transformation can be a catalyst for change within First Nations communities. The document outlines some of those benefits could include new opportunities to build engagement, equity and ownership in the energy system and opportunities for economic empowerment and leadership, including for First Nations women.
So, with all of that intent in mind, that government's focus in mind, in that context - for Principle 4, does the suggested minimum requirements work? The documentation outlines all project proponents seeking Future Made in Australia. Support must have a target for a minimum of 4% of Indigenous employment. Is that enough? These are the questions that we're keen to explore with you. Then move to threshold requirements.
As mentioned earlier, beyond the minimum requirements, the guidance documentation suggests a number of threshold requirements that we're keen to hear your views on - such as where the project seeking Future Made in Australia support, again, about, at or above that threshold, as well as the identified target for First Nations employees exceeding the Indigenous participation requirements in the Indigenous Procurement Policy, proponents are also expected to set up targets in line with the policy, factoring in increases that occurred during the life of the project.
So, not the difference - you set the targets at the beginning. This is also the intent, too, for the flexibility around the plans and the flexibility around the implementation, to keep live and active and relevant throughout the life of a project. The documentation also sort of works through so that proponents must also have an identified target for use of First Nation suppliers and procurement activities in line with the Indigenous participation requirements in the Indigenous Procurement Policy.
Also factoring in targeted increases that occurred during the life of the project and proponents requiring a strategy for consultation, participation and partnership with Traditional Owner groups with regard to project decision-making. So again, the questions and the requirements that are set out in the guidance documentation are a starting point for discussion, and these are the elements, and they are those starting points that we're seeking your views on.
One thing we're also asking everyone, across all of the 6 Principles, is around monitoring and reporting. To achieve the vision and intended outcomes I've just described, it's important as we all know, that commitments against the Principles are effectively monitored and enforced.
The guidance documentation proposes the commitments will be monitored through reporting and a process of reporting, but also the flexibility and the ability to renegotiate commitments if any issues arise as the project progresses. We also propose that there will be consequences for non-compliance, if that non-compliance is significant and sustained.
Through this consultation, we're keen to hear from you about exactly what and how we should monitor. What we're interested to hear feedback on are the details of the approach to reporting and enforcement. I've included in the slide here some guiding questions to think about when it comes to providing feedback through this process if you had any.
So, things like what should be monitored and reported against to demonstrate delivery against these 2 Principles. Or if you wanted to provide feedback more generally, but if you're also able to provide feedback on these 2 Principles specifically as well. Are there any other appropriate mechanisms to ensure commitments are met for these Principles for the work and the engagement that you have with government? Is there other monitoring that you know of and are part of that should be considered in this process as well? And what's the appropriate frequency and level of detail for proponents to report against?
So, in terms of providing feedback throughout the consultation period, feedback can be uploaded as an attachment to the consultation page listed on the slide or sent via post. If you had any queries or wish to send a submission via post, please contact us on the email, the CBP consultation mailbox listed here on the screen. We're accepting submissions until the end of the day on the Monday the 2nd of February.
So once again, the consultation process which we are currently going through, and the feedback, insights and views and considerations shared with us through that process, will be part of developing the rules which is the legislative instrument for the Future Made Australia Act, but it gives effect to the Community Benefit Principles, and it will also help finalise what will become a live document for the guidance material which will help support proponents and decision-makers when implementing the Community Benefit Principles.
Q&A
So, we'll now move to the Q&A session. As I mentioned right at the start, we've got a healthy amount of time to go through the Q&A. I know the team are working through and receiving quite a few of your questions. So, I'd like to introduce to you now Ryan Dawson from my team. Ryan is a Manager for the Community Benefit Principles. So Ryan, welcome to this segment and I will hand over to you.
[Ryan Dawson speaks]
Yeah, thanks, Rebecca. And a note, there have been a number of questions that were pre-submitted through the registration process like I've mentioned in the chat. So, we've put those questions in there and we'll start with those. But I encourage you to add questions as you think of them throughout the Q&A process.
Question 1
I think the first one that we have is: The focus of the agenda is community driven, which is quite broad depending on how some applicants could sell their project. Is there an ideal project or business type that fits the bill best?
Answer
So, I think, to think of it broadly, the Future Made in Australia agenda is really aiming around fostering new and existing globally competitive sectors that can boost Australia's economic prosperity and resilience or supporting the transition net zero. So, these industries build on the potential of Australia's abundant natural assets, fair and competitive markets, and commitment to open trade and international investment.
The Community Benefit Principles are about ensuring that this support to the Future Made in Australia agenda in the priority industries have appropriate flow-on benefits to the community. So, the ideal project or business type is one that is able to provide that boost while also ensuring the benefits flow to those communities as well.
Question 2
Another question: As the scope has changed and the reporting requirements along with this, should potential candidates prepare specific resources to complete during reporting documentation?
Answer
So, I think it's probably important to say that we're consulting on the scope as part of this consultation and we're keen to hear stakeholder views about how to shape the Community Benefit Principles to be implemented under the Future Made in Australia agenda. So, all of your feedback is really important to kind of assess any of the problems and issues that arise through our starting point, as Rebecca kind of mentioned through the presentation.
Question 3
Here’s a question: Just wanted to clarify if the intention is to assess First Nations employment targets at the project level or at a company level?
Answer
So like Rebecca mentioned, the target should be a minimum of 4% Indigenous employment as a weighted average, of the full-time equivalent Australian-based workforce deployed on the contracted project by the end of the contract term. However, like I mentioned before, we're seeking feedback on how to shape the Principles, including the wording and appropriate focus to be implemented under the agenda. So, we want to understand those challenges and opportunities to ensure that the project flows to communities.
[Rebecca Lannen speaks]
And I might just jump in there too, Ryan. Just on that point, what's important to come back to in the documentation is the emphasis for the CBPs, in local, to our local communities where the project's being delivered. So that's one piece of context that we'd be keen to hear from you - how would it work in that context? So, your point of, overall for a company and employment targets, but you'll see from the language it's around the project. Sorry, Ryan.
Question 4
[Ryan Dawson speaks]
Thanks, Rebecca. Thanks. That's a really useful addition to that. Other questions coming in and thank you for your questions.
How will the framework support Traditional Owner groups to be able to engage with all the potential applications of Future Made in Australia support? In our experience, there is a preference to engage only with those who are successful rather than an applicant.
Answer
So again, this is a really valid kind of position and point, based on previous experience in engaging with communities, so we're keen to hear these views in-depth and the reasoning behind them about how best to support Traditional Owner groups to engage with all the potential applications for FMA support in relation to the Community Benefit Principles. That's why we're actively seeking this feedback to shape the Principles themselves through the agenda.
Question 5
A question: So, 85% of all critical minerals neighbour Indigenous communities. What provisions are there to empower free, prior and informed consent, which should also require comprehension of opportunity realised and opportunity forgone?
Answer
So again, thanks for sharing your insights, questions like this. Goes to the call of why we are consulting and hearing your views, especially in and around the Principles. I will mention that it is the intention to adopt the principles like Rebecca mentioned throughout the presentation. So, we want to continue to hear your views relating to this to make sure that it works in practise.
Question 6
Future Made in Australia should create legislation to move to a common user infrastructure for offtake primary processing to reduce red tape, as critical minerals is a 16-year discovery process, from processing timeline in Australia.
Answer
So, we're keen to see how these can be applied and to make projects that are seeking Future Made in Australia support more effective, and that includes items including infrastructure and whether that can align with the Principles as appropriate.
Question 7
And, oh wow, there's many other questions coming through. So, we'll gradually work through them as best we can in the time we've got.
Can you please provide links to the recordings for the colleagues who are unable to attend?
Answer
So obviously the webinar is being recorded. The recording will be made available as soon as we're able to do so through the department's consultation web page, and that's the place where you've seen the public guidance, documentation and links. So that will be up there as soon as we're able to do so.
Question 8
There's another question: Can you please confirm that both the project and the proponents need to have a Future Made in Australia plan?
Answer
So, Future Made in Australia plans are required for projects receiving Future Made in Australia support at or above the threshold and that's what we've proposed through the guidance material. Proponents will be responsible for developing and implementing those Future Made in Australia plans for their projects. It's important that they’re available so that the decision-maker can have regard to those Principles when making decisions on the Future Made in Australia support.
Question 9
There's a question here: Will the engagement standard be consistent with other engagement standards in development? For example, the EPBC Act.
Answer
So, we are proposing genuine, early and collaborative engagement with First Nations local communities as this is crucial to understanding local considerations that may impact on the design and delivery of a project, in addition to securing social licence for projects. So yeah, we’re keen to hear your views on whether this is the right way to approach it. What will work practically and what will develop and deliver those benefits to communities.
Question 10
So, there's a question here about: What and where is a NZEA area?
Answer
So, the Net Zero Economy Authority is working closely with the regions that would be most affected by Australia's transition to a net zero economy prioritising the regions most at risk from decarbonisation. So, the current priority regions, which are published on freely available websites, include Collie in Western Australia, the Central Queensland area, the Hunter in New South Wales, Latrobe, Gippsland in Victoria, the Pilbara in Western Australia and Upper Spencer gulf in South Australia. So, thanks for that.
Question 11
Question: Are all 3 proposed Community Benefit Principle 4 threshold requirements with the caveat ‘if the project is in remote Australia’ or is it just the first one? Not a question but broadly, the proposed minimum threshold requirements don't go far enough. The government should expect more from Future Made in Australia supported projects.
Answer
So, only the first Principle for threshold requirement includes the specific caveat ‘if the project is taking place in remote Australia’. But just a reminder that we're pushing this as a starting point for consideration. So, if you think it doesn't go too far, we're happy to hear your thoughts. How can we make this more effective?
Question 12
So, are you learning from the Capacity Investment Scheme? Also, can you provide an example of how Principle 3 and 4 can work in practice?
Answer
We're working closely across, broadly across, all levels of government to incorporate best possible practises in adopting and implementing the Community Benefit Principles. So, like we're doing behind the scenes through government, we're keen to hear some of these examples of best practice and ways that similar initiatives have worked to support First Nation groups and organisations to participate in consultation on FMA programs. So, we welcome your thoughts on that as well.
Question 13
Are there any additional considerations being given to the use of First Nations data that may be collected as part of monitoring and reporting?
Answer
So, like Rebecca mentioned, we're seeking feedback on the monitoring and reporting of data to ensure the Community Benefit Principals are delivering those intended outcomes. It's important to manage data appropriately and we really welcome your views on what is appropriate collection, storage and availability of First Nations data that may be collected as part of monitoring and reporting.
Question 14
So, just questions around: We don't have much capacity for a submission but we can provide hot, shorter, high-level feedback.
Answer
Of course, that's very much welcome. We're happy to receive as little or as much as you can in the time provided. We understand the timing doesn't work for all, but we're happy to work with you, to get the information as much as possible. So, through the consultation page, there's an ability to be as brief as you need to be to be able to pass on whatever you can to us, and we'll certainly give it as much weight as any other submission provided.
[Rebecca Lannen speaks]
That's a good point, Ryan. And to back that into, you may have seen at a glance in the documentation, or through the cover note as well, here are the questions that we're asking for feedback on, and you can answer all the questions or some of the questions or just provide us feedback in general terms about more broadly your views on implementation. So, just to confirm for you that we've made that public in the cover note as well. So, I'm happy to receive any information in any way that is most appropriate and most you know goes to your own resourcing to be able to provide it to us.
Question 15
[Ryan Dawson speaks]
There’s a question here about monitoring and reporting as well. So how would these Principles be assessed as being met or non-compliant? Would there be subject matter experts within the Future Made in Australia team or would something like the National Indigenous Australians Agency be engaged?
Answer
So, this is from George representing the Western Green Energy Hub. So, it's a really important question. We appreciate the complexities of the various policy areas that are associated with the Principles. So yeah, again, happy to hear your thoughts about what you think or consider, based on experience or any other kind of past examples on what's a great level of monitoring and compliance that is appropriate for the type of initiative that we're trying to let out here today.
So, it's certainly something that we want to hear from you. We don't think that this is a kind of ‘set and forget’ type of initiative. It will require us to come back to ensure that it's implemented appropriately over time. So the feedback like this, is certainly important for us to be able to do this.
[Rebecca Lannen speaks]
And just to reiterate that too, and George, thank you and many of you on the call would be familiar with this too, and working with government and through the grant agreements or the funding agreements, there's monitoring reports that are provided, and with the implementation of these Principles and for a Future Made in Australia support plan. It's a quality check. It's a sense check. It's a reality check on what has been reported and whether or not it's actually been done.
So, if any, for you, George in the Western Green Energy Hub or anyone on this call, I'm sure many of you have had experience on that validation of information that has been provided as part of reporting. Any advice that you've got for us and how best we can do that, to validate or to check and work with proponents on that, that would be incredibly useful for us.
Question 16
[Ryan Dawson speaks}
Still a few questions coming in. A bit more slowly now, but just a reminder, we are accepting submissions to the consultation until Monday the 2nd of February, so I really appreciate the engagement that you've had through this and the previous webinar processes and any kind of questions coming through to our consultation team. So, really encourage you to provide your views. They're all very important to us.
So, there's a question around how local will be defined.
Answer
Like what we have presented in the guidance, we have presented ideas around some of these particulars, including what local would mean, but appreciate that this will change for different circumstances based on the project. In dealing with in projects in these regional and remote communities, the definition of remote may or may not be as appropriate given the circumstance. So, really looking for your advice around what is a reasonable kind of consideration around what is local and how it should be defined.
Question 17
So, questions from Steve Jones, thanks, from i2i Global. So firstly, they just wanted to commend DCCEEW, AEMO and ASL on their commitment and work to date on First Nations engagement, economic participation, employment and workforce development and shared benefits for renewable energy projects. This provides a good baseline, however, there have been lessons learned. Will DISR be engaging with them and their advisors to expand on this?
So, there's a second part about appendix B, threshold requirements only addresses employment and procurement. It must include benefits for sharing, including equity. Three - recommending using standard templates to guide the development of plan.
Answer
So yes, Steve, we are engaging across government to draw on those lessons learned to include what has and hasn't worked as well and we appreciate you coming over the top of that to shine a light on those examples that have. So yeah, really appreciate those particular examples and commending those agencies as well.
So, in relation to the threshold requirements, we're keen to hear what you think should be included as a requirement and how it should be assessed. If there's something missing, tell us, point it out so that we can make this more effective working with both community groups, proponents and decision-makers as well.
So, and please, we want to hear the feedback on the tools and guidance that you think might be able to support our information in the Community Benefit Principles. So, the development of a standard type of plan - we’re happy to try to work through a way that works for all those proponents and also those entities that are rolling out the funding through the Future Made in Australia agenda.
Question 18
Question here: Is there any intention for, or can it be considered, reporting requirements for all principles generally be complementary to other schemes? For example, the developer rating scheme being employed by Equifax on behalf of DCCEEW to avoid administrative burdens of similar but different reporting.
Answer
Just to point out that I think it's a really, really important point. It's one that is related to one of the principles that we're trying to do, in adopting the CBPs. So, where a proponent is already required to have a policy strategy or other document in place to meet a different regulatory or policy requirement at the Commonwealth, state or local government level, it's our intention to ensure that the decision-maker may have regard to that document in determining compliance with the minimum requirements or threshold requirements. So, it's our intention to try to reduce the duplication of existing applications to that achieve similar outcomes wherever possible.
Question 19
Just a couple questions: Is the government considering ways, whether funded by proponents or otherwise, to fund or resource communities, including First Nation communities, to participate in engagement activities and to identify local needs and priorities? And this is from Claudia in the Community Power Agency.
Answer
Thanks, Claudia. I guess, it's an important question and we need to hear yours, and others in the public's, their positions and strengths and weaknesses associated to whatever we implement. So, we're keen to hear feedback on how best to enable those First Nations communities and others to participate in these engagement activities.
Question 20
There's also a general question I think I can answer: Is the government considering specifying additional Community Benefit Principles under section 10(3) (B) of the Future Made in Australia Act, from Claudia again from the Community Power Agency.
Answer
It is possible, like through the legislation for the government to prescribe additional Community Benefit Principles. It's part of the consultation to provide any kind of thoughts that you have on this. What is missing? Certainly receptive to kind of any kind of feedback that you have on what is missing and what else could be there?
Conclusion
I think we're almost to the back end of all the questions that we have right now. We’ll pause as much as we can but just wanted to thank you for the vast number of questions that we received. So, just a reminder that, after the presentation is complete, that they will be published on the consultation page. It's also our intention to summarise these questions into a future frequently asked questions document for publication on the web page as well, as soon as we can. Given the time for the consultation, we'll be doing that quite shortly.
Otherwise, I think that's probably it for the Q&A function. Still happy to receive questions in any way after this presentation as well, but otherwise I'll pass back to Rebecca.
[Rebecca Lannen speaks]
Thanks, Ryan. And again, thank you everyone. This is not the last of us - as Ryan said, if you did have any questions or you wanted to follow up internally, with the organisations that you're working with, the communities you're working with, there’s the CBP consultation email address which is monitored by Ryan's team, so you can contact us throughout this consultation period as well.
But your questions have triggered questions for us, so we're keen to hear what your ideas are about, how that can be done, and answers to your questions which is really helpful in informing the public documentation and the rule that will give the CBPs effect. So, I appreciate all of your time. If we don't see many of you tomorrow, which is our final webinar, which will be on Community Benefit Principles 5 and 6, I wish you all a very lovely rest of the week and many thanks again for your time and your contribution.
[Transcript ends]