Analysis and Commentary


Is this the eclipse of the industry department and its minister?

Analysis and Commentary




By Peter Roberts

Are we witnessing daily the eclipse of the federal Department of Industry, Science and Resources (DISR) and its minister Ed Husic?

I ask this question for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the shuffle of the federal ministry which overlooked Husic while promoting the Assistant Minister for Manufacturing, Senator Tim Ayres to a new, potentially high impact role.

Ayres rather than Husic was selected to take on a much needed co-ordinating role across government as Assistant minister for a Future Made In Australia – much needed because there hasn’t been much co-ordination to date of a policy that affects multiple ministries.

Missing out on the role is one thing, but the fact that Ayres no longer reports to Husic, but direct to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese confirms Husic’s relative junior status within the ministry.

Observers of this federal government cannot help but notice that many, if not most, of the big announcements that affect industry do not actually come from Husic or emanate from DISR.

The most prolific announcer of industry related initiatives has been Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen.

Defence ministers, and especially Pat Conroy who has been promoted from his Defence Minister role into Cabinet and into a new role of Minister for Defence Industry and Capability Delivery, are also very active.

So while Husic was not mentioned in the reshuffle, two industry related ministers were seen to have performed well and were promoted.

Then there is the paucity of important policy announcements by Husic – if interested browse Husic’s media statements here to see the relative lightweight nature of his announcements versus, say, Chris Bowen’s here.

And the one big picture policy that is Husic’s to run with, the National Reconstruction Fund has not exactly set the world alight.

It has taken two and a half years to appoint a board, determine investment criteria and name investment staff.

This was a policy that was flagged well before the last election – one could have hoped for more rapid action by DISR and its minister – perhaps even a couple of quick wins in terms of investments made.

There are after all numerous areas which are crying out for a little government co-investment to nudge the private sector over the line to join in.

The issue seems partly a result of a long term decline of the capabilities of DISR, and Husic’s apparent difficulty in getting his ideas past Treasurer Jim Chalmers and Minister for Finance Katy Gallagher.

Certainly Husic shows no shortage of passion for his portfolio, unlike so many industry ministers of the past, and is regularly out there putting the case for a more activist industry policy. The passion is certainly there.

Whatever the case, industry decisions are increasingly being made outside DISR and Husic’s office.

While the whole of government becoming more aware of industry needs is a good thing, an apparent decline of the importance of the industry minister and his department is most certainly not.

Picture: Ed Husic



Share this Story
Analysis and Commentary



Stay Informed


Go to Top