The short answer

Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Amendment (Local Industry Preference) Bill 2026 explained

The Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Amendment (Local Industry Preference) Bill 2026 is a private member's bill introduced by Dai Le MP (Independent, Fowler) on 29 June 2026. It seeks to amend the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 to introduce a local industry preference mechanism in Commonwealth procurement. According to the official summary on the Parliament of Australia bill page, the bill would provide that, for specified Commonwealth projects, domestic manufacturers are to be considered ahead of non-domestic manufacturers in tender processes, and that at least 30 per cent of the total value of goods used in those projects must consist of products manufactured domestically. As at 5 August 2026, the bill is before the House of Representatives at the second reading stage and, as a private member's bill without government backing, faces significant obstacles to passage.

This is a federal system guide. State constitutions, parliaments and local-government laws can allocate comparable functions differently.

The useful question is not only “what is the rule?” but also “who administers it, which document controls it, and when might it change?” That distinction prevents an accurate general explanation from becoming wrong advice in a particular election, chamber or policy setting.

Evidence review

What the bill proposes

The bill amends the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act) — the central framework governing how Commonwealth entities spend and manage public money. The PGPA Act and the Commonwealth Procurement Rules made under it set out the rules for the billions of dollars in goods and services the Commonwealth buys each year.

According to the official summary on the Parliament of Australia bill page, the bill would provide that, for specified Commonwealth projects, domestic manufacturers are to be considered ahead of non-domestic manufacturers in tender processes, and that at least 30 per cent of the total value of goods used in those projects must consist of products manufactured domestically. The precise scope of the specified projects, and the definitions of domestic and non-domestic manufacturers, would be set out in the bill's text, which is available from the first reading documents linked on the bill page.

Dai Le, the member for Fowler in Western Sydney, has consistently advocated for local manufacturing and procurement in her electorate, which has a significant industrial base. The bill reflects the argument that government spending should support Australian jobs and capability where feasible.

Evidence review

Existing procurement rules and the gap this bill targets

The Commonwealth Procurement Rules already include a consideration of "economic benefit to the Australian economy" as one factor in value-for-money assessments. However, this is one factor among many — others include fitness for purpose, whole-of-life costs, and risk.

The rules do not create an explicit preference or set-aside for Australian industry. International trade agreements to which Australia is a party — including the WTO Government Procurement Agreement and various free trade agreements — also constrain the ability to discriminate in favour of local suppliers in certain procurement categories above specified thresholds.

The bill's proponents would argue that existing provisions are too weak to counteract the tendency of large Commonwealth procurement to flow to multinational suppliers, and that a legislative preference is needed. Critics would likely point to higher costs, reduced competition and potential trade agreement breaches.

Evidence review

Parliamentary pathway and obstacles

The bill was introduced on 29 June 2026 and the second reading was moved the same day. No debate has occurred. No committee referral has been made, which is typical for private members' bills that have not been brought on for debate. As at 5 August 2026, no proposed amendments have been circulated and the bill remains before the House of Representatives.

Private members' bills face a structural disadvantage in the House of Representatives. The government controls the legislative program and private members' business is limited to specific time slots. For a private member's bill to progress, it must either secure government support (which converts it into de facto government business) or attract sufficient cross-party support to be debated and voted on during private members' time.

No committee inquiry has been initiated, meaning there has been no formal examination of the bill's interaction with Australia's trade obligations, its cost implications, or its practical workability. These issues would need to be resolved before passage.

Evidence review

Who would be affected

If enacted, the bill would affect all Commonwealth entities subject to the PGPA Act — departments, agencies and statutory bodies. They would need to adjust procurement practices to implement the preference, including tender evaluation criteria, documentation and reporting.

Australian businesses, particularly small and medium enterprises and manufacturers, would be the intended beneficiaries. Foreign suppliers competing for Commonwealth contracts could face a competitive disadvantage in categories where the preference applies.

Australian taxpayers would bear any cost premium from preferring local over cheaper imported alternatives. Whether that premium is justified depends on the value placed on domestic industrial capability, employment, and supply-chain resilience — questions the bill would need to address.

Evidence review

Evidence and what remains unknown

No Bills Digest, regulatory impact statement, or independent costings are available for this bill. No public hearings or submissions have been taken. The bill does not have an Explanatory Memorandum — the bill's progress page lists no explanatory memoranda documents.

Key unknowns include: what definition of "local industry" the bill uses; which projects would be "specified" for the purposes of the preference; how the 30 per cent domestic content requirement would be measured and verified; whether the preference is subject to international trade agreement carve-outs; how it interacts with existing value-for-money requirements; and its estimated cost.

Readers should treat this bill as a policy proposal that has been introduced into Parliament but not yet scrutinised through the committee or debate process. The claims made in the member's second reading speech represent the sponsor's perspective and should be tested against the bill text and independent analysis.

Common questions

Before you rely on the answer

Does this bill require the government to buy Australian?

According to the official summary on the Parliament bill page, the bill would require that, for specified Commonwealth projects, domestic manufacturers are considered ahead of non-domestic manufacturers in tender processes, and that at least 30 per cent of the total value of goods used in those projects consists of products manufactured domestically. The detail of how this would operate is in the bill text.

Could international trade agreements prevent this from working?

Possibly. Australia is party to free trade agreements and the WTO Government Procurement Agreement that restrict discrimination against foreign suppliers in certain procurement categories. Whether this bill conflicts with those obligations would depend on its drafting and on the value thresholds and categories covered.

What happens next for this bill?

The bill is before the House of Representatives at the second reading stage. As a private member's bill without government backing, it faces structural obstacles to passage. It may be brought on for debate during private members' business time or referred to a committee; as at 5 August 2026, neither has occurred. The bill also serves as a vehicle to raise the issue of local procurement in parliamentary debate.

Source spine

Primary material used for this guide

Review trigger: Official summary published on the Parliament bill page on 2026-08-05; review when the bill status, committee report or official summary changes, or if the bill is brought on for debate or referred to a committee.

Archive note: Written from the bill's APH page and first reading text; updated on 2026-08-05 to reflect the official summary published on the Parliament bill page. No Explanatory Memorandum or Bills Digest was available at the time of writing. The bill had not been debated.

Primary links are provided without affiliate or tracking parameters. Confirm that the source still applies to the bill, sitting date, jurisdiction or reporting period before relying on it.