Dick Smith delivers huge wake-up call over fears Australia is becoming too reliant on overseas countries
Australian entrepreneur Dick Smith has issued a stark warning about the decline of local manufacturing, arguing that Australia has become dangerously dependent on overseas countries for goods and supplies. He frames this reliance as a vulnerability that leaves the nation exposed should international supply chains or trade relationships falter, and is urging greater support for domestic industry as a safeguard.
The businessman, known for founding Dick Smith Electronics and later launching an Australian-made food brand, has long campaigned for buying local and rebuilding the country's manufacturing base. His comments add to ongoing debate in Australia about self-sufficiency, supply chain security and the long-term economic risks of offshoring production.
- Dick Smith warns Australia is too reliant on foreign manufacturing.
- He says this dependence poses a national vulnerability.
- Smith urges greater support for local, Australian-made industry.
New here? Start with this
Dick Smith is one of Australia's best-known businesspeople, having built his name founding Dick Smith Electronics before later starting an Australian-made food company. He has spent years campaigning for consumers to buy locally produced goods and for governments to do more to support manufacturing within Australia.
His latest comments centre on concerns that Australia now relies too heavily on other countries for everyday goods and supplies, which he argues could leave the country vulnerable if international trade or supply chains were disrupted. This ties into a broader, long-running debate in Australia about how much manufacturing has moved offshore over recent decades and what that means for the country's ability to look after itself.
The issue matters because Australia's manufacturing sector has shrunk significantly since the late twentieth century, with many goods now imported rather than made domestically. Supporters of local manufacturing say this leaves supply chains exposed, while the debate also touches on wider questions about trade policy, jobs and the cost of goods for Australian households.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Advocates of Dick Smith's warning argue that decades of offshoring have left Australia perilously exposed, with critical goods such as medicines, fuel, fertiliser and electronics largely sourced from abroad, as the COVID-19 supply shocks starkly demonstrated. They contend that national resilience and sovereignty are worth a price premium, and that deliberate policy support for local manufacturing – through procurement rules, subsidies or tariffs – is a prudent insurance policy against geopolitical shocks, pandemics or hostile trade actions rather than mere economic nostalgia. They also point to the loss of skilled jobs and industrial capability as a long-term cost that pure efficiency metrics fail to capture.
The case against
Sceptics of this position argue that international trade and specialisation allow Australia, with its small population and high labour costs, to prosper by focusing on sectors where it holds genuine comparative advantage, such as resources, agriculture and services, while importing manufactured goods more cheaply from larger economies. They warn that propping up domestic manufacturing through subsidies or protectionism risks higher consumer prices, inefficient industries reliant on permanent government support, and retaliation from trading partners, ultimately making the country poorer rather than more secure. They further argue that genuine supply security is better achieved through diversified trading relationships and strategic stockpiles of truly critical goods, rather than attempting to re-industrialise broadly.