Susan Templeman (Macquarie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

The legislation before the chamber, the Communications Legislation Amendment (Australian Content Requirement for Subscription Video On Demand (Streaming) Services) Bill 2025, presents an opportunity to open a new chapter for Australia's screen industry. This is the moment when we can ensure that, in the streaming age, Australian stories do not fade into the background but take their rightful place in the spotlight, centre stage.

This legislation requires streaming services with more than one million Australian subscribers to invest at least 10 per cent of their expenditure or 7.5 per cent of their revenue into the Australian sector. It will need to be invested in new local drama, children's programs, documentaries, arts or educational content. There are two clear principles at stake here. One is that Australians deserve access to their own stories, no matter which screen they're watching on. The other is that those who profit from access to Australian audiences should support Australian storytelling.

The idea of guaranteeing Australian content is not a new or radical idea. In 1942, the Curtin Labor government introduced quotas for Australian music on commercial radio stations to support local musicians and foster a distinctive cultural identity. The Whitlam Labor government built on that reform, raising the requirement to around 20 per cent. That change provided crucial support for Australian music during the golden age of Australian rock and pop in the seventies and through to the eighties.

The Menzies government introduced Australian content requirements for commercial television in 1961, and the Whitlam government strengthened them in 1973. Those changes ushered in a renaissance of Australian screen content, which my generation got to see, bringing productions like Number 96, The Sullivans, A Country Practicefilmed locally, largely in the Hawkesbury—and Prisoner to Australian audiences.

When pay TV services launched in the 1990s, they were initially exempt from content obligations until the Keating government acted in 1995 to require providers to invest at least 10 per cent of their expenditure in Australian drama. This simple measure ensured that pay TV would meaningfully contribute to Australian drama, and it has. As a result, Australian viewers have enjoyed acclaimed series such as Love My Way, Wentworth and Cloudstreet.

Radio and broadcast television reach their audience through publicly regulated airwaves. Pay TV providers operate through cable networks that, in many cases, were built with public investment. It's reasonable to expect that, in profiting from these assets, media companies deliver a measurable public benefit in return. Since the Rudd and Gillard governments began the build of the National Broadband Network, streaming platforms have had unprecedented access to Australian audiences. Without the NBN, it simply would not be possible to operate large-scale, reliable streaming platforms in Australia. Yet—unlike radio and broadcast and pay TV—global streaming platforms have until now had no specific obligation to invest in Australian content—no obligation whatsoever. That discrepancy has real consequences.

We know the way Australians consume screen content is changing rapidly and fundamentally. In 2017, just 29 per cent of Australians used paid subscription streaming services. By 2024, that number had risen to 69 per cent, and 2021 was a watershed year, marking the point when Australians were more likely to watch content through an online subscription service rather than live or recorded free-to-air TV. According to some sources the average household now has more than three streaming subscriptions. Global streaming platforms are rapidly becoming an essential element of our cultural infrastructure. It's vital that this technology be deployed in a way that supports local cultural expression rather than accelerates the globalisation and homogenisation of culture. Time and again we've seen that, without clear rules and well-calibrated regulation, local content is vulnerable not because audiences don't value it—they do, profoundly—but because global market forces won't prioritise it if they're not required to. It's for precisely these reasons that France, Italy, Spain and Canada have all introduced local content obligations. Indeed, all EU member states require streaming platforms to ensure that at least 30 per cent of their catalogue consists of European works. So Australia is not an outlier here; we're just catching up to where we should have been some time ago.

Streaming platforms can and do produce fantastic Australian content. This reform is about guaranteeing that this will continue in the decades ahead. If streaming platforms are where Australian audiences are watching—and, increasingly, they will be—Australian stories must be there too. It's the responsibility of government to guarantee that access, and that's exactly what this legislation will do. By passing this law, the House will send a clear signal that providing Australian content is not a voluntary contribution but a fundamental obligation.

The legislation creates a regulatory framework fit for the digital age. It upholds the rights of Australians to see stories that reflect our shared identity while ensuring our screen industry isn't just viable but thriving. It affirms our commitment to forging a cultural identity that's made here, not imported by default. Labor has taken this policy to multiple elections, and our commitment was reiterated in our National Cultural Policy—Revive, which voiced the aspiration that Australian stories are seen and heard regardless of platform and that our creative industries and practice are future focused, technology enabled, networked and globally recognised. This change has been talked about for many years. The government has consulted on it extensively. We've listened to feedback and adjusted the policy accordingly. The time has come to deliver.

This reform is well and truly due because it's not just the future of Australian storytelling that is at stake; it's Australian jobs. When streaming services invest in local productions, the benefits ripple outwards through the entire economy. Screen productions create valuable work not just for writers, actors and directors but for the crews and businesses who make it possible. These are real, meaningful, skilled jobs like camera operators, set builders, hair and makeup artists, costume designers, location scouts, caterers, editors, postproduction specialists, visual effects artists, accountants, drivers and so many others whose livelihoods depend on a strong and steady production environment.

The screen sector industry directly engages a workforce of around 55,000 people and contributes more than $6 billion in value to the Australian economy. With a guaranteed minimum investment in our domestic screen industry, local producers will have the certainty they need to make long-term plans and invest in the next generation of creative and technical talent. This system will help ensure that those workers have a future in their own country, and it will help prevent the loss of creative Australians to more supportive environments overseas that robbed our country of so much great talent in earlier decades.

We know that no model will satisfy everyone. When balancing cultural and commercial imperatives, it's impossible to achieve 100 per cent consensus. Some may have preferred a different figure for the investment obligation. To them, I say this 10 per cent expenditure requirement is a floor, not a ceiling. Let's be clear: what matters most is the cultural outcome, not the number itself. The legislation mandates a statutory review after four years. If the data shows the scheme has fallen short, the policy settings can be revisited. This mechanism ensures that if changes are needed they can be made, and that when the industry grows the policy can grow with it.

Others will argue that obligations are unnecessary, that streaming platforms are already doing their fair share. To them, I say this system does not impose an undue burden but it does remove uncertainty. It's a modest, predictable requirement that ensures that local content continues to be available to Australian audiences and that jobs in the creative sector are supported. If this system were already in place, the vast majority of platforms would already be meeting their obligations. If streaming platforms want to invest more, and several already do, this framework doesn't stand in their way.

Streaming platforms are already producing fantastic local content across a range of genres, with productions like Apple Cider Vinegar, Boy Swallows Universe, Heartbreak High, Totally Completely Fine, Deadloch, Colin from Accounts and Bump. This legislation will ensure that the production of great content like this continues well into the future. Our government wants to work in partnership with the streaming platforms active in the Australian market. That's why we're putting forward a system that is practical and flexible. Our system will allow streamers who've invested more than 10 per cent in one year to carry that surplus forward as a credit for a period of up to three years. It recognises that production doesn't always fit into a neat 12-month window.

The system allows platforms to choose which stories they want to tell and to meet their requirement through any mix of drama, documentary, children's, educational or arts content. They are the genres where the cultural imperatives are most at stake. They are the genres where the risk of market failure is greatest, so they are the ones that our system is most focused on. It will allow them to meet the obligation either through 10 per cent of expenditure or 7.5 per cent of revenue—whichever best aligns with their business model. The revenue approach may be particularly attractive to new entrants to the industry, which will help ensure that we have a diverse and dynamic streaming market in future years. And this system will give streamers the freedom to fulfil the requirement through one major production or several smaller ones if they wish.

This reform has been almost two decades in the making. But, as Special Envoy for the Arts, I know how intensely we have worked on this over the last few years. I want to thank every industry representative who has contributed to the extensive consultation process that has shaped this legislation—some of whom have held many meetings with me and my team.

To Screen Producers Australia, whose Make It Australian campaign has kept this issue on the political agenda for years: thank you. You and your members have made a huge contribution.

To the Australian Writers Guild, the Australian Directors Guild, the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance and the hardworking advocates of the children's content sector: your passion and persistence have ensured that storytellers remain at the centre of this debate.

To the streaming platforms: thank you for your constructive engagement and for your willingness to meet, discuss and collaborate, and to meet again to discuss and collaborate. It is crucial to a sustainable and vibrant screen ecosystem. The government looks forward to working closely with you as the system is introduced.

To the opposition and crossbench members who voiced their support for this important reform: thank you for backing Australia's creatives.

I'd like to particularly acknowledge our Labor ministers for arts and communications, past and present, who've demonstrated so much commitment to Australian creativity and invested so much hard work in designing a system that is flexible, fair and fit for purpose.

This legislation will not fix every challenge that faces the screen industry. It will not deliver perfection, but it will deliver certainty and confidence. It will deliver investment, it will deliver opportunity for creative workers, and it will deliver Australian stories to Australian audiences. I'm confident that a decade from now we'll look back and say: 'That was the moment Australia stood up for our cultural sovereignty. It was when we said that our stories matter, our creative talent matters, and our screen sector deserves a strong future.'

Ultimately, this legislation is not about regulation. It's about identity. It's about the future of Australian stories and who gets to tell them. It's about whether our kids will grow up seeing their experiences on the screen, hearing voices that sound like theirs and recognising the landscapes. It's about telling every Australian that their stories matter and deserve to be seen, heard, celebrated and shared with the world. Our culture deserves to be nourished by content that reflects who we are, not who someone overseas thinks we ought to be. Every time we share a new Australian story on screen, we strengthen our sense of who we are.

With this reform, a strong screen industry and our extraordinary creative talent will remind the world that Australia is a nation with something to say and the confidence to— (Time expired)

See this speech in context