Tom French (Moore, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

She does. But technology has moved forward and the law must move with it. Australia's universal service obligation was constructed around fixed line voice services and payphones. It was built in an era where copper line was the primary means of communication. That architecture made sense in 1999. In 2026, the communications landscape is fundamentally different. For many Australians, particularly younger Australians, a mobile handset is their only telephone. Payphones are no longer the backbone of connectivity—mobile networks are. Yet, mobile voice and SMS have not historically been included within the universal service framework.

This bill addresses that omission. It establishes the universal outdoor mobile obligation, requiring that baseline mobile voice and SMS services be reasonably available outdoors across Australia on an equitable basis. That is a profound recalibration of universal service policy. It recognises that mobile connectivity is not an optional enhancement to modern life. It is essential infrastructure.

The obligation is deliberately scoped. Upon commencement, it applies to voice calls and SMS text messages. The limitation is not timidity; it is prioritisation. This legislation does not attempt to mandate universal high-speed broadband via satellite across every desert track. It focuses on what matters in remote and regional contexts. When something goes wrong, when a vehicle breaks down, when someone is injured, when severe weather rolls in, the first thing you need to be able to do is call someone or send a message. Voice and SMS are the foundations of emergency response and personal reassurance. By embedding those services within the universal service regime, the parliament is recognising their essential nature.

The obligation applies outdoors. It does not require indoor reception inside every building. It does not extend underground. It does not extend underwater. This reflects physical realities. Direct-to-device satellite services require line of sight to the sky. Designing the obligation around outdoor availability ensures that it is technically feasible, legally enforceable and operationally meaningful. In many remote communities, the key safety question is precisely this: if you are standing outside under open sky, can you connect? This bill answers that question affirmatively, where it is reasonably achievable.

For decades, extending terrestrial towers across sparsely populated regions was commercially unviable. The economics did not support it. Low-Earth-orbit satellite constellations are changing that equation. Direct-to-device connectivity allows standard mobile handsets to connect directly to satellites—no fixed disk, no specialised equipment, no bespoke installation.

SMS capability is already emerging commercially. Voice capability is expected to follow. The government has chosen not to wait for the technology to fully mature before establishing the legislative framework. Instead, this bill sets the expectation now. It ensures that, as the technology scales up, its deployment aligns with universal access principles rather than purely commercial incentives. That is proactive governance. Under this framework, Telstra, Optus and TPG will be designated as default providers from 1 December 2027. That date provides certainty to industry and clarity to consumers. It signals seriousness.

At the same time, the legislation includes flexibility. If wholesale market readiness or technological constraints require adjustment, the minister may refine its commencement or structure through legislative instrument. This is not rigidity. It is disciplined flexibility. The parliament sets the objective; the regulatory framework allows responsive implementation.

The obligation is framed in terms of reasonable availability, and that phrase is critical. Telecommunications networks are complex systems. Weather events occur. Maintenance is required. Spectrum interference happens. Devices vary in capability. The law does not require perfection. It requires that, where it is reasonably achievable to provide outdoor voice and SMS coverage, it must be provided. This is not a vague aspiration. It is a legal standard capable of interpretation, enforcement and oversight. It recognises constraints without excusing inertia.

Under this obligation, where voice services are supplied outdoors, emergency call requirements follow. As coverage expands, so does access to triple zero. In remote Western Australia I've seen how rapidly circumstances can change. Storm systems move quickly, vehicles fail unexpectedly and the distance between service centres is vast. Redundancy is critical. Layering baseline satellite-enabled connectivity into these environments strengthens resilience. It does not remove risk, but it reduces isolation, and, in remote contexts, reducing isolation can be the difference between delay and response.

This is not a voluntary undertaking. The bill enables standards, rules and benchmarks relating to reliability, performance and consumer protection. The Australian Communications and Media Authority will oversee compliance and enforce the obligation. Without enforcement architecture, universal service obligations risk becoming aspirational. With enforcement architecture, they become operational. Connectivity is not only about emergencies; it underpins productivity. Agricultural operations rely on coordination and logistics. Freight movements depend on communication along long corridors. Tourism in remote regions depends on traveller confidence. Resource operations rely on layered communications and systems. Reliable baseline connectivity contributes to economic stability in regions that drive national export performance. This bill strengthens the communication foundation of those sectors.

Beyond economics, connectivity sustains relationships. When you are working for weeks at a time in a remote location, the ability to send a message home matters. I remember queuing for payphones onsite—brief windows, limited privacy, timed calls. That was the practical reality. Technology now allows us to provide a more dignified baseline. This reform acknowledges that human connection should not be constrained by legacy infrastructure where modern alternatives exist. It does not erase geography. It does not eliminate technical constraints. It does not mandate universal broadband speeds everywhere. It does not nationalise networks. It sets a floor. If the technology exists to provide outdoor voice and SMS coverage, and it is reasonably achievable to deploy it, then the law should require it to be deployed. That is not extravagant; it is prudent.

Australia's scale demands policy responses suited to continental geography. Bringing mobile voice and SMS into the universal service regime is not regulatory expansion for its own sake; it is alignment with reality. It lifts the baseline expectation of connectivity. It ensures that universal service in the 21st century reflects how Australians actually communicate. When I reflect on working in remote environments, one principle stands out: you focus on what works, you build redundancy, you reduce unnecessary risk where you can. This bill reflects that mindset. It does not promise perfection. It does not overreach. It sets a realistic, enforceable baseline.

If you're standing outdoors in open sky in Australia and it's technically feasible to connect you, then that connection should be reasonably available. For a country of our size, our ambition and our economic footprint, that is not excessive. It is sensible and it is overdue. For those reasons, I commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context