Lisa Chesters (Bendigo, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Metcalfe, Axe Creek, Faraday, Walmer, Eppalock, Lockwood, Maiden Gully, Marong, Axedale, Mosquito Creek and Raywood are just a number of the communities that have contacted me since I was elected as a federal member for Bendigo, back in 2013, complaining about basic mobile phone coverage—the ability to make phone calls or text—simply disappearing. They have coverage one minute and not the next. There are a variety of excuses that they've been given over the years to explain why they've lost their coverage: more people moving into an area, like Maiden Gully, the weather on days and the topography—the challenges that you have when you live at the edge of these coverage maps. But what we had from those opposite when they were in government was nothing but excuses. It has taken our government to put forward for the first time a universal obligation for mobile phone coverage. You would think from the complaints from those opposite that it was their idea and they were waiting for us to implement it, but it's not. It is our idea.

We are drawing a baseline and saying to every Australian that, if you can see the sky, your mobile phone will be able to do the basic functions. That is what we're talking about here. We are not pretending that this will give every Australian access to the download and upload speeds. That's separate legislation and a separate program. What we're saying in the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025 is that this reform is not about replacing traditional mobile phone coverage. It's about expanding access. It's about making sure that for areas where we haven't had the investment from industry and government to co-invest in building the technology, where it hasn't been feasible, we will find another way and use other technologies to make sure that all Australians, if they can see the sky, will have access to basic telecommunications.

For many in the cities and even in some regional centres, this is a problem of the past. It is not something that they have experienced. You may argue that that's competition and that's just the way the market works, but that's the very problem. When we leave all of our challenges up to the market, regional areas like my own miss out. We miss out on the basics, on the fundamentals—the ability to make phone calls and to send text messages when we're needed.

In this debate, we've heard about the importance of this during natural disasters and when somebody has an accident on a farm or are caught on a road—the ability to connect when required. And it is very true that we need that basic function in an emergency. Far too often, I've been talking to colleagues—safely, of course—on my mobile phone, and I'll warn them: 'Hold on. I'm getting to a black spot. I'll call you back.' The phone drops out on sections of the Calder and the Midland Highway. It is a common occurrence. All locals know those black spots. You make the call before you get to the black spot. You make the call after you've passed through the black spot, or you simply wait until you're home. This is a regular occurrence for people in regional centres, so the ability to have a universal obligation, a guarantee that people can do the basics—phone calls and texts—is a game changer for regional Australia.

What we saw from those opposite when they were in government was a very clunky black spots program, which was aimed to help expand the coverage for mobile phones and connectivity in the regions. What I ended up getting in my electorate was roughly one tower per election cycle, and quite often it was in an area which didn't improve coverage. We know that because that's what the Auditor-General told us, but that's also what locals told us. It relied upon nomination from local MPs. It was a points based system. The MP could put forward a project. Local council could put forward a project. The telco had to say, yes, they'd invest in the project. Federal government would put some money in. Quite often the state would put some money in. You might also get industry putting money in. It was clunky. It didn't actually deliver the broad-span coverage that this bill is trying to do.

The fact is that we're trying to draw a line and say that we're not going to leave it up to the market and clunky grants based systems or point systems. We're going to start with a baseline of having a universal obligation to mobile phone coverage. That gives us hope in the regions that we are moving forward. We're not leaving it up to the market. We're not leaving it up to a clunky, subsidised, weird point system like we saw from those opposite. Instead, we're going to start with a baseline where we say to all Australians, 'If you can see the sky, you will have access to baseline mobile and tech services.' In some of our regions, that is a great foundation and starting point.

I think about all of our CFAs in the towns that I've listed, and it's often the No. 1 issue that CFA volunteer services raise with me, or it's a very close second. It's what the SES raise with me—the ability to get to accident sites quicker and sooner because somebody's been able to have access, the ability to communicate with each other, helping people to have access and communicate through. In Metcalfe, sometimes they feel like they're stuck in another era where they literally still have a phone tree that they activate on their catastrophic fire days or on days where they're worried, where they're phoning people on the landline to say, 'You have to get out now,' because they cannot rely upon text messages and mobile phones. They simply don't have the coverage. The hope for them in this bill, by establishing this baseline, is that they will be able to join the rest of us when we have those challenging days and that they'll be able to receive the same notifications as others.

This legislation brings mobile services into the longstanding universal services regime, which we've had in this country for other telecommunications services—landline and Australia Post, just to name a few—which previously only covered copper based voice services: the landline. By doing so, we are creating a framework that can protect consumers and ensure mobile services if the industry does not deliver in the national interest. That is the difference between us and those opposites.

We openly acknowledge to industry, particularly to these privately listed companies, that we get that your shareholders may not want to build a tower in towns like Metcalfe and Axe Creek. We get that. There's no money to be made there. There are literally not enough service providers. However, it is in our nation's interest that all of these users and anybody visiting these areas can access their mobile phones, and that's where we step in. This is what is different about this bill: for the first time in our country's history, we are drawing a line and saying that everybody should have access. I've heard from people who live in outer metro areas where this is a challenge. Welcome to our world. It's been a challenge for us for a long time, so it is welcome to see more and more people realising the opportunity that comes with this bill.

The changes in technology are going to be what makes this bill become a reality. The ability to use new technology as it develops to help people access the very basics will help change things here in Australia. The timing, whilst challenging, will create a clear signal to the markets of the importance of making sure that people can have access, and equitable access, to outdoor mobile phone coverage in areas in our regions. We aren't sitting around and waiting for the issue to fix itself. We're not waiting for the market. Our government is acting and sending a clear message to the industry: let's work together to solve this one.

Far too often we've heard excuses. Now we're actually making change. That is why this bill should be supported by all in this place and in the other place. It is creating a baseline, an opportunity for all of us to have access to the very basics of mobile phone text and voice. The proposal that is before us is a critical part of our government's comprehensive work to make sure we reduce the digital divide that exists in our country. It's critical to improving productivity. It's critical to supporting economic growth. But it's making sure that we support people when they need it. It's making sure that people can access support services in case of an emergency or are able to get the information that they need.

Once this is successfully introduced, it will also allow us to continue to build on bridging the gap when it comes to other needs—for example, data. I talk about data because I want to talk about the NBN rollout and how disappointed we in our part of the world were when those opposite took over and formed government and by the way in which they blew up our plan—they literally destroyed our plan—with the NBN rollout.

We had a series of mobile phone fixed wireless towers being built in our part of the world. Bendigo is a unique regional centre. Whilst in the town there is fibre to the premises or fibre to the node, now fibre to the kerb, our town and our smaller towns and Greater Bendigo itself has a large fixed wireless footprint. One of the towers within that plan wasn't built. It was knocked back for planning reasons. That tower went into the too-hard basket when those opposite were in government. That particular tower in Ladys Pass, near Mount Camel, was actually going to be the relay tower for four others. This meant that those other four towers, which were built in the north part of my electorate, around Greater Bendigo, weren't switched on. For the longest period, those residents and businesses in that outer part had people willing to sell them access to the NBN. They had people willing to sell them access to data plans, and they were signing up to them, but, when the technician would come out to connect them, they couldn't get connected. They couldn't work out why. After question after question, even in this place, after email, after protests and after petitions, we finally found out that it was because the relay tower had not been built. In the end, the solution after many years was to connect them to the south. It meant that, for the towers at the end, like tower No. 10, the coverage was incredibly low. Even though they finally did get access to the NBN via the fixed wireless, the signal was so low that it was almost not worth it.

It took a Labor government's election. In the last term, when Minister Rowlands was the minister for communication, she basically reviewed all of the fixed wireless towers and turned them up, upping what could be transmitted from those towers, allowing more people to be able to access the spectrum that they needed. It's another demonstration of how those opposite didn't really understand what was going on in the regions. What they did to the NBN is just one example of how they basically dropped the ball in terms of universal coverage with quick fixes to be able to say, 'Job done; move on.' That is how telecommunication has been dealt with in this country, and it's clearly not done, judging by the interest that we have seen in this bill.

As I have said, this bill that's before us should be embraced by all in this place, particularly regional members. It establishes for the first time in our history a universal outdoor mobile obligation. It says that, in our country, if you can see the sky, you should be able to access voice and mobile phones. For many in my part of the world, that is a game changer. The idea that you can drive throughout the region—my own region—and not get the SOS is something that many would welcome, knowing that on those catastrophic days you'll still be able to receive text messages and the early warning. That you'll still be able to receive voice calls is a game changer. Knowing that, if your daughter or son is driving home via Eppalock and something happens, they'll be able contact you—these things make a difference. They will ensure that all of us have the same opportunity as others in other parts of the country. I commend the bill and the reforms to the House.

See this speech in context