Sarah Witty (Melbourne, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of the Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026. At its core, this bill is about fairness. It's about whether people can trust the prices they see, whether they can leave a subscription as easily as they joined it, whether businesses compete by offering a better product or by wearing people down through confusion, pressure and manipulation.

Australians are smart consumers. We compare prices, we budget carefully and we shop around, especially right now, but increasingly we are navigating markets that are designed to exhaust us. We click on what looks like a cheap ticket, and a few screens later the price has jumped. We sign up for a free trial in under a minute and then spend half an hour trying to cancel it. We try to compare products online, only to be flooded with countdown clocks, pop-ups, hidden charges and endless prompts, pushing us towards a decision. We all feel that frustration every single day, and what frustrates us even more is the sense that these practices are not accidental; they are designed that way. This bill says clearly, 'This is not good enough.'

This legislation modernises the Australian Consumer Law to reflect the way Australians buy things now. We buy things online, through apps, through subscriptions and through digital platforms designed to shape our behaviour. Importantly, this bill recognises something we already know: there is a difference between persuasion and manipulation. Businesses should absolutely promote their products. Competition matters, advertising matters, innovation matters—but there is a line. When businesses deliberately create environments that confuse us, pressure us, hide information or trap us into spending money we did not intend to spend, governments have a responsibility to act.

Through this bill, the Albanese Labor government is stepping up in three ways: first, the general ban on unfair trading practices; second, the crackdown on subscription traps; and, third, the ban on drip pricing. Each of these reforms responds directly to experiences we are already having in our daily lives.

The first reform is a ban on unfair trading practices across the economy. This is significant reform. For too long there has been a gap in our consumer laws. There have been practices that clearly feel unfair to consumers—practices that distort decision-making and practices that cause harm—but those practices have not always met the threshold of misleading conduct or unconscionable conduct under existing laws. This bill closes that gap. It establishes a clearer principle: businesses must not manipulate consumers or unreasonably distort the environment in which consumers make decisions, in ways that cause harm. That matters enormously in a digital economy, because design is no longer neutral. Buttons matter, defaults matter, timers matter and the order in which information appears matters.

We know businesses can shape behaviour through design. Increasingly, small businesses are relying on behavioural pressure as part of their business model. This bill recognises that reality. Importantly, it is principles based. That means the law can evolve as markets evolve. Because technology changes quickly, digital platforms change quickly and consumer habits change quickly. If we rely only on narrow, piecemeal rules, the law will always lag behind. This approach creates a broad standard of fairness that can respond to harmful conduct as it emerges, and the bill gives practical guidance about what that looks like. It includes examples such as failing to disclose important information; presenting information in a way that is confusing or overwhelming; making it difficult for consumers to exercise legal rights; and using digital design features that place unreasonable pressure on people.

These are practices Australians encounter all the time. Most people listening to this debate would recognise them immediately. They are not abstract legal concepts; they are lived experiences—the app that keeps pushing 'buy now' warnings designed to create panic, the online forms that hide the cancellation button, the checkout screen where the final cost suddenly jumps.

Australians expect businesses to compete fairly. This bill makes that expectation enforceable. Importantly, this is not antibusiness legislation. Good businesses already operate fairly. Good businesses already communicate clearly. Good businesses already complete honestly. I've heard that directly from small-business advocates in Melbourne, including through conversations with business associations across the Melbourne electorate. Businesses doing the right thing should not be undercut by competitors relying on hidden fees, confusing terms or manipulative design to win consumers. Fair competition depends on fair rules, and fair rules create stronger markets.

The second major reform deals with subscription traps. Honestly, we have had enough of them. Subscriptions are now everywhere: streaming services, fitness apps, software, meal kits, news subscriptions and gaming services. Subscriptions can absolutely be convenient. Many businesses use them responsibility, but, too often, subscription systems are designed around one assumption, which is that we will forget—that we will miss a renewal or give up trying to cancel. That is where the problem starts.

Research shows Australians are wasting enormous amounts of money on subscriptions that they no longer want to use. We are not staying subscribed because we love the product. We are staying subscribed because leaving has become too difficult. That is not consumer loyalty. That is friction by design. This bill changes that. Businesses will have to clearly disclose key information before someone signs up. We must be told that we are entering a subscription, what it costs, how long it lasts, how renewals work and how we can cancel it. And that information must be prominent and easy to understand, not buried in pages of fine print, not hidden behind vague language and not scattered across multiple screens but simple, clear and visible. The bill also creates a framework for reminder notices. If a free trial is about to end, we will be told. If a renewal is approaching, we will be reminded. That sounds basic, but right now too many systems rely on silence.

That is why this bill also addresses cancellation. This part matters. Cancellation must be straightforward. It must be easy to find, it must be easy to do, and it must only require steps that are reasonably necessary. A contract that can be entered into in seconds should not have half an afternoon to escape. We all know exactly what that feels like when we can subscribe online instantly but to cancel suddenly we need to phone during business hours, navigate endless menus, answer retention questions or search through page after page, trying to find the right button. This is deliberate friction. This bill says, 'Enough.' Again, this reform supports good businesses too. Many businesses already make subscriptions simple and transparent. Those businesses should not be disadvantaged by competitors relying on confusion and exhaustion to keep customers paying.

The third major reform deals with drip pricing, and Australians know this one well. We see a product advertised at one price. We click through, invest time and fill in our details, and suddenly extra fees appear—booking fees, service fees and processing fees, one charge after another. By the final screen, the original price barely resembles the real one. That is drip pricing, and Australians are tired of it. This bill tackles that directly by requiring businesses to show mandatory fees upfront and at the same time the advertised price is displayed. Right now, too many of us only discover the true cost after we have already spent time working through the purchase process.

In Melbourne, people know exactly what that feels like. We are a city built around live music, comedy, theatre and major events, and too often a ticket that looked affordable at the start suddenly becomes much more expensive by the final check-out screens once booking fees and service charges are added on. This bill says that the full mandatory costs should be clear from the beginning. People should be able to decide what they can afford before they commit to buying a ticket, and supporting Melbourne's creative life should feel exciting, not frustrating. Importantly, this bill does not ban transaction fees. It bans hiding them. That distinction matters because transparency matters. Businesses that disclose the true price upfront should not be punished for doing the right thing.

These reforms form part of a much broader agenda from the Albanese Labor government to strengthen competition, improve productivity and create fairer markets, because stronger consumer protections and stronger competition go hand in hand. This government has already delivered the most significant overhaul of merger laws in 50 years. We have increased funding to the ACCC so it can take stronger action against misleading pricing practices. We have outlawed unfair contract terms and introduced penalties for companies that breach those laws. We are strengthening the unit-pricing code and cracking down on shrinkflation so we can clearly see when products shrink while prices stay the same. We made the food and grocery code mandatory, backed by real penalties, and we have increased the maximum penalties under the Competition and Consumer Act from $10 million to $100 million. Penalties matter. If penalties are too weak, they simply become part of the business model. Strong consequences matter because fairness matters, and this agenda stretches right across the economy.

Through National Competition Policy reforms, the government is working with states and territories to remove barriers to stop new businesses entering the market. We are improving occupational licensing, supporting the right to repair, improving labour mobility and helping workers move more freely across jurisdictions. Stronger competition drives productivity, and stronger productivity supports living standards.

I also want to acknowledge the businesses that are already doing the right thing. Small businesses especially are already operating transparently and fairly. They are not the problem. In fact, many small businesses are hurt by unfair practices from larger competitors. This bill helps create a marketplace where businesses succeed because they offer better value and better service, not because they are better at hiding fees or trapping consumers.

Markets work best when people trust them—when prices are what they seem, when information is clear, when consumers can make genuine choices, when businesses compete fairly—and trust matters deeply right now. The people we represent are working hard. Families are budgeting carefully. Every dollar matters more. We should not have to fight hidden fees, confusing systems and manipulative design just to buy a concert ticket, cancel a trial or compare prices online.

This bill restores something simple but important: clarity. It gives people back time, back confidence, back agency, and it sends a clear message that in Australia fairness is not an option. This legislation modernises consumer protections for the economy our communities live in today, and it builds a marketplace where good businesses can thrive by doing the right thing. That matters for consumers, that matters for competition and that matters for trust in our economy.

Whether someone is buying groceries, signing up for a subscription or heading out to support Melbourne's live music and creative scene, they deserve transparency and fairness. People across our communities are all working hard for their money right now. They deserve markets that respect that effort: markets where prices are clear, where cancelling a service is simple, where businesses compete fairly and openly. That is what this bill moves us to do: a fairer marketplace, stronger consumer protections, better competition and an economy where trust matters again. That is good for consumers, good for honest businesses and good for Melbourne. I commend this bill to the House.

See this speech in context