These amendments are about proportionality. They recognise that an ordinary small business's website is different from a platform that allows users to share harmful material, and they seek to give small businesses clarity about their obligations under this legislation. Think about the businesses in Fowler—a builder in Edensor Park displaying photographs of completed renovations, a bakery in Cabramatta showcasing its baked goods variety, a cafe in Liverpool accepting bookings, a restaurant displaying its menu, a mechanic in Bonnyrigg advertising Services. These businesses use the internet to reach customers and earn a living. A website used for those purposes should not be treated in the same way as a service that allows users to distribute pornography or generate new images using artificial intelligence. The law should recognise that distinction clearly.

My amendments make three changes. First, they establish a small business exemption using the small business entity definition in the income tax legislation. That exemption is not unconditional. It does not apply to services that allow users to post, share or send material to other users or otherwise communicate with one another. It does not apply to services that provide or link to pornography. It does not apply to services that generate or enable users to generate, provide or link to AI generated nudity, and it does not apply to services targeted at children. The amendments also allow the commissioner after inquiry to remove the exemption for a particular service when satisfied that it poses a material risk of serious harm to users in Australia. Business sites alone should not provide an ongoing exemption for a service with those features or risks, but an ordinary small business website should have a clear exemption where none of those exceptions apply.

Second, the amendments require compliance costs to be taken into account where a small business remains covered. That does not make it cost effective. It does not create an automatic defence. It ensures that the cost of an action or measure is considered when determining what is appropriate for a small business. A family business does not have the same resources as a multinational technology company. Recognising that difference is not an argument against online safety. It is an argument for obligations that are practical and proportionate.

Third, the amendments require an independent assessment of the likely cost to small businesses of complying with this part. The report must be tabled in both houses of parliament for small businesses that remain covered, the part would apply only after a further six months. To be clear, the deferral also applies to small businesses operating services excluded from the ongoing exemption, including services targeted at children and those involving pornography or AI generated nudity. It also applies where the commissioner removes the exemption. That is the transition proposed by these amendments. It should be considered separately from the question of which services qualify for an ongoing exemption. The assessment would give parliament and small businesses a clearer account of the likely compliance costs. The additional six months would provide time for affected businesses to prepare. I ask the government: How many small businesses does it expect to be covered? What does it estimate compliance will cost businesses operating ordinary, low-risk websites? Why should those costs not be taken into account when determining what measures are appropriate?

These are practical questions about how the legislation will operate beyond the major technology platforms. Small businesses deserve clear answers. We should distinguish between services according to their features and risks, we should consider the resources of the businesses expected to comply, and we should understand the likely cause of the obligations parliament imposes on small businesses. For anyone who has a small business in this House, they should understand how much costs have increased to operate a business since this government came to power. These amendments seek to put those principles into legislation. I ask the House to support them. I commend the amendments to the House.