Anne Webster (Mallee, National Party, Shadow Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise this morning as the shadow minister for regional communications to speak on this bill. The Telecommunications Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025 primarily seeks to amend the Telecommunications Act 1997 to establish a mandatory carriage service provider registration scheme, make industry codes directly enforceable, increase maximum civil penalties and allow the Minister for Communications to increase infringement notice penalties. The bill complements other telecommunications legislation by strengthening consumer protections, providing the Australian Communications and Media Authority, ACMA, with greater enforcement powers and aligning with the broader goal of a consumer-centric telecommunications sector.

The coalition supports this bill, which is a step in the right direction when it comes to enhancing consumer protections in telecommunications. However, this bill is not a comprehensive review of consumer protections in the telecommunications sector, something which the Regional Telecommunications Independent Review Committee, RTIRC, called for in their December 2024 report, which the government has failed to respond to. There is a legislative requirement to respond to this report within six months. They are three months overdue so far. There are 14 recommendations, and we are yet to hear a peep from the minister. The coalition's form in government on responding to RTIRC reports within the legislative timeframe was far stronger than Labor's, and I hope the government's response to the RTIRC report is not waiting until the universal outdoor mobile obligation, or UOMO, legislation passes the parliament. UOMO is by no means a comprehensive solution to shortcomings in regional telecommunications.

I moved on Monday that the Albanese government be held to account for failing to meet a legislated deadline to table its response to a key regional telecommunications report. This is yet another example of Labor's lack of focus on regional Australia and another demonstration of their ongoing lack of transparency. Regional people deserve better. While Australians wait for the government's late response to the Regional Telecommunications Review, they also want answers from Labor about when the UOMO legislation will be introduced.

Let me take a moment to paint a brief picture of the experience of regional Australians when it comes to telecommunications. On that front, I can tell you that metropolitan Australians and regional Australians are not in the same boat. Just yesterday, I met with Rhys Turton, a proud farmer and Chair of GrainGrowers. He lives in York in the Western Australian wheatbelt. Rhys lives 17 kilometres from a Telstra tower and says that, while the mobile phone network is workable from Monday to Friday, come the weekend, he has to drive up the hill and stay in his ute. When 5,000 people drive out of Perth, he can't make a call or send a text, even with boosters.

Rhys went on to tell me that data and connectivity are a big part of his agricultural business and, when they fail, the impact on productivity is huge. He says: 'If we have a vehicle breakdown, I go to the web and pull up a parts manual after driving to the top of the hill. If I call the service guy and the guy says he will ring me back, do I wait on the top of the hill to take his call?' How can people like Rhys be expected to run a productive business, one that drives our economy, while sitting around on the top of a hill waiting for a phone call? He also says: 'I am sick of spending money for a service that isn't a proper service. I feel my argument is so basic. I had better reception on CDMA.'

It is ridiculous that regional Australians put up with such poor connectivity. Rhys's story illustrates the challenges country people face—Australians who technically do have coverage of some sort under our existing terrestrial mobile network. Regional Australians become digital lifehackers, experts in messing around to use the limited service that is available. But as soon as congestion builds up, service goes out the window. The Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman, TIO, received 51,854 complaints from consumers living in regional, rural and remote Australia between 2021 and 2024. Regional Australians are indeed getting a raw deal. I don't need the TIO to tell me this. I know it to be true based on my own experience and the experience of constituents across Mallee.

Constituent complaints range from system faults to poor service quality, poor mobile service coverage, outages and accessibility barriers. The TIO's report highlights that faults and service problems often take longer to resolve in the regions and that, often, mobile service coverage is poor or non-existent. For example, the ombudsman referred to cases where 'a regional customer may report faults over several years without any lasting improvements to their services'. I'd like to know how many people in metropolitan Melbourne or Sydney would tolerate that. Additionally, the TIO heard from consumers who signed up to a mobile service after being told that their mobile would work in their area, but, when returning home to a remote location, found they had no service. Regarding satellite services, the TIO's complaint data shows that regional consumers continue to experience unreliable connections and service quality problems.

I have to highlight that, during a cost-of-living crisis, regional Australians pay the same price on their mobile phone plans as people in the inner cities who get far higher download speeds and service reliability. Returning to Rhys's experience, which I mentioned earlier, the RTIRC report talks to his exact issue, stating:

…existing mobile networks in many regional areas are under pressure and facing congestion and capacity issues that require urgent attention—

Urgent attention, I say to the government—

to ensure reliable service.

RTIRC reports that many people living in regional, rural and remote Australia remain dissatisfied with their mobile experience, citing issues such as unreliability, frequent call dropouts and slow data speeds. The committee reports:

In many regional centres, the existing infrastructure struggles to cope with demand, particularly during peak usage periods or times of crisis.

RTIRC suggests that 'attention must turn to improving the quality of services in areas with existing terrestrial mobile coverage'.

This is important in the context of technology that is changing at a considerable pace, where low-Earth-orbit, LEO, satellite technology presents new opportunities for access to voice-capable broadband connectivity within fixed premises in the bush. It also presents opportunities to expand basic mobile phone connectivity in areas where there is currently none and in places where expanding the terrestrial network is simply not feasible. We cannot put mobile towers every 14 kilometres. It's just not going to work. The expense is enormous. For those who don't know, it's around a million dollars per tower. We must invest in up-to-date technology.

We need to be realistic about the technology advances, what they look like and the timeframes involved; be aware of what industry is doing or likely to continue to do off their own bat because it makes commercial sense; and listen to the experience and needs of consumers in the regions, who are often most aware of what really makes a difference on the ground.

When it comes to the experience of telecommunications for regional Australians on the ground, the 3G network shutdown is a prime example of the failings of the Albanese Labor government. The 3G network shutdown in Australia, completed by major telcos in 2024, aimed to repurpose spectrum for enhanced 4G and 5G services. However, the Albanese government's management of the shutdown of the 3G network was a complete mess. I called time and again for the former minister to prevent the foreseeable calamity of a rushed 3G shutdown, and the Albanese government was very slow to act. Even then, the 3G shutdown was marred by significant failings, widespread disruptions, a surge in complaints and ongoing service losses for some consumers, particularly in the regions.

Despite promises of equivalent or improved coverage, 4G or 5G signals do not reach as far as 3G in some terrains, creating new black spots. This was particularly acute in rural areas with fortuitous 3G coverage—that is, unofficial signals beyond the mapped areas, which telcos did not commit to replicating. In regional or remote areas, consumers report 4G is unreliable or absent where 3G actually worked, resulting in phones dropping to SOS mode or having no signal at all, requiring them to drive up hills or climb towers for reception, as Rhys has to do. And I have to say I experience this on many of my Mallee roads. I have conversations going on the telephone while I'm driving, they drop out and they have to be called again and again.

Thousands of consumers have been left with worse or no coverage at all, particularly in rural and remote areas. Farmers' agtech equipment has been rendered useless. There is no coverage on their properties to call triple 0 if there is an accident or emergency. People with life-saving health devices are having to charge them constantly because the device is searching for a signal that isn't coming, rendering the device useless because it isn't on them while it's on the charger. At their own cost, because of this government's failures, people are installing Starlink satellites for their homes and properties because the lack of access is quite literally threatening lives and livelihoods.

There have also been reports of poor handling of consumer complaints about their loss of service post the 3G shutdown. It isn't good enough, and the Albanese government should be ashamed of their lack of response to help the people impacted.

I hope I have done justice to the bleak nature of the regional telecommunications experience for consumers so far this morning. I would now like to draw the House's attention back to the consumer protections in regional telecommunications and refer again to the report of the Regional Telecommunications Independent Review Committee.

Recommendation 4 of this report is about consumer protection and service standards. Key findings of RTIRC's report regarding consumer protection and service standards include:

The regulatory and consumer protection framework for telecommunications is extremely complex—

due to multiple pieces of legislation, contractual requirements and industry codes. Other findings are:

Consumers' expectations of consumer protections and telco providers' service standards are not being met.

People in rural and remote areas experience faults and outages more frequently, and repair times are often extended compared to urban areas.

RTIRC also discuss the need to modernise consumer protections to ensure relevance to changes in technology and models of service delivery and the need for a consolidated and streamlined framework of consumer protection to reduce duplication, streamline compliance and enforcement and improve effectiveness. The RTIRC report calls for a full overhaul of telecommunications consumer protection and service standard frameworks, suggesting the modernisation of the universal service obligation as a sensible time to do this.

As the shadow minister for regional communications, I highlight that the Nationals are championing regional connectivity. As our highest priority, the Nationals are committed to working with consumers and the telecommunications sector to design an updated universal service obligation that ensures that regional Australians have the connectivity required to enable economic participation and maximise productivity gains and have access to high-quality educational content and virtual health care and meaningful social connection. I call on this government to lift their game.

Jo Briskey (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Telecommunications Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025 may appear to be about abstract regulation and technical changes, but in reality it is about fairness and keeping us connected. It is about making sure that families, small businesses and workers in communities like mine in Maribyrnong and right across the country get a fair go when it comes to the services we rely on every single day. We all know what it feels like when a phone line goes down, when the internet cuts out or when we're hit with an unfair bill and left on hold for hours. For a parent, losing connection may mean that their child can't finish their school project that's due the next day. For a small business, it might mean losing customers that simply can't wait. For an older Australian, it might mean not being able to call a loved one or a doctor when they need to the most. These are not small inconveniences; they are things that cause real stress in already busy households. They are the moments where working people lose time that they don't have and small businesses lose money that they can't spare.

For families already juggling the rising cost of living and small businesses working hard to keep the doors open, these failures cut deep. They cost money. They cost time. They cost trust. And they leave people feeling powerless against the big corporations, who seem untouchable. That's why this bill matters. Telecommunications is the infrastructure of modern life. It's how kids do their homework, how parents talk to their families overseas, how local small businesses connect with customers and how workers earn their living.

This bill gives Australians protections that they should have had a long time ago. It arms the regulator, ACMA, with the teeth it needs to hold dodgy telcos accountable. It lifts penalties for bad behaviour from $250,000 to nearly $10 million or more for the larger companies—no more shrugging off fines as simply a cost of doing business. It creates a register of service providers so dodgy operators can't hide in the shadows and rip people off. It makes compliance with industry codes mandatory so families and small businesses aren't waiting months for regulators to step in. That is fairness in action. That is Labor delivering.

Let me pause on the carriage service provider, or CSP, register, because this is significant reform. Right now, there is no single comprehensive list of who is operating in the telecommunications market. That means a provider can set up, take people's money and, in some cases, cause real harm, all the while flying under the radar. For such an essential piece of social and economic infrastructure, this is not on. This bill fixes that. It creates a national register, a transparent list of providers who are operating legitimately. For families, this means confidence that the company selling you a phone plan is accountable. For small businesses, it means knowing that your internet provider is properly monitored. For industry as a whole, it means a level playing field, because those who do the right thing won't be undercut by dodgy operators who cut corners. And, importantly, the regulator will have the power to shut down providers who pose an unacceptable risk to consumers. That's not a power that will be used lightly, but it will finally give ACMA the power it needs to stop harm before it spreads. We've seen this work in the energy sector, where regulators can exclude retailers who fail customers. Bringing that same power to telecommunications is just common sense.

Another vital part of this bill is the modernising of the penalty framework. For too long, the fines in telecommunications lagged behind other sectors, like in energy, banking and consumer law. That left telcos operating under weaker laws than in industries facing similar risks. This bill fixes it. It brings telecommunications penalties in line with those other sectors. That means, when a company breaks the rules, the Federal Court can look not just a flat fine but at the scale of the misconduct. Penalties can be tied to the benefit a company may have made from breaking those rules or to a percentage of their turnover. Why does this matter? It means that the punishment fits the crime. A giant multinational won't get a way with the same slap on the wrist as a small provider. The court can scale the penalty to the size of the business and the seriousness of the offence. That's fairness. That's consistency. And it means Australians can trust that the rules apply equally, no matter how big the company is.

I think of the cafe owner in Ascot Vale, who can't serve customers if their EFTPOS goes down; the tradie in Keilor East, who relies on their phone to get the next job; and the logistics company in Tullamarine that loses money every time the internet drops out. Under the coalition, these businesses were left to fend for themselves. Under Labor we're making sure the rules work for them, not against them. For workers too, whether it's a transport relying on an app, a nurse swapping shifts or a teacher delivering lessons online, this bill protects their livelihoods by ensuring the services they depend on are reliable and fair.

Let's be honest about how we got here. For nearly a decade, the Liberals and the Nationals had the chance to act. Those opposite had the chance to stand up to the big telcos, but they chose not to. They left penalties so low that the worst offenders could treat them as loose change and just a cost of doing business. They left regulators underpowered. They left families, workers and small businesses exposed. Let's not forget the NBN, a second-rate system built on copper that is still holding back households and businesses today. That was their choice. That is their legacy. The coalition like to talk about standing up for small businesses. But, when push came to shove, they were nowhere. They didn't their back, but we do. We are fixing the mess they left behind.

This bill is part of a bigger story—a story of government putting fairness back at the heart of our economy. Since coming to office, Labor has backed people in financial hardship. We've made it a legal requirement for telcos to provide proper support for customers doing it tough. That means families in Maribyrnong who hit a rough patch are treated with compassion not given more stress. We've protected those experiencing family and domestic violence. Survivors can now safely and quickly manage their phone services without tipping-off an abuser—because everyone deserves safety, dignity and connection. We've cracked down on scams. By working across telecommunications, banking and digital platforms, we've helped stop Australians, including retirees and small businesses, lose their savings to criminal scammers. We've invested in regional and local connectivity. Through mobile blackspot programs, on-farm solutions and community pilots, we're making sure small businesses and workers in every corner of this country can compete, succeed and stay connected.

What does this mean in practice? It means a small retailer in Kensington can stay connected to suppliers without outages cutting into their margins. It means a shiftworker in Gladstone Park can rely on their phone to organise care for their kids. It means a farmer outside Melbourne can use digital tools to grow their business. These are real protections, real investments and real changes that make life better for working people and small businesses. That's what a Labor government does. We put people first, and we put fairness first.

In Maribyrnong fairness is not just an idea; it is lived every single day. It's lived by the migrant families in Flemington, who depend on reliable internet so their kids can keep up with their classmates and so they can stay connected to loved ones overseas. It's lived by the factory workers in Airport West, where a reliable phone network keeps production moving and shifts coordinated. It's lived by the small businesses in Avondale Heights and Strathmore, where the EFTPOS transaction matters and where a dropped connection can mean lost sales. It is lived by those parents and young professionals working from home in Moonee Ponds and Aberfeldie, who rely on fast, dependable broadband to reach new markets, engage with their colleagues and attend virtual meetings. And it is lived by older Australians right across our community, who deserve the peace of mind of being able to call their family, their doctor or emergency services without worrying that the line will fail.

When telecommunications systems fail, it's not just a technical glitch; it's people in our community being disconnected, losing income and feeling isolated. That is why this bill is so important to my community in Maribyrnong and right across the country. It says to every person in my community, 'You matter.' It says to the cafe owner in Niddrie, 'Your business matters.' It says to the nurse in Essendon juggling shifts, 'Your job matters.' It says the family in Glenroy, 'Your connection to each other and the world matters.' The people of Maribyrnong expect fairness. They expect accountability, and, with this legislation, the Albanese Labor government is delivering just that.

Australians had a choice at the last election between two very different approaches: the Coalition, with weak protections, dodgy operators running riot and corporate lunches, and Labor, with tough enforcement, fair rules and protections that put families, workers and small businesses first. To no-one's surprise, they voted for a fair go. This legislation is doing just that—bringing fairness to the forefront, building trust among consumers and providing much-needed accountability. It is about putting people back at the heart of the telecommunications system. That's what the Albanese Labor government is delivering, and that's why I stand here proudly to commend this bill to the House.

Melissa McIntosh (Lindsay, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Telecommunications Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025 makes changes to the Telecommunications Act to strengthen consumer safeguards, something we should all agree is a top priority. The bill will create a register of carriage service providers, enable the direct enforcement of industry codes, amend the existing two-step process for the application of penalty amounts for infringement notices and increase the maximum penalty for breaches of the codes from $250,000 to $10 million.

Schedule 1 of the bill will create a new carriage service provider registration scheme. This new registration scheme will require all telecommunications providers to apply to the Australian Communications and Media Authority for registration to operate in Australia. This will provide ACMA, as the regulator for the sector, with visibility of all operators in the Australian market, of which there are an estimated 1,500. This will ensure ACMA is able to educate, monitor and, where necessary, take swift enforcement action for breaches of any codes or standards. Should providers breach their obligations or pose a risk to consumers, ACMA will have the ability to cancel their registration to operate. These arrangements are similar to those in the energy sector, where the Australian Energy Regulator has the power to exclude operators from the market where there is a risk to consumers.

As part of the scheme, providers will also be required to report all cybersecurity incidents. Where there is a cyber breach, the appropriate bodies must be notified and remedial action taken swiftly. Protecting people's personal data and information is of the upmost importance, so ensuring there is swift action when these incidents occur will ensure that Australians' private information is protected from fraud and scams. Full visibility of all operators will also ensure ACMA can target compliance and enforcement activities and, when necessary, take appropriate action.

Schedule 2 of the bill amends the act to make registered industry codes directly enforceable by ACMA. The telecommunications industry has a co-regulation model by which industry is responsible for the preparation of codes which are then submitted to ACMA for registration. Once a code is registered with ACMA and enforced, the code must be complied with by the sector.

In practice, what has been established under the act is a two-step enforcement process. If there is a complaint of wrongdoing or a breach of an industry code, ACMA will direct a provider to comply, essentially issuing a warning for them to correct their behaviour and to do the right thing. Should they not, ACMA's enforcement powers then become available. This enforcement action can include penalties through the Federal Court, enforceable undertakings or the issuing of an infringement notice.

Currently, part 6 of the act says:

Compliance with an industry code is voluntary unless … ACMA directs a particular participant in the telecommunications industry … to comply with the code.

This phrasing has led to a misconception that compliance with industry codes is voluntary. As the explanatory memorandum to this bill states, while code compliance is technically voluntary, after ACMA issues a direction to comply or a formal warning to a provider, they can then take enforcement action if the provider continues the noncompliance.

Since January 2024, ACMA has issued 19 formal warnings, one remedial direction, 16 directions to comply, four enforceable undertakings and infringement notices totalling close to $16 million. Some of these breaches relate to people's privacy and safety, which are of the utmost importance. For example, there were seven notices issued to providers in 2024 for breaches of the emergency call database rules. These rules require the telco providers to keep a person's telephone number and address updated so that, when the number calls triple 0, emergency services—police, fire or ambulance—are deployed to the correct address the first time. Adherence to this code is vital. People's lives depend on it.

The requirement to monitor and report suspected spams and spoof numbers is another important one. If telcos aren't adhering to the code, the impact on people, financially, psychologically and emotionally, is significant. In 2024, of scam types, phone scams led to the highest overall losses, with more than $107 million lost by nearly 2,200 people. Since the start of 2024, ACMA has issued 10 directions to comply with the reducing scam calls and SMS code, but none of these resulted in a financial penalty to providers, because of the two-step process.

The changes in this bill will strengthen ACMA's powers and the speed at which they can use them, to provide an even greater protection for consumers and ensure we have responsible operators in our telecommunications sector. The changes in this bill will make compliance with industry codes mandatory in the first instance, removing the requirement for a two-step process before ACMA can take enforcement action. There'll be no more warning shots, ensuring more immediate action can be taken for breaches of codes. I will note, given much scrutiny of the telecommunications sector over recent years, that this is a change the sector itself has called for. Notably, the Australian Telecommunications Alliance, which is a peak body for the industry, has been calling for these reforms since 2023. These changes will strengthen ACMA's powers to ensure the regulatory regime is as robust as it can be and that operators are held to the highest standards—as all Australians expect.

Finally, the bill will increase penalties issued to providers for breaches of industry codes and standards from $250,000 to $10 million. The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network, the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission have long advocated for civil penalty reform to ensure penalties for breaches reflect the severity of the breach and the harm caused. The increase in the penalties will address this and align the telecommunications penalty framework to those in the energy and banking sectors, competition legislation and Australian consumer law.

This bill makes important changes to strengthen protections for consumers and the integrity of the telecommunications industry. They are changes which the coalition will support, but let's not forget about the failures of this government when it comes to telecommunications. The Albanese Labor government's botched closure of the 3G network has left many areas right across the country with little or no telephone service. Their shutdown of the 3G network was a complete mess. Thousands of consumers have been left with worse coverage or no coverage at all, particularly those in regional, rural and remote areas.

Our farmers have had their ag tech equipment, like soil monitors and weather stations, rendered useless. For years, we have been pushing our agriculture sector to upgrade their business operations with the newest and best technology. They have spent an absolute fortune doing so, and, after the 3G closure, many businesses had their equipment fail. Worse still, where these locations no longer have coverage, they can't call for help on their properties when they need it. People with life-saving health devices are having to charge them constantly because the devices are searching for a signal that just isn't coming. It renders the device useless because it isn't on them; it's on charge. At their own cost, because of this government's failure, people are installing Starlink satellites for their homes and properties because of the lack of access. It's quite literally threatening lives and livelihoods. It isn't good enough, and the Albanese Labor government should be ashamed of their lack of response to help people impacted by the closure of the 3G network.

Notwithstanding the failures I have just highlighted, the coalition will support this legislation. It does provide stronger protections for consumers and strengthens the integrity of the sector. I commend the bill to the House and move the second reading amendment. I move:

That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:

"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House notes the Government's telecommunications failure:

(1) on the botched closure of the 3G network that has left many Australians without telephone services in peri-urban, regional, rural and remote Australia;

(2) to respond to the 2024 Regional Telecommunications Independent Review Committee Report which was tabled in December last year to ensure regional communities have access to reliable telecommunications; and

(3) to release the consultation paper on the Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation, despite committing to legislate this by the end of 2025".

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

Is the amendment seconded?

Anne Webster (Mallee, National Party, Shadow Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the amendment.

Anne Stanley (Werriwa, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to make my contribution to the debate on the Telecommunications Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025. The introduction and passage of the enhancing consumer safeguards bill delivers on the Albanese Labor government's commitment to keeping Australians connected no matter where they live by strengthening telecommunication consumer protections.

The enhancing consumer safeguards bill was first introduced into the 47th Parliament in February this year. It passed the House without amendment and was considered by the Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills but lapsed when the 47th Parliament was prorogued. It is for this reason we are, again, passing this legislation, because consumer protection is paramount, and I'm happy to speak on the bill again.

This bill strengthens the compliance and enforcement tools available to Australia's telecommunications regulator, the Australian Communications and Media Authority, ACMA. This will enable the regulator to better protect Australian consumers from poor and harmful telecommunication practices. The bill increases the civil penalties that the Federal Court can issue for breaches of industry code and industry standards from $25,000 to nearly $10 million. The bill modernises the civil penalties framework so that the Federal Court has the option to issue fines for regulatory breaches which can include $10 million or three times the benefit gained for regulatory breach or 30 per cent of turnover. Currently, civil penalties for breaches of industry codes and standards are not commensurate with the harm caused or high enough to deter noncompliance.

The bill amends the Telecommunications Act 1997 to increase the maximum general civil penalty for breaches of industry codes and standards from 25,000 to 30,300 penalty units. This is the equivalent of just under $10 million at the time of drafting, to align with penalties currently available for breaches of service provider determinations. It means that penalties for all these instruments will be aligned to the 30,300 penalty units. The amendment will also strengthen the penalty framework for industry codes, industry standards and service provider determinations to allow for penalties based on the value of benefit obtained from the conduct or turnover of the relevant provider. This will allow for penalties greater than $10 million.

This penalty framework better aligns with those in other relevant sectors, like energy and banking, and under the Australian Consumer Law. It more adequately reflects the communications market and the varying size of the entities engaged in the market, ranging from small-to-medium businesses to large corporations. It allows the Federal Court to determine the appropriate penalty imposed on an entity for a breach. The bill also expands and clarifies the authority of the Minister for Communications to increase infringement notice penalties so that ACMA can issue for breaches of industry code, industry standards and service provider determinations. This will ensure the regulator remains flexible and responsive and can be adapted over time.

The bill establishes the carriage service provider registration scheme to increase visibility of providers operating in the market and to stop the operation of dodgy carriage service providers, who pose an unacceptable risk to consumers. A carriage service provider has a broad definition under the Telecommunications Act 1997. However, in simple terms, it's an entity that uses a carrier's facilities to supply telecommunications services like phone or internet to the public. Currently, there's no comprehensive list of providers operating in the market. This hampers ACMA's efforts to proactively educate carriage service providers about their obligations and target compliance and enforcement activity. Establishing a carriage service provider registration scheme will increase the visibility of the market and provide ACMA and other government agencies the ability to educate providers, streamline complaints and compliance processes and create better overall market accountability.

The amendments to the Telecommunications Act 1997 will also empower ACMA to stop providers operating in a market who pose unacceptable risks to consumers or who risk significant consumer harm. This will provide a deterrent for significant noncompliance and will increase the trust of consumers in the registered carriage service providers, including new or smaller providers. This is similar to the energy sector, where the Australian Energy Regulator has the power to exclude energy retailers from the market and has used this power to quickly prevent and stop consumer harm. ACMA's power to exclude carriage service providers from the market is expected to be used as a measure of last resort, with suitable arrangements for review of decisions, avenues for registration and maintenance of connectivity for impacted consumers. This reform means that the carriage service providers that are doing the wrong thing will face consequences, and consumers will be better protected.

Furthermore, the bill makes the telecommunications industry codes directly enforceable by ACMA, incentivising industry compliance and enabling the regulator to take swift action to address consumer harm. ACMA currently cannot take direct enforcement action for breaches of the industry codes it has registered under part 6 of the Telecommunications Act, no matter how egregious. Under the Telecommunications Act 1997, compliance with the industry codes is initially technically voluntary. For breaches found, ACMA could only direct a provider to comply with the code or issue a formal warning. ACMA can only take stronger enforcement action if the provider continues its noncompliance—that is, if it fails to observe the directions given by ACMA. This isn't good enough.

Instead, this bill introduces amendments to part 6 of the Telecommunications Act 1997 to make compliance with the industry codes mandatory and remove the need for ACMA to direct a particular participant to comply with the code in the first instance. This is a measure that will make our laws stronger and more enforceable. Since coming to office, the Albanese Labor government has been working to deliver better telecommunications and to better protect the people who use it. These are just a few things that we've already delivered: a new industry standard requiring telecommunications companies to provide adequate support to consumers experiencing financial hardship and a new industry standard requiring telecommunications companies to support and assist consumers experiencing domestic, sexual and family violence. This came into force on 1 July this year.

Earlier this year, the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 was amended to introduce consistent obligations on the telecommunications, banking and digital platform sectors to prevent, detect and disrupt scams. The Albanese Labor government is also delivering a more connected Australia by investing in regional connectivity. The $55 million round 8 of the Mobile Black Spot Program is under assessment. There's been $50 million for Regional Roads Australia Mobile Program Pilot schemes, including $8 million for Victoria and Western Australia and $10 million for New South Wales. The pilot programs will test new and innovative solutions to increase mobile communications coverage on regional highways and major roads.

Round 3 of the regional connectivity program awarded over $115 million towards 74 projects that respond to local priorities with the objective of maximising economic opportunities and social benefits for regional, rural and remote communities. This included $7.4 million towards seven projects targeting improved connectivity for First Nations communities in Central Australia from a dedicated Central Australia stream. Two successful rounds of the On the Farm Connectivity Program have provided over $30.4 million in rebates, delivering on thousands of connectivity solutions for primary producers. $20 million has been committed to round 3 of the program, which will open later in 2025.

I was glad to have a chance to speak on the legislation earlier this year. I know how important this is to make this system more accountable and to stop companies from ripping people off. For too long, the regulator hasn't been given the necessary tools to make sure the telecommunications companies are doing the right thing. The Albanese Labor government has been working to improve our regulators, from strengthening the financial systems regulator to establishing the National Anti-Corruption Commission. We believe, in this country, that it doesn't matter how big you are or what wealth and power you have—no-one is exempt from consequences, no-one is above right or wrong, and no-one is above the law. I commend the bill to the House.

Tim Wilson (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Small Business) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'd like to start by acknowledging the previous speaker and the sentiment that she finished with, which is that the bill is focused on there being no standard, for an Australian, where anybody is above what is right or wrong. It's a point that we in this parliament, and those who have had the great privilege of serving in parliament, should all reflect upon and is perhaps something that the former premier of Victoria should be thinking about at this important moment in the context of his behaviour in Beijing in the past 24 hours.

Getting to the Telecommunications Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025, this legislation, on the surface of it, is not one that should necessarily quicken the blood or excite many of the members in this House. It's to do with ACMA regulations in the context of making sure there are appropriate standards in place and extending them beyond carriage providers, and I get that, for a lot of people, this may not be a very exciting or enthusing topic. Of course, it's very important. When legislation's drafted, particularly for telecommunications or technology—technology will always outpace regulation and the law. In one sense, that's actually a good thing. Technology is moving at a pace that is faster than government. Government should be slower because it is calm, it is methodical, and, when it seeks to impose a standard, it is universal, whereas technology, by its nature, is dynamic, it is exciting, and it seeks to move faster, because it's reflective of human need.

That is why I've always been so excited about technology and excited about the potential not just of things like internet, of course, and telecommunications but also of what artificial intelligence can do. But we're also mindful of the human impact, and, of course, that's where law comes in to maintain standards and ethics but also to make sure that, where there's an overstep or a breach, government does its proper job to secure safety, dignity and security. And that's a constant balance for all of us.

But another thing we have to look at is how law can be weaponised by government to seek to silence or censor people. So I look at this bill—and we're going to support it—but I do so, frankly, with caution. I'm old enough—and I'm not that old—to remember the last time we had a Labor government. There are members in this chamber who weren't here and are now, bright eyed and bushy tailed—some elected in 2025 and some that were elected before then—sitting on the government benches, proudly wearing the moniker of the Australian Labor Party—

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

Order! I give the call to the Minister for Aged Care and Seniors.

Sam Rae (Hawke, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Aged Care and Seniors) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm seeking a point of order for clarification. I understand that Practice is clear that, where a member has already spoken, they are not eligible to then second the second reading amendment.

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

That is correct, Minister. A way forward is if the person who did move the second reading amendment stands up and seeks leave to second the second reading amendment.

Anne Webster (Mallee, National Party, Shadow Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I second the second reading amendment.

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

Thank you. You can proceed, Member for Goldstein.

Tim Wilson (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Small Business) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Deputy Speaker Chesters. But I'm sure you're going give me a whole 15 minutes all over again. I was in full flight! That's okay.

I'm old enough to remember when there were former Labor members sitting on the benches of this parliament on the government side, during the last term of a Labor government, debating legislation. I wasn't here; I was but a member of the public concerned about the future direction of this country. I remember when Labor members were sitting on those benches, and what were they using telecommunications powers for? They were using them to shut down the media—to silence and regulate the media, look at pathways to introduce internet censorship and limit what Australians could see when they didn't like what Australians were searching for. They looked, particularly, to impose different pathways of internet censorship, because they wanted to control people's lives.

I've said this in this parliament many times before: the objective of the Labor Party at every stage of your life is to control Australians. They want to control education so they can control what your children learn and how they see the world. They want to control the workplace so that unions can control you and your standards. They want to control housing so that you rent and they can control how you live and make you dependent. They want to control you on a salary so that you never have the dignity and independence of owning your own small business. They want to control your superannuation through an industry superfund so that you never have the independence and dignity of an SMSF to manifest and manage your own destiny. And, of course, when it comes to telecommunications powers, it is the most wonderful backstop for them to be able to go on and control the information you seek, how you can access it and, even with the wonders of mobile telephony and technology, stop you accessing the information that you seek.

So I look at this legislation—I look at every piece of legislation in the context of telecommunications—and my starting position is that I look at the minister, I look at those at the table, I look at those on the opposition benches, and I go, 'I never start from a position of trust,' because I've seen what you've done before. I know your natural temptation to control the Australian people and how you weaponise this legislation to do so.

You just need to look at their performance in the past week. We talked about it earlier in the week. Think about the gift that they have been given by the Australian people of a 94-seat majority and the trust that they have been given. What are they using—or abusing—that trust to do at the moment? Introduce a veil of secrecy and shut a curtain down over this parliament and Canberra to silence journalists, to limit their capacity to access information and to limit scrutiny of this parliament. They have made it harder for Australians to submit freedom of information requests to scrutinise decisions of government. They have introduced fees to make it harder for people to access basic information about how public servants and the government are making decisions.

We've seen how they want to literally abolish pathways for reviews of decisions in the context of Defence medals. I have never thought that this was a priority of the Australian government, but, in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis when people are dealing with the realities of financial stress and getting to the supermarket with a red basket, this is their priority. When it comes to the powers and the priorities they have, this is where it is. It is not based on how they empower the Australian people. When it comes to telecommunications and introducing standards, I always look with a high degree of scrutiny, because their focus has never been on how they empower the Australian people; it has been on how they control the Australian people.

It doesn't mean there aren't important measures that need to be addressed through telecommunications powers. One of the biggest problems we face in this country right now—and it's a big challenge in the context of Victoria; you can speak to the member for Mallee—is the proliferation of crime. Crime is a massive problem, no matter where you go in Victoria. The failure of Victorian government to address the problems of crime—whether it's in the streets of Black Rock, Beaumaris, Brighton, Bentleigh, McKinnon or Ormond. Throughout the Goldstein electorate, there are violent home invasions, people breaking into people's houses, or scams and cybercrime, which is going on all across the country. That was why community safety and crime were such important issues in the Goldstein electorate at the election, including the proliferation of antisemitism, which was manifest both in the physical form and on telecommunications platforms.

One of the things we also took to the election was the importance of having mandatory minimum sentences in the context of online sexual violence and crimes. That isn't the priority of this government. Closing FOI pathways for Australians is. Closing Defence medal review pathways is. Stopping the access of the opposition to be able scrutinise the decision-making government is their priority—

Anne Webster (Mallee, National Party, Shadow Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Shame!

Tim Wilson (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Small Business) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

'Shame,' says the member for Mallee, and she's right. Stopping violent sexual predators on online platforms probably should be a priority for this government, but it isn't. It's certainly one of our priorities. That's what we should be addressing through telecommunications platforms. Whether it is cybercrime, sexual violence, scams or violent home invasions with machetes—these are pretty important issues for this country, but they're not the priorities of the current government.

Of course, the other thing we need to address through telecommunications platforms is access to basic services. This has been something that Labor has never been afraid of spending obscene amounts of public money on for low return. The problem is that they still leave so much of the country behind, because their focus has always been on how they use telecommunications as a mechanism for pork barrelling rather than for improving the basic infrastructure that Australians need with a sense of universal obligation. Members from rural and regional electorates can talk about that at length. I don't seek to project or represent their communities on those issues, but I know full well that it remains an ongoing problem, particularly to do with mobile telephony services. The member for Mallee, as I understand it, has previously raised issues where people are increasingly using Starlink installations because they can't get access to the services they need through the National Broadband Network. We also have, even in urban centres like the Goldstein electorate, massive problems around access to telecommunications services—basic things like mobile telephony.

You've got the state government basically seeking to weaponise housing approvals and development. I'm getting more and more complaints in places like Highett, Cheltenham and even Brighton, where people are having increasing problems accessing telecommunications services, including mobile telephony services and even television services. When it comes to basic standards and safeguards in telecommunications powers, this fits as part of the communications framework that people expect to see from our nation's parliament and our laws. Only the other day, I got a complaint about minimum access to services for mobile telephony in Brighton, with someone explicitly saying, 'Can we see more effort from Telstra to be able to access basic 4G and 5G services?'

The same has also been increasingly true around Hampton East, Cheltenham and parts of Moorabbin. More and more people are working from home, but, because of an increasing number of developments of high-rise apartments and increasing disruptions from 5G access to internet connections, they're not getting the basic services and standards that they reasonably expect. So there's an accountability gap about the information they need—and, of course, they need more and more assistance, particularly where there are activity centres. It's not just that they're facing it now; they're concerned that it will fall on deaf ears into the future with this government.

People expect basic standards and basic services. That is not in dispute in telecommunications powers. But what they also expect is that the government is going to step up and meet those expectations, and they're not hearing it, they're not seeing it and they're living with the consequences.

I'll just read out a quote from a constituent only the other day: 'Despite strong community opposition, a development has since been amended to increase from the original plan to eight storeys, with additional apartments. This construction has created absolutely chaos for residents—illegal parking, unsafe road conditions, but 5G disrupted internet disruptions, loss of free-to-air TV reception for residents opposite and numerous other impacts that council has been completely unprepared to manage.' Some of these sit within council and some sit within state government, but the one that sits within federal government responsibility is telecommunications powers. When we talk about safeguards and we talk about standards, this is the lived reality in urban Australia right now, and the government is completely asleep at the wheel.

Of course we support the legislation's broad intention, what is seeks to achieve, but we are mindful. We have seen too many times that members of previous Labor governments, when they're given powers around telecommunications, weaponise them with the objective of seeking to use them to censor or silence opinions or views that they don't like—not ones that are criminal but ones they don't like. They've tried to regulate the media and tried to censor and silence those who have differing opinions. We still remember that era of the Rudd government—and there are some people from the Rudd government who are still around—who got their blood pumping at the idea that they might be able to close down dissenting voices.

The Labor Party have never really liked diversity, except their own diversity, which is from the Left to the far left. We want a full diversity of Australian voices, and that's by making sure systems remain open and making sure telecommunications powers have a limit to ensure there's standardisation and the Australian people flourish—that those powers are not used as a weapon to control Australians, as the Australian Labor Party has a sad, shameful history of doing because that is in their core. It is in their DNA and what they seek to do when they gain the treasury benches.

Debate adjourned.