Susan Templeman (Macquarie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is the second time I've spoken on this bill, because it's one of those matters that we considered prior to the election, but it wasn't able to be dealt with by the parliament at that time. That's a shame, because this is about trying to bring in enhanced protections for consumers. I refer to the comment from, really, the peak communications consumer body, ACCAN, who have welcomed the fact that this bill is now being debated a second time—keeping in mind that it had passed through this place and it had landed in the Senate. As they say, it's time to finish the job of delivering long-awaited powers for the regulator to crack down on telcos that cause consumer harm. This is something that ACCAN and other consumer organisations have long called for. They wanted stronger powers and penalties to be available to the Australian Communications and Media Authority, ACMA. I note the comment of CEO of ACCAN, Carol Bennett:

The legislation addresses persistent gaps that have left many consumers exposed to harm.

She is absolutely right. This is a bill that really plugs some of the gaps that have allowed consumers to be very vulnerable to actions or the lack of action by the telecommunications businesses, and it provides more teeth for ACMA to be able to tackle those.

Let's look at some of those things. We're talking about telecommunications, which is an absolutely essential connector that we all need. We need it for our families; when I was running a small business, I absolutely needed reliable telecommunications to run my business; and our communities need it, particularly when there are disasters. Goodness knows that my electorate of Macquarie—the Blue Mountains and the Hawkesbury—has experienced more than its fair share of natural disasters, where connectivity has absolutely been key. It isn't just during the crisis that it can be life saving to have connection; it's following the crisis, in the speed with which things are restored that can make such a difference. We know that Australians deserve of a telecommunications system that is fair, accountable and built on trust. Remember that most of our mobile phone and landlines—for those of us who still have a landline—and a big portion of our internet is privately owned and privately operated, underpinned by the NBN, a government-owned agency. All the mobile stuff we do is all in the private sector these days.

This bill equips the telecommunications industry regulator, ACMA, with the tools and powers that it desperately needs to protect consumers from poor and harmful telecommunications practices. Significantly there are very big increases in the penalties that can be applied. For instance, it increases by 40 times civil penalties that the Federal Court can issue for breaches of industry codes and industry standards. We're not just doubling something. We're not just boosting it a bit. What we're saying is that this needs to be much bigger—40 times larger. The cap is now up from $250,000 to nearly $10 million. It's a shame that we need to have such a big stick there to make the telcos do the right thing, but our conclusion is that we absolutely need to have much stronger powers and much greater capacity to act when they do the wrong thing.

This bill also modernises the civil penalties framework so that the Federal Court has the option to issue fines for regulatory breaches. The fines can be $10 million or three times the benefit gained for the regulatory breach—so there's a very clear connection between the breach and the financial gain that the telco received, and the penalty will relate to that—or a fine of 30 per cent of turnover. These are much more significant penalties.

This bill also expands and clarifies the authority of the Minister for Communications to increase infringement notice penalties that ACMA can issue for breaches of industry codes, industry standards and service provider determinations. Another aspect of the bill is around establishing what we call a carriage service provider registration scheme. Right now, we don't necessarily know who all the carriage service providers are, and this is about increasing the visibility of the CSPs who operate in the market so that we can stop the operation of dodgy carriage service providers who pose an unacceptable risk to consumers. Registering them means we have visibility, which means we have the capacity to act much more effectively when issues arise.

Another thing this bill does is make the telecommunications industry codes directly enforceable by ACMA. Really, the aim of that is to incentivise industry compliance and enable the regulator to take swift action to address consumer harm. These reforms will ensure that ACMA is an empowered and effective regulator and that appropriate structures are in place to drive better behaviour by telecommunications companies. This is not something that has just suddenly been needed; this has been needed for some time. I think every member of parliament here would have dealt with constituents who've had issues with telcos where those issues have not been adequately dealt with and addressed by the telecommunications provider. I would hope this entire parliament realises that this is urgent, and I hope the Senate realises that too.

Since coming to office, the Albanese government has focused very heavily on lifting the standards for this sector. There has been a new industry standard requiring telecommunications companies to provide adequate support to consumers experiencing financial hardship. We've also had a new industry standard requiring telecommunications companies to support and assist consumers experiencing domestic, sexual and family violence, which came into force on 1 July, and I just want to share some of the details about that. The sorts of things that are in that standard, which can make such a difference to a woman and her children who are escaping family violence, are things that will require the telco providers to be involved, to stand up and act and to keep victims-survivors safe, including reversing disconnection, suspension and restriction of services when a domestic and family violence safety risk is raised by a customer. It will also ensure that they're only contacting people using agreed methods and that they're hiding sensitive information, like calls to 1800RESPECT, and preventing those things from appearing on bills. That can actually save lives. The changes we've made also ensure staff are appropriately trained to recognise and support victims-survivors. People need that, because you don't automatically know what to do when someone makes a disclosure, and that training of telco staff is really important.

The changes also ensure that victims-survivors will never be asked to engaged with the alleged perpetrator to resolve their telco issues. Again, that's about dignity. That's about ensuring you're not exacerbating a situation. There are a number of measures to prevent victims-survivors from being retraumatised, by not having to repeat their story multiple times or provide extensive evidence of abuse. Then what follows that is giving customers a greater say in managing the security and privacy of their accounts. So I'm very pleased that the first tranche of that came into effect from 1 July. That new industry standard fits with this piece of legislation as one of several things we're doing to lift the standards and to make our telecommunications sector responsive to consumer needs.

Another area that we've focused on in telecommunications that aligns with the bill that we're discussing here today is in the changes to the Competition and Consumer Act, which we amended to introduce consistent obligations of the telecommunications banking and digital platform sectors to prevent, detect and disrupt scams. So we're not seeing the telecommunications sector in isolation from banking when it comes to scams. Many a time, people will find that it is a text message on their phone that can be the trigger or the first attempt of a scam. It might be something on their social media. It might be an email. It's coming through a carriage service provider. It's coming to them, and, at every step of the scam process where scammers use social media, phone or email, where they then get people to dip into their banking, all those sectors have to be responsible for it, and that's what our legislation has done.

I referred earlier to ACCAN and its support for the changes that we are making today. I note that they've thanked the government for putting consumers first. In their view, the reforms better align telecommunications with other essential services like energy and banking by strengthening enforcement, lifting penalties and making industry codes enforceable.

You can see the consistency of the approach that we're taking in this way. We're saying to the sectors, 'You all have shared responsibility here.' This bill, in particular, lifts those consumer standards so that they are consistent. I do note that ACCAN highlights that 'new powers are only as good as the regulator who wields them'. Like ACCAN, we fully expect ACMA to act quickly and transparently when providers fall short, and we are confident they will do that.

As Australians, we rely very heavily on phone and internet services every day. When something goes wrong, it does need to be dealt with quickly. Previously, there has been a gap in doing that. We recognise that there are a whole lot of things we need to do to expand the access to telecommunications. One of our policies—I think it's important to be reminded of this—is to have a universal outdoor mobile obligation on the telecommunications providers. That's going to require the mobile carriers to provide access to mobile voice and SMS almost everywhere in Australia. I'm particularly keen to see this because I represent an electorate that has mountains and valleys. It's got rugged, World Heritage terrain where it's easy to get lost and, if you do get lost, really hard to make a phone call.

The universal outdoor mobile obligation, the UOMO—it's very catchy—will ensure that up to five million square kilometres of new competitive outdoor mobile coverage will come into existence, including more than 37,000 kilometres on regional roads. It is so important for people travelling through the regions or living in the regions to have coverage as they drive. Whether it's in national parks, out on the farm or out in quite remote areas, outdoor coverage will be accessible almost anywhere where Australians can see the sky. Our objectives in doing this are to expand the triple 0 access for all Australians right across the nation. My community is only about 95 kilometres from Sydney, but this will potentially save lives because people travelling on very challenging roads where it is difficult to get a signal, like Bells Line of Road or Putty Road, will be able to call for help.

It will expand outdoor voice and SMS coverage into existing mobile black spots that are really challenging to tackle because of the geography. It will improve the availability of mobile signals during disasters and power outages. These are the sorts of things that we are prioritising, always putting consumers first. This bill looks at protections for consumers. We have separately looked at expanding access to services for consumers. We have got more protections for victims-survivors of domestic and family violence, and I am very proud to be part of a government that says the consumer comes first. The services exist to serve consumers, and how they are treated in the process is absolutely vital. I commend this bill to the House.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Janelle Ruggeri and Graeme Kruger just brought along to my office some very impressive young people: Nathan Crawley, Emily Marston, Sarah McCaskie, Thomas Hatty and Daniel Andreazza from Griffith and Tocumwal. They're not from my Riverina electorate per se, but they certainly are from the geographic area of Riverina. They are rice growers. You might wonder why I'm raising this—before I get a point of order on relevance from the minister at the table—as part of the debate on the Telecommunications Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025. Like the member for Macquarie, I appreciate that farming requires good telecommunications, and every place needs the very best telecommunications and the utmost safeguards for consumers. That is why the coalition supports this bill's second iteration. It has been enhanced by an amendment—an excellent one, at that—moved by the shadow minister for communications and shadow minister for women, the member for Lindsay. I acknowledge that she has put that forward, and I very much commend it to the House.

These young rice growers, who are part of the Ricegrowers' Association of Australia's Next Generation Leadership Program, emphasised to me the importance of technology in what they do. They absolutely have to have the very best telecommunications as they do research into lowering emissions from their paddies and maximising every precious drop of water. They still call them paddies even though they're doing a flush method rather than a pond method on some of these modern rice farms these days out in the Murrumbidgee Irrigation Area and in Coleambally. But they can't do their research, and they therefore can't be even more environmentally sustainable than they already are, unless they have good telecommunications to be able to pass on the data, the analytics, the knowledge and the updates. Then they can have it at one central point so that they can learn from their research and their farms can be more profitable, sustainable and progressive.

I really commend the work that each and every one of those young farmers are doing, because they are the future. It doesn't matter whether you're growing rice, or whether you are indeed growing any sort of food or fibre, you need to have the very best of telecommunications. What we're seeing these days is farmers using groundbreaking GPS technology on their tractors and equipment so that they stay in line, each and every bit of valuable soil is utilised to its maximum benefit and each and every valuable droplet of water is used to its maximum benefit. That only happens when you've got the very best of technology, the very best of global positioning systems technology and good mobile communications.

The member for Macquarie mentioned her electorate and the fact that the geography and topography of her electorate is wide and varied, which is very similar to the Riverina electorate that I now serve with the new alignment of boundaries of the Australian Electoral Commission, which came into effect at the May election this year. I've now retaken the Snowy Mountains, Kosciuszko and beyond. We've got hilly terrain. The high point of Australian politics is Kosciuszko. The mountaintop, the summit, is in the Riverina electorate. I'm very proud of that fact. The fact is that they are very prone to fires and very prone to having emergency situations. We need the best telecommunications to enable our emergency service workers to communicate, get help and save people's lives when things happen. If you think about it, at the moment, we've got Australia's largest manhunt happening in Porepunkah in north-east Victoria, and they no doubt need good telecommunications, too, as they search for the killer of those two brave police officers.

When we have a rollout of telecommunications in the bush, we need to be fair about it. I know many members have come in and talked about colour coded spreadsheets. The sad reality is that the colour coded spreadsheets for the telecommunications towers, in the first term of this government, were all red. They claimed that they were, as part of the rollout of towers, simply honouring election commitments. But they need to be fair about this when it comes to the spread of telecommunications towers, because everybody needs good telecommunications not just Labor electorates. I would urge and encourage the new communications minister, to consider that when they are funding those towers, which not just provide convenience and data sharing but indeed save lives—they absolutely do.

The member for Macquarie also mentioned an important part of this telecommunications bill we are debating—domestic violence and scams. I do want to commend that aspect of this bill and the fact that, if there is a partner who is being subjected to domestic abuse, particular numbers will not showing up on telephone bills. That's absolutely, vitally important. Anything that can be done to protect and safeguard particularly women in domestic violence situations, obviously, is to be applauded and encouraged.

When we come to scams, I would urge and encourage people to avail themselves of a copy of The Little Book of Scams. It doesn't matter who's in government—I actually had the former member for Whitlam come to my electorate and run a very worthwhile scams seminar in Wagga Wagga, and he was fabulous. These days, the scammers are so professional and so adept at separating people from their money for their own graft and gain that it is quite remarkable. The Little Book of Scams is good reading. It's sobering reading. It's actually helping people spot and avoid scams. And, when it comes to scams, telecommunications are the preferred method of choice by a lot of these people who would steal people's money. It's white collar crime and it's on an industrial scale. These nefarious characters are coming in from overseas—they're operating from overseas bases. They're also very much operating right here at home. They prey on older people. They prey on vulnerable people. I would advise people to take heed of what the government says when it comes to text or SMS scams, email scams, phone scams and website scams. Because money's hard enough to earn in this cost-of-living crisis; you don't want to be giving it up to somebody who is not earning it but just wants to separate you from your hard-earned wealth. So I commend that particular publication to everybody.

The Telecommunications Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025 before us does create a register of carriage service providers. It does enable the direct enforcement of industry codes and increases the maximum penalty amount from a quarter of a million dollars to $10 million. That might seem a lot of money, and it is, but corporations have an obligation to do the right thing and to put in place the provisions, the measures and the personnel to ensure that customers are safeguarded—that the consumers who use their services are kept as much as possible away from those activities and those people who would otherwise do them harm. It also amends the existing two-step process for the application of penalty amounts for infringement notices.

I had a visit to my parliamentary office yesterday by Chris Taylor and Christina Cawkell from Telstra, and it was good to get an update. I commend Mr Taylor for the work that he has done in my electorate and others besides to ensure that he keeps members of parliament and moreover—very much moreover—members of the public updated with what the big telco is doing when it comes to services. Ms Cawkell is looking after the shires I've just taken over—Snowy Valleys, Yass Valley and Upper Lachlan shires. She has others in her care as well. I respect the job that they're doing, and I emphasised again that there are still communities that are hurting from the changeover from 3G. I know Telstra very much acknowledges that and are working on it, but there are people—the member for Macquarie mentioned people on landlines—who are relying on their landlines.

I know that in my electorate there are people out Ardlethan way, in Ariah Park, Beckom, Kamarah and that district, who have to climb up on top of their silos, would you believe, to get a signal. You could imagine climbing up a silo, with one hand on the ladder and one hand on your phone, just to get a signal. That might be to be able to sell your grain, to be able to get the best price for your stock or whatever the case might be, but it might also be to get an ambulance. When it comes to getting help for these little communities and these farmers who do so much for our nation, just to try to get an ambulance is an exercise in itself—let alone having to climb a silo to do it. We need to remember that and we need to reflect on that. Particularly when the Minister for Communications is designating funding for vital telecommunications upgrades, that is so very important.

The new carriage service provider registration scheme is going to require all telecommunications providers to apply to the Australian Communications and Media Authority for registration to operate in Australia. It should have always been the minimum, quite frankly. 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 at the moment. It will ensure that ACMA is able to monitor, to educate and, where necessary, to take rapid enforcement action for any breaches of any codes or standards.

I know that this particular legislation passed through the House before. It lapsed, but it is good that it has been able to return. Should providers breach their obligations—or, indeed, pose a risk to consumers—ACMA would have the ability to cancel their registration to operate. This should be an absolute minimum in this day and age, because telecommunications are far too important to have people operating in the industry or the sector who could probably otherwise best be described as cowboys. People who are operating in this sector need to understand that there are minimum standards and that there are high fines now able to be imposed. They were high before; they've now very much got into the area of very severe, as they should be.

These arrangements are similar to those in the energy sector, where the Australian Energy Regulator has the power to forbid operators from operating in a market where there is risk to consumers. They can't determine the price of power, unfortunately, but they're able to do that. This telecommunication amendment is good legislation. It's worthwhile legislation, but I do commend to the House the amendment put forward by the member for Lindsay.

Trish Cook (Bullwinkel, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on a matter which is critical to the lives of every single Australian, and it's a matter that goes directly to the heart of our government's values of fairness, accountability and trust. I am speaking in strong support of the Telecommunications Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025. Enhancing consumer safeguards—that's what it's all about.

As the federal member for Bullwinkel, I represent an electorate that stretches from the periurban fringes of Perth to the wheat belt, where, every single day, our families, businesses and emergency services rely on telecommunications to function. In today's world, connectivity is not a luxury; it's the lifeblood of our communities. It supports our kids' education, it enables small businesses to trade, and it connects us with our loved ones, especially in times of crisis. Australians deserve a telecommunications system that is fair, accountable and, most of all, trustworthy. For too long there have been many poor practices in the industry. This bill changes that. It's a comprehensive package of reforms that will equip the Australian Communications and Media Authority, ACMA, with the modern, effective tools it needs to protect Australian consumers from poor and harmful practices.

The core of this bill can be distilled into three key reforms, and I wish to speak to each of them today. The first reform is that we are increasing maximum civil penalties. In the current framework, the maximum civil penalty for a serious breach of industry codes and standards is $250,000. For a multinational corporation generating billions of dollars in revenue, a quarter-of-a-million-dollar fine is simply a slap on the wrist. It is, as my colleagues have also said, simply a cost of doing business. It is an amount that does not deter harmful practices. It sends a message that it's more profitable to break the rules and pay the fine than it is to do the right thing by your customers. This is fundamentally wrong, and it erodes the trust that Australians place in their service providers. This bill dramatically changes that. It amends the Telecommunications Act to increase the maximum general civil penalty for breaches of industrial codes and standards to 30,300 penalty units, which, at the time of drafting, is just shy of $10 million. This is a 40-fold increase in penalties—a powerful statement that this government is serious about consumer protection.

But we go even further. The bill modernises the penalty framework to give the flexibility for fines to be based on the benefit gained from such conduct—up to 30 per cent of the relevant provider's turnover. This means that, for a company with a very high turnover, the penalty can and should be significantly more than $10 million. This penalty framework aligns our telecommunications sector with standards that we see in other industries, like energy and banking, as well as the Australian Consumer Law. This is about creating a level playing field, where the penalty for the breach is truly proportionate to the harm caused and where no company, no matter how large, can treat consumer protection as an optional extra. It ensures that the Federal Court can impose a penalty that is a genuine deterrent. Effectively, it strongly encourages companies to prioritise ethical conduct over a quick profit.

The second crucial reform of this bill is the establishment of a carriage service provider, or CSP, registration scheme. This was a longstanding issue for the previous Labor and coalition governments, and this lack of visibility is a black hole for regulators. The limited visibility of the carriage service provider has hampered ACMA's ability to actively educate providers on their obligations and to target compliance efforts. This bill changes that. By establishing a CSP registration scheme, we will increase the visibility of the market and give ACMA and other government agencies the ability to streamline complaints and compliance processes. It will provide a clear line of sight, ensuring that every provider is known and accountable. This means that dodgy providers will no longer be able to operate in the shadows, preying on consumers without being held to account.

It also introduces a powerful deterrent. ACMA will be empowered to stop CSPs from operating in the market if they pose an unacceptable risk to consumers or cause significant consumer harm. This power will be used as a last resort, with suitable checks and balances in place, but it provides the regulator with the necessary authority to protect consumers from the worst actors in the industry. It means consumers can have greater confidence in the providers that they choose, knowing there is a system in place to ensure that they are held to account. This is a reform that will incentivise better behaviour and weed out those that are doing the wrong thing.

This may sound like a technical change, but in fact the impact is profound. Under the current legislation, even if a telco is caught red-handed breaching a code, no matter how egregious the breach, ACMA can only issue a direction for them to comply with the code. It is only if the provider then fails to follow that direction that ACMA can take stronger enforcement action. This bill removes that clunky and time-consuming two-step process. It makes compliance with these codes mandatory from the moment they are registered. This gives ACMA the ability to take immediate and decisive enforcement action, providing a stronger incentive for industry compliance and ensuring that consumers are protected without delay.

These are not standalone measures. The bill is a vital piece of our government's broader consumer protection agenda. Since coming to office, we have already introduced new industry standards to support consumers experiencing financial hardship, and we just saw recently the implementation of a new standard that requires telecommunications companies to support and assist consumers experiencing domestic, sexual and family violence. We also amended the Competition and Consumer Act earlier this year to introduce consistent obligations on telcos, banks and digital platforms to prevent and disrupt scams. This bill is a crucial pillar in that ongoing work.

As the member for Bullwinkel, I know the important of connectivity, not just for consumer protection but for the economic and social wellbeing of our community. This is why the Albanese Labor government is also delivering historic investment in regional connectivity. A large part of my seat is considered regional. The $55 million Mobile Black Spot Program, which had applications close this April, will provide resilient mobile coverage in disaster-prone areas, and certainly Bullwinkel is a disaster-prone area with regard to bushfires. The $50 million Regional Roads Australia Mobile Program pilot programs, which also include an $8 million allocation for Western Australia, will test new solutions to increase mobile coverage on our regional highways and major roads, improving safety and connection. And, of course, round 3 of the Regional Connectivity Program awarded just over $115 million towards 74 projects, which also included a dedicated Central Australia stream to improve connectivity for First Nations communities.

This bill is a testament to the Albanese Labor government's commitment to a fair, accountable and trusted telecommunications system. It is a win for consumers, a win for integrity and a win for a more connected Australia. I commend the bill to the House.

Alison Penfold (Lyne, National Party) 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 amount for breaches of the codes from $250,000 to $10 million. Full visibility of all telecommunications operators will also ensure ACMA can target compliance and enforcement activities and, where necessary, take appropriate action. The changes in this bill will strengthen ACMA's powers and the speed at which they can use them, to provide even greater protections for consumers and ensure we have responsible operators in our telecommunications sector.

This is an important step towards holding the telcos to account to industry standards, but I think what is missing from this legislation is a consideration of the standards themselves. As they currently stand, the bar is too low. We need to reassess the universal service obligation. The USO is the obligation for Telstra to ensure that standard telephone services are reasonably accessible to all people in Australia on an equitable basis, wherever they reside or carry on business, and to ensure that payphones are reasonably accessible to all people in Australia on an equitable basis, wherever they reside or carry on business. Rather than being maintained or improved, the quality of landline phone infrastructure is noticeably deteriorating, especially in rural areas of the electorate. In times of emergency, the consequence can be life threatening. Not only is Telstra failing in its universal service obligation of providing reasonable standard telephone services via landline phone connection, but it is also failing to provide a reliable and cost-effective alternative. Many people are forced to go to the more expensive Starlink satellite in the hope that it will prove to be reliable. This government must negotiate new terms that better reflect advances in technology. Telstra and, indeed, all providers need to be held to account and made to uphold these new universal service obligations.

This bill does nothing to improve mobile and internet services in my electorate, which has poor to non-existent mobile and internet service—one of the biggest issues, next to roads and health, that is consistently raised with me. Mobile and internet service is becoming increasingly unreliable in many locations across my electorate. Frustratingly, the service is worse now than it was just a few years ago. In rural areas of the electorate, loss of internet and mobile service for extended periods is becoming increasingly common. I'll give you an example. Residents within the town of Marlee have gone weeks and, on one occasion, well over a month without any mobile or landline service. In coastal areas of my electorate that experience a seasonal influx in tourist numbers, like Forster, Tuncurry and Harrington, internet either operates at snail's pace or simply drops out.

I can give you an example from Harrington. A butcher there, only a Christmas ago, could not service any of his customers. His Square just simply could not work, because this small town—I know many of the MPs here, who often holiday in my electorate, would know that the population of Harrington can triple in a holiday season, but the bandwidth can't cope with the additional people and the 30 per cent natural increase in the use of data. Businesses in this town of Harrington—it's the busy time; it's when they're planning to hopefully make a bit of cash—simply cannot run their business unless people have cash in their wallet. This is a huge issue for small businesses in towns like Harrington and many of my other coastal communities. It's simply not good enough in a society that's increasingly forced to become reliant on technology. People in Nabiac struggle to access their online prescriptions. Pensioners are unable to access their myGov account. Hotels and restaurants are unable to take bookings online. People are unable to make medical appointments or receive reminders. They're unable to contact family and friends, and they're unable to contact emergency services in times of dire need. I've got a number of communities that are a single road in and a single road out—places like Pindimar and Bundabah and places like Pacific Palms that are surrounded by forest, and there is no escape. Having an internet or phone service that actually works when you need it is critical to them surviving in those difficult circumstances.

I want to use an example from the Gloucester District News of the Area of a town called Barrington on the Thunderbolts Way on the other side of Gloucester. I'll just read the first bit because I want to put this on the record:

LOCAL resident Shelley Faull has described the Telstra mobile phone service to the village of Barrington and its surrounds as being "woeful".

According to Telstra's Network Coverage Map the whole village of Barrington is covered by its mobile service, and there is nothing to indicate that Barrington residents are likely to experience issues using their mobile phones.

According to locals and visitors however, the map does not match their lived experience.

"I have to stand on my verandah to get any mobile connection, and then I have calls that keep dropping out …

…   …   …

"The hall is an emergency refuge centre if there is a fire, flood or other disaster, and there is no mobile coverage at the hall.

This is the lived experience of people in my electorate and the lived experience of people in regional Australia. We have to take these needs seriously.

Recently, a gentleman—his name is Todd Barnes from Pappinbarra—who'd returned from South Africa emailed me and told me his story. He said:

From Johannesburg we drove 650km south-west to the north cape province and not once did I not have phone service…I had the same service as the local guys. I could call, send pictures and videos in the middle of a paddock in the middle of nowhere … [At home] I can't even drive from Port Macquarie to Taree without the phone service dropping out multiple times.

That's on the Pacific Highway, our national highway. He went on to say:

Not good when Australia is supposed to be a first world country … The local African guys can't believe we can't drive between towns on a highway and not have mobile service. They thought I was pulling their chains.

Again, are we being left behind in the regions? Why are we being left behind in the regions? I understand that geography plays a part, and I understand the geography in my electorate, but, surely, a modern Australia that cares about the regions can find a way to ensure that all Australians have access to mobile and internet services.

I want to talk now about the poor assistance that many of my constituents have when they try to deal with telcos. I just want to remind the House that the Lyne electorate is in fact the oldest electorate of all here, so my constituents are particularly challenged by technology. Many of them have not grown up with it. They've come to have to use a mobile phone as much older people. Indeed, I know it is my own experience. I'm going to say that the first time I ever used email was when working in the minister for industrial relations's office in 1996. I remember the computer lab going in at school. I'm 54, and even I find the challenge sometimes difficult. I, myself, have come to it later in life, but I appreciate that, for much older Australians, it's more difficult.

Constituents also report a very poor customer service experience when reporting issues to the telcos' call centres. They are firstly met with an extremely long wait time for either in-store visits or calls to the call centre, and then they are faced with a person on the other end having no understanding, appreciation or empathy for the situation or for the client. My constituents have informed me of numerous instances where a maintenance person scheduled to attend their property to fix the issue cancelled at the last minute. No-shows are a common experience, as are technicians failing to first confirm with the business or household that the scheduled time is acceptable. Better training is certainly required. I have to say I have raised this directly with the telcos. I have spoken even with the stores in my own electorate and the staff there to raise the issues of ensuring that the staff are trained, first of all, to be responsive and communicate and also to make sure that they understand who they're talking to and really try to help them. I do give credit to successive governments, also, for investing in the regional tech hub because that has also been a great source of support for many people in regional Australia, particularly farmers and older Australians, to go and get one-on-one support try—as I often say—to unscramble the bureaucracy and technology to try and make it work for them.

Moving on to fee-for-no-service, there are also numerous examples of telcos charging fees for either no service or substandard service. If a customer experiences a loss of service for a substantial period of time, providers do not credit the customer unless the customer makes a request. Even then, they may not get a full credit refund for the time the service was not provided, or if only a substandard service was provided. What other business could get away with charging a customer when they have not received a service in return?

Providers are failing to meet the customer service guarantee standard and are failing to proactively pay compensation if they are unable to meet timelines to fix landline services. I am looking forward to the telcos reporting on the levels of compensation that they provided to many of my constituents affected by the May floods.

With the oldest electorate in the country, many of my constituents lack the skills and tech-savviness to be able to navigate jargon and technology. One of my constituents, John, a 92-year-old still living at home in Allynbrook, was sold a brand-new mobile phone. He was told that it would finally enable him to make calls. It has not. John and his wife must still rely on their fading landline. I've seen constituents encouraged to disconnect their landline but, when the mobile does not work satisfactorily, they are then charged a $250 landline reconnection fee.

I think this is one of the issues, because the expectations of consumers are very different to the technical expertise of those selling the equipment. I know that the expectation of many consumers and many people in my electorate is that—when they know their landlines are failing and the copper technology is pretty much done and dusted—when they buy a mobile phone, sign up to a contract and give their home address, when they agree, the telco acknowledges that that service works at their house. I can't tell you the number of times that I've had constituents come to me, saying: 'I've been sold a phone. I bought it; I signed the contract thinking it would work at home, but it doesn't work at home.' But, then, Telstra, Optus or whoever it is, say: 'We don't guarantee. We will not guarantee that your service will work at home. It's a mobile phone; it's meant to work when you're roaming.' The expectations of the customer and the delivery by the telcos are not aligned, and that is a serious issue, particularly for older Australians.

I also want to speak to some of the funding which, sadly, we are not seeing in the electorate. The Mobile Black Spot Program has not been extended beyond 2026-27, with zero dollars allocated. Furthermore, the government has not allocated any funding in 2027-28 to the Better Connectivity Plan for Regional and Rural Australia. Like the Mobile Black Spot Program, there is no funding for these programs beyond 2026-27. There has been no announcement on another round for the Mobile Network Hardening Program. This funding is critical and important. The government needs to be supporting sensible policies that facilitate arrangements to ensure that the telecommunications infrastructure framework supports efficient, effective and equitable mobile telecommunications network delivery across Australia, including in rural and remote areas.

Claire Clutterham (Sturt, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's fair to say that, without telecommunications connectivity, living life would be very difficult. Telecommunications connectivity is required to participate in family and personal life, in education, in sport, in business and, importantly, in the community. Therefore, no matter where you live, connection is fundamental. Because of the widespread role telecommunications connectivity plays for all of us, a system that is fair, accountable and built on trust is critical for Australia.

The Australian Communications and Media Authority is the regulator of this sector, acting to regulate communications and media with the purpose of maximising the economic and social benefits that communications infrastructure, services and content bring to all Australians. The authority of ACMA is the authority that makes decisions on matters of importance for ACMA, including with respect to telecommunications consumer issues. Covering the internet, telephones, TV, radio and content, spectrum and equipment compliance, the Australian Communications and Media Authority sets and manages rules about communications, media services and markets. It provides licences for people, organisations and products to operate in Australia. It plans and manages the airwaves to make space for new services and technology, such as 5G, and it also considers complaints and problems and takes action when rules are not being followed.

These complaints and problems may relate to a number of different areas—firstly, broadcasting compliance and investigations, which are investigations into TV, radio and online content, and the rules about what broadcasters can show on TV and radio. Secondly, ACMA considers telemarketing and scam compliance and investigations, which, in very broad terms, relate to breaches of the law as they concern the sending of marketing emails or messages. Thirdly, with respect to radiocommunications and telecommunications compliance and investigations, ACMA investigates licensing, interference management device supply arrangements, customer equipment and cabling compliance, media control and ownership compliance and other investigations which also form part of ACMA's remit, which means, in broad terms, ACMA's power to require rectification in circumstances of breaches of statutory control, media diversity or directorship rules. These investigations may require the production of documents, the examination of witnesses or the holding of public hearings.

In addition, ACMA also accepts enforceable undertakings under the Broadcasting Services Act 1992, the Telecommunications Act 1997, the Spam Act 2003, the Radiocommunications Act 1992 and Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act 2014. Then it issues infringement notices under several pieces of legislation, including the Do Not Call Register Act 2006, Spam Act, Telecommunications Act, Broadcasting Services Act and telecommunications and radiocommunications regulations. The remit is extremely large, and this regime is designed with purpose to facilitate compliance with these important pieces of legislation and regulations, because they regulate telecommunications connectivity, which all Australians need and which must be fair, trustworthy and accountable.

The types of infringement notices ACMA has issued include where organisations have failed to undertake adequate identity checks when porting consumers' mobile numbers from other telecommunications companies. They also include where providers have sent marketing emails and SMSs without consent and without a functional unsubscribe facility and where they have failed to confirm that a person requesting a high-risk customer transaction was in fact the customer or customer's authorised representative, in that there was a failure to use an applicable identity authentication process prior to undertaking the high-risk transaction. There have also been infringement notices where organisations have failed to comply with billing accuracy rules as set out in the Telecommunications Consumer Protections Code by not being able to provide, verify and demonstrate accuracy of bills to customers. There can be no reasonable argument against the proposition that Australians deserve for these types of infringements to be investigated, called out and then rectified.

Finally, ACMA's remit also includes telecommunications compliance and investigations, the premise of which is that telecommunications companies must follow certain laws when delivering mobile, landline, internet and NBN services to the Australian public. These laws cover matters including the details and words that advertisements must and must not contain and how telecommunications companies must handle complaints when complaints are made to them. They include rules about customer identity authentication, rules about assisting law enforcement and security agencies with their work and rules for priority assistance services, which relate to landline services for people with life-threatening medical conditions. Telecommunications companies providing these services must meet the rules for the faster repairing of faults and the timeframes for connection of new services and must make arrangements for more reliable service.

With respect to consumer protections, ACMA also takes action in relation to telecommunications to ensure that companies that are delivering mobile, landline and internet services follow laws that are applicable to them and that are directly relevant to the protection of consumers. In carrying out this function, ACMA collects information, consults about issues related to compliance and then assesses the level of risk. More specifically, in doing this, ACMA consults with consumer interest groups; analyses industry complaints data; commissions studies and publishes reports about telecommunications safeguards or the telecommunications consumer experience; provides compliance information to industry; undertakes compliance assessment; investigates serious, repeated and systemic noncompliance, which could be referred to ACMA by external parties or identified by ACMA itself; and takes enforcement action where warranted. Australians need and deserve for ACMA to have this remit so that they are protected when utilising essential telecommunications services.

That's where we get to this bill. It is so important, in that it will equip the telecommunications industry regulator with the tools and powers it needs to protect Australian consumers and to carry out its remit, so Australian consumers do not fall foul of poor and harmful telecommunications practices. Some of the measures this bill proposes include increasing the quantum of civil penalties that can be issued by the Federal Court for breaches of industry codes and standards. This is being increased by 40 times, from $250,000 to nearly $10 million, because bigger deterrents are needed. The bill also modernises the civil penalties framework to give the Federal Court options in relation to issuing fines for regulatory breaches. This can include three times the benefit gained from the regulatory breach, $10 million or 30 per cent of organisation turnover. Currently the civil penalties for breaches of industry codes and standards are not a deterrent. They are not commensurate with the harm caused. They are not high enough to deter noncompliance.

The amendments will also modernise the penalty framework for industry codes, industry standards and service provider determination to allow for penalties based on the value of the benefit obtained from the non-compliant conduct. This penalty framework better aligns with those in other relevant sectors like energy and banking and, under the Australian Consumer Law, more adequately reflects the telecommunications market and, in fairness, the varying sizes of the entities engaged in the market, which range from small to medium businesses to very large corporations. This is an appropriately described discretionary option for the Federal Court.

The bill also establishes a carriage service provider registration scheme to increase visibility of carriage service providers operating in the market and stop the operation of unprincipled CSPs, who pose an unacceptable risk to consumers or cause significant harm. The amendments to the Telecommunications Act of 1997 will empower ACMA to stop CSPs who do pose this unacceptable risk from operating in the market. This will provide a further deterrent for significant noncompliance and will increase consumer trust in registered CSPs, including new or smaller CSPs. Importantly, ACMA's power to exclude CSPs from the market is expected to be used as a measure of last resort only, with suitable arrangements for the review of a decision, re-registration avenues and, critically, the maintenance of connectivity for impacted consumers, because we know that connectivity that is as uninterrupted as possible is necessary for everyone. This reform means that carriage service providers that are doing the wrong thing will face consequences and that consumers will be better protected.

Importantly, this bill also makes telecommunications industry codes directly enforceable by ACMA, incentivising industry compliance and enabling ACMA to take swift action to address consumer harm. Currently, it 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 the breach is, because, under this act, compliance with industry codes is initially technically voluntary. Part 6 of the act prescribes that bodies and associations representing sectors of the telecommunication industry may develop industry codes, that industry codes may be registered by ACMA and that compliance with an industry code is voluntary unless ACMA directs a particular participant to so comply. So, currently, if a breach is found, ACMA can either direct a provider to comply with the code or issue a formal warning. The bill introduces amendments to part 6 of the Telecommunications Act to make compliance mandatory, which removes the need for ACMA to direct a particular participant to comply with the code in the first instance.

This bill also builds on the work that the Albanese government has delivered since coming to office in 2022, including a new industry standard requiring telecommunications companies to support and assist consumers experiencing domestic, sexual and family violence. This bill is designed to increase levels of public trust in Australia's telecommunications system by further empowering the regulator to take meaningful action in relation to specific and clearly defined instances of noncompliance.

Andrew Gee (Calare, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I support the Telecommunications Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025 because I believe it can make a positive contribution towards holding telecommunications companies to account, and I think that aspect of it is supported. But I come from country Australia, and, in the Central West of New South Wales, mobile phone coverage is not what it should be. It is a serious problem for many of our local communities.

I get many, many pieces of correspondence, phone calls and emails, from our local constituents, who are very concerned about the state of mobile coverage, and my concern is that the Mobile Black Spot Program, which the Australian government has operated for a long time, is no longer fit for purpose, because it's not clearing up all of these black spots. I'll return to that in a moment. Here are just a few examples of some of the constituents who've written in to me to raise issues about poor coverage. Geoff has written in about poor mobile coverage at Mookerawa, not far from Stuart Town. Ross has written in about poor mobile phone coverage at Marrangaroo, which is near Lithgow. Ines raises coverage issues at Frog Rock and is very upset about what's happening there. It's poor coverage; it's not where it should be.

Ralph has written in about the lack of mobile coverage around Oberon. It is a serious problem around Oberon, especially around the Shooters Hill area and around Black Springs. I'm going to return to Black Springs in a moment. Judie out at Spicers Creek has issues with mobile connectivity out there. Ralph from Lyndhurst—again, there are serious issues of poor mobile service and reception around there. Then we have people like Julian, who's written in about the poor mobile coverage between Oberon and Bathurst. There are 'several blackspots on Telstra 4G', he writes, and he also points to areas like Wisemans Creek, Carlwood Road towards O'Connell and the area around the railway track in Rydal—and Rydal station itself. The coverage is not what it should be.

Dave from Arkell, in our area, has written in, and he says there's been a problem with phone reception since 3G was turned off. He said:

we used to have quite good reception until last October. Now reception is getting much worse even with a booster in the house. Essentially no reception most of the time or call last for maybe one minute.

I have contacted Telstra many times and got the big run around. they want to ring me back all the time and when we dont answer they cancel the whole complaint process. Well if we havent got reception how can we answer.

This is very frustrating … and means we have to go by car to another location to simply make a phone call.

How can we make some progress on improving this situation?

That's from David Rickards.

Clint Anderson writes about issues of connectivity and mobile reception around Lower Lewis Ponds and in the Banjo Paterson Way area. Chris from Rylstone—around Narrango Road in Rylstone—has complained to Telstra about poor reception since the 3G shutdown and, unfortunately, did not get the answers that he was looking for and that we were all looking for from Telstra. That's why I believe that the Mobile Black Spot Program really does need an overhaul. I think it's fair to say that the telcos have picked all of the low-hanging fruit from this program—that is, they put in bids for the locations from which they can make the most money. But all of those locations have now been taken, and their interest in this program is clearly waning. We're not getting the results from it.

There's a good example of this issue we've been having for a number of years at the village of Black Springs, which is not too far from Oberon. Telstra put in a bid a number of years ago for a small-cell tower to be placed at Black Springs, but, since then, it seems to me and the community that Telstra has been doing its level best to back out of actually delivering a small-cell tower at that site. We've had many, many conversations with the local community members and successive mayors of the local council out at Oberon, and I have to say we have been deeply unimpressed with the way that Telstra has handled this.

Telstra really needs to have a good look at the way that they are operating their community relations, because in the way this has come about there has been delay after delay. Every time a solution is brought to Telstra to address the reason that they say this tower can't be put there, another excuse is found. Now Oberon Council have come up with another location, which is opposite the location where Telstra originally wanted to set up the tower, and, again, Telstra are delaying actually getting a small-cell tower for the people of Black Springs. It is very, very frustrating for Mayor Andrew McKibbin and the team at Oberon Council, and it's very frustrating for me, because this saga has dragged on for far too long. But it highlights the problems that we are having with this program and with getting telcos to commit not only to honouring their commitments but to continuing to deliver for country communities.

Another good example is Shooters Hill, not too far from Black Springs, where the community has been fighting for mobile coverage for a long, long time. So I say to Telstra: you've really got to have a look at the way you're operating in these communities, because you're not winning any friends out there. A lot of us have misgivings about the way Black Springs has been handled. It does Telstra no credit. I urge the minister to have a look at the way the Mobile Black Spot Program funding is being rolled out. It needs to be made a lot more effective. Right around the Calare electorate, we have black spot after black spot everywhere you go, from places like the Castlereagh Highway between Lithgow and Mudgee to the Mitchell Highway heading into western NSW. From our larger communities to our smaller ones, mobile black spots abound.

Mobile connectivity is an essential service. We need it for business, for tourism, for emergencies and to keep our communities connected. Government has a really important role to play here, and our communities should not be forgotten. This is a fundamental issue of fairness and equality between city and country. City people take these services for granted. They forget that there are people out in the bush who are making extraordinary contributions to the wealth and prosperity of this country that are being overlooked for mobile connectivity. It's not fair, it's not right and it must be brought to a close. The way the government could do it would be to make the Mobile Black Spot Program a lot more effective.

I urge the government to have a really good, hard look at the program so that it better serves the needs of country Australia and the communities of central western NSW. I know I speak for everyone in our part of the world, where we demand proper access to mobile phone service and mobile connectivity. We're not getting that at the moment. You can put a lot of the blame at the feet of the telcos, but the government also has a very important role to play and, when programs are not effective enough, they need to be overhauled so that they serve the interests of our country communities. We demand nothing less.

Debate adjourned.