Carol Berry (Whitlam, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Reliable telephone and internet services are key to all aspects of life in today's world. Telecommunications is an essential service as critical as other core utilities like power and water, and, at its best, it enables Australians to fully participate in and contribute to society. Modern telecommunications allows people to stay connected with friends and family, and, importantly, this includes overcoming barriers that may be created by age and distance. It provides access to important government services, including vital health services as well as banking and retail shopping services. It empowers us to stay informed about what's happening in the world, and it assists businesses to become more productive and competitive.

Modern telecommunications enables remote study and work, revolutionising both education and labour—a shift that has accelerated and become entrenched since the COVID-19 pandemic. This change in the way we live and work has placed even greater importance and reliance on telecommunications. Telecommunications is fundamental to our private and public lives, and that is why the Albanese government is committed to keeping Australians connected no matter where they live. This government also believes that Australians deserve a telecommunications system that is fair, accountable and built on trust. That is why we introduced the telecommunications financial hardship industry standard, which requires telecommunications providers to take all reasonable steps to proactively identify customers who may be experiencing financial hardship, to ensure they provide appropriate support and to prioritise keeping customers connected. Importantly, the standard provides the Australian Communications and Media Authority, ACMA, with strong enforcement powers to ensure telecommunications companies are following through on their obligations.

The Albanese government also established a mandatory telecommunications industry standard to further protect Australians impacted by domestic and family violence. The domestic, family and sexual violence industry standard, which came into effect on 1 July last year, ensures victims-survivors receive better support from their telecommunications provider and removes barriers faced when seeking help. The Competition and Consumer Act 2010 was amended last year to establish a scams prevention framework that places consistent obligations on the telecommunications, banking and digital platform sectors to prevent, detect and disrupt scams.

The Albanese government recently took action to strengthen our triple zero system following two Optus outages that affected these vital services in September 2025. The first outage resulted in the failure of over 600 triple zero calls, mostly in South Australia, the Northern Territory and Western Australia. Tragically, three failed calls may be linked to deaths. The second outage resulted in at least nine triple zero calls from the Dapto area—which is in my electorate of Whitlam—failing to reach emergency services. Thankfully, welfare checks confirmed all those who called triple zero during this second outage were okay. These unacceptable outages are being investigated by the independent regulator, and the Albanese government has taken action to strengthen oversight of the triple zero system through legislation.

The new laws give the triple zero custodian the power to demand information from telecommunications providers through ACMA so it can monitor triple zero performance, identify risks, respond more quickly to outages and make improvements. The legislation also increases the maximum penalty faced by telcos to $30 million for failing to follow the triple zero rules. Other actions taken by the Albanese government to strengthen the triple zero system include real-time reporting of outages to ACMA and emergency services; new rules forcing telcos to test triple zero during upgrades and maintenance; new requirements for providers to ensure triple zero calls fall back to other networks; mandatory improvement after triple zero outages; additional performance requirements, to be issued by the custodian, through ACMA, to telcos within six months of the commencement of the laws to assure Australians of best practice; and a public register of network outages, to be maintained by telcos.

The Albanese government's implementation of the legislative amendments and new standards that I've outlined confirm that we understand the critical role telecommunications plays in today's world and that consumers must be protected. The bill currently before the House, the Telecommunications Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill, continues this positive work by equipping ACMA with the tools and powers it needs to protect Australian consumers from poor and harmful telecommunications practices.

This bill will result in several important changes. First, it increases the civil penalties the Federal Court can issue for breaches of industry codes and industry standards by 40 times. Currently, civil penalties for breaches of industry codes and industry standards are not in line with the harm that can be 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 industry standards from $250,000 to 30,300 penalty units—which is currently equivalent to just under $10 million—to align with penalties currently available for breaches of service provider determinations. The amendments also modernise the penalty framework for industry codes, industry standards and service provider determinations to allow for penalties based on the value of the benefit obtained from the conduct or the turnover of the relevant provider, allowing for penalties greater than $10 million. The Federal Court will now have the option to issue fines for regulatory breaches, which can include $10 million fines, three times the benefit gained from the regulatory breach, or 30 per cent of turnover. This penalty framework better aligns with those in other relevant sectors like energy and banking, and, under Australian Consumer Law, it more adequately reflects the telecommunications market and the varying size of the entities engaged in the market, ranging from small to medium businesses to very large companies, allowing the Federal Court to determine the appropriate penalty imposed on an entity for a breach. The bill also expands and clarifies the Minister for Communications' authority to increase infringement notice penalties that ACMA can issue for breaches of industry codes, industry standards and service provider determinations.

This bill establishes a carriage service provider registration scheme. Under the Telecommunications Act, there is a distinction between carriers, which operate telecommunication networks and infrastructure, and carriage service providers, or CSPs, which provide a range of telecommunications services such as phone or internet access. Currently, only carriers are required to be licensed and registered with ACMA, and there is no comprehensive list of carriage service providers operating in the market. This omission hampers ACMA's efforts to proactively educate carriage service providers about their obligations and target compliance and enforcement activity.

In September 2023, the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts released a discussion paper concerning whether a CSP registration or licensing scheme should be developed for the telecommunications industry. The paper noted:

… there has traditionally been a low barrier to enter the telecommunications market as a CSP. This low barrier has enabled a large and diverse market for the supply of telecommunications services. However, some stakeholders have argued it has also allowed some providers to operate in a manner that causes significant consumer detriment … The market is open and competitive, with a significant number of CSPs—with estimates there may be approximately 1,500 'eligible CSPs' and a much larger number of general CSPs. Telecommunications have become firmly entrenched as an essential service in general life and commerce. Against this backdrop, it is appropriate to revisit fundamental aspects of the framework, including whether CSPs should be covered by a registration or licensing scheme.

The discussion paper noted that both Canada and Singapore operate telecommunications service provider registers or licence systems, and it outlined arguments in favour of a CSP registration/licensing scheme that included 'increasing visibility of CSPs operating in the market', which would assist regulatory agencies such as ACMA to provide education on CSP obligations, and 'facilitating an effective mechanism' for ACMA to stop CSPs that 'pose unacceptable risk to consumers, or cause significant consumer harm' operating in the market.

Establishing a CSP registration scheme will increase visibility of the market and stop the operation of dodgy CSPs who pose an unacceptable risk to consumers or cause significant consumer harm. It will also give ACMA and other government agencies the ability to educate providers, streamline complaints and compliance process, and create better overall market accountability. In the energy sector, the Australian Energy Regulator has the power to exclude energy retailers from the market, and it has used this power to quickly prevent and stop consumer harm. ACMA's power to exclude CSPs from the market is expected to be used as a measure of last resort, with suitable arrangements for a review of decisions, avenues for reregistration and maintaining connectivity for impacted consumers. Importantly, this reform means CSPs that are doing the wrong thing will face consequences, and consumers will be better protected.

Another amendment in this bill will make telecommunications industry codes directly enforceable by ACMA. This will incentivise industry compliance and enable 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 the act. Compliance is, initially, technically voluntary. If a breach is found, ACMA can 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, it fails to observe ACMA's direction to comply.

The bill introduces amendments to part 6 of the Telecommunications Act 1997 to make compliance with industry codes mandatory and remove the need for ACMA to direct a particular participant to comply with the code in the first instance. These reforms will ensure ACMA is an empowered and effective regulator and that appropriate structures are in place to drive better behaviour by telecommunications companies.

In supporting this bill, I believe that it is important to note that the Albanese government is delivering on a more connected Australia by investing in regional connectivity. This includes $50 million for Regional Roads Australia Mobile Program pilot programs, with $10 million invested in my home state of New South Wales. These pilot programs 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 includes $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 Farm Connectivity Program have provided over $30 million in rebates, delivering thousands of connectivity solutions for primary producers, and $20 million has been committed to round 3 of this program. In addition, the $55 million round 8 of the Mobile Black Spot Program is under assessment.

It is essential that all Australians, regardless of their individual circumstances, are able to access and use telecommunications services. Contemporary consumer safeguards and industry obligations should reflect the role of telecommunications as an essential service, especially as businesses, governments and other organisations increasingly shift to online interaction platforms. This bill strengthens the safeguards that protect consumers and cracks down on telecommunications providers who mistreat customers. It ensures telecommunications providers meet community expectations by acting in good faith, providing reliable services and supporting customers. If they don't do these things, they will be accountable to the regulator. These are important reforms, and I commend this bill to the House.

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm proud to rise to support the Telecommunications Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025, and I'm proud to be part of a party that is committed to keeping Australians connected, no matter where they live.

This bill will give the telecommunications industry regulator, ACMA, the tools and the powers it needs to be effective. It displays this government's commitment to protecting Australian consumers from poor and harmful practices in the telecommunications industry—and it's high time, too.

For nine long years, out-of-metro and regional communities were sorely neglected under successive coalition governments. Australians watched as they delivered the dodgy Mobile Black Spot Program funding only to Liberal and National seats. While they spent their time feathering the nest for the member for New England, who has since deserted them—he's run away—the rest of Australia was left in a lurch. In McEwen, we were constantly ignored. We were punished because we weren't a National or Liberal seat. Places like Gisborne South and Woodend felt the brunt of it. Communities across McEwen were left out of funding rounds for mobile towers. We're one of the most fire-prone areas in the country—74 per cent of our electorate has been burnt out in the last 25 years with fires—but we could not get towers under the program.

I saw the damage firsthand. Telecommunications barriers shifted the playing field, making it harder for people to live and work in our towns and suburbs.

Over those nine long years, I heard from countless frustrated constituents who faced mobile phone problems. Weekends were worse, particularly with the surge of visitors coming into our beautiful part of the world, and businesses had problems relying on 4G EFTPOS facilities that were often unusable, causing major frustrations for traders and visitors alike. However, the most consistent message I received was this: 'My telecommunications provider has failed me and I can't get them to fix it.'

There are countless examples. One constituent had no choice but to have their service with Opticomm, a wholesale provider that operates in many estates in our area. The customer wanted just a simple, stock, standard job: the delivery of fibre to the premises—a pretty basic task, provided daily in homes right across our nation. They were charged $550 for the service. The technician arrived, stayed for 10 minutes and then shot through. He told the customer he couldn't get it working due to a 'blockage' and that he would need a civil engineer first. Opticomm took the money, as if they had completed the job, and left this customer hanging. He couldn't get anyone, and he couldn't get his money back. It's not good enough. Customers deserve better than this. The experience ended with a generic email telling the customer, 'Take the matter up with your builder or your internet service provider'—anyone but the people responsible: Opticomm. Like most people, he didn't have a builder on call; and he couldn't blame the service provider, since he, appropriately, had booked the installation with Opticomm directly. The whole experience left him out of pocket and feeling scammed.

In developing communities like Beveridge, problems with wholesalers and providers need to be tackled. With large new estates, growth has underlined the urgent need for customer support. Recent outages—again, with Opticomm—occurred, along with radio silence from the company. Residents had no indication of the status of the outage or when it would end. This lack of communication and support was both disappointing and stressful for members of those communities. It hampered their daily lives. It hindered their ability to work from home and to complete essential tasks and even school assignments.

Stories like this are as uniform as they are clear. If anything happens to go wrong on the customer's side then it's an extra charge, but if something goes wrong on the operator's side then it's working to their terms, their timelines, their conditions. What is fair for the customer is often the last thing that comes to mind for some of these companies, which is why these laws are important.

So what does this bill do to fix these things? Firstly, it establishes a carriage service provider registration scheme. The message is clear: if you're selling a service to people, you must be able to be seen and contacted by them. We are stopping the operation of dodgy service providers. With the passage of this bill, you can't just disappear into the shadows once you've been paid. Now, visibility requirements will prompt CSPs to deliver messaging to people affected by outages.

Secondly, it updates enforcement action. As I said before, ACMA is the regulator for carriage service providers. Currently, it cannot take direct enforcement action for breaches of the industry codes, no matter how egregious. It can direct companies to comply and issue a formal warning. Big deal! Clearly they take no notice of that. And ACMA can only take stronger measures if the provider continues in its noncompliance. This gives carriage service providers the ability to break whatever code they want, as long as they don't break it for too long. They rinse and repeat, to cut corners, while they protect profits and customers suffer.

Let's look at another local example. And—surprise, surprise!—again it's with Opticomm. At Lorimer, Opticomm bought connections previously owned by Telstra. Where, beforehand, there had been no connectivity issues, all of a sudden the internet stopped working. Cue the following process. A customer attempts to contact Opticomm and is told: 'Call your internet provider. It's not our issue.' The customer calls the internet service provider, and the ISP says: 'Ask Opticomm to get a technician out.' Finally, Opticomm sends a technician out, who can't fix the problem; apparently, they've got to get the more specialised technician required. This happened to a customer three times—three separate technicians over the course of three weeks. The first two came and left without figuring out the problem. It is just not good enough. After the third visit, the technician finally said the issue might be with the fibre cables in the street and that that might be affecting the neighbours too. Opticomm said, 'Well, it might be a couple of days and it might be a couple of weeks to fix.' This tale is told far too often in communities. Given these providers essentially have a monopoly in particular areas, it is up to the government to step in. We need better enforcement capacity, and that is what we will deliver.

Thirdly, we are increasing the penalty for breaches, and modernising the civil penalties framework will make a big difference. It will deter providers from factoring the cost of noncompliance into their profit margins. Under these amendments, we will increase the civil penalties that the Federal Court can issue for breaches of industry codes and industry standards from $250,000 to nearly $10 million. These new laws will also give the court the option to issue fines for regulatory breaches, which can include $10 million, three times the benefit gained for the regulatory breach or 30 per cent of turnover. The government will stop providers from taking advantage of Australians by hitting them where it hurts: their bottom line.

I also want to take note of the protection this bill will provide for consumers experiencing various forms of hardship. Since coming to office, the Albanese government has delivered two new industry standards. One is the requirement that the telecommunications company provide adequate support to customers experiencing financial hardship. The second requirement is that the telecommunications company support and assist consumers experiencing domestic, sexual and family violence. This is so important for people.

Our government, the Albanese Labor government, recognises that we rely on telecommunications connectivity to support our families, our businesses and our communities. We deserve a telecommunications system that is fair, accountable and built on trust. We're not seeking radical change here. This is fixing a framework so that it is consistent with Australian consumer law.

It's also consistent with this government's push for a more connected Australia. Outer metropolitan and regional communities have suffered for too long. We're making the big changes, investing $55 million into round 8 of the Mobile Black Spot Program. This will go a long way to filling the cracks left by the previous pork-barrelling government. We are putting $50 million towards the Regional Roads Australia Mobile Program. Funding here will go towards testing new and innovative solutions for increasing mobile coverage on regional highways and major roads. In round 3 of the Regional Connectivity Program, we have awarded $115 million to 74 projects that will respond to local priorities. These initiatives will deliver economic opportunities and social benefits for regional, rural and remote communities. Through the On Farm Connectivity Program, the government has allocated $43 million across three rounds to enable primary producers in agriculture, forestry and fisheries to extend connectivity in their fields and take advantage of connected machinery and sensor technology.

The amendment carries with it principles of connection, assistance and justice. These were the ideals that were written into the original bill back in 1997, and we're bringing things up to date because of the dodgy operators out there. You don't need to take it from us; you can listen to the Australian Telecommunications Alliance, the Australian Communications and Media Authority, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, the Australian Communications Consumer Action Network and the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman. All were consulted on this bill before it was introduced.

To conclude—I think it's important to recognise the sliding-doors moment that Australia is facing right now. We are seeing great developments in online communication and generative AI technology that improve quality of life. The future is exciting, and it's full of promise. But, as we reach forward for tomorrow, we must also make sure that no-one is stuck with the problems of the past—the problems created under nine years of mismanagement. The Albanese Labor government has listened, and now we are turning what we've been told into action. We are enhancing consumer safeguards and delivering on our promises, and I commend this bill to the House.

Gabriel Ng (Menzies, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on the Telecommunications Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025. Telecommunications are essential to the infrastructure of modern Australia. They allow people to stay connected with family and friends. I needed it to keep in touch with my daughter when she was walking to school this morning. We use it to run businesses, access information and seek help in emergencies. For those of us in this place, they are critical to staying connected with our communities, accessing timely information, responding to issues and making sure we know what's going on. I can see members opposite on their phones right now; that's how essential they are to us.

Like many Australians, I feel the absence of my phone immediately if I leave it behind. We're all very dependent on our phones. That dependence brings with it a clear expectation: Australians expect telecommunications to be accessible, reliable, high quality and affordable. This legislation responds to that expectation. The Albanese Labor government is placing the rights and needs of consumers at the centre of the telecommunications framework. We support a strong and competitive telecommunications industry, but it must operate within a regulatory system that protects Australians and reflects the essential nature of these services.

The urgency of reform is clear. The Optus triple zero outage was a profound failure of corporate responsibility. Australians were unable to contact emergency services—police, ambulance and fire—at moments when they needed them most. The consequences were serious and, in some cases, tragic. In response, the government acted to strengthen accountability and transparency across the sector. We made clear that stronger oversight is required when failure places Australians at risk. We enshrined the Triple Zero Custodian framework in law and empowered the Australian Communications and Media Authority to act swiftly. These reforms improve coordination across the triple zero system and ensure that government can intervene decisively during outages.

Those opposite had years to act, and they failed to deliver the safeguards Australians needed. When the risks were evident, they did not respond. When the system required strengthening, they allowed it to remain exposed. This government has taken action. We have reviewed the consumer protection framework and moved to strengthen it where it has fallen short. This bill builds on that work. It strengthens protections for consumers experiencing financial hardship, and it supports recent action directing the Australian Communications and Media Authority to develop stronger rules for people affected by domestic, sexual and family violence. This builds on our work across government to address this social scourge that affects far too many people across our communities.

Our position is clear: the telecommunications sector must serve Australians. Strong safeguards must be in place, and there must be meaningful consequences when providers fail to meet their obligations. This bill improves compliance and enforcement by strengthening the tools available to the regulator. It ensures that protections remain effective in a modern and evolving market. Schedule 1 of the bill establishes a carriage service provider registration scheme. At present, there is no comprehensive list of providers operating in the market. This lack of visibility has made it difficult for the regulator to engage with providers, to educate them about their obligations and to respond effectively to emerging risks.

Without a clear register, of course enforcement is more difficult. Patterns of consumer harm are harder to identify and providers can operate without sufficient scrutiny. The new registration scheme addresses this gap. Like Santa, we're making a list and we're checking it twice. It creates greater visibility across the sector and allows the regulator to identify providers that pose unacceptable risks. It also supports better education, more efficient complaint handling and stronger overall accountability. This reform contributes to a fairer market. Providers who meet their obligations should not be undercut by those who avoid them. A transparent register supports responsible operators and strengthens confidence in the system.

Schedule 2 of the bill makes industry codes directly enforceable. Under the current framework, the regulator cannot take immediate action for breaches of these codes. It must first issue a direction to comply, or a warning, and act further only if that direction is ignored. This two-step process has limited the regulator's ability to respond quickly to harm. It has created delays and reduced the effectiveness of enforcement. The reforms removed this barrier. The regulator will be able to act directly when breaches occur, improving responsiveness and strengthening deterrence. Providers will be held to account in a more timely and effective manner.

Schedule 3 of the bill strengthens the penalty framework. The maximum general civil penalty will increase from $250,000 to 30,300 penalty units. That's currently the equivalent of $9.9 million—a significant increase. Existing penalties have not reflected the scale of harm or the size of major providers. In some cases, they've been treated as the cost of doing business. The updated framework allows penalties to be linked to the benefit gained from misconduct or the turnover of the provider. This ensures that penalties are proportionate and effective. It recognises that the sector includes both small operators and large corporations. A single fixed penalty does not achieve fairness or deterrence across such a diverse market. These changes bring telecommunications into line with other regulated sectors, including energy and banking, as well as the Australian Consumer Law. They also give the Federal Court the flexibility to impose penalties that reflect both the nature of the breach and the scale of the entity involved.

Schedule 4 strengthens the infringement notice regime by expanding the powers of the Minister for Communications. This allows infringement penalties to be adjusted to remain effective over time and ensures they continue to act as a meaningful deterrent. Taken together, these reforms equip the regulator to act as a strong and effective watchdog. They also create clear incentives for better conduct across the industry. The message is straightforward: poor behaviour will attract consequences and consumer harm will not be tolerated.

This bill sits within a broader program of reform. Since coming to office, the government has delivered a range of measures to strengthen consumer protections. These include a new industry standard requiring providers to support consumers experiencing financial hardship and a standard mandating assistance for those affected by domestic, sexual and family violence, which came into effect from 1 July 2025.

We have also amended the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 to introduce consistent obligations across telecommunications, banking and digital platforms to prevent, detect and disrupt scams. Building on this, the government is progressing broader reforms to ban unfair trading practices across the economy, including hidden transaction fees and subscription traps that distort consumer choice and erode trust. Too often, Australians see only one price and then pay another to find themselves locked into subscriptions that are difficult to exit. These reforms will require clear disclosure of fees, stronger transparency at the point of purchase and straightforward cancellation processes.

This work is part of a wider effort to strengthen competition and accountability, including increasing penalties for misconduct, improving enforcement powers and ensuring regulators have the tools needed to act decisively. Taken together, these measures reflect a coordinated approach. Australians should expect fair, transparent markets and consistent protections across the sector, and there must be real consequences when these standards are not met.

At the same time, we are investing in telecommunications connectivity. The government has committed $55 million for round 8 of the Mobile Black Spot Program; $50 million for the Regional Roads Australia Mobile Pilot Program, including targeted funding for Victoria, Western Australia and New South Wales; and $115 million under round 3 of the Regional Connectivity Program, supporting more than 70 projects. These investments are essential. They improve coverage and connectivity, particularly in outer suburban, regional and growing communities.

Reliable telecommunications are critical for access to employment, education, health care and other essential services. This bill complements those investments. As networks expand and improve, it is equally important that consumers are treated fairly and that providers meet clear standards of conduct. Australians should have confidence that the services they rely on are delivered responsibly. They should also have confidence that, when providers fail, there are real and enforceable consequences. This legislation reflects a clear commitment to putting consumers first. It strengthens safeguards, improves accountability and ensures telecommunications services meet the expectations of the people who depend on them every day. For these reasons, I commend the bill to the House.

Ed Husic (Chifley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It probably comes as a surprise to people that, during a sitting week, this building will house between 4,000 and 5,000 people. It's a phenomenal number. It's the size of a small suburb. Imagine us turning up on the Monday of budget week and finding out that the wi-fi didn't work. We switch and think, 'Well, that's okay because we've got mobile, and we'll go to mobile broadband, such as its performance is in a building like this.' But, when that doesn't work, we figure we'll go to our desktops and connect up through an ethernet connection. But, when that doesn't work, we figure we'll just have to put up with it—these are first world problems, as the kids say—for 15 minutes. But that turns into half an hour, which turns into an hour, which turns into a day. It turns into four days. It turns into five days in budget week. Could you imagine how this place would respond with no phone or internet access for five full days?

I relate that experience because that's what the constituents I represent have had to live with not just in one suburb but in a number of suburbs in the electorate of Chifley in Western Sydney. It has brought home to them yet again—and certainly to me, as their representative—how dependent we are on reliable communications. It's not just, as some people might try to dismiss, some sort of luxury. Modern communications are needed by a lot of people to operate businesses, including home based businesses, and for a whole host of other things that they're dependent on, such as accessing government services and doing their shopping, and for whatever else they've become used to. When it's gone, you really feel it.

Over the last few months, I've spent a lot of time listening to families, small-business owners and workers in my electorate who've asked for something that many Australians have taken for granted: a connection that works when they need it. As I said, those communication networks underpin almost every aspect of modern life—how people work; study; access health care; run home based businesses; connect with government services; stay in touch with families, friends, communities. Reliable communications today is essential infrastructure. It's on par with electricity and water. When that infrastructure fails, people quite reasonably expect accountability and improved service. That is why the Telecommunications Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025 matters.

It's a bill that strengthens consumer protections in telecommunications by giving the regulator way stronger enforcement powers, making industry standards mandatory, ensuring there are real consequences when providers fail to meet their obligations. Much of what this bill seeks to do collides with the experiences of constituents I'm proud to represent.

In December, Colebee experienced a simultaneous fixed line outage and mobile network outage. That combination effectively knocked out almost every single way people connect. Some were left without connectivity for up to four days. Then, just weeks later, residents in Bidwill copped the same thing: outages left households of entire streets without internet or wi-fi for days at a time. Some reported outages that lasted up to five days, and, during those outages, many residents contacted my office to raise their concerns about the reliability of mobile coverage, the limited choice of retail service providers and the overall quality of telecommunications services in my area.

So, in January, I held a telco town hall with local residents in Colebee to talk about the quality and access of service in their area. I want my community to feel confident that their experiences are absolutely being taken seriously. Over 40 people came along to the town hall that night. Most of them work from home. Their jobs depend on stable, reliable internet. Here's what I heard. Families were told repeatedly that their service would be restored, only for it to drop out again minutes later. The cycle repeated. Many spent hours on the phone to providers without receiving clear information or reliable timeframes for repair. Residents also told me that, in practice, they're better off relying on updates from neighbours and social media than contacting telcos during service outages. Some told me they'd spend an hour or even more on hold just to get information they should have received in a text message. In our parts of Western Sydney, those outages hit particularly hard because this is one of the fastest growing parts of the country, with new communities filling with young families, first home buyers and small businesses.

In this day and age, as I said, getting access to communications isn't just an infrastructure issue; it's also a fairness issue. One resident told me he's lived in four different homes across Australia over the past 15 years, including in regional centres, and that moving to a new estate in Western Sydney—get this—was the first time he'd experienced such consistently poor service. He said, 'I've never experienced service this bad anywhere else in the country,' in a part of Sydney 45 kilometres away from the CBD. That's a sobering reflection when we consider that these suburbs aren't remote or hard to reach; they're in rapidly growing communities in metropolitan Sydney. My constituents wanted to know why they could be contacted instantly when a bill was due yet somehow couldn't be reached when there was an outage affecting the entire street. They wanted clear, timely information and some sense that someone's going to actually be accountable to fix the problem.

One story from that night has stayed with me because it captures the absurdity of the system as people experience it. A constituent told me he'd signed up for a one gigabit per second service, but what he was actually getting was around 450 megabits per second. That 450 might sound fine to someone who hasn't had to rely on that connection for work, study, telehealth and running a household, but that's not what he's paying for, and it's not what he was promised. He did what any consumer should be able to do—he called his provider to get it fixed. Instead of being helped, he was told to contact his wholesaler, Opticomm. The member for McEwen said he has had similar problems with Opticomm in his contribution to this debate. The constituent contacted the wholesaler. The wholesaler then sent him straight back to the retail service provider—a run-around, back and forth. This is a story too common. All he was asking for was the service he was already paying for and has every right to receive under a contract. The constituent recounted that he is so tired of the problem that he's almost given up. He doesn't want the full service he's entitled to; he just wants a stable connection. It's unacceptable that he has to resign himself to poor service. He was promised he'd get the service that he'd paid for, but he is not getting it.

Another issue raised at my town hall went beyond outages and spoke to the broader question of how these networks are evolving and how providers are treating customers. Over 10 years ago in Colebee, residents were instructed not to purchase or install an external TV antenna, assured that free-to-air signalling would be delivered through the then Telstra Velocity network, which was a fibre-to-the-home connection. Around 2020, Telstra sold the network to Opticomm. Then, late last year, Opticomm told customers it would shut down free-to-air access that used fibre networks in the former Telstra Velocity service areas, and that shutdown occurred in February.

As Free TV Australia CEO, Bridget Fair, has said, this was a key feature which households were invited—I just want to emphasise that they were invited—to rely upon. Opticomm simply told customers they should install an external antenna or purchase an interior one. Whilst Opticomm is not obliged to provide television broadcasting services and the government is unable to intervene to stop them, it's the way this situation was handled that bothers me and many in my community. The decision to stop free-to-air signalling unfairly shifts costs for decisions made by both Telstra and Opticomm, in terms of setting up the network and then running it thereafter, to consumers. What the conversations at the town hall made clear to me is that, while technical faults are sometimes unavoidable, the real frustration often lies in the lack of transparency and the absence of meaningful consequences when standards aren't met. Too often, consumers feel they've got absolutely no leverage, no power and nowhere to turn to. Those are entirely reasonable expectations for what is now an essential service.

Following the town hall, I've raised these issues directly with Telstra and Opticomm, and I've also raised issues with Optus. I've told Telstra and Opticomm that the companies that made promises and didn't deliver should be the ones who stump up the cost of new antennas. I want to be perfectly clear here. Residents were forced to install new antennas that they previously had been told they never needed. Those residents should be compensated. I've sought updates on the outages, pushed for clearer communication protocols during service disruptions and asked for specific responses on compensation, mobile coverage gaps and infrastructure delays, including the long-awaited activation of a mobile tower in Colebee adjacent to the Stonecutters Ridge golf course. I'm pleased to report the following feedback from the town hall. Optus has told me they're bringing forward the deployment of tower infrastructure at that site.

But all of this isn't just happening in my electorate. What's really concerning is that the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman continues to report tens of thousands of complaints every single year about faults, outages, poor customer service and billing disputes. The Australian Communications and Media Authority, or ACMA, repeatedly identifies systemic issues from irresponsible sales practices to unfair disconnection policies and poor information about coverage. At present, the penalties available for breaches of industry codes and standards just don't reflect the scale of telecommunications market failures or the harm that poor practices can cause. A maximum civil penalty of $250,000 might sound substantial on paper, but, for a lot of companies with billions of dollars in annual turnover, it's unlikely to drive meaningful behavioural change.

This is the gap that the bill is designed to close. It significantly strengthens the compliance and enforcement tools available to the regulators. It increases the maximum civil penalties the Federal Court can impose to equivalent of nearly $10 million today and introduces modernised penalty frameworks, allowing the court to set fines based on the benefit gained from the breach or a percentage of the provider's turnover, which is huge. That approach aligns telecommunications with sectors like banking and energy, where we already recognise that stronger penalties are necessary. And it makes the industry codes mandatory and directly enforceable.

I just want to end on this point. We have been operating under a promise with telecommunications that it would continually improve. In fact, since the late nineties and the arrival of the internet, we've been told we will get access to communications in a way that moved us beyond that historical relic known as the landline. We have been told every time a new mobile network rolls out that we'll get better service. It started with 2G, 3G, 4G and 5G; 6G is literally around the corner. Even with those great leaps forward, people still complain. Bizarrely, they cannot get a mobile signal in their home. It doesn't matter if you're in an urban area or a regional one.

Frankly, in this chamber, it's too often the case that, regardless of our politics, we will have representatives from different parts of the country talk about why telecommunications isn't working for them. It's certainly understandable. With the way that our people live on the continent that is as great as ours, where it's spread out and where the distances are great between centres, it's understandable that there will be challenges from time to time. But my question is: why does it continue, and why is the promise of modern communications not being fulfilled? We should not still be having those types of complaints. We do have to ask questions about not just the standards but the promises being made by modern telecommunications providers to the people that we represent, from the member for Maranoa's electorate through to mine in metro Sydney, from regional Australia to our town centres. It should not be the case that, in this day and age, these telecommunications companies—regardless of who's in power, mind you—are always having the same complaints.

It's notable in this debate how many members of parliament have got up, regardless of the political colour of their background, to complain about the quality of telecommunications. This is sending a massive signal to our telecommunications providers, large and small: clean up your act; do better. The sector should be delivering. They keep extending promises to us, every single time, and yet we've still got constituents saying it's the same old same-old. They absolutely deserve better.

Jodie Belyea (Dunkley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Telecommunications is no longer a luxury or a nice-to-have; it's an essential national infrastructure—like electricity, water and banking—that underpins work, education, emergency information and participation in our economy. Because it is essential, the power imbalance matters. When a service is sold unfairly, when a bill is wrong, when a complaint goes nowhere or when people are not connected, people are put at a significant disadvantage. They can lose contact with family, miss work opportunities, fall behind in study or be cut off from essential services they depend on, like triple zero and other emergency services. That is why strong safeguards are not red tape; they are basic rules of a fair market. Australians should be able to trust that what they are sold is what they will receive, that hardship will be met with support and that there will be real consequences when providers breach their obligations.

In 2026 the simple act of making a call, paying a bill online, making a GP appointment or checking in on a loved one depends on one thing: reliable telecommunications. When that connection fails and when Australians are misled, overcharged or ignored by the very companies they rely on, the consequences are very real. People can—and unfortunately do—lose their lives. That is why I rise to speak today in strong support of the Telecommunications Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025.

The bill delivers on the Albanese Labor government's commitment to keeping Australians connected, no matter where they live, by strengthening consumer protections and making sure the system Australians rely on every day is fair and accountable and built on trust. We need this legislation because too many Australians have been let down for far too long. In Dunkley, constituents have told me about the run-around when they try to fix billing errors, the stress of being chased over disputed debts and the difficulty of getting timely, fair outcomes when something goes wrong. Dare I mention the black spots that exist in the community? We have seen patterns of misleading sales practices, poor complaints handling, billing mistakes, aggressive debt collection, failures in hardship support and inadequate treatment of vulnerable customers. These are not isolated incidents. They are systemic issues that demand a stronger framework and stronger enforcement.

In my electorate of Dunkley, connectivity is not optional; it is essential. Families rely on it to stay in touch with loved ones, small businesses rely on it to trade, students from Monash University and Chisholm TAFE rely on it to learn, and older Australians rely on it to access vital services, including health care and government support. But, too often, people in our community face poor service, unexpected costs, or complaints processes that feel designed to wear them down. These are not minor inconveniences. They can cause serious financial pressure and significant stress. This legislation is about drawing a clear line. Telcos must do better. They must meet their obligations. Consumers must be protected from harm, and the regulator must have the tools to act quickly and effectively so that trust in this essential service is earned, not assumed.

The enhancing consumer safeguards bill was introduced in the 47th Parliament, in February 2025. It passed the House without amendment and was considered by the Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills, but it lapsed when the parliament was dissolved. Today we are taking the important step of progressing these reforms once again.

At the heart of this legislation is the strengthening of the compliance and enforcement powers of the Australian Communications and Media Authority, or ACMA. ACMA plays a critical role in overseeing the telecommunications sector, but for too long it has lacked the full suite of tools needed to respond to serious breaches and protect consumers effectively. This bill changes that.

One of the most significant reforms in this legislation is the increase in civil penalties that the Federal Court can issue for breaches of industry codes and industry standards. Currently, those penalties are capped at about $250,000. That is simply not commensurate with the scale of harm that can be caused, nor is it sufficient to deter large telecommunications providers from engaging in non-compliant behaviour. This bill increases those penalties by 40 times, bringing the maximum to nearly $10 million, or 30,000 penalty units at the time of drafting. Importantly, it also modernises the civil penalties framework. Under these reforms, the federal government will have the option to impose penalties that reflect the seriousness of the breach, including a fixed penalty of up to $10 million, three times the value of the benefit obtained from the misconduct, or 30 per cent of the company's turnover. This ensures that penalties are not just symbolic; they are meaningful, proportionate and capable of driving real behavioural change across the industry. It also brings the telecommunications sector into alignment with penalty frameworks in other sectors such as energy and banking, as well as under Australian Consumer Law.

Another critical reform in this bill is the establishment of a carriage service provider, or CSP, registration scheme. A CSP is, in simple terms, an entity that uses a carrier's network to provide telecommunications services such as a phone or internet service to the public. At present, there is no comprehensive register of CSPs operating in Australia. This lack of visibility means it's difficult for ACMA to effectively monitor the market, educate providers about their obligations and target compliance and enforcement activities. The establishment of a CSP register will address this gap. It will provide ACMA and other government agencies with greater insight into who is operating in the market, it will allow for more proactive engagement with providers and it will streamline complaint-handling and compliance processes. Most importantly, it will give ACMA the power to stop CSPs from operating where they pose an unacceptable risk to consumers or cause significant harm. This is a strong but necessary measure. It will act as a deterrent against serious noncompliance and help restore confidence among consumers that providers operating in the market meet appropriate standards. It is important to note that this power is expected to be used as a measure of last resort, with appropriate safeguards in place, including review mechanisms, avenues for reregistration and arrangements to ensure that consumers are not left without connectivity.

The bill also addresses a longstanding issue in the regulatory framework: the enforceability of telecommunications industry codes. Currently, compliance with industry codes is technically voluntary. In the first instance, if a breach occurs, ACMA can issue a direction to comply or a formal warning. Stronger enforcement action can only be taken if the provider fails to comply with that direction. This creates unnecessary delays and can allow harm to continue. This bill fixes that by making telecommunications industry codes directly enforceable by ACMA. This means that from the moment a breach occurs, ACMA will have the authority to take enforcement action without first having to issue a direction and wait for further noncompliance. This is a critical reform. It will incentivise industry compliance and enable the regulator to act swiftly to address consumer harm.

In addition, the bill expands and clarifies the authority of the Minister for Communications to increase the infringement notice penalties that ACMA can issue for breaches of industry codes, industry standards and service provider determinations. This ensures that infringement notices remain an effective and flexible enforcement tool capable of responding to evolving risks in the telecommunications sector.

These reforms are part of a broader commitment by the Albanese government to strengthen consumer protections and improve outcomes across the telecommunications sector. Since coming to office, the government has already delivered significant reforms. We have introduced a new industry standard requiring telecommunication companies to provide adequate support to consumers experiencing financial hardship, recognising that access to connectivity is critical, particularly during difficult times.

We have also introduced a new industry standard requiring telecommunications companies to support and assist consumers experiencing domestic, sexual and family violence—a very important initiative for women in my community. This standard came into force on 1 July 2025 and represents an important step in ensuring that the vulnerable Australians are treated with dignity and respect when they need it.

Earlier this year, amendments were made to the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 to introduce consistent obligations across the telecommunications, banking and digital platform sectors to prevent, detect and disrupt scams. These reforms reflect the government's recognition of the growing threat posed by scams and the need for a coordinated, cross-sector response.

The government is also investing in a more connected Australia, particularly in regional, rural and remote communities. This includes the $55 million round 8 of the Mobile Black Spot Program, which is currently under assessment. It includes a further $50 million for the Regional Roads Australia Mobile Program's coverage pilot programs, which will test innovative solutions to improve mobile coverage along regional highways and major roads. It also includes more than $115 million awarded under round 3 of the Regional Connectivity Program to support 74 projects that respond to local priorities and deliver economic and social benefits to communities.

While Dunkley is a metropolitan electorate, these investments matter to our community as well. Many of our local businesses rely on regional supply chains, and many families maintain strong connections with regional Australia. A stronger, more connected Australia benefits all of us. At its core, this bill is about ensuring that the telecommunications system Australians rely on is fit for purpose. It is about ensuring that the rules are clear, that they are enforceable and that there are real consequences when those rules are broken. It's about ensuring that consumers, whether they are in Dunkley or anywhere else in the community, can have confidence that they will be treated fairly and that their rights will be protected. And it's also about ensuring that our regulator, ACMA, is empowered to do its job effectively.

For the people of Dunkley, this means stronger protections, faster action when things go wrong and greater accountability from telecommunications providers. It means a system that works better for consumers, not just companies. Australians deserve a telecommunications system that reflects the essential role it plays in our daily lives. They deserve services they can rely on, providers they can trust and a regulator that can act when needed. This bill delivers on these expectations. I am proud to support the Telecommunications Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025, and I commend it to the House.

Steve Georganas (Adelaide, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It gives me great pleasure to speak on the Telecommunications Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025, an important bill, because these are reforms that are designed to ensure that the Australian Communications and Media Authority is not just a regulator in name or a toothless tiger. This is about empowering it so that it's an effective protector of consumers, and that's why this is a good bill.

When you look at telecommunications in this country, no longer is telecommunications about wires and connecting a landline to a house or to a business. There's far more that goes into it nowadays. Our connectivity is reliant on a whole range of things, from the internet to the providers ensuring that we have connections so we can stay in touch with our families. It's how families stay in touch and how businesses are connected to the business world and operate. And, of course, particularly for regional and remote communities and communities that are isolated in other ways, it's their only connectivity that connects them to modern Australia. So you can see how important it is to ensure that everyone in Australia has connectivity, is connected to their telecommunications provider and has the services that they pay for. As with every other service, you pay for a particular service and you require that service to give you the goods that you've paid for. In this case, it's telecommunications. Every Australian, as I said, relies on it, and, because of that, every Australian deserves a system that's fair, accountable and built on trust.

But when that trust is broken—and many of us, in our electorate offices, see it on a regular basis, where people have paid for a particular provider to offer a particular service and, for whatever reason, it's a dead area where the internet drops out and their phones drop out—we see it, and we see the frustration that goes with that. Well, there is now a responsibility, and we give that responsibility to the authorities to be able to investigate and to ensure that the providers are doing the right things by the consumer, because, as I said, when that trust is broken, when consumers are misled, overcharged or exposed, it's everyday Australians who pay that price.

That's why this bill is providing the strong action that is required. The bill recognises the truth that a modern economy demands a modern regulator with real powers to act. It ensures that the Australian Communications and Media Authority, better known as ACMA, our telecommunications regulator, has those tools at its fingertips, has the authority at its fingertips and has the strength that it needs to protect consumers and hold the industry to account, because, without real consequences, standards mean very little. We've seen it in the past.

That's why this legislation is significant reform. It increases the penalties for breaches of industry codes and standards, not by a small margin—not just by a token margin, as we've seen in the past—but dramatically, from $250,000 to $10 million. That is a message to providers that perhaps have been doing the wrong thing or are not quite up to scratch with the services they provide for the money that's being given to them by the consumer, to actually have a really hard think about it. It really sends a message. It modernises the penalty framework so the Federal Court can impose fines that reflect the scale of wrongdoing, including up to $10 million, three times the benefit gained or up to 30 per cent of a company turnover.

The bill goes further. It strengthens enforcement by allowing ACMA to act quickly and decisively, including issuing infringement notices and ensuring industry codes are not just guidelines but enforceable standards. It also increases transparency by establishing a registration system for carriage service providers, ensuring bad actors and bad providers in the system cannot operate unchecked, because too often, as I said earlier, we've seen that Australians have been exposed to unreliable providers, misleading practices or services that fail when they are needed most.

I'll give you a small example of a provider that was trying to gain business in a particular area in my electorate—it was in the western suburbs of Adelaide, where my son and his wife reside. I went over to visit the grandchildren that day, there was a knock on the door, and my daughter-in-law went to the door. She came running back to me and said, 'It's someone from the government—the NDIS.' I thought, 'That's strange,' because I knew at the time there was a scam going around, or providers were trying to get extra business by claiming that the NDIS was coming to your area and, if you signed up, they would become your provider. I quickly went out and said to this chap: 'With absolute confidence, I know that the NDIS is not doorknocking. Where are you from?' We dug a bit deeper and found he was just a door-to-door salesman. The provider was using salespeople to increase their sales in, I think, an unethical way by not actually explaining who they were and where they were from. There was a stop put to that very quickly. This goes back a number of years, and I know that practice has been wiped out, but this is the type of stuff that we're trying to wipe out of this industry. It's about that and, obviously, about what people pay to ensure that they receive those services. It's about trust, it's about fairness, and it's about protecting Australians in a world that's increasingly connected. This bill matters because behind every industry code and every regulatory power is a real person that's affected. Sometimes, whole communities can be affected, as they depend on a service that simply has to work.

In another story, I was contacted about some serious concerns at the Ridleyton Greek Home for the Aged, which is in the western suburbs of my electorate. In correspondence, the general manager wrote to me—I asked him to put it in writing—and described ongoing issues with the facility's phone and nurse call system. This was a system that a particular provider had connected. Systems are not optional in an aged-care home. They're fundamental to safety, communication and care. The facility paid a substantial amount to this provider for the system to work. Originally scheduled to be completed in a short timeframe, there were problems. Though the aged-care home kept on paying, it was still not functioning to an acceptable level. Despite that, the provider began charging fees, and, during a particularly concerning period, families reported that they couldn't reach or struggled to reach the facility by phone, causing distress and complaints. Imagine if you had a parent or grandparents in an aged-care facility and you just couldn't get through. Staff were also reported to experience frequent call dropouts and disconnections, including when transferring calls. For an aged-care home, this is not an inconvenience; it's a risk.

This is the sort of stuff that we're giving powers to ACMA to be able to investigate. I know it's currently being looked at, and we're hoping for a resolution very soon. When families can't reach their loved ones in an aged-care facility, anxiety rises. When staff can't rely on the phones to coordinate their carers for shifts et cetera, that brings difficulties. When nurse call systems are unreliable, the stakes are not financial—they are human. We will be able to stamp this out through this new regulation and through this bill.

We require these reforms, because under stronger powers and stronger penalties, the regulator is better positioned to respond quickly when issues do arise—when telecommunications services cause harm. When industry code becomes directly enforceable, providers have a stronger incentive to comply, and consumers have a clearer pathway for protection. When infringement notices can be issued more effectively, poor practices will get addressed faster. There's proof in the pudding for that. When there's a registration scheme for carriage service providers, it becomes harder for dodgy operators to sit in the shadows of the market and sell their wares to unsuspecting consumers. Ultimately, it will be easier to identify who they are through this bill. This is what good regulation should do. It should protect families, protect consumers and not frustrate them; support essential services such as our telecommunications industry and not undermine them; and ensure that no organisation providing critical communications infrastructure can treat reliability and safety as optional. I'd like to congratulate the minister, who's in the room with us, for this good bill. I commend this bill to the House.

Anika Wells (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Sport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the members who contributed to consideration of the Telecommunications Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025. This bill is about one simple thing: keeping Australians connected and keeping Australians protected. Telecommunications are critical to our everyday lives, but we must ensure the system delivering these services to paying customers is fair and accountable.

The reforms in this bill will significantly strengthen the safeguards to protect consumers, improve enforcement tools and incentivise better behaviour through tougher penalties. They give the industry regulator—the Australian Communications and Media Authority, or ACMA—the tools it needs to ensure telecommunications companies do the right thing by their customers and act quickly in relation to misconduct. That is what we expect from the regulator. Consumers must be front and centre in the work that ACMA does, and I expect them to be proactive in executing their regulatory functions.

The Albanese government is committed to supporting reliable, high-quality and affordable telecommunications services, supported by a strong regulatory and consumer safeguards framework. Already we are undertaking some significant improvements to the telecommunications industry. We have mandated that telcos must notify customers, emergency services and regulators of outages immediately, while also tightening oversight of triple zero. Telcos have a responsibility to prioritise their customers, and we are ensuring the industry meets these expectations. We will continue to do this work to improve the sector. We are ensuring that the industry meets these expectations, and this bill will help.

Specifically, the bill amends the Telecommunications Act 1997 to increase the civil penalties the Federal Court can issue for breaches of industry codes and industry standards from $250,000 to nearly $10 million or more in some circumstances. The bill clarifies the minister's powers to increase infringement notice penalties; makes telecommunications industry codes directly enforceable by ACMA, enabling the regulator to take swift action; establishes a carriage service provider, CSP, registration scheme to increase visibility of CSPs operating in the market; and stops the operation of those who pose an unacceptable risk to consumers. Our government has listened to the feedback of industry, regulators, the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman and consumer advocates. We all want to ensure the telecommunications industry meets and delivers a higher standard for customers. This is what these reforms will deliver.

I note the opposition support this bill. We welcome them joining us to protect consumers. I note the member for Lindsay introduced an amendment. We will not be supporting this amendment, which, in practice, has functioned as an opportunity for the opposition to talk about anything other than the substance of this bill. For example, the member for Goldstein used his time to talk about how the government seeks to control Australians. Despite the member's ongoing and lively contributions to the House, the Albanese government is focused on delivering consumer protections for all Australians. This bill is, first and foremost, about looking after consumers as well as driving fairness and building trust in the vital telecommunications industry. I call on members to support the bill.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the amendment moved by the honourable member for Lindsay be agreed to.