Alice Jordan-Baird (Gorton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Telecommunications is essential to the lives of every Australian. In 2026 the importance of quality, reliable and affordable mobile services cannot be understated. We rely on mobile phones for connectivity more than ever. Despite that, Australia's longstanding universal service obligation does not include mobile services. For rural and remote parts of Australia, that means no access to something as basic as being able to pick up your phone and dial triple zero during an emergency. The universal outdoor mobile obligation will change that.

We are, for the first time, establishing a legislative framework to create a universal outdoor mobile obligation. Our national mobile network operators—Telstra, Optus and TPG—will, for the first time, need to provide reasonable access to outdoor baseline mobile coverage across Australia on an equitable basis. The amendment bill before us, the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025, is about recognising the importance of mobile services as essential services and treating them as such. That's because traditional mobile coverage is currently provided in areas where about 99 per cent of Australians work and live but covers only one-third of the Australian landmass. In those areas, of around five million squared kilometres, it is not possible to make a triple zero call. We are making sure that, when it comes to telecommunications, no-one is held back and no-one is left behind.

I've seen the need for amendment bills like this one before us firsthand in my electorate of Gorton. In Melbourne's west, we're one of the fastest-growing electorates in the country. I represent over 50,000 families across the electorate, with new ones being created every day. We have about 10 babies being born in the city of Melton alone every single day. In so many ways my electorate represents Australia as a whole, with its vitality, its rich cultural and linguistic make-up and its aspirations for the future. An electorate like mine—young, diverse and aspirational—has many needs that have yet to be met. But as communities grow infrastructure needs to keep up. I'm talking about the basics, like quality roads, access to water and sewerage infrastructure, and telecommunications.

Right now in my community, suburbs like Truganina, Mount Atkinson, Fraser Rise, Bonnie Brook, Aintree, Rockbank, Thornhill Park and Deanside don't have adequate mobile services. These communities don't have basic access to things people living in inner-city suburbs take for granted—like regular internet access to call your friends and relatives, to go about your everyday life, for kids to do homework, for parents to work from home or operate a local business, or for emergency services to be accessible in those most crucial moments. Emergency services are a true lifeline, and access to those emergency services when you need it is crucial. In those terrifying moments, seconds are critical. Not having the most basic access to mobile data is life-threatening. It is simply unacceptable that we have growing communities in Melbourne's outer suburbs who don't have access to telecommunications.

In my electorate, I've launched a campaign, the Mobile Signal Strength and Blackspot Mapping Survey. We've sent it out to the community asking them to help us identify our mobile coverage black spots, particularly in new suburbs within the growth corridor of Gorton, so we can collect real location based evidence to demonstrate the impact telecommunications has on the safety, business and daily life of our community and to advocate for community updates from service providers and infrastructure upgrades where required. I've had hundreds of responses to my community survey. Our community is coming together, helping us to identify those black spots and advocating for change, because telcos are an essential service provider and we need to hold them to account to adequately deliver these services. I know access to telecommunications is not a luxury, and I know it is an essential service that underpins public safety.

What we're doing here with this bill is providing that basic mobile access right across Australia, across rural and remote areas. There were people who thought it would never even be possible to deliver mobile coverage across Australia. I get that; Australia is a massive continent with vast inland areas. But with the advent of the new low earth orbit satellite direct-to-direct technology, this pipe dream will now become a reality.

Some have also said that we should wait until the technology is widely available before legislating the UOMO. But waiting is a risky game. We are legislating the UOMO now to ensure baseline mobile coverage is widely available, and available as quickly as possible. Waiting would mean leaving rollout decisions to industry alone and risking some Australians being left behind. What we're doing here is clever planning to avoid problems like what I'm seeing in my community right now, where one of the biggest barriers to provision of mobile towers is that they aren't accommodated for in industry planning and, as a result, some Aussies are getting left behind. Here's what we're doing to make sure no-one gets left behind.

This bill modernises Australia's universal service framework. Historically, universal service obligations focused on fixed voice services and payphones, but the reality is that Australians now overwhelmingly rely on their mobile phones. Mobile services are no longer optional extras; they are essential infrastructure. This bill updates the law to reflect the way Australians actually communicate in 2026. It incorporates designated mobile telecommunications services into the existing universal service regime for the very first time. To be clear, the UOMO isn't about replacing traditional mobile coverage with new technology; it's about ensuring they work together to complement each other, and making sure that together these networks cover as much of Australia as possible and enable the community to benefit from new technology. Initially, the mobile telecommunications services subject to the UOMO will be voice services and SMS, reflecting the early technology capability of our policy objectives of public safety. We're also creating a flexible framework with this bill, where the scope and timing of the UOMO can be adjusted by ministerial instrument as the market develops and satellite technology evolves as well.

We have a proposed default date of 1 December 2027. At this time, all three operators will be required to ensure that baseline mobile coverage is reasonably available outdoors throughout Australia. We also recognise that there are some circumstances where Optus, Telstra and TPG will not be able to meet this obligation. For example, D2D requires a clear line of sight to the sky. Sometimes this isn't possible to achieve. I know this well because it's also an issue in my community, in our growth corridor. We recognise that, but the intent of this bill is to make sure that services are available as widely as possible.

We're also creating new powers to set standards, rules and benchmarks for mobile services, with flexibility for these to apply before the UOMO starts. Standards, rules and benchmarks are so important here because it sets expectations for telcos and for our communities as well. Here we're providing a framework to hold industry to account if it doesn't deliver. Standards could cover issues like ensuring that there are affordable products to meet the needs of vulnerable groups or requiring industry to reduce the impact of planned mobile outages through better planning. Whilst standards will need close consideration, including the content of those standards and even the need for them, it's important to have the ability to step in if the market doesn't deliver. To make sure that's an option, there'll be a close consultation with regulators, industry and consumer groups to make sure standards are fair but consumer focused.

Importantly, this framework is enforceable. We are making sure that the ACMA will have responsibility for enforcement of the UOMO—there are a lot of acronyms here—and any associated standards, rules and benchmarks. That includes powers to investigate breaches, issue infringement notices, impose penalties and take compliance action where required, because obligations only matter if there is accountability behind them, and because communities deserve confidence that telecommunications providers will actually deliver the services that Australians rely on.

Importantly, this bill is also technology neutral. That means it does not prescribe a single technological solution. That flexibility is important because this technology is continuing to evolve rapidly—it's evolving every single day—and we want to make sure that regulation can evolve alongside this innovation as well.

This legislation is one piece in the puzzle of making sure every Australian can make a triple zero call no matter where they are. Our government has already taken significant steps to improve equitable access to mobile coverage. We've brought in the Better Connectivity Plan for Regional and Rural Australia, which provides more than $1 billion to rural and regional communities to improve mobile and broadband connectivity and resilience. It funds programs like the Regional Connectivity Program, the On Farm Connectivity Program, the Mobile Black Spot Program and the Regional Tech Hub. These are programs that improve access to reliable communications for households, businesses and farms, provide targeted solutions for communities with unique connectivity challenges and reduce gaps in mobile and internet access between metro and regional areas.

The BCP has also responded to emerging needs and government priorities by funding new initiatives that include support for broadcasts and news initiatives, extending the School Student Broadband Initiative and the First Nations Digital Inclusion package. This package is a critical step towards ensuring that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have equal levels of digital inclusion. It's a $68 million package of measures that improve access to internet and mobile services, digital services and infrastructure. These include telehealth, education, banking and government services, and this ensures that our First Nations Australians can access the information and services they need to make informed choices about their own lives and their own communities.

Our government has also provided significant funding to upgrade the NBN in regional, rural and remote Australia, including upgrading fixed-line areas with more resilient fibre services and expanding the fixed wireless footprint. We've also taken significant steps to strengthen regulations for telcos and ensure that telcos are providing transparent, reliable and equitable services to all Australians. In November 2024, we directed the ACMA to introduce enforceable industry standards to improve how telco companies communicate with their customers. These rules require telcos to keep customers informed and updated on major outages, and they ensure that in the event of an outage those affected receive communications and can access clear information about the outage.

Last year, we expanded on those rules with the significant local outages standard. This standard ensures that, when local outages occur, consumers are informed of the outage and updated with information, including the likely cause of the outage, the types of services impacted and the estimated timeframe for the issue to be resolved. We also directed the ACMA to introduce new obligations around preventing and managing triple zero outages. Since April last year, telcos have been required to provide information about outages to police, fire and ambulance services and report it to the ACMA. Significantly, the rules also mandate that, when a triple zero outage occurs, the provider enables calls to be carried by an alternative telco network. These new standards are clear and enforceable with serious financial penalties and civil proceedings in the Federal Court.

Earlier this year, we also directed the ACMA to ensure that appropriate support is provided to telecommunications customers experiencing financial hardships. The new financial hardship standard mandates that telcos establish and promote their hardship policies, identify customers experiencing financial hardship, provide a better range of options for assistance and prioritise keeping customers connected. This reform acknowledges that, as an essential service, telecommunications need to be available to everyone, including those experiencing financial hardship. It sets a clear standard that telcos must accommodate people in vulnerable circumstances and ensure that they are able to access telecommunications. For the first time, we're ensuring that telcos provide reasonable access to outdoor baseline mobile coverage across Australia.

We know that this legislation is the right decision because we know it's what rural and remote communities need right now across Australia. Extensive consultation informed this legislation with industry, consumer representatives, state and local governments as well as telecommunications stakeholders. That included mobile network providers, consumer advocacy groups and regional representatives. It's a collaborative process that has helped ensure the framework is practical, flexible and focused on public outcomes. It's been designed with the communities it will serve. The rural and remote communities have been at the absolute forefront of this thinking. It's so important because, at its core, connectivity is about safety, about equitable access to services and about better access to emergency services and support. This is exactly what this bill is focused on.

No Australian should be unable to contact emergency services because they live outside a metro area, and no growing community like mine should be left behind because of infrastructure planning failing to keep pace. We are bringing Australia's telecommunications framework into the modern era, expanding access to mobile connectivity, strengthening public safety and ensuring that all Australians, no matter where they live, can remain connected when it matters most.

David Littleproud (Maranoa, National Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I stand to support the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025 in principle and support what the government is trying to achieve here in the evolving shape of telecommunications. Particularly for those of us that represent rural and remote electorates, it's important. This evolving technology gives us hope because, at the moment, there isn't a lot of hope for us. Many of the telcos have packed up and left, and that cancer that started in regional Australia is now spreading to peri-urban areas around capital cities.

It's admirable that the government is trying to keep pace with the change in technology, and that is important. But there is an important admission in this bill that doesn't go to actually address much of the framework that is already in place through the universal service obligation. The universal service obligation was put in place when Telstra was privatised, and, at that stage, the technology that was available to every Australian were landlines and payphones. There were around 60,000 payphones when Telstra was privatised. We're now down to about 14,000. I mean, the only people using payphones at the moment are drug dealers. No-one is using payphones at the moment, and landlines are becoming less and less frequent.

But, unfortunately, the universal service obligation has not moved with the technology. This government is taking one step too far in terms of forgetting that there is still technology that we rely on out there in regional Australia, and the universal service obligation should be extended to existing telephony infrastructure that much of the Australian taxpayer has paid for, not the telcos but the Australian taxpayer through the black spots program that we put in place when we were in government we put in place. That was there to try and give coverage to people in regional Australia. But, unfortunately, the universal service obligation still only controls the landlines and payphones and omits covering the maintenance of mobile phone towers.

We put in place over 1,500 when we were in government under that black spot program, but there is no regulatory framework to make the telcos maintain them to the standards of which they're meant to. A mobile phone tower should in its establishment cover around a 14-kilometre radius. Now, in many of the cases because the batteries aren't being maintained, there is no service, and there is no requirement on the telcos to go and repair those towers. In regional and rural Australia, that has actually diminished, and, in fact, many of them are flat out being able to cover the towns in which they reside in or even the highways that they cover. But even worse is when they say, 'Well, we still get our landlines out there.' In many cases, a landline is all we can use. In the case of very remote stations in my own electorate out in western Queensland in the outback, it's their only communication to get the flying doctor in.

But under the old universal service obligation, the only requirement for the telcos to go and fix these landlines has an averaging provision. So even the Productivity Commission found that Telstra, who have the contract for the universal service obligation and who gets $270 million a year to maintain those payphones and to maintain those landlines, were actually averaging the provisions of repairing landlines in capital cities because, lo and behold, that's where their technicians were, but they were averaging provisions out in the outback. In my own electorate, I can tell you that in Birdsville and Roma, they were taking three, six, 12, 18 months to repair landlines. In fact, I even have a photo sent to my electorate office of Telstra's ability to actually repair a landline out near Roma. I think it was between Roma and Injune. They've actually run a new line from the main telephone power line coming down the highway, and, instead of putting new poles up, they've actually wrapped it around a couple of gum trees through to the house and attached it to the house. That was their way of fixing this landline for these people who'd been waiting for nearly six months.

Telstra is having a lend of us. $270 million a year, and they use average provisions to be able to take the money off the Australian taxpayer. I grant you, about $100 million of that is Australian taxpayers, and $170 million is what's levied of the telcos, but they are effectively having a go at us all. That is why this bill should actually extend to the existing infrastructure that's there, particularly that mobile telephony, to hold these telcos to account, to remove the averaging provisions as a penalty, to make sure that telcos are there, johnny-on-the-spot, to fix these problems not just with landlines and payphones but with mobile phone towers.

In the town of Dalby—12,000 people live in Dalby—Telstra took down their mobile phone coverage service for nearly two weeks. They did not care one iota about the fact that the good people of Dalby had no mobile telephony for nearly two weeks. That is a disgrace. My heart pours out to the families who lost loved ones because of the triple zero fiasco only less than 12 months ago.

Let me say to those in this chamber today that we face that sort of risk and that sort of outcome that we saw because triple zero went down because of Optus every day in regional, rural and remote Australia. Our mobile phone towers don't work. There's no regulatory guardrail for them to be fixed. That's the sort of risk that we face up to every day. While there's a national outpouring of mourning for the families that were lost, understand that that happens to us every single day. Our whole communities lose mobile phone towers for a couple of weeks. We lose them along our highways. This is where we've got to understand the technology that's there also needs to be protected.

I'm proud of the National Party that made the reform around USO pivotal to our policy pitch to make sure not just that landlines and payphones are protected but that mobile phone infrastructure—particularly that you, the Australian taxpayer, have paid for—is maintained and kept to a standard to protect every Australian. That's where we should go. Even with low-orbit-satellite technology, which is what we're moving towards to regulate here—and congratulations to the government for taking those steps; it's the right thing to do; it honestly is—the telcos themselves will tell you that their mobile phone infrastructure that is there, those towers that are right across, will still be required for backhaul and backup. So why wouldn't we, as legislators, amend this bill to also regulate to ensure that the universal service obligation is extended to mobile telephony infrastructure to protect every Australian?

I understand now. We've been battling for this for years for those that live in regional and rural Australia, and it's only now that this cancer has grown from regional and rural Australia to periurban Australia that we are understanding why there is action. This is why it's important, as legislators, that we get this right. We can fix it. If there's $270 million a year being paid to Telstra through a universal service obligation contract, then we have every right to change that. If Telstra doesn't want to do that, who cares? There'll be some other entrepreneur out there that'll want to take this contract up, and they'll want to go and make sure that these landlines and these payphones—whatever's left of them—as well as the mobile phone towers across Australia are maintained. That's a universal right that we deserve as Australians. This is a universal service that saves us.

Society has evolved because of the technology that's been provided to this country, and that's a great thing. But none of us should be left behind. I say to the government that the opportunity that lays ahead has been missed. It is right to ensure that there are regulatory guardrails around the new technology, but missing what's there is a missed opportunity. It does risk lives. It puts our lives at risk, and that's why we've been passionate, as the National Party, to stand up and say we can't go on with this any longer and that this is a risk to our wellbeing. It's not just for us to be able to get on with the commerce of feeding and clothing you and sending the resources in to save the bills. This is something that, as a parliament, I think we should come together and fix.

This is a positive step that the government has taken with respect to the new technology, but it's missing the opportunity that lays there for us. I say to the government: please go back to the drawing board and add this. It's not asking for any more money. We're not saying we want more than the $270 million that goes out every year in the universal service obligation. But, because there are fewer landlines and because there are fewer payphones, Telstra's having a red-hot crack at us. They're having a red-hot crack at the Australian taxpayer. Who wouldn't want a contract for $270 million to do three-fifths of bugger all? There are no payphones to fix—so much so that they made them free to use anywhere around Australia—and the landlines are definitely going down in usage.

There will be a day when technology will take out the need for the copper, and that's a good thing, even in those remote places in my electorate, like Birdsville, west of Longreach and even west of Roma, where you can't get mobile phone coverage so you still need that landline for that hour of need to ring the flying doctor. This is an opportunity to say, 'Let's get this right.' Let's actually pause and understand the complexity of the problem and not leave a gap, which—hands up—we've all missed. But it's one we've always fought to close in the National Party. This is pivotal to getting the telecommunications right in this country.

We can simply say that we are not asking for any extra money. We are asking for a reallocation of that $270 million, which doesn't need to go towards addressing these low-orbit satellites and the new technology that's going on. We don't even own that infrastructure. But we own the infrastructure that was there, which we gave as a free hit to these telcos, who are making money out of it. We are simply saying, 'Let's reallocate that $270 million to make sure those towers are maintained.'

While we're at it, why wouldn't we look at mandated roaming? I congratulate the government's move towards mandated roaming in emergency circumstances. But we face emergency circumstances every day in rural and regional Australia. The Mobile Black Spot Program allowed Telstra, Optus and Vodafone to all apply. We've got stranded assets across regional Australia. You might go through a Vodafone tower, then you hit two Telstra towers and then you hit an Optus one. Unless you've got three different phones that connect into them, they're basically useless. So why wouldn't we look at that? The ACCC, when they last looked at this, made a mess of it, to be honest. They said that we shouldn't have mandated roaming.

I'm not saying that you should get it for free. I'm saying that what the telcos should do is tell us what it costs to have roaming on your phone. If you go overseas and you decide to take roaming, you pay $5 a month or $5 a week or whatever it is. Give us the number and let the consumer decide whether they want roaming so they can use any tower. I'm not asking the telcos to pay for it. I'm simply saying, 'Why don't you give us the number?' It might be $10 a month, $20 a month or $25 a month. The consumer should decide. They should be able to decide that they can go under any mobile phone tower in this country and use it if they're prepared to pay for it.

But the telcos don't want that, particularly Telstra, because they use regional Australia as their biggest advertisement in the cities, saying they have the most coverage across Australia. They use us as their selling point but screw us over and give us nothing in return in terms of the infrastructure we need—so much so that the ACCC found just the other day that the claim they made in some of their advertising about the coverage they had was actually false. I could have told you that five years ago. They're full of it. The reality is that Telstra's been found out, so let's not let them dictate terms about how our telecommunications should be in this country. They don't care. They gave up a long time ago, and I gave up on Telstra a long time ago. They are full of it, and the reality is they are cleaning up the Australian taxpayer and having a red-hot laugh at us.

This is an opportunity for this parliament to go back to the drawing board and get this right—to add onto the work that this government is doing with respect to the new technology that's coming and to fix the mistakes of the past. That's what a good parliament would do, a parliament that understands the complexities of a universal right of telecommunications to keep us all safe and to give us the opportunity to go and make a quid. That's what we want.

We're not asking for a cent—not one brass razoo. I'm not saying we want one more cent, apart from that $270 million to force Telstra to do the job that they are paid to do and to do a job that they could do. If they don't, get rid of them. Who cares. Someone else will take up that universal service obligation and spend that $270 million in such a way that the Australian taxpayer, particularly people in regional Australia, might be able to turn on their phone or use it in their hour of need, when they need to ring triple zero. My heart bleeds for those families who lost loved ones, but just understand that that happens to us every day.

Why would we stand in this parliament, with an opportunity to fix it today, and just walk past it and let it go? That's not what legislators should do. We should have the courage to take on the telcos, particularly companies like Telstra, who have done nothing for regional Australia. They've done nothing but take. Now the good people of peri-urban Australia are feeling the same thing. This is the time to square the ledger, square it up with Telstra, and make that $270 million work for the Australian taxpayer.

Ash Ambihaipahar (Barton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I risk to speak on the Telecommunication Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025. This bill is about ensuring that, no matter where you are in this country, you will be able to call for help. If you're broken down on the side of the highway, if you're injured on a farm or if you're just lost in the bush, this bill ensures that, if you can see the sky, you will have coverage.

The concept of a universal obligation is not new. It originally came in 1991 and applied to the provision of voice services and serviceable payphones to everyone in Australia, regardless of where they lived. Now only 15 per cent of Australian adults use their landlines, whilst 98 per cent of us use our mobile phones. This reliance is even more pronounced in regional Australia. I can't say I know the stats for payphones, but it's safe to say it's pretty slim. It is for this reason that consecutive reviews have called the existing USO outdated, irrelevant and also costly. There are clearly few fans of the USO as it stands. Accordingly, this new UOMO focuses on dragging our telecommunications into the modern world.

The bill defines the UOMO as 'the obligation to ensure that mobile coverage is reasonably available outdoors to all people in Australia on an equitable basis'. This includes 'the obligation to supply each kind of designated mobile telecommunications service such that the service is reasonably available outdoors throughout Australia'. Said designated mobile telecommunication services are focused on voice calls and SMS. However, the minister is granted the power to update these DMTs following the next advancement in mobile services when they so choose. This means that, when SMS becomes the next landline, we can update our legislation efficiently. In the same way, this bill on a whole has a flexible framework which can be adjusted by a disallowable legislative ministerial instrument as the market develops and satellite technology evolves.

Importantly, this bill does not simply express a hope that coverage will improve. It creates a legal obligation. It gives government a clearer role in setting expectations for mobile network operators, and it gives the parliament a framework to make sure those expectations keep pace with technology. That matters because, for too long, mobile coverage has been treated as a commercial question alone. If a provider believed a place was profitable enough to service, it was serviced. If it was difficult, expensive or inconvenient, communities could be left waiting. This bill changes that starting point. It recognises that outdoor mobile coverage is not just another consumer product; it is part of the national safety net. This bill is a commitment to making sure that such a safety net is fit for purpose so that, when the worst happens, you can always reach out for help.

I also want to make this point clearly. A universal obligation cannot just be understood as a regional policy issue. Of course, regional and remote communities face some of the most serious and dangerous coverage gaps in the country, and this bill is a major step forward for them, but the principle behind the bill is much broader than that. The principle is that Australians should not be left disconnected simply because the market has not delivered reliable coverage where people live, work, commute and gather. That principle applies on a remote road. It applies on a farm. It applies in a national park. Just as we are saying that we are a mobile-first country, we must also accept that the principle applies when individuals are just trying to use their phones for the basics of everyday life in urban Sydney as well.

This problem of mobile coverage cuts right to the heart of our densely populated and urban communities, like the suburb of Carlton in my electorate of Barton. Carlton is a growing suburb that is home to a culturally diverse community of young families, students, small businesses and essential workers. Many would assume that, being less than 15 kilometres outside of Sydney CBD, Carlton is well within a fully serviced and urban telecommunications environment. Yet, for many of my constituents, mobile coverage is poor and, to their frustration, has remained so for many years.

Let me begin with one of the most notorious and persistently experienced issues: lack of connectivity at the Carlton railway station. During peak commuting hours, hundreds of residents pass through Carlton Station, commuting to and from work and attempting to access mobile data at the same time. The result is predictable: networks become overwhelmed and speeds drop dramatically, and that's if you're lucky. In most cases, service becomes entirely unusable. Constituents tell me that when they're near the station they cannot send any text messages, check emails, make calls or access transport apps for service updates. In a modern city, in a major transport hub, this is simply unacceptable.

This problem is compounded by the nature of housing in Carlton. The suburb is increasingly characterised by high-rise and high-density residential developments. While these developments are very much essential to meeting Sydney's housing needs, they also present unique challenges for telecommunications infrastructure. Residents report that their fixed line internet services through the NBN are unreliable and slow, in particular, during peak usage times. In these circumstances, mobile data is not a luxury; it is a necessary backup. Without it, residents are left with no reliable means of connectivity at all. The consequences of poor mobile coverage are not mere inconvenience; they are punitive. I've heard from constituents who have been threatened with fines because they were unable to produce a digital driver's licence or valid transport ticket when requested by authorities. In an age where government services are increasingly digitalised, we must ensure that the infrastructure underpinning those services is reliable. It is fundamentally unfair to expect compliance with digital requirements when the means to access them cannot be guaranteed.

Carlton is also one of the most multicultural suburbs in our nation. For many residents, English is not their first language. These constituents rely heavily on translation apps to navigate daily life, whether it's communicating through service providers, interpreting governmental services and health information or interacting with authorities. When mobile coverage fails so too does the community's ability to access these essential tools. A digital divide is not just a technology issue; it is a matter of inclusion, equity and social cohesion. The impact extends further still into the local economy. Carlton's small businesses depend on reliable mobile connectivity for their day-to-day operations. From processing digital payments to managing online orders and communicating with customers, mobile service is integral to the modern commerce in Carlton. When coverage is poor, transactions fail, productivity drops and customer confidence is eroded. For small businesses already operating on tight margins, these disruptions can have serious financial consequences.

One of the frustrations I hear from these constituents is that coverage maps do not always reflect the lived experience. A map may show that an area is technically covered, but that does not mean a person can reliably use their phone when they need to. There is a difference between theoretical coverage and usable coverage. If your phone shows one bar but the call drops, that is not meaningful coverage. If a text message will not send, that is not meaningful coverage. If a person has to walk around a street corner and hold their phone up in the air or wait until they leave the station precinct before they can connect, that is not the standard Australians should expect. This is why the language of the bill is important. It focuses on coverage being 'reasonably available'. That phrase matters, because availability cannot just mean something that exists on paper. It has to mean something that works in practice.

I acknowledge that some of the issues in Carlton I've raised go beyond the narrowest reading of this bill. This bill is principally about baseline outdoor mobile coverage, with a particular focus on voice calls and SMS. It is not by itself a complete answer to the congestion, indoor reception, mobile data reliability or every local black spot. But that is exactly why it's worth raising Carlton in this debate. Carlton shows how quickly the line between basic coverage and modern connectivity is blurred. A phone call, a text message, a digital licence, a transport update, a translation app and a payment system are all part of the same basic expectation that when people are out in their community their phone will work. This bill starts with the most fundamental part of that expectation. It says that outdoor mobile coverage should be reasonably available across Australia on an equitable basis.

That is the right foundation, but as the technology develops and as the minister considers future designated mobile telecommunications services the lived experience of communities like Carlton must be part of that conversation. We should not build a framework that only asks whether a signal technically exists. We should build one that asks whether people can actually rely on the signal when they need it. This bill, with its evolving framework and its commitment to recognising new technology as it comes into the system, provides a strong, stable foundation for better mobile coverage across Australia. It means that we will not be locked into legislation that considered the landline to be the be-all and end-all as we were before. I hope that this bill sends a clear message to providers: coverage should span the whole of Australia, it should allow you to make calls in an emergency and it should not fail when you're simply using your phone to complete the small but essential necessities of everyday life.

This bill is an important step in modernising Australia's telecommunications framework. It recognises that mobile coverage is no longer a convenience. It's a basic part of how people stay safe, access services, participate in the economy and go about their daily lives. The Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation sets a clear expectation that, wherever reasonably possible, Australians should have access to baseline outdoor mobile coverage. That matters in the regions, it matters on our highways, on farms and in our remote communities, and it matters in suburbs like Carlton, where people are still dealing with the frustration and unfairness of unreliable mobile service in the middle of a major city. The example of Carlton shows why this work is so important. It reminds us that the coverage gaps are not always where people expect them to be. They can exist in dense, growing, multicultural communities close to the CBD where thousands of people rely on their phones every day to commute, work, study and run a business, translate information, access government services or even keep in touch with their family.

This bill will not fix every telecommunications problem overnight. It will not, by itself, solve every issue with congestion, mobile data, indoor reception and every local black spot, but it does set the right foundation. It treats outdoor mobile coverage as essential infrastructure and gives us a flexible framework that can respond as direct-to-device technology develops and as community expectations change. That is the practical value of this reform. It moves us away from an outdated model built around landlines and towards a framework that reflects how Australians actually live.

A mobile phone is now how many Australians call for help, receive emergency information, access transport updates, produce a digital licence, make payments, contact family and interact with essential services. The law needs to recognise that reality. For communities across the country and for the constituents in Carlton and in my whole electorate, this bill sends a clear message: reliable mobile coverage matters and the standard we accept must keep rising. I commend the bill to the House.

Simon Kennedy (Cook, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In the 21st century in Australia, reliable phone coverage is not a lifestyle extra. It's not a consumer perk. It's foundational national infrastructure. It underpins our relationships, our families, our businesses and even our safety. Phone coverage isn't just an issue in far-out regional areas. In Sydney, in the seat of Cook, we face this all the time. Constituents are continually raising concerns about persistent mobile black spots and poor reception, including in the Miranda region, which includes one of the largest Westfields in Sydney. We're not talking about an area in some remote, far-flung part of Australia, which also should demand good coverage. We are talking about Sydney. It's not a minor inconvenience.

I'd like to read some of the feedback I am getting from constituents about this, particularly about the T4 line. Again, this is not some far-flung, regional line. This is a line that services 410,000 customers per day, or one-third of Sydney Trains' customers. Rail patronage on the T4 line grew by 17 per cent, meaning they were operating at or above capacity. The T4 line is the most crowded line on the rail network during the morning peak, with passenger loads averaging 144 per cent of seated capacity and 75 per cent of services operating above target capacity. Here we have a line that is flat-chat full.

Let me read you some of the correspondence I have had about this line. Starting in Cronulla, it is also the line at Sutherland, going all the way into the city. Here is an email to Transport NSW that I was copied in on by a constituent, and this is what Transport NSW had to say:

Thank you for your feedback regarding the internet and phone connectivity along the T4 line from Cronulla to Martin Place. I understand how important it is for many to have Wi-Fi access while travelling, and I am sorry for the frustration it may cause

As you can appreciate, Wi-Fi relies on mobile reception to provide a consistent connection. There are currently a number of blackspots along the Blue Mountains and South Coast lines.

Please also be advised that there are no immediate plans to introduce Wi-Fi on trains, however your feedback has been forwarded to our service planning area for future consideration.

For further enquiries about your cellular connectivity, it is best that you reach out directly to your service provider and ask what changes may be made in the area to their infrastructure.

We reached out to both Telstra and Vodafone, and here is what the constituent had to say to me in response to both this and their responses:

What a disappointing non-response; I really did expect to hear that someone in your organisation would care about the connectivity concerns and productivity of the customers of the T4 line—and would have plans to remediate the issue.

Please escalate this further up your management chain as a matter of high importance to your customers. I have copied in my local federal and state member so that they are aware of your response as I had previously asked the question of both of them.

I am sure we have all personally experienced what happens when a residential person calls a telco—

So the solution needs to be from government. The constituent goes on to say:

Hopefully there is a near future state where we can all work together to solve problems rather than ignore them—or put the work back onto the customer to drive a solution. As a suggestion, perhaps you can engage with the telcos yourself to apply pressure for the changes required; a regulatory solution on minimum standards could also be the answer.

Here is another email from a constituent who wrote to me about what it was like in Cronulla:

I am not sure if this is in your remit, however train passengers from Cronulla to Sutherland suffer phone and internet blackspots at Woolooware tunnel, Kirrawee station (complete lack of any connectivity) and, if they go further, the Jannali cutting and of course, the complete technology blackout underground from Sydenham.

That's before they leave home at Cronulla where calls go straight to voicemail and you can't get decent internet connection especially around 3pm in the afternoon.

Is there any pressure that can be put on providers to upgrade their technology to a first world offering? Any support or suggestions you can provide would be appreciated.

Here is another one in Kirrawee:

I raised my concerns about the phone reception at my home.

…   …   …

I moved to a villa in May 2022 and immediately noticed that I had very limited mobile service with Telstra. One bar if I am lucky.

I raised my concerns with Telstra and the ombudsman, with no remedy unless I want to install an expensive antenna, as it is a strata complex this would be extra difficult to get approval for.

I had to upgrade my mobile phone to one that I could get calls through WI FI. This has solved the problem as long as there is no outage with the NBN or power. I work at home 3 days a week, when there is a power outage I am completely cut off from my colleagues.

A number of my neighbours are elderly and they are very concerned that in an emergency, it could be difficult to call someone.

This is a line in an area with over 400,000 passengers per day. Think about the lost productivity of these people. Even worse, it's a train line. Let's think about this from a safety perspective. It's in the middle of Sydney. How can Telstra, Vodafone and the other providers allow this to happen in Australia's largest city? It's meant to be one of the premier cities in the world, and we have a black spot for one of our busiest train lines in the country. This has to stop.

We've written to Telstra and we've written to Vodafone, and I will keep fighting for my constituents. We will not stop until we get services on this T4 line and we fix the black spots in Kirrawee and Miranda. I also have constituents in Lilli Pilli, where it faces the national park, writing to me. This is a high bushfire danger zone in Sydney where they don't have mobile phone reception. This area has been subject to bushfires in the past. We have residents there who have completely no phone reception. Again, I have written to Telstra, and Telstra has been found wanting, so it's time for government to step up.

My message is to both Telstra and the Labor government. Telstra, you must fix these black spots. We will not stop until you fix the black spots along the T4 line, around Kirrawee station, around Miranda station and down at Lilli Pilli near the national park. If you don't, I will fight for this Labor government to force you to fix these areas, because this isn't a fringe concern.

You can't tell me there's a cost-benefit analysis that doesn't make sense when up to 400,000 people are using that line. That's four times the size of Accor Stadium. They're on that train every single day. I hope it's fine and safe, but you shudder to think of what would happen if there were serious injuries or a serious incident there. It doesn't even have to be that. It could be someone experiencing a heart attack or heart difficulty. It could be some random occurrence. What could happen on these train lines where people are left flailing without assistance is limitless. This is a First World country, and it's the biggest city in the country. It's one of the premier cities in the world, and we don't have phone reception? It beggars belief.

I'm sick of the Sutherland Shire being screwed by governments—the Labor federal government, the Labor state government and the Labor aligned Sutherland Shire Council. We've had enough. We overshot our housing targets last term. The Sutherland Shire has increased the amount of housing. We're one of the few local councils that increases our housing targets. We're taking all these extra people, in part because of these reckless immigration policies. But we're getting screwed on the infrastructure while Western Sydney is getting train lines, metros, light rails, new schools and budgets.

I walk around my electorate. I go and visit all the schools. I'm watching kids using demountable toilets without toilet rolls. I can't find a primary school where they can fit the whole school in any of the halls. There are still school rooms without air conditioning in the Sutherland Shire. There's mould in some of these primary schools that I'm seeing. There are demountable buildings everywhere, and we're overshooting our housing targets. Why are we getting screwed on infrastructure? Why are we getting screwed with mobile phone black spots and insufficient school infrastructure? The roads are a disaster. They're building the M4 and stopping it before it hits the Sutherland Shire. It's got a sinkhole. They're not extending that. There are no new road upgrades.

I see Premier Minns is now looking at putting 4,300 apartments in Kurnell. It's got one road in and one road out—no public transport—and the phone reception there can be terrible. You drive to Kurnell, and you lose the signal every single time. This isn't some far-flung back heap of Australia. This is the place where the meeting of two cultures first occurred. It's where Captain Cook landed. This should be as important as the Opera House and as Bennelong and should be celebrated as much. We can't even get phone reception, and we just want to chuck in 4,300 apartments without any new infrastructure, new roads or new schools? They don't even plan to build a school. Well, Cronulla High School and Kurnell Public School have fallen demountables already. Where are these people going to go?

Stop screwing the Sutherland Shire. I've had enough of it. The citizens of the Sutherland Shire have had enough of it, and we're going to stand up. We can't have all of this development if we don't get the infrastructure. The Sutherland Shire has been overlooked for far too long. We've got a Labor federal government, a Labor state government and a Labor aligned council. We need these people to stick up. These should be bipartisan issues. I'm willing to work with them. I'm willing to put the partisan attacks away if we can see a plan. Let's start with fixing these mobile phone towers and black spots on one of the busiest lines in the busiest city in one of the best countries in the world. Let's fix them in Kirrawee, Miranda and Lilli Pilli, and let's invest in the infrastructure my people deserve.

If we look at the full bill itself, there are some good things. But we need to start thinking about the triple zero consequences and failure. This communications policy isn't theoretical. We've already seen what happens when people try to call triple zero and it doesn't connect. If you've got no phone reception, it can't connect. The recent history of triple zero is showing that newly emerging device compatibility issues have shaken public confidence in the system. Senate inquiries have exposed troubling governance and shortcomings and highlighted the gaps in oversight and governance. We had the tragic loss of two Australians following device incompatibility issues. This underscores the seriousness of communication failures. This is even more serious than device incompatibility. It doesn't matter if you have a device if you can't get access at all.

Australians can't afford another botched rollout, and people in the Sutherland shire can't either. We need assurances from this government that systems will be put in place that won't leave Australians with older handsets left behind and won't leave residents in the Sutherland shire behind. We're doing the heavy lifting on population. We met our targets. We're densifying. You can't find a park anywhere around Cronulla. You can't find a park anywhere around Sutherland shire hospital. We're doing the heavy lifting. We are the unsung heroes of Sydney. We don't complain. We don't kick up a fuss but we are sick of being taken for granted. I'm sick of receiving these emails and having nothing to show for it. I'm going to fight for the people in my electorate. I'm going to fight the federal Labor government, I'm going to fight the state Labor government and I'm going to fight the Labor aligned local council to see us get the infrastructure we deserve. It starts with mobile phone towers, but it doesn't end there; we'll look to schools, we'll look to roads and we'll look to parking.

We can't just keep having endless amounts of population growth with no infrastructure to show for it. Why is it that Western Sydney gets a metro? Why is it that Western Sydney gets light rail? Why is it that Western Sydney gets school after school? Why is it getting WestConnex? Where's 'SouthConnex'? Why are we cut off from the rest of the city? There might be passports on the bridge when you get down there. We might not always like everyone coming to visit, but I'll tell you what: we're building enough houses for them. And if we're building the houses for them, we should be getting the infrastructure for them too.

There is some structural reform in this bill, and structural reform of this scale warrants comprehensive parliamentary examination before it's locked into law. We want to make sure the definitions, the enforcement mechanisms, the spectrum allocation, the pricing implications and the device compatibility all get the detailed interrogation they deserve. Most importantly, we want to see how this will be physically delivered, developed, scrutinised and put into action—so we are calling for more scrutiny on this bill. Given the government's record on 3G and triple zero, due diligence on this isn't optional; it's essential.

The coalition has a proud track record on telecommunications. We've invested in regional connectivity and backing programs that deliver practical improvements on the ground, but we realise some of these issues have existed for a long time. So let's work together bipartisanly; I offer that, and I'm willing to do that in the Sutherland shire, but I need to see a plan for how we're going to give the people of the Sutherland shire the infrastructure they deserve. They're sick of being screwed over, and I'm sick of them being screwed over. I'm sick of these complaints and emails coming into my inbox and having nothing to show for it. Well, this stops now. We've got a petition to get the Sutherland shire the infrastructure they deserve, and I won't stop fighting until we deliver that outcome.

Aaron Violi (Casey, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well done, Member for Cook, on that passionate speech—a great local member for the Sutherland shire. I said in my first speech almost four years ago—

Julian Hill (Bruce, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Citizenship, Customs and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

To quote yourself!

Aaron Violi (Casey, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

To quote myself, Member for Bruce—that 'the difference between a working phone line can be life and death'. That was in reference to my experience during the Black Saturday bushfires and also the June storms of 2021 that hit my community. My family and I lived those disasters, as so many in our community did, and we lived firsthand the experience and the vulnerability you feel when you can't call for help, when you realise that you're alone and that if something had happened to the people you love there would be no-one to come and help you. There is no greater sense of helplessness, fear and frustration that you have than when you don't have the ability to call for help. That experience I've lived, and my family has lived, is lived by hundreds of thousands of people in our community every single day all across this country.

But I've also seen the other side of the equation. Twelve months ago, just before the election—on the eve, actually, of the last election—there was a car accident in front of my house. A gentleman unfortunately had gone straight into a tree. I and a couple of neighbours were looking to help get him out of the car as it looked like it might start burning. We were lucky that my neighbour's wife was able to call the emergency services. There is no greater sound in the world, when you are trying, with no expertise and no skills, to help someone get out of a car that might come alight, than the sound of those sirens that came to help that community member and to help us. So I want to pay tribute very quickly to the Coldstream CFA, the Lilydale CFA, the local SES, Ambulance Victoria and Victoria Police, who were all there. All of our emergency services turned out to help that accident victim, and that was because we were able to call for help.

But let's imagine another scenario. It's a scenario I haven't lived but which many in Australia have. Let's imagine you're in a regional town. You might be in the great Gippsland area, which is so well represented by the member for Gippsland; I'm sure there are roads like this in Gippsland. You are driving along, and you come across an accident. You've come across a car that's hit a tree. You pull out your phone, and you go to call the emergency services. You look at your phone, and there's no reception. You have no ability to call for help for that community member. You're left with a choice. If you're fortunate, you might have two people in the car, and one person could stay with that accident victim and do the best they can with what they've got, and the other person could drive to the nearest town or farmhouse and hope that they're home and they've got a landline, or hope that they come into reception.

The sad reality in 2026 in Australia is that that's happening every day. There's a fair chance that that's a lived experience of someone today in regional Australia. That is why it is so important that we make sure that we get this legislation right. That's before we even talk about the basic standard that people all across Australia deserve to be able to call their friends, their families and their loved ones. Isolation is a significant issue. If you're at home, living in regional Australia, rural Australia or even suburban Australia and outer urban areas like my electorate of Casey, and you can't call your friends, you do feel isolated. You feel alone whether there is a disaster or you just want to say hello and catch up with someone.

The intent is right. We absolutely want to provide coverage for everyone. But, unfortunately, like so many things that this government does, the intent might be good, but the delivery has to be there. The concern I have with this legislation is not with the legislation itself—as I said, the intent is there—but the minister who has carriage of this legislation has a track record of not being able to deliver when it comes to important legislation. We saw this minister, when they were the Minister for Aged Care, fail to support the aged-care industry and aged-care residents. They needed to be reshuffled across to communications. We've seen that failure when it came to the triple zero debacle and the 3G debacle. We've seen that with the social media ban—a big announcement. We saw them fly to New York and spend over $100,000 of taxpayer money for a five- or six-minute speech to claim all the glory of the legislation. Speak to any high-school kid, though. I've got a son in year 7, and he has said to me that all his mates are on social media. I still valiantly keep him off social media. Let's hope he actually listens to his dad.

Julian Hill (Bruce, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Citizenship, Customs and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Listen to your dad.

Aaron Violi (Casey, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I know. He probably doesn't; I live in hope, Member for Bruce! The reality is that kids these days are still on social media. It's not working. So there is a track record of this minister having big announcements and complete failure on delivery.

This is too important to fail. This is about people's lives. It's about their standard of living. It's about making sure they can call their families, their friends and their loved ones. If they have an emergency, they can get the help they need. If they come across an emergency, they can get that support. So we'll continue to scrutinise the rollout of this legislation. We'll make sure it goes to a committee process. We know and we've seen this week that this government does not like scrutiny. They do not like committee processes. We will hold this government to account.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour, and the member will be granted leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed.