Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Environment and Water) | Link to this | Hansard source

I table a revised explanatory memorandum relating to three of the bills and I move:

That these bills be now read a second time.

I seek leave to have the second reading speeches incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The speech es read as follows—

NEWS JOURNALISM PAYMENTS BILL 2026

Introduction

Journalism matters.

It matters to our democracy, to the health and cohesion of our communities, and to Australians who rely on trusted reporting to understand what is happening locally, nationally and around the world.

But quality journalism does not happen on its own.

It is reliant on skilled journalists, strong newsrooms and sustainable news organisations.

In a 24-hour news cycle, people expect news to be accurate, timely and available—wherever they live.

To deliver this, Australia needs more journalists, not fewer.

Because journalists are the lifeblood of Australian news.

They tell our stories, hold governments and institutions to account and provide Australians with the information they need.

The News Bargaining Incentive is not intended to raise revenue.

Its purpose is to encourage commercial deals between digital platforms and news publishers, as was envisioned under the previous News Media and Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code.

To be clear—the government's firm preference is that platforms do deals with publishers.

News content contributes to engagement, trust and the overall value of major digital platforms.

It enriches their feeds and drives revenue. And that is why platforms should make a fair commercial contribution to sustaining it.

If they don't—they will end up paying more.

The incentive responds to the imbalance in bargaining power between large digital platforms and Australian news publishers.

That imbalance is particularly acute for smaller publishers, which do not have the same resources or commercial leverage as larger organisations.

If digital platforms decide to pay the charge instead of making commercial deals, there must be a fit-for-purpose mechanism to return that revenue to Australian journalism.

That is what this bill does.

Any revenue raised by the News Bargaining Incentive will be used to support the sustainability of news and journalism in Australia.

The bill establishes the News Journalism Payment Scheme, which will distribute any revenue raised by the News Bargaining Incentive to eligible Australian news organisations, supporting a sustainable, diverse and independent news sector.

It will use a statutory, formula-based model to provide stable, transparent and proportionate funding based on investment in public interest journalism.

Context

A high-quality and trusted journalism sector is fundamental to Australia's democracy and the way we live.

A rich and diverse media landscape keeps Australians informed, connects local communities, helps combat misinformation and disinformation, and supports social cohesion.

Local journalists report on the decisions and events that directly affect the people they serve.

They cover councils, schools, courts, businesses and neighbourhoods.

But quality journalism is costly to produce. And the economics of producing news has changed.

The commercial revenue that once supported news production is diminishing.

Advertising income has been significantly eroded by the shift to online—a market dominated by the same digital platforms that do not compensate Australian journalism.

Between 2006 and 2022, the commercial broadcasters' share of Australian advertising expenditure fell from 43 per cent to 17 per cent as advertisers moved their spending online.[]

That decline threatens Australians' access to quality public-interest journalism.

That is why the government is creating a statutory solution to support public-interest journalism and the journalists who produce it.

Key Provisions of the Bill

The News Journalism Payment Scheme will distribute any revenue raised by the News Bargaining Incentive to eligible Australian news organisations.

The Australian Communications and Media Authority administers the Register of eligible news businesses under the News Media Bargaining Code.

News businesses will need to be registered to apply for a payment under the News Journalism Payment Scheme.

There will be two payment periods following the collection of any revenue through the News Bargaining Incentive.

Payments will be allocated according to the number of journalists an organisation employs, including freelancers.

Put simply: the more journalists an organisation employs, the larger its payment will be.

Eligible roles will include journalists, photojournalists, videographers, data and visual journalists, and editors and producers involved in producing core news content.

Using journalists as the basis for payment recognises the vital work they do investigating, analysing, compiling and reporting the stories that matter to Australians.

A 20 per cent increase will apply for journalists working in regional and remote areas, journalists employed by small-to-medium news organisations, and journalists working in news organisations that serve diverse communities.

This recognises the challenges of employing staff in regional and remote Australia and the financial pressures experienced by small-to-medium publishers.

It also supports publishers serving communities that are underrepresented in Australia's media landscape.

Those communities deserve news services that understand their experiences and report on the issues that matter to them.

Payments made under the News Journalism Payment Scheme will serve a clear and valid public purpose: supporting ongoing investment in Australian news and journalism.

The bill will therefore impose obligations on payment recipients to maintain their journalists in respect of the payment received across the relevant period.

The scheme is not about providing payments without obligations.

It is about supporting journalists to remain in the jobs that are vital to the production of public interest journalism.

Additional support for small publishers and start-ups

I take this opportunity to thank the many news organisations, broadcasters, academics and other stakeholders that participated in public consultation on the News Journalism Payment Scheme.

Their feedback has informed the final design of the scheme.

One of the clearest messages from consultation was that additional support is needed for very small publishers and start-ups seeking to establish core news services online.

That need is particularly acute in areas where there is currently insufficient news coverage—often described as news deserts.

The bill therefore provides for a special allocation of five per cent of any revenue raised by the News Bargaining Incentive for a separate grants program.

That program will focus on supporting small publishers and start-ups to build their businesses and produce news for local communities.

This support matters.

Smaller publishers often operate with limited resources and face a disadvantage when dealing with the world's largest digital platforms.

Yet they can also be the organisations closest to the communities they serve.

They report on local issues that may never make national headlines and provide a voice for people who might otherwise go unheard.

Additional support for Australian Associated Press

Australian Associated Press plays a unique and vital role in Australia's media landscape. Through its wholesale news service, AAP provides its newswire service to more than 400 Australian news publishers, with more than 300 of those located in regional areas. For many news organisations, particularly those with limited resources, AAP's reporting helps supplement local coverage and ensure Australians continue to have access to trusted news.

That work delivers benefits well beyond any single publisher. AAP supports the production and distribution of quality journalism at scale, helping to strengthen the diversity, reach and resilience of the Australian news sector.

Under the Bill, AAP will receive a dedicated allocation of five per cent of any revenue raised through the News Bargaining Incentive, acknowledging the essential role it plays in supporting public interest journalism and news organisations across Australia.

Conclusion

News and journalism are critical to the proper functioning of Australia's democratic system of government, the health and cohesion of our communities, and keeping Australians informed.

Australia must continue to have a free, diverse and independent news sector.

But news is costly to make.

The government's News Media Assistance Program is already providing much-needed funding to news organisations, including by supporting the ongoing employment of thousands of journalists across Australia.

We want journalists to be able to focus on providing Australians with high-quality journalism without having to worry about the stability of their jobs.

After all, it is people who produce public-interest journalism.

We need more journalists reporting from our cities, from regional and remote Australia, and from communities that have too often been underrepresented.

This bill builds on the government's commitment to Australian jobs, quality journalism and a sustainable, diverse and independent media sector.

NEWS JOURNALISM PAYMENTS (CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS) BILL 2026

Introduction

Competition and Consumer Act 2010

Key Provisions of the Bill

NEWS MEDIA BARGAINING (ADMINISTRATION) BILL 2026

The News Media Bargaining (Administration) Bill 2026 forms part of the Government's commitment to support a strong, sustainable and diverse Australian news media sector.

At its core, this Bill is about a simple proposition: if large digital platforms benefit from Australian news, they should make a fair contribution to sustaining it.

Australian journalism matters to our democracy, informed public debate and local communities that rely on trusted reporting.

But the economics of journalism have changed. Advertising revenue that once helped fund Australian newsrooms has shifted substantially to large global digital platforms. At the same time, Australians continue to rely on news businesses to create quality news content that requires journalists, editors, photographers and producers.

That imbalance is not new. It was why the Parliament supported the News Media and Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code in 2021.

The Code was an important reform. It helped secure commercial agreements, supported investment in public interest journalism, and recognised the bargaining power imbalance between large platforms and the news organisations whose content helps inform, engage and retain users.

But the Code has a limitation. A platform can seek to avoid bargaining obligations by withdrawing or reducing the availability of news content.

That is not good enough.

Australian journalism should not depend on whether a large digital platform chooses to carry news, and platforms should not avoid contributing by simply walking away from it.

That is why the Government is acting.

This Bill establishes the administrative framework for the News Bargaining Incentive.

The purpose of the incentive is clear. We want platforms and news businesses to do commercial deals.

That is the Government's preference, the market-based outcome this legislation is designed to encourage, and what will best support a sustainable, diverse and independent Australian news sector.

The Bill applies objective criteria to identify the largest digital platforms with significant search or social media services and substantial Australian digital advertising revenue. It is targeted at those platforms with the greatest market power and the greatest capacity to contribute.

The Bill establishes a charge and offset mechanism. In-scope digital platforms will incur a liability based on their digital advertising revenue attributable to the operation of a significant search or social media services in Australia.

But platforms can reduce, or fully extinguish, that liability through eligible expenditure under commercial agreements with Australian news businesses.

In other words, platforms have a clear choice. They can do fair commercial deals that support Australian journalism. Or, if they choose not to, they will pay the charge.

This is not about raising revenue for the Government. Any revenue raised will be returned in full to the Australian news sector through the News Journalism Payment Scheme.

The incentive is deliberately focused on encouraging deals. The offset is generous, recognises commercial agreements, and provides enhanced incentives for agreements with small and medium news businesses.

That matters because media diversity matters.

This reform is not only about major media organisations. It is also about independent publishers, regional outlets and smaller newsrooms that serve local communities and add to media diversity.

The Bill encourages support to be spread across the sector, rather than concentrated among a small number of large organisations. Platforms will need eligible agreements with at least eight different news organisations to obtain the offset.

That requirement reinforces the central purpose of the scheme: more deals, with more news organisations, supporting more Australian journalism.

The Government has consulted extensively on the design of the News Bargaining Incentive. We have listened to feedback and made targeted refinements to better align the legislation with its policy objective.

Those refinements include narrowing the charge base to Australian digital advertising revenue from significant search and social media services, strengthening the incentives for commercial agreements, and providing greater support for small and medium publishers.

The result is a practical and targeted reform.

It strengthens the News Media Bargaining Code, responds to changes in digital markets, backs Australian journalism, and ensures large digital platforms cannot avoid making a fair contribution to the news content from which they derive value.

Public interest journalism is not free to produce. It takes journalists on the ground, editors, producers, photographers, newsrooms and a sustainable commercial foundation.

Australians should be able to access trusted information about their communities, economy and democracy, told through Australian eyes and with an Australian perspective.

That is what this Bill supports.

The Government wants large digital platforms to enter into and maintain fair commercial agreements with Australian news businesses.

Where they do, they can reduce their liability. Where they do not, they will pay a charge that goes back to supporting Australian journalism.

That is fair. That is practical. And it is the right thing to do for the long-term sustainability and diversity of Australia's news media sector.

Full details of the measure are contained in the Explanatory Memorandum.

NEWS MEDIA BARGAINING CHARGE BILL 2026

This Bill accompanies the News Media Bargaining (Administration) Bill to impose the charge and establish the rate of charge that underpins the News Bargaining Incentive framework.

The charge is set at 2.75 per cent of Australian digital advertising revenue generated from significant search and social media services operated in Australia.

The charge works with the offset mechanism in the Administration Bill, to create a clear incentive for commercial agreements to be made by digital platforms to support a strong and diverse Australian news ecosystem.

Full details of the measure are contained in the Explanatory Memorandum.

TREASURY LAWS AMENDMENT (NEWS MEDIA BARGAINING) (CONSEQUENTIAL) BILL 2026

This Bill accompanies the News Media Bargaining (Administration) Bill to make a range of consequential amendments necessary to support the operation of the News Bargaining Incentive.

These amendments provide the supporting aspects of the framework required for administration, collection and enforcement—ensuring that there is appropriate interaction with existing tax laws.

They are an important component needed to effectively deliver the policy objective to support the sustainability and diversity of Australia's news media sector.

Full details of the measure are contained in the Explanatory Memorandum.

Sarah Henderson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Communications and Digital Safety) | Link to this | Hansard source

It's my pleasure to rise and speak on the news media bargaining incentive package of bills. I start by saying that the coalition supports a strong, sustainable and independent Australian news media sector. Quality journalism, Australian journalism, journalists telling Australian stories—that is one of the foundations of our democracy. It informs public debate. It holds governments and institutions to account. It gives voice to communities which might otherwise go unheard, and it ensures Australians have access to accurate, reliable and diverse sources of information. Of course, this is particularly important in regional Australia, where the local newspaper, radio station or digital outlet may be the only local source of detailed reporting on issues which matter to those communities.

This package of bills before the parliament establishes the news media bargaining incentive scheme, following the Albanese Labor government's decision to walk away from the coalition's world-first news media bargaining code. As we consider these bills today, it's very important to be cognisant of the work of the coalition in holding the digital platforms to account—ensuring that they could not publish Australian news content on their platforms without providing appropriate compensation. It was the coalition that first recognised this growing imbalance between the global digital platforms and Australian news publishers. It was the coalition which commissioned the ACCC to investigate the problem and to support our work to come up with a solution. When a voluntary scheme was first proposed in 2019 and the digital platforms did not cooperate, this led to the news media bargaining code. That was incredibly important in bringing Meta and Google to the table to conclude more than 30 commercial agreements reportedly worth around $250 million annually to Australian news organisations. But I have to make this very important point. In April 2024, Meta—pretty disgracefully, I might add—walked away from the news media bargaining code. It abandoned its obligations, in breach of the law. It threatened to take news off its digital platforms: Facebook and Meta.

This could have been resolved. This could have been resolved in a number of ways. The code could have been amended, and this was very much the view of former ACCC chair Rod Sims. It could have been amended by way of a deeming provision. Irrespective of whether or not an applicable or relevant digital platform published news, the code could have been amended to deem that the digital platform indeed was publishing news, to stop them playing games, pulling tricks and compromising our Australian media sector. Unfortunately, the government decided not to try and bring forward sensible amendments to the code in light of Meta's reprehensible conduct.

That was in April 2024. It's now August 2026. It's taken more than two years for this to be resolved. In those two-plus years, the Australian news media sector has really suffered because Meta walked away and abandoned its responsibilities. It breached the law. Of course, the government did nothing. So, in the case of Meta, these deals were abandoned. Then, in the case of Google—Google delivered around 70 per cent of the total number of commercial deals under the news media bargaining code—those deals continued on to a large degree, but they were allowed to wilt on the vine. That's not good enough.

If there is an issue, Australian media is so important to our democracy and to our rule of law. The viability of our Australian media organisations, our newsrooms and our journalists is critical. They are under increasing pressure as more and more advertising dollars are drained from Australian media onto digital platforms. It is deeply regrettable that it has taken so long for these bills to come into the parliament. There was so much mucking around. I don't know what the communications minister and the Assistant Treasurer were doing for more than two years, but I will say one thing: the news media organisations have paid a very heavy price. They have lost very substantial amounts of revenue, and that is simply not good enough.

We now have this package of bills: the news bargaining incentive scheme. This delivers a number of different components. I'm very pleased to say that, after a lot of advocacy from the coalition, digital platforms will face a 2.75 per cent charge based on Australian digital advertising revenue if they avoid making direct commercial agreements with Australian news media organisations. That was 2.5 per cent, and, as the Assistant Treasurer, Mr Mulino, explained, that would deliver about $200 million to $250 million in total revenue, by way of those commercial agreements, to the Australian media sector. That's a big concern because, although they're commercial and confidential, we know these deals were at least $250 million back in 2021. How could the government deliver a scheme that would take Australian news media organisations backwards?

Treasury estimated that the total amount to be captured would be between $200 million and $250 million. More than $250 million per annum was captured back in 2021. From our point of view, that was unacceptable, and there was quite a bit of cage rattling behind the scenes in relation to increasing the charge. I am pleased that an amendment went through the House yesterday, which was agreed to by the coalition, and that charge is now 2.75 per cent.

Platforms must complete at least eight commercial deals to meet the scheme's conditions and offset liabilities that would otherwise apply. I think that's been a welcome change. I do note the very positive response from the likes of Country Press Australia, which represents many small rural and regional media organisations. They were concerned about the original proposal for only four media organisations to be included in this scheme. This is an important change. When the exposure draft was first released, there was a lot of criticism, and it just again goes to show that the government did not do its homework on the consultation. The fact that it would seek to cut out bodies such as Country Press Australia, which represents so many important and vital small rural and regional media organisations and the like, was pretty regrettable. That now, of course, means that a much larger number of news organisations are potentially eligible to enter into a deal with the digital platforms.

The bills have also reinstated the pre-deal cap of 25 per cent, meaning no single publisher deal can offset more than 25 per cent of the platform's total levy obligation. If any digital platform decides to do a dirty trick, like Meta did in April 2024, they will be required to pay a charge, the charge of 2.75 per cent, which cannot be offset, so they will be required to pay more money—unless we see more fun and games, and I'm not confident that won't happen. Those funds that are collected will be distributed in accordance with a statutory formula based on the number of editorial staff at a news organisation. We would like to see the definition of editorial staff expanded to include those who primarily fulfil the roles of providing commentary or opinion because, often at news organisations, very senior journalists take on the role of opinion writers as well as reporting straight news. So we would certainly like to see that definition changed. As part of this distribution scheme, five per cent will be offset for Australian Associated Press and five per cent for small publishers by way of grants. I think the other pleasing part of the scheme is that, apart from Google and Meta—and, of course, Meta has both Instagram and Facebook—we expect that, given the threshold that applies, which is a minimum of $250 million, TikTok will be captured as will Microsoft's LinkedIn because professional social media platforms are now also captured.

It's been a pretty tawdry journey to get to this point. It's been very regrettable that these bills have taken so long to be resolved. Unfortunately, even when the exposure draft was released, it did not cut the mustard. That has now been corrected not just in the bills that came into the parliament. Again, more work was required to lift the charge, and that amendment went through the House yesterday, as I mentioned.

I do want to note we are concerned about the distribution of grants to media organisations. We raised concerns because of similar media grants programs, particularly those awarded by the Department of Home Affairs. We uncovered that a number of those grants had gone to media organisations which platformed extremists and undermined social cohesion. So I am very concerned about the track record of the government. There's also concern about journalism grants under other funding programs. The Journalism Assistance Fund made grants available to advertising agencies, events companies and, frankly, media organisations that were not in the business of news and public interest journalism. There was a lot of rubbery due diligence done by the government in relation to some of these grants. There was also a very specific decision to exclude News Corporation and News24. I think that was disappointing because they also have many important newspapers and other media outlets right across this country, so that was most regrettable. So, when it comes to trusting this government to deliver grant funding with integrity and appropriate due diligence, I certainly don't have a high degree of confidence. I would trust and hope that, in relation to any other media grants that might be distributed through this scheme, the appropriate due diligence will be completed.

Let me just reiterate that the coalition remains committed to ensuring those who derive significant value from Australian news contribute fairly to its production. We're not going to let big tech off the hook. We're simply not going to do that. That is what drove the coalition's world-first news media bargaining code. We were sick of seeing the digital platforms ripping off the news content, the hard work of Australian journalists and producers and subeditors and photographers and everyone else who worked so hard to deliver Australians their news.

This is an important step forward in remedying the very significant vacuum over the last two years. We support funding for journalism, particularly regional journalism, which is vital for our democracy. We support a framework which encourages genuine commercial agreements rather than just dependence on government funding mechanisms. We are strongly committed to supporting Australian journalism and the importance of Australian stories being told by an Australian media sector, and I do hope that this package of bills does deliver what it's intended to do.

Charlotte Walker (SA, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

I think most Australians can agree that having good journalists around is very useful. They sit through council meetings most of us would struggle to get through. They spend days digging through documents. They turn up to court. They talk to people, check claims and work out what's happening. They come into this building and ask politicians questions that we may or may not be thrilled to answer. That is their job, and our democracy is much better for it.

The problem is that doing all of that costs money, and the way journalism has traditionally paid for itself has changed a lot over the last 15 years. Advertising used to provide a huge amount of the revenue that kept newspapers and newsrooms going. Over the past couple of decades, more and more of that advertising has moved online, and a very large share of it now goes to a small number of global tech companies. At the same time, Australian news organisations have been trying to work out how to keep paying reporters, especially in smaller and regional newsrooms, where the margins can already be pretty tight. This legislation is about dealing with this reality. If large digital platforms are operating in Australia, making substantial advertising revenue here and benefiting from an online environment where Australian journalism is shared, searched for and consumed, we think it's fair that they contribute to keeping that journalism going.

Australia has actually been working on this for a while. The news media bargaining code was introduced in 2021 and was genuinely world leading at the time. It encouraged digital platforms to reach commercial agreements with Australian news publishers and brought a significant amount of money back into Australian journalism. But we've also had five years to see where that system could be improved. One of the biggest problems became pretty obvious when Meta announced that it would not renew its commercial agreements with Australian news companies, which were estimated to be worth around $70 million a year. Under the existing arrangements, platforms also have the option of responding to regulation by removing news from their services altogether. We saw Meta do that briefly in Australia in 2021, and we have since seen it happen in Canada. That gives a company with enormous market power a pretty handy bargaining tool. If the rules become inconvenient, it can threaten to stop carrying news.

The news bargaining incentive has been designed so that strategy no longer gets them out of paying their fair share. The new incentive will apply to major social media and search platforms with significant Australian audiences and more than $250 million in relevant Australian digital advertising revenue. For platforms that meet these thresholds, there will be an equal charge to 2.5 per cent of that relevant advertising revenue. But we would much rather see that money going directly into commercial agreements with Australian news businesses. That is how the scheme has been designed. If a platform enters eligible commercial agreements with Australians news organisations, that spending can be used to offset the charge. The standard offset is 150 per cent, rising to 200 per cent for agreements with small and medium news businesses. So there is a pretty strong incentive to sit down with Australian publishers and reach a deal.

There are also rules to make sure those deals are spread across the media sector. A platform needs agreements with at least eight eligible news organisations to get the offset, and no single agreement can account for more than 25 per cent of its total liability. This is important because Aussie journalism is much bigger than just the handful of big mastheads everyone knows. Some of the most important journalism in this country happens in small newsrooms. It's the journalist covering their local council every week and knowing when something does not quite add up, or a journo covering a bushfire, a local hospital, a school closure or a development proposal. It is a reporter who knows the community they're writing about and knows who to call when something happens.

When those jobs disappear, we feel the difference. There are communities around Australia that have already seen local newspapers close or shrink to a fraction of what they once were. Sometimes there is nobody left whose job is to turn up to the council meeting, follow a local issue for six months or ask why a decision was made. Those stories are probably never going to trend nationally, but they still matter a lot to the people who live there. That is why this scheme gives platforms an extra incentive to make agreements with small and medium publishers rather than concentrate all of their spending on the biggest media companies.

The same thinking carries through to what happens if a platform decides to pay the charge. Every dollar connected to the news bargaining incentive will go back into the Australian news industry through the News Journalism Payment Scheme and grants. I really like that the payment scheme has been built around the people actually producing journalism. Payments will be linked to the number of journalists an organisation employs, including freelancers. The definition also reflects what a modern newsroom looks like. It covers journalists, photojournalists, data and visual journalists, editors and producers directly involved in producing core news content, because journalism has changed. A reporter today might be writing an article, recording an interview, filming something for social media, working with data or producing a podcast. Plenty of excellent journalists freelance across organisations. This legislation recognises that.

There will also be a 20 per cent uplift for journalists employed by small and medium news organisations, journalists working in regional and remote Australia, and organisations serving diverse communities, including First Nations and culturally diverse communities. Those organisations often face higher costs and smaller potential audiences, but the work they do is incredibly important. If you live in a regional town, you should be able to find out what your local council is doing. If you're part of a community that rarely sees itself reflected in mainstream coverage, there should be room in our media landscape for journalism made by and for that community. If we want those services to exist, there have to be journalists there to produce them. That is also why organisations receiving payments will have to maintain their editorial capacity over the payment period. The scheme is designed to keep journalists working.

There is separate support for really small publishers and startups as well. Five per cent of revenue raised through the incentive will go towards grants for small publishers and new organisations trying to build local news services. That is a great part of the package because we should be thinking about how new journalism grows as well as how existing organisations survive.

There are parts of Australia now being described as news deserts, where local coverage has become extremely limited or disappeared altogether. And, when you think about what that means in practice, it is pretty concerning. If there are no local journalists, who is regularly sitting in the council chamber? Who is following up when a government project is delayed? Who is covering the local court? Who knows enough about a story to realise that the explanation they are being given does not quite stack up. Social media can tell you that people in town are angry about something. A local journalist can actually find out why.

The legislation also provides a dedicated support for the Australian Associated Press, with five per cent of revenue raised going towards the AAP. AAP is one of those organisations that most Australians probably do not think about very often, even though they come across its work constantly. Its newswire provides content to more than 400 Australian publishers, including more than 300 in regional areas. It does a huge amount of the basic reporting that keeps the wider Australian media system functioning, and recognising that role makes sense.

The government has also made sure that good-faith commercial agreements entered into since 1 January 2025 can count towards offsets under the new system. The policy was announced in December 2024, so companies that responded to the announcement and reached agreement should not be disadvantaged for getting on with it.

Meta has called the policy a digital services tax. Industry groups representing major US tech companies have made similar arguments. I'm pretty sure there has never been a company in history, when told they have a new financial obligation, that has said: 'Perfect! That is just what we were asking for!' They can make their case, but we also have to look at what has happened to the Australian media market.

The advertising market has changed dramatically. Global platforms now capture a huge amount of the digital advertising revenue generated in Australia while news organisations are trying to fund the expensive work involved in producing original journalism. The government has come up with a system that encourages those platforms to negotiate commercial agreements and gives extra incentives for deals with smaller publishers. This is very reasonable and, for people my age and younger, the whole debate is happening alongside another massive change in the way we consume the news. A lot of young Australians are not buying a newspaper every morning or sitting down to watch the six o'clock news. We see a headline on Instagram; someone sends us a story in a group chat; we hear something on a podcast and we google it; we see a TikTok clip and then maybe search for the full interview. Sometimes the first hint that a major world event has happened is a meme about it or the Betoota Advocate making a joke.

There are some genuinely great things about that. We have access to more information and more voices than previous generations could have imagined. But we also have access to a crazy amount of false information. Someone can make a very confident 60-second video about an issue they learnt about that morning and by lunch it has a million views. False information moves incredibly quickly. AI-generated material is becoming easier to produce. People are seeing real reporting mixed into the same feeds as advertising, opinion, conspiracy theories and whatever their algorithm has decided will keep them scrolling for another 20 minutes. In that environment, having people whose actual job is to check things becomes really important. Journalists make phone calls. They speak to the other person involved. They check documents. They ask for evidence. They have editors who ask whether the story stacks up. They can be held accountable when they get something wrong. All of that takes time and money. We cannot spend years worrying about misinformation and declining trust in institutions while ignoring whether the people producing reliable information can afford to keep doing it.

There is also a pretty direct democratic consequence when newsrooms shrink. A journalist who loses their job does not just disappear from a payroll spreadsheet. There are stories that would have been covered that now will never be written. There are questions that will not be asked. There are meetings nobody will attend. There are discussions that will receive less scrutiny. And there are communities that will know less about what is happening around them. Governments should care about that, even when journalism is inconvenient for us—especially when it's inconvenient for us. I'm sure every politician in this building has had the experience of seeing a journalist walking over, and suddenly remembering we have a very important meeting somewhere in the opposite direction. But that is part of the job. We are supposed to be questioned.

Governments are supposed to have their decisions scrutinised. Businesses should be scrutinised too, along with courts, councils, institutions and everyone else who exercises power in this country. For that to happen, Australia needs journalists who have the time and resources to do the work properly. Australia will be better for it. I commend the bill to the Senate.

Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to contribute to this debate today. I understand that this legislation will pass this morning. I think we need to be really clear about the state of media not just in Australia but around the world. Things have changed rapidly in the last few years. As big tech, social media companies and big AI are flooding the zone and using not just the work of others but the spread of mis- and disinformation as part of their currency, we've got to be really serious about what we do to ensure public interest journalism survives, thrives and is defended.

There are some in this place who have little regard for the work of journalists. There are some in this place who would like to pick and choose which journalists and which media companies show up to their press conferences. Those people are the same people who are trying to tear our democratic institutions down. When you look around the world, Australia is not unique in this. The rise of far-right politics is a direct threat to democracy. One of the biggest threats to democracy, and how you undermine it, is the undermining of the role, the job and the legitimacy of journalism. In order for democracy to be strong, to be trusted and to have authority to deliver what it should—which is for the people who decide, the citizens, the voters, the community—we need a strong public interest journalism sector.

It is not a coincidence that the same right-wing forces that wish to tear down our democratic institutions are also the same people who want to lock journalists out of their press conferences. It is also not a coincidence that these very same politicians also want to roll out the red carpet for big tech and the billionaires who run AI. They don't want any regulation on big tech. They want to hand Australian land over to people like Elon Musk and they want to be able to pick and choose which journalists they'll take questions from.

The main culprit that wants to tear down journalism and democracy in this country is of course Senator Pauline Hanson and One Nation, and why is that? It's because they don't like people asking the tough questions. They don't want to be held to account for their lunatic policies that do more to protect the interests of big tech and billionaires than to help people who are struggling right now. When Pauline Hanson stood at the National Press Club and outlined her suite of policies, from crazy to bad, who did she attack? She didn't just attack migrants; although, she had a good swing at them. She attacked women. She attacked young people. And she attacked journalists because she doesn't like them asking the tough questions.

Fast forward a few weeks later and One Nation is locking journalists and media companies out of press conferences. This is authoritarian stuff happening on our watch from people within this parliament, which is a democratic institution that only gets to exist because of the belief that we will be held to account, not just by the public square but by those that are skilled and trained and whose job it is to hold us to account. These bills goes some way to giving media and journalists in this country a fair crack at sustainability in a world where big tech wants to hoover everything up, make massive profits and shut out the real humans doing the real work and who ask the real tough questions. But it's not a silver bullet.

If we don't defend public interest journalism, if we don't defend our public broadcasters and if we don't defend the freedom of the press to come to press conferences—whoever is hosting them—ask questions and expect that they'll be answered, then we are not doing our job. I think it is absolutely galling that somebody can be elected, come into this place, earn hundreds of thousands of dollars on the taxpayer's dime and then think they should be able to pick and choose who holds them accountable. It's arrogant, it's dangerous and it's cowardly. There's a reason that Pauline Hanson and One Nation locked journalists out of their press conferences. It's because they're running scared.

The people of Victoria deserve to know what One Nation will do if they're elected. Guess what news the majority of people who live in rural and regional Victoria and the rest of the country rely on for their public interest journalism? They rely on the ABC, and of course Pauline Hanson wants to gut them. She doesn't just want to shut them out of her press conference but wants to cut them. Senator Pauline Hanson and One Nation are so scared that people will know what they really want to do that they think they can ban journalists whenever they like. It is a bad, slippery slope. Public interest journalism—the pesky questions from journalists—is a fundamental foundation to our democracy, and it must be defended.

These bills are not perfect. There are elements that I think could have gone in a way that supported more independent and smaller players. But I've been pleased to help push the government to increase access for smaller players and independent players to these funds. The other problem we have in Australia is a very concentrated media landscape. The big players—News Corp, Nine, Seven West—dominate not just our television screens but the written word, the press and our radio waves. We need to find better and more important ways to support new players and media diversity in this country. I'll be keeping a very, very close eye on how this scheme rolls out.

I'm disappointed that the government has failed to put on the table a mechanism for forcing AI and big tech, who are using AI technology to hoover up the content of journalists and news organisations for their own profits—they're not paying a cent. That is not covered in these bills. AI is not tackled in this piece of legislation, and it should have been. The government is now on notice because it's not just social media companies that are taking the work of journalists, flogging it off on their own platforms and not paying a cent; AI is doing it every day. We need a mechanism to force the big-tech companies to pay Australian journalists and creators for the work that they are stealing. Big tech has become so humongous. These big-tech companies, these big AI companies, have become so humongous that it's near impossible for an Australian media company to have a fair go in any negotiation—and that is only going to continue to get worse. The Australian government has to do something about that quick smart. These companies are mostly US companies. Look at the trust deficit in the United States right now amongst their public—the trust deficit in politics, media and news. It is rock bottom. We cannot afford to allow that to happen here—it already is, arguably, and we have to stop continuing down that US path.

I urge the government: don't sit on your hands waiting for some silver bullet. You're going to have to do the hard work. It's taken years for the government to put this on the table, and it's cost journalists jobs in Australia already. If you roll over for the big AI companies, it's going to be very, very hard to get things back on track. I know the government is currently trying to work through those issues, but I am fearful that you're not strong enough to stand up to big AI. I am fearful of that. I don't think you've got the guts, but I want to be proven wrong. I want to see this government work with this parliament to stand up to AI and force them to pay for the work that they are stealing.

If we don't have public interest journalism being used, shared and distributed, then we end up with politics and media flooded with lies and rubbish, AI slop, misinformation and disinformation. Who benefits from that? The very people who sit in this corner, who want to tear democracy down. It will cost us all. It's not just about the jobs of journalists. It will cost us the strength of democracy. You've got to stand up to AI, and you've got to stand up to the right wing who sit in this very corner, in this chamber, who are doing the bidding for big tech, for the big billionaires and for themselves. They are doing nothing about helping Australians.

I move:

At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate:

(a) acknowledges that the biggest gap in this legislation is that it neglects to address the artificial intelligence platforms that are rapidly becoming the biggest tech companies in the world;

(b) notes that artificial intelligence companies take the work of Australian journalists, news organisations and content creators to feed into their large language models without paying rights-holders for it; and

(c) calls on the Government to urgently consult on pathways to ensure artificial intelligence companies are also forced to pay for the journalistic work that they take and use".

Kerrynne Liddle (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Health and Aged Care) | Link to this | Hansard source

The coalition is proud to support a strong, sustainable and independent Australian news media sector. It's important that a strong, independent, sustainable media holds government and institutions to account, gives communities voice and gives access to accurate and diverse sources of information. That's especially important in regional communities.

Media has been under attack for years. As a former professionally trained working journalist, along with my colleague Senator Henderson, I've seen that change firsthand: the sustained job cuts and the threat posed by AI and big tech. Niche media and public interest journalism are important because at the end of the communication line are the audiences—Australians—who rely on that information, and they mustn't be shortchanged.

Quality journalism is the backbone of an informed, connected Australia, and nowhere is that more true than in regional and remote communities. Local newsrooms cover everything that national outlets overlook, from local meetings to court cases and community events. In doing so, they keep local democracy accountable and communities connected. They cover the stories that are important to the people in those local communities. It is local media that Australians trust most and rely on for potentially life-saving information during disasters, floods, cyclones, fires or local emergencies, because the coverage comes from people who know the area. It is local media that understands what residents actually need to know, and they have the bandwidth to provide that critical information. As newsroom capacity across the country continues to shrink, with dozens of communities now classified as 'news deserts', we must ensure digital platforms contribute fairly to the journalism they profit from, helping sustain the regional and independent outlets that so many in Australia depend on.

But we are here today because the Albanese government abandoned the coalition's news media bargaining code unnecessarily, and it has taken years to get here. That is on Labor. These bills create a new news media bargaining incentive following the Albanese government's decision to abandon the coalition's news media bargaining code.

The coalition laid the groundwork for this original framework. In 2019, the coalition asked the ACCC to tackle the growing imbalance between global digital platforms and Australian news publishers who were having their content used without being paid as they should have been. When voluntary negotiations failed, the coalition delivered the world-leading news media bargaining code in 2021. The code recognised a simple reality: Google and Meta had become unavoidable gatekeepers between publishers and their audiences. The coalition's code delivered more than 30 commercial agreements, reportedly worth around $250 million to Australian news organisations. The problem was never that the code failed. The problem was that the government failed to use it and failed to monitor it. When Meta walked away from the negotiating table in April 2024, Labor chose to dismantle the framework rather than amending the existing code for changing circumstances. It took the government more than two years to resolve the impasse, and news media organisations and journalism, meanwhile, paid a heavy price. The government sat on its hands for far too long. There was no urgency from Labor. When it did act, what Labor did was change for change's sake. We know they're good at that: duplication of effort, wasting taxpayers' money and looking like they're actually doing something when in reality they've done very little—lots of effort, lots of money, missing on the big stuff like AI and big tech, and not much to show for the money or the effort. And, while that has gone on, those outside of Canberra are impacted, and not in a good way. If you ever wondered why Australia now has a $1 trillion debt, look no further than this Labor government and how it does its work.

These bills establish the framework for the news bargaining incentive scheme and the associated news journalists payment scheme. I'll mention just a few of the key features. There's a levy that is a 2.75 per cent charge if the users avoid making direct commercial agreements with Australian news media organisations and reinstatement of a pre-deal offset cap of 25 per cent, meaning no single publisher deal can offset more than 25 per cent of a platform's total levy obligation. On fund distribution, any charges collected where commercial deals aren't made are redistributed in full to support Australian journalism under a statutory formula tied to journalist numbers, with five per cent set aside for grants to small publishers and five per cent for the Australian Associated Press. The scheme applies to major digital platforms earning $250 million or more per year—currently, Google, Meta, Instagram, Facebook, TikTok and Microsoft's LinkedIn. Professional networking platforms like LinkedIn are now captured. A problem, though, that should have been obvious is that AI platforms are excluded. Labor is asleep at the wheel on AI and its impacts and implications—on everything.

The scheme depends on accurately calculating Australian digital advertising revenue. If revenue is understated, liabilities are understated and support for Australian journalism is diminished in turn. The Australian Taxation Office has the powers needed to verify revenue claims and prevent avoidance. Big techs must be held accountable, and that starts with properly measuring their revenue so Australian journalism is protected for generations to come.

The coalition remains committed to ensuring that those who derive significant value from Australian news contribute fairly to its production. We support sustainable funding for journalism, particularly for regional journalism, which is vital to our democracy, and a framework that encourages genuine commercial agreements rather than depending on government funding mechanisms. While we did not back the government's original proposal, we are pleased the coalition's work in rattling the cage has delivered a strengthened news incentive scheme with an increased charge of 2.75 per cent. The objective of these bills is clear: a strong, diverse and independent Australian media sector that can continue to serve Australians for generations to come.

Tammy Tyrrell (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

Journalism is an essential pillar of Australian democracy, helping to strengthen social cohesion and uphold democratic accountability. But quality journalism is costly to produce. While the commercial revenue that has traditionally supported news production has declined, digital advertising has shifted to a small number of global platforms like Facebook and Google. These global players now collect massive digital advertising revenue while many Aussie news businesses remain under financial pressure. That just isn't right, and it isn't fair. Without action, Australians risk losing local and regional news services, reducing media diversity, public-interest journalism and democratic accountability. Without media diversity and public-interest journalism, our democracy grinds to a halt and people can't easily find news reporting based on facts without plugging an agenda. We've seen it happen overseas. Australians can't afford to only get their news from shock jock, uninformed YouTubers instead of qualified rational journalists. That's a recipe for disaster, a disaster for our critical thinking skills, for us as individuals and for us as a democratic country.

So how do we fix the problem? We have to fix the bargaining imbalance between platforms and Australian news businesses. The News Journalism Payments Bill 2026 and related bills tackle that bargaining imbalance through a carrot-and-stick model. These bills finally crack down on the platforms and push them into doing the right thing—making commercial agreements with Australian news publishers. This means platforms like Facebook pay Aussie news publishers in return for making money off their content. It seems pretty fair, I reckon.

Essentially, digital platforms like Facebook will be charged 2.75 per cent of their digital advertising revenue attributable to Australia, but platforms can reduce this charge and offset it through eligible commercial agreements with Australian news businesses. In other words, either they do the right thing and make deals or they have to pay up. If platforms make money from Australian news, they should help sustain it either by investing directly through commercial agreements or by paying the incentive charge. These agreements are expected to deliver around $225 million to $275 million each year to support public-interest journalism and Australians' access to quality news and local reporting. Any revenue collected through this incentive charge will be returned in full to the Australian news industry, and this will help sustain a diverse news ecosystem and ensure Australians continue to have access to quality news and local reporting.

Payments to the news sector will be allocated based on the number of journalists an organisation employees, recognising that the more journalists employed, the greater the investment in public-interest journalism. But what I love about this bill is that it's also designed to help the small publishers that don't have many journos employed yet. Five per cent of the revenue will be dedicated to a separate grants program focused on supporting small publishers and start-ups to grow their businesses and produce news for local communities. It's designed to help grow our news sector so that it's more diverse.

I've spoken with many amazing organisations over the years who have pushed for changes like this—organisations like LINA. I also want to call out and celebrate that a 20 per cent uplift will apply for journalists employed by small and medium news organisations in regional and remote Australia. It'll also apply to news organisations serving diverse communities, including First Nations and culturally and linguistically diverse communities. This recognises how hard it is to employ journalists in regional and remote Australia and the financial pressures facing smaller and community focused publishers. It is a massive win for all our journalists and news organisations down in Tassie.

I also want to recognise that these bills are the result of a heap of work over a number of years. Public consultation occurred back in 2025 and on the exposure draft legislation earlier this year. I want to call out the amazing work of the Minister for Communications, Anika Wells, and Assistant Treasurer, Dan Mulino. I also want to call out both of their respective departments and the public servants who helped navigate the complex beast and their persistence over many years to make it happen. These bills are a really good news story, helping the Australian journalism sector and our broader democracy whilst holding the international digital platforms to account.

To the digital platforms I say do the right thing and enter into commercial deals with our Aussie news publishers, and to my fellow senators I say support the bill, support commercial investment in Australian journalism and help a secure, sustainable, diverse and independent news media industry for the future.

Alex Antic (SA, Liberal Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak against the News Media Bargaining Charge Bill and the consequential amendments. This is not the first time. We've been here before. In 2021, the news media bargaining code promised to rebalance the relationship between platforms and publishers and that it would sustain journalism across the country. What actually happened? The money went to the three or four biggest incumbents already dominating the market. The political establishment in this building loves the mainstream media. Whether you're from the left or you're from the right, there's a news outlet for you. What they hate are the independent platforms and podcasters because they owe nothing to no-one, as they say. This should tell everyone in this building what they need to know about this bill.

This is just a subsidy dressed up as a bargaining mechanism. There's no requirement for a single dollar to be pushed back towards public interest journalism. There's no transparency mechanism. There's no public interest test on spending. As I said, the money flows to the big incumbents not the struggling local small outfits. Smaller publishers receive fragments. Some receive nothing at all. There's no requirement that the money goes towards actual journalism. In fact, the inclination is that it just tips into general revenue where it could go for shareholder returns or executive largesse.

This also assumes that the legacy media is inherently more valuable than it demonstrably is. It's absolutely laughable to suggest that the legacy media retains some sort of unique, irreplaceable democratic value that justifies government intervention on its behalf. It's just comical to suggest that. The assumption that the legacy media provides a superior democratic value is therefore highly contestable, and the internet and the digitisation of the market have diversified the public debate, breaking the monopoly on the debate which was previously held by the old world media, leading to the emergence of new dedicated influencers and podcasters.

This bill is really nothing more than a legislative attempt to put that monopoly back together. Government should be encouraging innovation and ensuring that digital markets remain competitive based on merit rather than engineered bailouts. It rewards decline rather than adaptation. The scheme was triggered specifically because platforms concluded news content wasn't commercially worth carrying. There's no opt out for hosting less news, because the levy applies whether the news appears on the platform or not. This is nothing more than insulating an industry from a market signal that it should have responded to. This is protecting incumbent power not journalism, and the policy fits a pattern of government tendency to protect existing power structures. It's a rhetorical nod to reform while structurally protecting incumbent power, framed as being tough on big tech, who's actually preserving the incumbents's position.

I won't be supporting these bills. I ask that other colleagues also look past the rhetoric and ask the question that matters, which is who's actually getting the money and why are we protecting an industry that is demonstrably withering on the vine.

Josh Dolega (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

Every day, Australian journalists do the hard work of finding facts, testing claims and telling the stories that matter. Reporters knock on doors, sit through council meetings, attend court hearings and spend weeks or months investigating issues that impact our local communities. They even sit in this place and have the hard job of making sense of what's happening and reporting back to their audiences through articles, live crosses and live blogs. Editors check the facts and photographs, and camera operators capture the moments that help us understand what's happening around us.

This work is not free. Good journalism takes skill. It takes time and resources. It requires newsrooms willing to pursue the truth, to ask difficult questions and to stand behind their reporting. While the story can appear on a social media feed in seconds, the work behind it often takes days or weeks and sometimes months. The Albanese Labor government recognises that a healthy democracy depends on that work. Australians need reliable information so they can make informed decisions, hold governments to account and understand the issues impacting their lives. Strong journalism helps strengthen our communities, shine a light on wrongdoing and provide a voice to people who might otherwise go unheard.

The news media bargaining incentive bills incentivise commercial agreements between digital platforms and Australian news businesses, with platforms able to reduce their liability through eligible deals rather than pay the charge. We've introduced this because we believe Australians deserve access to news that is independent, diverse and locally produced.

Debate interrupted.