Parliamentary Updates

25 November 2025

This bill ensures that streaming services contribute fairly to the Australian screen sector, supporting our stories and our creative workforce. I start by thanking the minister and the government for their engagement and for acting on this longstanding commitment to protect the screen industry. I appreciate the government's engagement on the bill and willingness to discuss concerns that have been raised by local constituents, members of the industries and members of the screen industry as well as streamers. I've met with a number of streamers; I have Stan located in my electorate, and I have met with a number of others.

We know the sector requires investments across culturally significant types, including drama, children, documentary, arts or education content. These different types of content help to define Australia's identity. They tell our stories, reflect our lived experience and create shared cultural touchstones. We know drama gives us stories that last, whether that's Mystery Road, The Newsreader, Total Control, Love My Way or Black Snow. These are shows that Australians gather around and remember for decades to come.

Despite quotas being placed for commercial broadcasters, investment in drama, documentary and children's content has been falling significantly. Children make up almost 20 per cent of the population. They require specific content that reflects their world, one that is age-appropriate, educational and distinctly Australian. It's critical for their early education and social development and for building a sense of belonging. Yet the children's sector has been amongst the hardest hit by declining investment.

The amendment I've circulated seeks to amend the objects to make very clear the intent, which I understand has been indicated by the government, that the investment and this requirement on streamers be across all types of content, from drama to documentary to children's content. It amends the objects clause with a new part 8C of the bill, to clarify the intention of the bill to ensure that streaming services contribute to the development, production and dissemination of Australian stories by making balanced genre investments across all types mandated in the bill, including drama, children's programming, documentary, arts programming and educational content.

This amendment would embed the bill's purpose explicitly into the legislation and would ensure that ACMA's oversight and compliance align with the overall intention of the bill. This is significant, given the broad discretion in the bill for ACMA to make the rules. ACMA's oversight needs to align with parliament's clear expectation that investment be balanced across all culturally significant genres and that Australian stories remain central to our screen environment.

The bill is an important step to guaranteeing Australian stories and voices on our screens. It recognises that investment in a broad range of culturally significant areas is important for the strength of our national identity. However, we need to safeguard that intent. The framework must be implemented with clarity, accountability and ambition. We can't afford to get this wrong. I've heard from the minister that there will be a review period and that, in four years time, we will assess whether spending has been balanced across all types of content. But, when the screen industry employs over 60,000 Australians, drives a huge amount around creative export and shapes how we Australians see ourselves in our place and in the world—at a time when investment is so critical in these areas and has been falling so dramatically—this amendment just seeks to make sure that it is clear around the intention that the investment should be across all types of content.

We know the stories matter. They deserve to be told, to be seen and to be supported by a system that values their contribution to our economy, our identity and our shared future. And, whilst I know that speeches can be meaningful and explanatory memoranda are meaningful in assisting ACMA in assessing—especially in four years time, when the review occurs—I think it is very important to give a very clear direction to streamers as to the objects and the intention of the government in this legislation: wanting there to be investment across all sectors. We can't just assume it will be done. By making it explicit in the objects, we make clear the expectation of investment across all areas. I had wanted to move amendments around specific subquotas, but I understand the legal difficulties around that—but that is why I submit that this objects amendment is the best way forward.

I thank the minister for that clarification, but it does raise a pretty concerning red flag. It does mean that sectors like documentaries or children's content could fall off the map completely over the next four years for the government's having failed to ensure that there is streaming investment in those sectors. What could very well result from this is a complete loss of those Australian stories from our screens because of decisions by international streaming companies to only focus on dramas. Then what will have happened is that we will have in fact failed to protect, through this legislation, and to save Australian stories across the full gamut of what is required to support stories. The storytelling is so important, but there's also the cultural identity and why it is so essential that we continue seeing Australian content. There is the importance of preserving the jobs and the industry in this sector, and there is also making sure that that diversity of content is made. So what assurance, then, can the government give that those in sectors such as children's programming and documentaries will not completely disappear over the next four years while we wait for the review period?