David Coleman (Banks, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Communications) Share this | Hansard source

I've already spoken twice on this bill so I don't propose to speak at length. The opposition broadly supports this bill, which makes sensible changes such that gambling using a traditional credit card, a credit card via a digital wallet or digital currency would be prohibited in the future. We think that is sensible. We note that much of this started in the inquiry led by the member for Fisher back in 2020, which made recommendations which have broadly been adopted by the government. So we broadly support this legislation but we have one amendment before the House at the moment, and this is specifically in clause 15 of the bill. In addition to the methods of paying for gambling which are prohibited by the bill, that clause also states:

(d) a method of a kind determined by the Minister by legislative instrument for the purposes of this paragraph

Basically, that means any means of exchange determined by the minister in the future could be prohibited.

We are concerned about that for a number of reasons. Firstly, something of that significance, where we are seeking to restrain Australians on how they use legal currency, is something that generally should come through the parliament. We think, as a point of principle, that's the right way for this to be done. If there is a proposal in the future to ban another form of legal exchange, it should come back to the parliament because it is a significant thing to do to affect the rights of Australians in that way.

We particularly note that this is a question of ministerial discretion, so ultimately we must consider the facts before us. Were this to come into place, the Minister for Communications would have that discretion. We're concerned about that in general but particularly concerned given that we have seen, on numerous occasions, failures of judgement by this minister—and that judgement is effectively what comes into play here through clause 15. We have seen that failure of judgement most notoriously in relation to the misinformation bill, where the government has begun the process of walking that back, of delaying the bill, of taking provisions out of the bill because it is, frankly, one of the worst pieces of legislation ever put before this parliament. That was a judgement of the minister because the minister published that legislation, and you don't publish legislation because you think it's a bad idea; you publish legislation because you think it's a good idea. That was the judgement of this minister, so we are anxious about that judgement.

We're also anxious about the judgement, as we said, as it pertains to the Mobile Black Spot Program—a tremendous program created by the coalition, that has helped thousands of Australians to access vital mobile connectivity in regional and rural areas. We saw this minister shamefully politicise this program, with some 74 per cent of sites being allocated to Labor electorates, even though Labor held only a third of seats in rural and regional Australia. It was patently wrong, and so much so that it has really captured the attention of the Auditor-General, who is now very carefully going through all of the facts and all of the information in relation to this program. He said he'll come back by May next year. He is conducting a very thorough and forensic investigation into this very sorry episode relating to the Mobile Black Spot Program. That goes to judgement as, indeed, does the minister's inexplicable decision to fail to implement the eSafety Commissioner's recommendation to implement a trial of age verification software to protect children from dangerous content online. The eSafety Commissioner wanted to do that. The pornography industry doesn't want that to happen. They welcomed the minister's decision not to proceed with that trial, but the minister has been roundly condemned by dozens of experts.

See this speech in context