Lidia Thorpe (Victoria, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I move amendments (1) and (2) in my name on sheet 2703:

(1)—Schedule 1, page 3 (after line 5), after item 1, insert:

1A Section 3

Insert:

cash service obligations means obligations under section 28AA.

(2)—Schedule 1, page 3 (after line 10), after item 3, insert:

3A At the end of section 25

Add:

; (d) its cash service obligations under section 28AA.

3B After section 28

Insert:

28AA Cash service obligations

(1) If Australia Post:

(a) supplies goods or services in the course of:

(i) supplying postal services under section 14; or

(ii) carrying on any business or activity under section 15; or

(iii) carrying on any incidental business or activity under section 16; and

(b) offers to accept a payment for the supply in person at an office of Australia Post in Australia;

then Australia Post must offer to accept, and accept, the payment in cash.

(2) Australia Post must offer an in-person cash withdrawal service at each office of Australia Post in Australia to the extent that the service is:

(a) a business or activity under section 15; or

(b) an incidental business or activity under section 16.

(3) Subsection (1) does not apply to a payment in cash to the extent that:

(a) the payment exceeds the higher of the following:

(i) $10,000;

(ii) another amount prescribed by the regulations; or

(b) offering to accept the payment would pose a security risk to an employee of Australia Post; or

(c) offering to accept the payment would be contrary to another law of the Commonwealth or a law of a State or Territory; or

(d) offering to accept the payment would be contrary to current health advice issued by an official or agency of the Commonwealth or of the State or Territory in which the offer is made; or

(e) access to cash in the form of change is needed for the purposes of the payment, but that access is not readily available.

(4) Subsection (2) does not apply to a cash withdrawal to the extent that:

(a) the withdrawal exceeds the higher of the following:

(i) $10,000;

(ii) another amount prescribed by the regulations; or

(b) offering to provide the withdrawal would pose a security risk to an employee of Australia Post; or

(c) offering to provide the withdrawal would be contrary to another law of the Commonwealth or a law of a State or Territory; or

(d) offering to provide the withdrawal would be contrary to current health advice issued by an official or agency of the Commonwealth or of the State or Territory in which the offer is made; or

(e) access to cash is needed for the purposes of the withdrawal, but that access is not readily available.

These amendments are about ensuring access, particularly for regional communities, to banking in post offices. When I lived in regional Victoria, my local post office provided access to the local Lake Tyers Aboriginal community, who still rely on those banking services. If those kinds of banking services are ripped out of regional communities, they won't be as accessible. People don't have vehicles or the resources to go into town; they're not as privileged as some. So they rely totally on Australia Post outlets and the facilities that they have, including banking facilities. That's basically it.

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

The Australian Greens will be supporting these amendments. I think they are quite important amendments, as Senator Thorpe has outlined. Many communities, particularly those in regional areas and small towns, don't have banks. The big banks have given up on the communities. They've shut down and they've left town. Often, the post office is the only place left for people to be able to engage in their banking activities. This is what's going on across the board with Australia Post. I want to be clear about this. Australia Post is being hollowed out time after time after time. Post offices are hubs of our communities. Every time the government decides to cut a service it's being done as a cost-saving measure, which is ultimately reducing the level of service and support for people in our communities, whether it's cutting the number of days that letters are delivered, putting up the cost of postage, getting rid of banking or, indeed, shutting down branches and the post offices themselves.

In Campbelltown in South Australia, in the electorate of Sturt, we have a move by Australia Post to shut down that branch. The local community is livid. They're upset about it. This particular post office services a large number of residential facilities for the elderly and homes for senior Australians. It's those people who use the post office on a regular basis, and it's currently in a location they can walk to. If that post office is shut down, it'll be near impossible for them to be able to access the next closest post office. I urge Australia Post to think better about the decisions they are making to shut down branches, leaving communities in the lurch.

Whether it's with this amendment bill or the next round of cuts to Australia Post—it doesn't seem to matter whether it's the Labor Party or the coalition in government—they continue to undermine Australia Post being a proper service of the Australian people. The quasi-public/private outfit is clearly not working to deliver services to people and the community. I commend the amendment.

Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank senators for bringing this amendment to the Senate. I note that issues around access to banking, particularly in rural and regional Australia, have been spoken about often in this chamber. They are issues that many senators care about deeply.

The government does not support this amendment. The amendment would require post offices, including independently operated, licensed post offices, to hold large sums of cash to accommodate multiple potential cash withdrawal transactions of up to $10,000 each. This would impose a significant additional cost on Australia Post and its licensees to hold large sums of cash, which would have implications for cash-in-transit costs, security and investment in upgrades to retail outlets. This could be particularly onerous in smaller licensed outlets which often operate in conjunction with another small business, such as a newsagency or general store. While acknowledging the significance of banking services in regional Australia, it is important to note that Australia Post is not a bank. It provides limited banking services through Bank@Post, including accepting cheque deposits, bill payments and limited cash withdrawals.

I note that the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee examined access to banking services in rural and regional Australia in recent times and made a series of recommendations. These include the Australian government working closely with the banks and Australia Post, major banks having agreements with Australia Post and harmonising the products offered through Bank@Post, including for small businesses. This work is ongoing.

Sarah Henderson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The opposition won't be supporting this amendment. We have long held concerns about, and been strong advocates for, postal services in regional communities. We recognise the importance of local post offices, which are so often at the heart of local communities, particularly in the regions.

I'm literally just reading this amendment now, so I do want to say that, while I believe that there are some appropriate and important issues raised by Senator Thorpe, there has not been the appropriate amount of time to consider what Senator Thorpe has put forward. What I will say is that the coalition has long raised serious concerns about the availability of postal services in the regions. We have long advocated for local post offices, because, as I say, they are at the heart of every single community, but we do not support this particular amendment in its current form. Certainly I think that if Senator Thorpe wants to raise these issues in a more considered way then she is absolutely at liberty to do so.

At first blush—I'm literally reading it as I'm on my feet—in relation to issues about the availability of cash and the like, there is clearly no basis upon which we could possibly support this amendment as it currently stands, but, as an opposition, we remain open to doing anything and everything that we can to ensure that Australians have the best postal services in this country. As I say, not only have we been strong defenders of postal services; we have raised ongoing and serious concerns, including in the most recent estimates hearings, in relation to Australia Post's obligations to provide services, as embedded in legislation, by way of local post offices, particularly in rural and regional Australia.

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

Spare us a lecture from the Liberal Party about Australia Post—

Deborah O'Neill (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Hanson-Young, resume your seat. Senator Davey, on a point of order?

Perin Davey (NSW, National Party, Shadow Minister for Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I believe Senator Hanson-Young has already spoken on this.

The TEMPORARY CHAIR: We are in committee, and it's a free-flowing debate. Senator Hanson-Young, you have the call.

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

Spare us a lecture about Australia Post from the Liberal Party, whose Prime Minister, of course, so famously tried to sack Christine Holgate on the floor of the parliament because she was standing up for local postal branches and trying to protect postal services in rural and regional Australia. Spare us the lecture!

I actually have a question for the minister. I imagine the minister will have to take this on notice. I would like the minister to come back to this chamber and explain whether the government has raised concerns of the Campbelltown post office being closed and explain whether Firle post office, which is next door, will follow next. What briefings has the minister had on this? Has the local member, James Stevens, who seems to be asleep at the wheel, done anything about it?

Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Hanson-Young, I don't think government would object to providing this information to you. I will say that there's not really a provision for taking things on notice in exactly this form in this environment. I wonder if a better way to deal with it might be for a question to be lodged through the chamber or even for you to write directly to the minister. I'm happy to undertake to raise it with her, but, in the end, it may be that a direct communication between the two of you may yield the result you are after.

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

Very good.

Perin Davey (NSW, National Party, Shadow Minister for Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will just point out to Senator Hanson-Young—through you, Chair—that very similar questions were raised directly with Australia Post during the Senate estimates process, which is the correct process for asking those sorts of questions.

This bill was presented as a non-controversial bill, and the fact that, at the very last minute, we've had an amendment thrown before us, with no time for consideration of the amendment and no approach or conversation from the drafter of the amendment, just shows that this is not a genuine attempt to amend this bill. This is actually a stunt.

We have actually followed process. We participated extensively in the regional banking inquiry that made some significant recommendations about Australia Post services, Bank@Post services and the like. We take very seriously the operation of Australia Post services in rural and regional Australia, in the more than 2,000 sites where Australia Post services are offered and the more than 350 regional locations where Australia Post is the only financial institution in the town.

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

The National Party is letting down regional Australia again. What is the point of the National Party?

Deborah O'Neill (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Davey, please resume your seat. Could the senators at the end of the chamber, who know that they have the opportunity to speak on this matter, stand and seek the call or cease interjecting? It's highly disorderly.

Perin Davey (NSW, National Party, Shadow Minister for Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will continue, because we are very concerned about the services that Australia Post offers in the regions. But there are ways and means to go about it. Had the author of this amendment come to see us and sat down with us to raise the concerns that they're trying to address with this last minute amendment, we might have had a very extended conversation and we might have been able to find common ground. But to lump us with an amendment at the last minute, at the eleventh hour, and try to wedge us is just politics at its worst.

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

Well, the National Party are clearly feeling a bit sore and sorry for themselves today. They've been pulled into line. They've given up on access to free sport. They've been whipped into line by their Liberal coalition partners to do the bidding of Murdoch. Now what we have is them going to water on this.

The TEMPORARY CHAIR: Senator Hanson-Young, resume your seat, please. Senator Henderson?

Sarah Henderson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On a point of order, I would just ask you to direct Senator Hanson-Young to the substance of the purpose of the committee, which of course is the bill before the Senate.

The TEMPORARY CHAIR: Senator Henderson, there is no point of order. This is a debate about the matter to which Senator Hanson-Young was referring.

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

Well, the National Party have clearly had their wings clipped this week, and they're a bit grumpy, aren't they? They're a bit sensitive and a bit touchy, because they've had to roll over on the amendments that would have provided free access to sport. We're rushing through. We're about to have it. At one o'clock, the bill's going to go through here, and the National Party are locking out half of Australian households from being able to access sport on their phones and on their smart televisions without having to pay exorbitant fees. So they've let down regional Australia on this. Now we have this bill. There's an amendment that they say they support the notion of, but they don't have the guts to vote for it. What is the point of the National Party? What is the point?

Sarah Henderson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Firstly, I want to raise concerns about this amendment. The Australian Postal Corporation and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2024 is a bill to enhance the security of mail and the security of our borders. I again reiterate my concerns that this amendment, which does not really relate to the substance of the bill, has been brought forward.

The amendment essentially relates to forcing every Australia Post post office to accept payments in cash. I think this does give rise to some unintended consequences. I don't know whether Senator Thorpe has conducted any sort of consultation with Australia Post or with licensed post office holders, but it doesn't consider, of course, what would happen if a post office didn't have the capacity to do so and what would then be the penalties to that post office. So I think, in very general terms, this raises a lot of concerns, including the unintended consequences if a particular post office could not comply with this cash requirement. Again, I invite Senator Thorpe to take these issues up elsewhere with us. We would be, of course, very interested in discussing any way in which we can enhance the services of post offices across our country, including in regional and rural Australia, and I look forward to having those productive discussions with Senator Thorpe.

Question negatived.

Bill agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment; report adopted.