Rebekha Sharkie
Mayo · Centre Alliance · Australia
“People often say to me, 'What's the greatest thing that you love about your job?' I would say—what I love the most is actually never in the media—that what I love the most is when my team and I can help somebody with their aged care issue or their NDIS package or a Centrelink problem.”
“For all of us, and certainly for me, that is my team members, and some of them have been with me for many, many, many years. Whether they've been with me for a short time or a long time, I've got to say that every single member of my team has been fantastic. They really have. I love the team of people I work with.”
“These have all been incredibly worthwhile and important projects that our whole community has backed in together. One that we've all really loved and enjoyed being on is the Amy Gillett Bikeway. That's now been extended from Mount Torrens to Birdwood.”
“Ten years ago today, the community of Mayo put their trust in me to represent them. I'd particularly like to acknowledge former senator Nick Xenophon. Nick Xenophon put his trust in me to represent his party.”
“I mustn't forget Kangaroo Island and upgrades to Hog Bay Road which have improved safety. We've had such enormous population growth, but there is so much more to do. There's always so much to do. When I look at health, we have emergency departments that have been upgraded at Victor Harbor and a new emergency department in Mount Barker.”
“He is constantly asked by children and teachers if his skin hurts, if the eczema is getting worse and, by some children, 'What's wrong with you?' There are thousands of children just like Angus in Australia whose severe eczema will cause some long-term physical and emotional harm if they cannot access new treatments.”
The complete record
Every one of 370 lines we hold for Rebekha Sharkie, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 8.
“Well, I still think that's a free ride and a tax incentive for gambling and tobacco. I do commend the minister for his work on this bill, and research should not be used to exacerbate serious health risks, addiction and associated problems. As I said, I support this bill—it's a good start—but I don't believe that it is appropriate for the Australian taxpayer to in any way subsidise any research and development by gambling or tobacco entities. They already cost our community so much; they already make such obscene profits. Theoretically, a tobacco and gambling company could, under this legislation, undertake research related to harm minimisation. But there would be no obligation for the company to then apply the findings of that research to actually benefit the community.”
“In 2022-23 the following companies were reported to have claimed the following expenditure for research and development activities under the research and development tax incentive: Tabcorp Holdings, $43 million; Aristocrat Leisure, almost $19 million; the Lottery Corporation Ltd, over $10 million; Unibet Australia, over $9 million; and Ainsworth Games Technology, almost $8 million. And there are many, many more: Player Elite Pty Ltd, Betting Technologies Australia Pty Ltd, Advanced Gaming Pty Ltd, Gamurs Pty Ltd, BetTube Corporation Ltd, BetCloud Pty Ltd and PointsBet Holding Ltd. I've mentioned Ainsworth and Unibet Australia—the list goes on. Schedule 4 of this bill will exclude research and development activities by gambling and tobacco companies from eligibility—unless those activities are solely for the purpose of harm minimisation.”
“Managing the harms caused by gambling costs Australians billions of dollars each year, and, of course, those billions of dollars don't equate to lives lost. In Victoria alone, gambling reportedly cost $14.1 billion in 2023 through financial impacts, emotional and psychological harm including depression and suicide, lost productivity, crime, relationship and family impacts including domestic violence, and other costs. I don't believe that Australian taxpayers should also be subsidising gambling companies through tax incentives.”
“There was $16.2 billion in R&D expenditure claims for 2022-23 by almost 13,000 companies, mostly public and multinational businesses. There was a total of $8.7 billion for the multinationals. Ninety-three per cent of claimants were Australian owned. There were no claims in relation to tobacco company research and development in that 2022-23 year. However—and this is really important—the same report indicates that 18 companies which identified as part of the gambling industry collectively claimed expenditure of more than $100 million in research and development tax incentives in that year. We know gambling costs and impacts Australians. Financially, there was a loss of over $31 billion from gambling in 2022-23, making us the biggest losers globally on a per capita basis.”
“The research and development tax incentive represents the single largest component of government support for business research and development in Australia. It provides tax offsets to companies for eligible research and development expenditure and aims to boost research and development by encouraging investment in R&D that might not otherwise be undertaken. It fosters groundbreaking research and Australia's research and development ecosystem. Annual report data about R&D tax incentives in entities is a source of information on companies that have claimed R&D tax incentives for each income year, and this encourages voluntary compliance with the program's requirements and raises public awareness of companies' claims against this tax incentive. The 2022-23 R&D tax incentive report, which is the most recent, is based on 30 June 2025 data.”
“I very much support the Treasury Laws Amendment (Delivering an Efficient and Trusted Tax System) Bill 2026. There are four schedules to this bill. Schedule 1 makes it easier for taxpayers to donate low-value gifts under $2 in value through, for example, supermarket round-up donations. This is a Productivity Commission recommendation. Schedule 2 provides that trustees are to report in a trust income tax return the tax file numbers of any beneficiaries with an entitlement, and it also enables the Australian Taxation Office to streamline reporting and improve accuracy—sounds very reasonable. Schedule 3 is for minor technical amendments and corrections, and schedule 4 excludes tobacco and gambling related research and development from eligibility for the Australian government's research and development tax incentive.”
“I move: That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House: (1) notes that: (a) Australians lost $31.5 billion from gambling in 2022-23, making us the 'biggest losers' globally; (b) the total estimated cost in Australia of smoking was estimated at $136.9 billion in 2015-16 through healthcare, ill health, premature mortality and other costs of smoking; and (c) while the 2022-23 Australian Taxation Office Research and Development Tax Incentive Transparency Report reported no claims in relation to tobacco companies, 18 companies which identified as part of the gambling industry collectively claimed more than $101,000,000 in tax breaks through this Tax Incentive, which comprises the single largest component of government support for business research and development in Australia; and (2) calls on the Government to completely exclude all research and development activities conducted by gambling and tobacco companies and entities such as research organisations which obtain any funding from such companies from eligibility for the Research and Development Tax Incentive because their profits result from harm caused to our community, and their research and development activities should be entirely self-funded".”
“Just this morning, I received an email from an elderly lady who said: Albo's Support at Home is an absolute joke, which would be funny if I was not part of it. I have been in receipt of a home care package … I was "upgraded" to a level 4 … and have recently been informed that I am only receiving 60% of the advertised annual amount, namely $36,000 out of $63,000. This means that I miss out on vital services, such as hydrotherapy, social support, and meal preparation. I also do not receive necessary assistance with technology and home modifications, which are … necessary. Why is the government doing this to older Australians? Please do better.”
“The government are rationing out, eking out, that funding. Thirty-six thousand people have received interim funding of 60 per cent, and only 129 cases out of those 131,000 the government have deemed as urgent. I would say every single older person who has been assessed as 'needing care in the home' is an urgent matter. What happens is that people get sick. They end up in hospital. They end up malnourished. They end up having a fall. They end up not eating properly or not having a shower. We must turn our attention to this. If the job of all of us in this place is to take care of Australians, with respect to older Australians, we are failing abysmally. I'm receiving emails every day.”
“We've now had the new aged-care system for five months. This was supposed to make life better for older Australians, but for so many this has done the absolute opposite. We have long waiting lists. We have robo-assessments. We have fewer services at higher cost. We have no cap on fees, which allowed many providers, as soon as it turned over to 1 November, to very significantly increase their fees. We have packages allocated at a fraction of what they should be. This whole system is an abject failure. When we look at Senate estimates from February this year, as at 31 December 2025, we had 230,000 older Australians who were waiting for an assessment or waiting for care for simple care at home—230,000 older people, 103,000 waiting for an assessment, and 131,000 who were waiting for approved funding.”
“We need to be drilling more of our own domestic product, we need to be refining this product and we need to take Australian sovereignty seriously because we need to fuel ourselves and we need to be able to feed ourselves; otherwise, we as a nation can't defend ourselves.”
“I remember that the previous government had tickets in Texas, which was just a ridiculous idea. We didn't have fuel onshore. We also must look to re-establish our refineries. The fact that we just have two refineries on the east coast of Australia is deeply concerning. It's actually farcical. It's unbelievable that a nation as large as Australia would have that. Anyone with an interest in geopolitics can see the vulnerability. If China decides that they're going to go into conflict with Taiwan and somehow Australia is involved in that, the shipping lanes will stop. This will be nothing compared to that as an issue.”
“It was just over 20 years ago that Australia had eight oil refineries, and most of our demand for our fuel was managed domestically. Now we just have two that remain, in Geelong and Brisbane, and neither of them is really fit for purpose. Neither of them, to my understanding, is able to process and refine diesel, which is the bulk of the fuel consumed in Australia. So now Australia imports around 90 per cent of its refined fuel. How crazy is that? If we learn nothing else from this crisis, we as a nation must truly take sovereignty as a serious issue. As the Canadian prime minister said, 'A country that can't fuel itself, feed itself or defend itself has very few options.' I urge the government not only to have a minimum of 90 days of fuel on Australian shores—I must say, this is a problem that was created by both governments.”
“If I say nothing else in this place, surely we can learn from this current crisis that we must be keeping a minimum of 90 days worth of strategic reserves on shore? The government has said just today that we have 39 days of petrol reserves, 30 days of diesel reserves and just 30 days of jet fuel reserves. That's a third of what our obligations are under that treaty. In contrast, it's been widely reported that the reserves of some other member countries are far higher than ours. Let's look at New Zealand, our close neighbours. They have 49 days worth on land. Japan has 254 days; South Korea, 208 days; France, 108 days; and Spain, 113 days. Due to, I think, a complacency from extended peacetime, we have made our risk and exposure so great.”
“Let's look at oil prices. Oil prices have risen sharply since the start of the Iran war. Australia uses Singapore refined product benchmark prices. Oil prices had been around US$72 a barrel before the US strikes on Iran. They're now sitting at around US$112 or US$113 a barrel, and the Commonwealth Bank says there is a strong likelihood of the oil price lifting to between US$120 and US$150 a barrel if this conflict continues. Tied very closely to Australia's sovereignty and, I think, Australians' confidence in fuel security is our fuel reserves. Australia is not compliant and, in fact, hasn't been compliant since 2012 with its obligation to hold 90 days worth of fuel reserves under the International Energy Agency treaty.”
“However, to get to this point, there has been enormous pain for motorists and families for weeks, and that damage can't just be undone. Even with the halving of the fuel excise, we're still going to be looking at around $3 a litre for diesel, which is prohibitively expensive. Talking with many small businesses in my electorate that are in the tourism industry, they've already seen a lot of cancellations over Easter, where people just can't stretch the budget to book and stay and do that travel in their car. Filling up the car is becoming a luxury. There are also hundreds of petrol stations across the country that have run out of different types of fuel or diesel. If I look at my electorate today, unleaded petrol is on average $2.59 a litre, diesel on average is $3.25 a litre and many, many service stations are out of stock.”
“I would like to thank Mr Farrell for the very early morning detailed briefing on this legislation. I'd like to talk about a couple of issues that surround this issue and really look at how we've got to this place. I do, of course, welcome the government's announcement today on halving the fuel excise to 26.3c per litre for three months and also the cut to the heavy vehicle user charge. This will be very important for the trucking industry. Australia will also adopt a national fuel security plan that has been finalised with the support of the states and territories, which have been collaborating with government over the past couple of weeks to ensure the delivery of a consistent plan. This is absolutely good news.”
“The Export Finance and Insurance Corporation Amendment (Strategic Reserve) Bill 2026 provides new powers to do, I think, two very important things—(1) finance the import of fuel and other necessary goods and (2) provide financial derivatives and price point support to purchase, sell and stockpile fuel and other necessary goods to ensure domestic availability only on government direction and to manage exposures as appropriate, providing flexibility to deal with the current fuel crisis now and to stabilise supply and avoid escalation and destabilisation in the future. It will help the government to manage Australia's exposure to risk around acquisition and delivery of fuel in the unpredictable and destabilised global environment that we're currently in.”
“My question is to the Minister for Aged Care and Seniors. Recent Senate estimates revealed that, between 1 November 2025 and 23 January 2026, 414 older Australians appealed their Support at Home package. The department then advised at estimates that just two of those 414 appeals were reviewed over a seven-week period. Does the minister believe that completing just two reviews over that timeframe is acceptable?”
“In many parts of my electorate, it's well over $3 a litre. So it would just be logical that this would be a primary consideration for the government—that we look to address the fuel excise and provide that immediate relief to families right now. I know the government said: 'Look, we're providing tax cuts in the middle of the year. We do provide support for child care.' How does that help a pensioner or an unemployed person? They're not getting those tax cuts. If you're a pensioner, you're probably not putting a child in child care. So I say to the government: urgently address the fuel excise. We can do this now. It will have an enormous impact on Australians.”
“So, really, you could say the Australian government, between GST and fuel excise, is getting the best part of nearly a dollar for every litre of fuel. The member for Makin is looking at me inquisitively. When you take 52.6c and add the GST component of around 30c—when fuel is $3.30 a litre in many parts of Australia—we're heading to more than 80c, Member for Makin. That is just under a dollar for every litre that you buy, as far as I'm concerned. So it is a huge expense for people—again, particularly for people living in the regions, who have no other choice. The government supported the coalition when there was a halving of the fuel excise during COVID, and that had an immediate relief effect. The government did support that, when they were in opposition. At that time, I think fuel was about $1.80 a litre.”
“We have very limited public transport across regional Australia, so we are reliant upon our cars, we are reliant upon our utes and we are reliant upon our generators. That is just life in regional Australia. So I would urge the government, when it meets with all of the state and territory leaders, to put the needs of regional Australia absolutely at the front of the queue with respect to fuel. We need to talk about the fuel excise. The fuel excise, with this massive increase in fuel prices at the moment, is crippling Australians. Right now, every Australian pays 52.6c in the litre in government tax for every litre of fuel they buy. On top of that, there is GST on that excise—so that's a double tax—and then GST on the whole price per litre.”
“Now, I know that the government has told people not to stockpile fuel, but, when your livelihood depends on fuel, when your livelihood depends on having that diesel, when the animals on your property depend on that diesel for their ability to survive, it is a precarious situation. That's the issue around having fuel. I know that the government's National Cabinet has been meeting regularly, including on Monday—something that, of course, I absolutely support—but there must be a strategic plan about how to get fuel to the regions. Because it's the regions that grow the food. It's the regions that feed the cities. I might just say, to those who are not growing the food, that it's not like we in regional Australia can just get up 10 minutes earlier and get on that bus or get on that train.”
“The issue that is being discussed in every house in my electorate, around every dinner table, is fuel—both the cost of fuel and whether people can access fuel. Certainly, there are many service stations in my electorate, because we have so many independent distributors. But being without fuel, or having to effectively ration the stock that they have, is causing enormous anxiety in regional Australia—whether you're a dairy farmer, a grape grower trying to get all the grapes off the vine or a broadacre farmer thinking about putting in your next crop and hoping that you're going to get some rain in April—and that's part of the reason why there is such a fear and such a need to stockpile fuel.”
“My question is to the Treasurer. For every litre of fuel sold in Australia, the government receives 52.6c in excise tax. We are in a cost-of-living emergency, and we must act now. Diesel has increased by over 55 per cent in the last month. This is devastating for regional communities like Mayo. Will the government suspend the fuel excise for 60 days to provide immediate relief for Australians.”
“We're then valuing families and valuing the role of the stay-at-home parent. We did that in 2001, but now it's 2026. I feel that that value is not there and not being recognised. We can do better.”
“They say the ultimate dream for their family is to be able to have one parent staying home and raising the children and one going off to work for just those early years. This is about choice. Many women would like to go back to work—absolutely; that is your choice. But at the moment we're taking away that choice from families where one parent doesn't want to go back into the workforce but wants to be able to stay home and see those first steps and hear those first words. So we must do better. It seems patently obvious to me that we need to do income tax splitting. When you have children who are under school age, it is a fair thing to do. It's something the government must absolutely do. If we want to lift our birth rate, we have no other choice aside from making sure we have incentives there for families.”
“If there is the same amount of income in a family, $120,000 under that roof, but one is out earning and one is taking care of the children, they pay $26,000 in tax—22 per cent of their income versus just 14 per cent for the previous family's scenario. This is unfair. This is disincentivizing families from caring for children themselves. Yes, we've got paid parenting leave of 26 weeks a year. But then what happens? What happens when the baby's 26 weeks of age? No family in Australia can afford to stay home with them still. They bundle them off to child care. I see them in the morning, at 6 or 6.30 am, in the dark, having to drop babies off. And I talk to so many families in my community.”
“Going to the motion from the member for Kennedy, when we look at tax distribution, it is fundamentally unfair to families where one parent is at home raising children and one parent is going off to work. Looking at families where two parents are each earning $100,000 each—a total tax income of $200,000—they pay $41,000 in tax. If one parent earns $200,000 and the other does not earn an income outside the home because they're doing the most important job of all, that being raising children in the home, that same family would pay $56,000 in tax. So $41,000 or $56,000, and the same income is coming in under the main roof. That is patently unfair and must be addressed. Looking at lower-income families, a couple earning $60,000 each would pay $17½ thousand in tax.”
“Real wages have not kept up with the increased costs of living. Each household now needs two full-time workers to cover a mortgage and just the absolute basics. There were 1.2 million two-parent families who were eligible to receive Family Tax Benefit Part A in 2001. Now that's just over 600,000. That's because we haven't lifted that threshold limit of $120,000 for eligibility for Family Tax Benefit Part B. Going back to when I had young children, when as a family we very much relied on Family Tax Benefit Part B—my husband was a tradie—there were just over 26,000 families, in 2001, who received Family Tax Benefit Part B. Now it's only 7½ thousand, because the thresholds have not kept up.”
“I commend the member for Kennedy for this motion, because this is about choice and fairness, and it is currently untenable for one parent to care for children at home if they wish to do so. Fewer young people are having children. Our current birth rate is just 1.5 for every couple. Over half of Australians under 35 have delayed parenthood due to cost pressures. We seem to have forgotten that parents are the first and best teachers, and parents should have the choice to raise their children at home if that suits their family best. During the last decade, the proportion of one-year-olds in child care has gone from 25 per cent to over half. We pay for private childcare centres—over $30,000 in many cases—to fund the care of a child, but we place very little value on the parent or, indeed, the grandparent.”
“If we had the 90 days of fuel reserves, I don't think we would have had as much fear from people in our communities, particularly in regional communities like mine. We can't just get on a bus, we can't just get on a train and we can't just not put diesel in our tractors. We have Vintage coming up—it is really getting away—next week and we are really concerned. This must be a timely reminder for the future. We must ensure that our island nation has 90 days of fuel reserve onshore.”
“We should be stocking 90 days of fuel reserves like we are supposed to do as part of the International Energy Agency. Instead, we only have 36 days of petrol and 32 days of diesel. Now, that has been an issue for as long as I've been in the parliament. Successive governments have not had the 90 days of fuel reserves. I've got to say, actually this government has had a higher rate. I think we went down to 27 days under the previous government. I first spoke about this in 2017, whether it's been questions, whether it's been letters to ministers over successive governments and look where we are today. We have communities who are fearful of running out of fuel, and that's resulted in a massive spike in demand and sharp prices.”
“When Drew and Pete asked staff if the business was in any way connected to or using the same accountant as M&F Disability Services, they were threatened. They were assaulted and called retarded. It's on the film. This was sent to all of us. We should all be watching this. The NDIS is supposed to be an important social service that provides reform and a change of life for people living with disability. It's not supposed to be a bottomless pit of funding to be exploited by some providers. We're going to see, in the 2028-29 year, $63 billion in funding. There is so much to say about this. I would just like to say that Pete and Drew have done an exceptional job in exposing this one element of potential fraud in the NDIS. The NDIS fraud chief, in recent Senate estimates, said 10 per cent of NDIS claims are potentially fraudulent.”
“They brought no equipment, they used the unit's tissues and they gave a very poor clean. They invoiced for two hours—$236 for that 25 minutes, where $116.60 was for cleaning and $120 was for labour costs. The provider stated that auditors advised them to charge a minimum of two hours, as required under NDIS rules. That is not correct. Upon being confronted, the provider changed the invoice from $236 down to $24. Further investigations showed a banned provider allegedly reappearing in the same location with the same phone number and same accountant. M&F Disability Services was closed due to fraud. Their registration was revoked and they were served a lifetime ban from providing NDIS services. Now operating in the same location with the same phone number and using the same accountant is Sunny Days Care.”
“On Sunday afternoon, every MP was emailed a video by investigative journalists Pete Z and Drew Pavlou on NDIS fraud. They investigated suburbs with high numbers of NDIS providers. In some buildings, there were multiple shopfronts with padlocked doors and no operational phone numbers or websites. A whistleblower cleaner stated that many providers charge participants for a minimum of two hours for just 30 minutes of cleaning or less, and that providers double the charge when two participants in the one property are both receiving NDIS funding. This is a rort. The NDIS states that a provider cannot charge a participant for more time than is actually booked for support delivered. The journalists booked an Airbnb unit, a little studio, for an NDIS clean. Help in Support cleaners stayed for just 25 minutes.”
“Areas of known black spots or insufficient mobile coverage that could benefit from a tower in my community include Gumeracha, Montacute, Charleston, Brukunga, Wistow, Dawesley, Flaxley, Harrogate, Chapel Hill, Bull Creek, Nangkita, Woodchester, Currency Creek, Waitpinga, Lower Inman Valley and Deep Creek; and, on Kangaroo Island, Vivonne Bay, D'Estrees Bay and Karatta. Now I know that, in my time as the member, we have been able to get—and lobbied very, very hard to get—more mobile coverage across our area. But, truly, regional Australia deserves the same equitable mobile phone coverage—I mean, we've all had mobiles now for decades. It's hard to believe that so much of Australia is still left with absolutely no service at all. I do support this bill, but I do support it very cautiously.”
“In Mayo, shutting down 3G has absolutely reduced our coverage, because you can no longer make calls in those areas where previously you could. When they turned off 3G, and we had 5G, it really limited us, in very many areas, to just the immediate town. Now I know that the government and telcos have said, 'No, no, we've been able to upgrade and expand.' I can tell you right now, as someone who does a huge amount of driving, it had a very real negative impact across my community, and still does. I would say our blackspots have got wider, and that really impacts our safety. And, as I said, as to Deep Creek, where we had a bushfire in recent weeks, there are still black spots in that community.”
“Similarly, weather related power outages can result in telco services no longer working, including if the outage has affected a local mobile tower. Now, that will affect an entire community, when we lose a tower, until it's repaired. Consumers are understandably concerned that they cannot make or receive calls or emails during such outages. And then, of course, we all rely so heavily on apps to find out where a fire is coming from and what weather is coming towards us. So we're losing capacity to work or it's contributing to safety concerns. This is a real issue in regional Australia. Aside from the 2023 and recent triple-zero outages, regional, major and mass outages were also a source of complaints other than those caused by natural disasters. There are local telecommunications issues in my electorate, as I mentioned previously.”
“When we look at natural disaster coverage, there are complaints re telcos' dealings with natural disasters in regional Australia, in relation to disasters and mass outages. This bushfire season, Mayo residents had to navigate bushfires—including a large one, that was uncontrolled for several days, in Deep Creek; it destroyed a number of homes and outbuildings, and, at one point, threatened the ferry infrastructure at Cape Jervis. A lack of coverage creates safety risks during bushfires and other emergencies, due to the service across our topography. Mayo residents need to be able to rely on telco services for timely and accurate information, but weather events commonly damage consumer lines or telco equipment, with a wait of several weeks for repairs and replacement.”
“In some instances, telcos misrepresent mobile coverage as available in areas when it is very clearly not. Mobile coverage maps should be standardised, with information regarding location, quality and speed, and accessibility, to enable informed consumer choice. The review found that landlines should be useable and reliable, and redress easy to secure. If mobile service problems exist, consumers may not be able to afford satellite service and there may not be alternative carriers. And modern minimum service obligations are needed, for voice and internet, in regional and rural areas. We deserve the same level of telecommunications that they have in the city. Regional Australia is what's feeding Australia. It's what's clothing Australia. And yet it is very clear that we do have a second-class system when it comes to telecommunications.”
“The Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman, the TIO, review of regional telecommunications showed regional, rural and remote customers experience limited or no access to telco services—for example, limited, unreliable and poor mobile coverage—no recourse to alternative tech providers, and service faults take longer to resolve. It found that telco regulatory frameworks, including the universal service obligation scheme, need to be modernised to ensure regional consumers' reliable access to telco services. Regional consumers complained of service being unavailable, expensive and/or delayed; limited choice of retailers or technologies; and that sometimes services are discontinued, replaced or no longer supported. Realistically, often the only phone service is a mobile service in regional and remote areas.”
“While I support the introduction of this universal outdoor mobile service, I share the member's concerns that its benefits may not be equally shared across regional, rural and remote Australia. Her amendments seek to address this by explicitly including affordability and availability as aspects of a service being available on an equitable basis, requiring the minister to have regard to fault rectification timelines when setting performance benchmarks—that's going to be critical—and giving the minister an explicit power to make rules requiring temporary disaster roaming during emergencies. In my electorate, when we had the fires, the minister was required to provide a statement explaining the reasons for a determination that the UOMO did not apply in particular circumstances. Let's look at the regional telecommunications review of 2024.”
“If I look across Kangaroo Island, it's about 150 kilometres wide, about 50 kilometres in depth. There are vast patches that have very poor mobile telecommunications. If we look at the rest of regional Australia, at areas such as the member for Grey's electorate or at western New South Wales, you can drive for hours at a time with no coverage at all. Certainly, since the 3G system has been turned off, that coverage has diminished across regional Australia. I do support the amendments drafted by the member for Indi. I believe that they've been tabled. I will be moving those amendments on behalf of the member for Indi. The member for Indi has, during her whole time in this place, very much championed investment in and forward thinking about regional telecommunications.”
“Even though the universal outdoor mobile obligation is coming, this is not a substitute for continued investment in towers. I can't say that enough: this cannot be a substitute for continuing to invest in towers. In my electorate, on any drive that I do between my electorate office in Mount Barker and my satellite office in Victor Harbor, no matter which road I take to get to the other office, which are about an hour and 15 minutes away from each other, I will go through significant patches where there is no coverage at all. We're talking about an area that's a high-risk bushfire area. We're talking about an area where there's a high propensity of crashes. So there is a real vulnerability that exists for regional Australians that doesn't exist for metropolitan Australia.”
“So while I welcome the introduction of this bill to create the universal outdoor mobile obligation, we must remember that this is just a framework that may lack the teeth needed to ensure that all Australians, not just those that live in metropolitan Australia, have guaranteed universal outdoor mobile connectivity. I do note that it will only cover voice and text to begin with. Telcos are working towards this now, but it is experimental and aspirational, let alone satellite. At least it will prevent telcos from having a monopoly in an area. They must share networks and that is critical in my community. If I look at Kangaroo Island, we have huge stretches where there's one telco and absolutely no coverage if you're with the other.”
“The Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025 seeks to establish a universal outdoor mobile obligation for three national operators. It's going to require Optus, Telstra and TPG to provide reasonable and equitable access to outdoor mobile, voice and text services across Australia. There will be benefits for regional and remote Australia, where we've been promised benefits, and certainly my community very much needs those promises. We're told that it will improve competition in the market. The scope and timing can be adjusted by the minister by instrument as market and technology evolve, such as emerging low-level satellite technology, which I personally think will be a complete game changer if we can ever get it truly off the ground.”
“My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. There's a run on fuel across Mayo. Despite fuel distributors working around the clock, many service stations are needing to restrict sales. Demand is expected to further increase as Vintage steps up for our grape growers. What action is the government taking to stabilise domestic supply chains in regional communities like Mayo so that we're not left with empty bowsers?”
“We just can't have that in this nation. We can't have electricity so expensive that we don't have manufacturing bases anymore. My state was the powerhouse for manufacturing. We have the highest electricity. We have lost our manufacturing. We have very little time to turn this around, and we must all bring our attention to this to make it happen.”
“That's going to hit the hip pocket of more than 15 million Australians who have some form of private health insurance. The affordability and availability of health care is one of the biggest issues for people who live in my community. The bottom line is people are hurting, and the government needs to do more to reduce the cost-of-living pressures. This means a conversation about the big household costs—like electricity, like the kind of power we generate, like taxes and rebates on fuel. That means talking about rising inflation and interest rates and the economic management or mismanagement that's making it harder and harder every day for Australians to pay their bills. It can't be that in this nation I have pensioners in my community who go to bed before the sun goes down because they just can't afford to heat their homes.”