Communications Legislation Amendment (Australian Content Requirement for Subscription Video On Demand (Streaming) Services) Bill 2025; Second Reading

Continued the debate

Leeser argued that the Coalition has a long history of supporting the screen industry through measures like the producer offset and location incentives. Leeser contended that the government had delayed action for four years and was now rushing the bill to avoid scrutiny, creating a financial penalty for the industry if it was not passed immediately. Leeser highlighted concerns about the bill's compatibility with the Australia-US Free Trade Agreement and the lack of provisions for content prominence. Leeser moved an amendment to note the Coalition's support for the industry and the government's delay, while calling for an inquiry into unintended consequences.

Opposition response

Webster argued that the bill addresses a market failure where international streamers operate without the regulatory burdens faced by Australian broadcasters. Webster highlighted the disparity in tax contributions by major streaming platforms compared to their Australian revenues. Webster emphasised the need for transparency regarding how much investment would benefit regional Australia, foreshadowing amendments to ensure regional stories are included. Webster stated that the bill was a necessary step to ensure a level playing field in the digital media landscape.