Bill Debate · Second Reading

Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026; Second Reading

Senate · Wednesday 1 July 2026

Continued from Monday 22 June 2026.

Official Hansard for this day (APH) · Read this debate on OpenAustralia

At a glance

The Senate debated the Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026, which introduces a general prohibition on unfair trading practices and specific rules against subscription traps and drip pricing. The government argued the bill protects consumers from manipulative digital practices and saves billions annually. Opposition and crossbench members supported the targeted reforms but raised concerns about regulatory costs for small businesses and the breadth of the general prohibition. Amendments were proposed to delay application for small businesses and clarify legal definitions, while others sought to extend protections to financial services. The bill was ultimately defeated in a division.

Outcome

The bill was not passed, with 20 votes against and 30 votes for in the division.

Summary in reported speech - not a transcript. AI-generated, so check the official record before quoting.

How the debate unfolded

Continued the debate

Matthew Canavan (QLD) (Liberal National Party) LNP

Canavan expressed qualified support for the bill, acknowledging the need to address subscription traps and drip pricing. However, Canavan argued that the definition of unfair conduct was too broad and would impose significant compliance costs, estimated at $123 million annually, with $103 million falling on small businesses. Canavan proposed amendments to delay the start date for businesses with under $10 million in annual turnover until 1 July 2030. Canavan also suggested adding the word unfairly before manipulate and material before detriment to provide greater legal clarity and reduce litigation risks.

Government response

Tim Ayres (Minister for Industry and Innovation; Minister for Science) ALP NSW

Ayres defended the bill as a necessary update to the Australian Consumer Law to protect consumers from manipulative practices. Ayres noted that the Senate Economics Legislation Committee recommended passing the bill and highlighted government support for ACCC guidance to assist businesses. Ayres explained that the government is taking a staged approach to extending protections, first consulting on small business and franchisees before considering application to the financial services sector. Ayres argued the reforms promote fair competition and prevent honest businesses from being undercut by those using deceptive tactics.

Opposition response

Kerrynne Liddle (Shadow Assistant Minister for Health and Aged Care) Liberal SA

Liddle stated the coalition supports strong consumer protections but argued the bill creates uncertainty and imposes excessive costs on small businesses. Liddle highlighted that $103 million of the estimated $123 million in annual regulatory costs would fall on small enterprises. Liddle criticised the government for exempting union memberships from the new subscription trap rules while applying them to other sectors. Liddle urged the government to accept coalition amendments to clarify definitions and delay implementation for small businesses to reduce compliance burdens.

Lisa Darmanin (VIC) (Australian Labor Party) ALP support

Darmanin described personal experiences with difficult subscription cancellations and highlighted evidence that Australians lose over $1 billion annually to unfair trading practices. Darmanin explained that the bill introduces a general prohibition on unfair conduct and specific rules for subscription traps and drip pricing. Darmanin noted that the reforms align with international trends and support the government's broader agenda to strengthen competition and consumer protection.
Nick McKim (TAS) (Australian Greens) Greens mixed

McKim supported the bill's consumer protections but criticised the government for excluding the financial services sector from the new provisions. McKim argued that this exclusion resulted in regulatory gaps and left consumers vulnerable to harm from financial institutions. McKim proposed amendments to extend the unfair trading practices ban to financial services and to include lead generation as an example of unfair conduct. McKim contended that the government was prioritising corporate interests over consumer safety.
Michelle Ananda-Rajah (VIC) (Australian Labor Party) ALP support

Ananda-Rajah illustrated the prevalence of drip pricing and subscription traps, noting that older people and young adults are particularly vulnerable. Ananda-Rajah stated that the bill bans unfair trading practices and aligns Australia with other jurisdictions like the EU and UK. Ananda-Rajah highlighted that the reforms are part of a wider strategy to strengthen competition, including increased ACCC funding and stricter penalties for breaches.
Tyron Whitten (WA) (Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) One Nation mixed

Whitten welcomed the specific rules against subscription traps and drip pricing but opposed the broad general prohibition on unfair trading practices. Whitten argued that delegating power to the ACCC to define unfair conduct creates regulatory uncertainty and poor governance. Whitten criticised the government for relying on bureaucratic discretion rather than clear legislative rules, citing similar concerns with other recent legislation.
Paul Scarr (QLD) (Liberal Party) Liberal mixed

Scarr supported the targeted reforms for subscription traps and drip pricing but raised concerns about the general prohibition's impact on small businesses. Scarr endorsed coalition amendments to clarify the definition of manipulate by adding unfairly and to require material detriment. Scarr also supported delaying the application of the law for small businesses until 2030 to allow for legal certainty. Scarr called for the ACCC to provide detailed guidance to help businesses comply with the new provisions.
Sean Bell (NSW) (Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) One Nation mixed

Bell moved a motion noting that the specific reforms for drip pricing and subscription traps were positive. Bell expressed concern that the broad prohibition powers created regulatory uncertainty and continued a trend of delegating sweeping powers to regulatory bodies. Bell called on the government to prepare complete legislation that limits red tape rather than relying on delegated powers.

Votes during this debate

Division 5: Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026; Second Reading Not passed 20–30

First speaker today

Matthew Canavan (QLD) (Liberal National Party)

LNP

Bill

Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026

Speeches

9 speeches, 6 other contributors

Topics

No tags

Debate Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026; In Committee Bill Debate, 2 Jul 2026 · Same bill
Debate Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026; Third Reading Bill Debate, 2 Jul 2026 · Same bill

About Senate debates

The Senate debates bills, motions, matters of public importance and the answers given in Question Time. Senators from all parties and the crossbench take part, and a minister or the minister representing them usually replies for the government. Summaries are in reported speech, not transcripts; always check the official record before quoting.