Jacinta Collins voted moderately for increasing consumer protections

The majority voted in favour of a motion introduced by Centre Alliance Senator Stirling Griff. Motions like these don't make any changes on their own but are politically influential because they represent the will of the Senate.

Motion text

That the Senate:

(a) notes that:

(i) during the 2017-18 financial year, over 4 million items were recalled in Australia due to safety concerns, including Takata airbags, Infinity cabling, Safetech pool gate latches and Samsung washing machines,

(ii) according to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, each day at least 10 people require medical attention as a result of injuries received by using unsafe products, and

(iii) earlier this year, the Federal Court found that the Australian distributor for Thermomix failed to notify consumers of safety issues with the TM31 model – the distributor continued to sell $16 million worth of appliances in the two months between becoming aware of the safety faults and issuing a recall;

(b) acknowledges that, unlike the United Kingdom, the European Union, Canada, Malaysia and Brazil, the Australian Consumer Law does not prohibit the sale of unsafe products;

(c) further notes that:

(i) a General Safety Provision (GSP) could be included in the Australian Consumer Law, which would penalise unconscionable retailers who seek to profit from the sale of unsafe products,

(ii) the introduction of a GSP was recommended by the comprehensive Australian Consumer Law Review in 2017,

(iii) the Communique from the Legislative and Governance Forum on Consumer Affairs (LGFCA), on 31 August 2017, noted that further consultation on the inclusion of a GSP would occur prior to a decision being made at the 2018 meeting of the LGCFA,

(iv) consultation has not occurred, and

(v) the LGFCA will meet on 31 August 2018 to consider the best and most consistent protection for Australian and New Zealand consumers; and

(d) calls on the Federal Government to protect consumers, and act on the recommendations of the Australian Consumer Law Review to introduce a GSP.

The majority voted against an amendment introduced by Greens Senator Scott Ludlam, which means that it was unsuccessful.

Senator Ludlam explained that the amendment related to creating "a no-disadvantage test to apply in the long transition period between the passage of the bill and the full migration of all of Telstra’s traffic across to NBN Co".(Read Senator Ludlam's full explanation of the bill and the related discussion here, after 10:47 am. ) This would have protected consumers from potentially being forced into an unfavourable access agreement.

Background to the bill

This bill was introduced following the lapse of the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Competition and Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2009 and relates to the regulation of consumer protection, competition and licensing in telecommunications markets. According to the bills digest, significant changes made by this bill include:

• improving the conditions for competition in telecommunications markets by requiring Telstra to be structurally or functionally separated
• making the telecommunications access regime less susceptible to deliberate delay and obstruction
• removing a technical impediment to the operation of the anti-competitive conduct regime applying to telecommunications markets
• clarifying the universal service obligation (USO) and customer service guarantee (CSG) to make it more enforceable
• extending the obligation to provide priority assistance to those with life threatening conditions to service providers other than Telstra, and
• enabling breaches of civil penalty provisions - including some concerning the USO and the CSG - to be dealt with by issuing infringement notices.(More information about the bill is available in its bills digest.)

With these measures, the bill seeks to address the issues that result from the monopoly caused by Telstra's vertically and horizontally integrated telecommunications network.

Although this bill is substantially the same as the earlier bill of the same name, it does have some additional provisions.

An equal number of senators voted in favour and against amendments introduced by Liberal Senator Simon Birmingham, which means they were unsuccessful. The amendments related to the bill's merits review provisions.(Read Senator Birmingham's explanation of the amendments and the associated debate here, at 10:01 am. )

Background to the bill

This bill was introduced following the lapse of the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Competition and Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2009 and relates to the regulation of consumer protection, competition and licensing in telecommunications markets. According to the bills digest, significant changes made by this bill include:

• improving the conditions for competition in telecommunications markets by requiring Telstra to be structurally or functionally separated
• making the telecommunications access regime less susceptible to deliberate delay and obstruction
• removing a technical impediment to the operation of the anti-competitive conduct regime applying to telecommunications markets
• clarifying the universal service obligation (USO) and customer service guarantee (CSG) to make it more enforceable
• extending the obligation to provide priority assistance to those with life threatening conditions to service providers other than Telstra, and
• enabling breaches of civil penalty provisions - including some concerning the USO and the CSG - to be dealt with by issuing infringement notices.(More information about the bill is available in its bills digest.)

With these measures, the bill seeks to address the issues that result from the monopoly caused by Telstra's vertically and horizontally integrated telecommunications network.

Although this bill is substantially the same as the earlier bill of the same name, it does have some additional provisions.

The majority voted against amendments introduced by Senator Simon Birmingham, which means that they were rejected.

Senator Birmingham explained that the amendments would reinstate the normal operative provisions of the Competition and Consumer Act (formerly the Trade Practices Act) and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) to a deal involving Telstra and NBN Co.(Read Senator Birmingham's full explanation of his amendments and the associated debate here, after 9:10 pm. )

Background to the bill

This bill was introduced following the lapse of the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Competition and Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2009 and relates to the regulation of consumer protection, competition and licensing in telecommunications markets. According to the bills digest, significant changes made by this bill include:

• improving the conditions for competition in telecommunications markets by requiring Telstra to be structurally or functionally separated
• making the telecommunications access regime less susceptible to deliberate delay and obstruction
• removing a technical impediment to the operation of the anti-competitive conduct regime applying to telecommunications markets
• clarifying the universal service obligation (USO) and customer service guarantee (CSG) to make it more enforceable
• extending the obligation to provide priority assistance to those with life threatening conditions to service providers other than Telstra, and
• enabling breaches of civil penalty provisions - including some concerning the USO and the CSG - to be dealt with by issuing infringement notices.(More information about the bill is available in its bills digest.)

With these measures, the bill seeks to address the issues that result from the monopoly caused by Telstra's vertically and horizontally integrated telecommunications network.

Although this bill is substantially the same as the earlier bill of the same name, it does have some additional provisions.

The majority voted against amendments introduced by Liberal Senator Simon Birmingham, which means that they were rejected. Senator Birmingham explained that his amendments would have ensured "that any ministerial direction given to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) regarding the criteria for acceptance of a functional separation or a structural separation [of Telstra] would be a disallowable instrument and therefore subject to the scrutiny of this place and of course the other place".(Read Senator Birmingham's full explanation of his amendments and the associated debate here, after 8:48 pm. )

Background to the bill

This bill was introduced following the lapse of the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Competition and Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2009 and relates to the regulation of consumer protection, competition and licensing in telecommunications markets. According to the bills digest, significant changes made by this bill include:

• improving the conditions for competition in telecommunications markets by requiring Telstra to be structurally or functionally separated
• making the telecommunications access regime less susceptible to deliberate delay and obstruction
• removing a technical impediment to the operation of the anti-competitive conduct regime applying to telecommunications markets
• clarifying the universal service obligation (USO) and customer service guarantee (CSG) to make it more enforceable
• extending the obligation to provide priority assistance to those with life threatening conditions to service providers other than Telstra, and
• enabling breaches of civil penalty provisions - including some concerning the USO and the CSG - to be dealt with by issuing infringement notices.(More information about the bill is available in its bills digest.)

With these measures, the bill seeks to address the issues that result from the monopoly caused by Telstra's vertically and horizontally integrated telecommunications network.

Although this bill is substantially the same as the earlier bill of the same name, it does have some additional provisions.

The majority voted in favour of a motion "that the following items in schedule 1 stand as printed [i.e. remain unchanged]: items 1 to 6, items 11 to 15, item 18, item 21, item 24, item 25, items 28 and 29, divisions 3, 4 and 6 in item 30, and part 10 in item 31". These items and divisions related to spectrum and pay TV, the disallowance of instruments and competition. This motion was put in response to an earlier motion to oppose these items and divisions put by Liberal Senator Ian Macdonald.(Read Senator Macdonald's explanation of his motion and the associated debate here, after 4:29 pm. )

Background to the bill

This bill was introduced following the lapse of the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Competition and Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2009 and relates to the regulation of consumer protection, competition and licensing in telecommunications markets. While substantially the same as the earlier bill, it includes some additional provisions.

According to the bills digest, significant changes made by this bill include:

• improving the conditions for competition in telecommunications markets by requiring Telstra to be structurally or functionally separated
• making the telecommunications access regime less susceptible to deliberate delay and obstruction
• removing a technical impediment to the operation of the anti-competitive conduct regime applying to telecommunications markets
• clarifying the universal service obligation (USO) and customer service guarantee (CSG) to make it more enforceable
• extending the obligation to provide priority assistance to those with life threatening conditions to service providers other than Telstra, and
• enabling breaches of civil penalty provisions - including some concerning the USO and the CSG - to be dealt with by issuing infringement notices.(More information about the bill is available in its bills digest.)

With these measures, the bill seeks to address the issues that result from the monopoly caused by Telstra's vertically and horizontally integrated telecommunications network.

The majority voted against amendments introduced by Liberal Senator Ian Macdonald. Those amendments were opposition amendments (1), (5), (6), (8), (9), (11), (12), (14), (15), (17), (24), (34), (36) to (40), (45) to (57), (64) and (65) and they related to spectrum and pay TV.(Read Senator Macdonald's explanation of the amendments and the associated debate here, after 4:29 pm. )

Background to the bill

This bill was introduced following the lapse of the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Competition and Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2009 and relates to the regulation of consumer protection, competition and licensing in telecommunications markets. While substantially the same as the earlier bill, it includes some additional provisions.

According to the bills digest, significant changes made by this bill include:

• improving the conditions for competition in telecommunications markets by requiring Telstra to be structurally or functionally separated
• making the telecommunications access regime less susceptible to deliberate delay and obstruction
• removing a technical impediment to the operation of the anti-competitive conduct regime applying to telecommunications markets
• clarifying the universal service obligation (USO) and customer service guarantee (CSG) to make it more enforceable
• extending the obligation to provide priority assistance to those with life threatening conditions to service providers other than Telstra, and
• enabling breaches of civil penalty provisions - including some concerning the USO and the CSG - to be dealt with by issuing infringement notices.(More information about the bill is available in its bills digest.)

With these measures, the bill seeks to address the issues that result from the monopoly caused by Telstra's vertically and horizontally integrated telecommunications network.

The majority voted against an amendment introduced by Independent Senator Nick Xenophon, which means that it was unsuccessful.

Senator Xenophon explained that: "Currently, data, including credit card numbers, passport details, PINs, licence numbers, marital status, home address and employment details can be, and are, sent to offshore locations without a customer’s consent". This amendment, he said, "will require banking institutions to obtain written, informed consent from customers before their personal information can be transferred to a person outside Australia".(Read Senator Xenophon's full explanation of the amendment and the associated debate here, after 6:48 pm. )

Background to the bill

The bill was introduced in response to an inquiry by the Productivity Commission into the consumer policy framework and a subsequent government consultation.(Read about that inquiry and the subsequent government consultation in the bills digest. ) It is the first of two bills to implement a national consumer law regime, to be called the Australian Consumer Law. This first bill will set the ground work for the regime and will only introduce the provisions about unfair contract terms, which are terms "that disadvantage one party but that are not reasonably necessary to protect the legitimate interests of the other".(More information about this bill and its soon-to-be-introduced counterpart can be found in the bills digest.)

The second bill, which has not yet been introduced, will implement the bulk of the Australian Consumer Law reforms.

The majority voted against an amendment introduced by Independent Senator Nick Xenophon, which means that it was rejected.

Senator Xenophon explained that "[u]nder this amendment it will be considered an unfair contract term if businesses charge customers additional fees for paying bills in person or with cash - with legal tender".(Read Senator Xenophon's whole explanation of the amendment and the associated debate here, after 6:27 pm. )

Background to the bill

The bill was introduced in response to an inquiry by the Productivity Commission into the consumer policy framework and a subsequent government consultation.(Read about that inquiry and the subsequent government consultation in the bills digest. ) It is the first of two bills to implement a national consumer law regime, to be called the Australian Consumer Law. This first bill will set the ground work for the regime and will only introduce the provisions about unfair contract terms, which are terms "that disadvantage one party but that are not reasonably necessary to protect the legitimate interests of the other".(More information about this bill and its soon-to-be-introduced counterpart can be found in the bills digest.)

The second bill, which has not yet been introduced, will implement the bulk of the Australian Consumer Law reforms.