Cash Distribution Framework Bill 2026, Cash Distribution Framework (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2026
Ms LE (Fowler) (18:06): Cash is still part of everyday life in my electorate, not as a relic or a last resort but as ordinary commerce. Walk through Cabramatta, Fairfield, Liverpool or Canley Heights and you will see businesses taking cash across the counter, families doing their weekly shop and people using cash to manage everyday costs. I send money home to relatives in Vietnam as well.
I use cash; I hand over cash at a money transfer business in Cabramatta, knowing that my aunty, who lives in a province in Vietnam, will have cash on the other end. For many people in my community, cash remains part of how they earn, trade and pay. The Cash Distribution Framework Bill 2026 is therefore not a debate about the past; it's about whether the system that gets cash into tills and ATMs will continue to hold up.
The bill gives the Reserve Bank power to designate cash distribution providers whose disruption could threaten the continuity of cash access. It gives the ACCC oversight of relevant agreements and commercial terms, allows it to set service standards and provides a pathway for disputes to be resolved. It also establishes crisis powers: directions, statutory management and the ability to transfer a business or its assets.
In a qualifying crisis, up to $400 million in Commonwealth funding support may be available, subject to ministerial authorisation, to help keep cash moving if a critical provider fails. I acknowledge the government for taking this step. The cash-in-transit sector has consolidated to the point where it rests largely on one set of shoulders.
The court-enforceable undertaking secured by the ACCC when Armaguard and Prosegur merged expires in September this year. When it lapses, the specific safeguards around service levels, geographic coverage and price increases will fall away. Doing nothing is not a neutral choice, and therefore I support the objective of this bill.
There are three parts of the framework that I welcome. First, it should be proportionate. The framework is intended to focus on providers whose role is significant to the national cash distribution system.
A small local operator servicing a handful of businesses should not face the same burden as a provider whose failure could affect communities across the country. Second, I welcome the ACCC's role. For a small business with limited options for cash collection, delivery or ATM servicing, there can be very little bargaining power over fees and service conditions.
Transparent arrangements, service standards and a practical path to resolve these disputes can make a real difference. Third, I welcome the crisis management regime. We have all experienced payment outages.
Of course, the Telstra outage is a very recent example. When terminals go down, transactions can continue only where cash is available in the till. People do not care about the corporate structure of a cash-in-transit provider.
They want to know whether they can buy dinner, fill the car and get to work in the morning. There are parts of this framework I'll be watching closely. First, the powers are significant, and significant powers need accountability.
The definition of a cash-distribution service is broad. Under the bill, the minister may make rules to include further services connected with cash or its availability or exclude service from the definition. The Reserve Bank may designate a constitutional corporation that provides cash-distribution services where it supports a significant part of the system, where disruption could threaten continuity or where it otherwise has a significant role in the cash-distribution system.
Flexibility is needed, but it must be matched by transparency. When a provider is designated or the rules are changed, affected businesses and communities should be able to understand the reasons and the likely impact. Consultation should be meaningful.
Appropriate review processes should be accessible, and parliament should be properly informed where public money is committed. Second, we need to be alert to the cost of compliance. The explanatory material recognises that designated entities may face significant costs in establishing new systems and reporting processes.
The risk is that some of those costs are passed through the supply chain to banks, retailers, local businesses and, ultimately, consumers. A cash-resilient distribution system is important, but resilience must not come at an unreasonable cost to the small businesses that rely on cash every day. The bill gives the ACCC an important role in overseeing commercial terms, including pricing.
The government and regulators should use that role to monitor the effect of this framework on service fees and access costs, especially for small businesses and communities with limited alternatives. Third, the framework must serve all communities that rely on cash. The bill rightly recognises the importance of cash for older Australians and people in regional and remote areas, but the policy discussion cannot stop here.
Outer suburban culturally diverse communities like Fowler must also be seen. We are in metropolitan Sydney, but that does not mean everyone has the same access to digital banking, payment systems or financial information. The Reserve Bank and the ACCC should measure cash access in a way that identifies communities with high cash reliance, limited digital confidence or language barriers, not only communities that are geographically remote.
If they rely only on national averages or a simple regional-versus-metropolitan divide, they risk missing places like Fowler. Separately, the cash acceptance mandate that commenced in January is important, but it has a limited reach. It applies to certain grocery and fuel retailers, while small businesses with aggregated annual turnover below $10 million are generally exempt.
Many local retailers also fall outside the relevant grocery and fuel categories altogether. I'm not asking to place new obligations on small business; I'm asking that we do not tell ourselves the job is finished. I support the objective of this bill.
I want it to work, but the government and regulators must be clear about who they are measuring. Cash used in south-west Sydney is not marginal, and we've heard from the previous member how important cash is to society. For many people and businesses in my electorate, it remains part of everyday life.
Keep cash available, keep it affordable, and count my community in the data.