Cash Distribution Framework Bill 2026, Cash Distribution Framework (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2026

Mr GEORGANAS (Adelaide) (18:43): It gives me great pleasure to be standing here to speak about the Cash Distribution Framework Bill 2026. This bill is exactly about that: the framework and distribution of cash. When you think of the distribution of cash, those of you that are around my age, who started working many, many years ago, all remember the security vehicles that would drive around and drop off our pay cheques in a little yellow envelope.

Handwritten on that envelope were the hours that had been worked, overtime, tax paid et cetera, and it was all cash. Usually on a Thursday lunchtime, you'd get paid, wherever you worked, and cash was immediately put into your pocket. Then, you would have to go off and bank it or pay your bills.

It was all done via cash. Of course, that was many, many years ago, and it's all changed. Technology has transformed the way that we do our banking, our shopping, our purchasing and how we conduct our everyday transactions—and it has been much easier.

For me, for example, it's much easier to have the phone and to tap when I buy a cup of coffee and to have direct debits out of my bank account to pay the bills. I'm sure it's the same for many, many people across our nation. But that's not to say that cash is not required.

Many people depend on actually having cash. You can see how things can go wrong when our internet system goes down and when our telecommunications systems go haywire. We saw that, not that long ago, when a couple of banks' systems went down and you were not able to do transactions and pay for goods that you required.

It caused havoc. The way that we pay and payment methods may be changing, but one thing remains clear and that is that millions and millions of Australians still rely on cash every single day. Especially for older Australians and pensioners, cash remains a trusted and familiar way to manage the household budget.

For many people living in regional and remote areas—as you would know, Deputy Speaker Claydon—cash remains a practical necessity. For Australians facing financial hardship, cash can provide certainty and control over day-to-day expenses. When technology fails—and it has failed; we've seen it fail—when systems go offline and natural disasters disrupt services, cash becomes more than a payment method; it becomes an essential safeguard and an absolute necessity.

That is why access to cash matters, and that's why this legislation before the House is so important. The bill before us, together with the accompanying Cash Distribution Framework (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2026, seeks to ensure that Australians can continue to access and use cash for as long as they choose. It complements the government's cash acceptance mandate, which came into effect on 1 January 2026, and it reflects a simple principle.

That simple principle is that Australians should never be forced away from cash because the system that supports it has been allowed to weaken. For many years, the cash distribution network has come under increasing pressure. When I talk about the distribution network, again, I talk about those vans that everyone is familiar with—Armaguard, previously Prosegur—and would have seen driving around the place, distributing cash.

They're picking up cash from banks, taking cash to banks and taking cash to businesses so there that is cash available to basically keep those cash transactions going. But fewer transactions in cash are now conducted and the infrastructure that supports cash distribution has become increasingly difficult to sustain. Service providers have consolidated.

Competition has been reduced. Today, much of Australia's cash distribution system depends on a near-monopoly provider. That creates risk for all the people who rely on cash; risk that essential services could become less reliable; risk that communities, particularly those outside major cities, could experience reduced access to cash; and risk that Australians who continue to rely on cash could be left behind.

This bill is about addressing those risks before they become problems, and it establishes that framework to place Australia's cash distribution system on a more sustainable footing. Importantly, it also recognises that access to cash is not simply a commercial issue; it's also a public interest issue. The ability to withdraw cash, deposit cash and access basic cash services is an essential part of economic participation for many Australians.

Therefore, this legislation provides the regulatory tools that are necessary to protect that access. It establishes a mechanism for the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to oversee critical cash distribution services and, when they go wrong, to be able to step in. When they need to see changes, they can step in again.

It provides the Reserve Bank of Australia with crisis readiness and intervention powers to ensure the continuity of services should serious risks emerge. These measures are particularly important for regional and rural Australia. In many communities, bank branches have unfortunately closed, financial services have become harder to access and cash services are increasingly concentrated in fewer locations.

For those Australians in rural and regional areas, access to cash is not a matter of convenience; it is an absolute necessity and it is a matter of inclusion. It's about ensuring people can continue to participate fully in the economy regardless of where they live. That's why the transitional arrangements contained in the Cash Distribution Framework (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2026 are equally important.

These provisions will ensure that, during the introduction of the new framework, safeguards remain firmly in place. As I said earlier, it gives the ACCC temporary powers to intervene where there is a significant risk to ongoing cash access, creating an important bridge between the current system and long-term arrangements established by the legislation. At its core, the bill recognises a simple reality, and that reality is that, while Australia's payment system may continue to evolve—and it will evolve—the government has a responsibility to ensure that those who rely on cash are not left behind, whether it's the pensioner paying for their groceries, the small business managing daily transactions or the family living in a regional community where digital alternatives are not always there or not always reliable.

Australians deserve confidence that cash will remain available when they need it, and that is exactly what this legislation seeks to secure. We've seen many banks close lots of their local branches. We've seen ATMs disappearing.

Walking down Rundle Mall in my electorate, in Adelaide—there used to be half-a-dozen ATMs in the major CBD shopping strip of Adelaide. I think I can count three or four, if that, now; they've all disappeared. The banks have basically put them out of action, because they're using less cash.

We've seen bank branches shutting, and we've also seen face-to-face banking services gradually reduced. Banks often argue that these changes reflect changing customer behaviour and the rise of digital payments, but I don't actually believe that. I think people want to be able to walk into a bank and actually speak to a human being.

We're dealing with people's finances. You want to feel confident. You want to know that you've spoken to someone and that someone is taking action on whatever that particular transaction that you've requested is or whatever the inquiry is.

I see some discrepancies when it comes to banks saying that it reflects changing times. I think it's a cost-saving measure from banks, and you can see it from the thousands of jobs that have been offshored because it's cheaper to create work overseas than to pay Australian workers. I feel that when they make profits of billions of dollars through the Australian community they also have a duty to the Australian community, whether it be creating jobs, offering services on a human-to-human basis or a whole range of other things.

They're not just commercial entities; they get a special licence from governments to operate, and there should be some payback—and I'm not saying there isn't. They do great work. They loan money to people.

But, at the same time, let's not lose track of one of the reasons why they're there. They're institutions. They are playing a vital role, and they've played a vital role in the lives of all Australians, but with that role comes a responsibility to ensure that people can continue to access basic banking services, including cash.

In my own community, I've seen firsthand how these changes are affecting people. My own bank has closed several branches in recent years. Like many Australians, I have found it increasingly difficult to find somewhere to walk into and to speak to a person.

Recently, I visited a major bank headquarters in Adelaide expecting assistance with an inquiry I had, only to discover that there were absolutely no tellers at all but machines that you press buttons on to get a ticket and then expect someone to perhaps give you access to their services. That experience highlights the directions that many banks appear to be taking, but it also demonstrates the growing disconnect between what some institutions are offering and what many Australians still need.

The issue is not confined, obviously, to individuals. It's affecting local businesses as well. In my electorate, a constituent of mine whose name was Mary, who operates a Bakers Delight bakery in one of South Australia's largest shopping centres, contacted me last year regarding increasing difficulty of accessing cash.

As a small business, many of their customers were pensioners, and they pay by cash. Every morning, they'd go into the branch in that shopping mall, get their cash float, take it back to the shop, do their banking et cetera, only to find out, when Mary went to her bank one particular morning to deposit her takings and obtain the cash flow and change for the following day's trade, that the service was no longer available, and she was directed elsewhere.

When she approached the other banks, she was informed that they could assist but only if she became a customer to their bank. She was effectively being asked to move her entire banking relationship that she'd had for many years simply to access cash. When she finally located another branch of her own bank willing to provide the service, it was seven kilometres away, and, every day, she was forced to make that additional journey simply to obtain the cash flow and change needed to operate her small business.

Then she was informed that the service was ending there as well after a few months. This is not about convenience. Mary's situation was not just about her convenience.

It was about the ability to run a small business and how that small business functions. It was very important that she had access to cash. We're also seeing cash refused in some everyday situations.

For example, I've heard stories of families taking their children with friend's children—in other words, taking friends' kids as well along with their family—to concerts and kids events in Adelaide, and these friends of the kids arriving with cash that their parents had given them to buy food and drinks during the interval or during the break of the event. When they went to purchase something, they were told cash is not accepted—not because they didn't have money, because they've got the cash, and not because they couldn't pay, because they've got the cash, but because the venue had decided that only cards would be accepted.

This was a story that was relayed to me by parents of these kids. What messages are we sending when a young Australian turns up with perfectly legal tender and is told that it cannot be used? We know that, as Australians, we value choice, and most Australians use digital payments every day, and many, as I said, enjoy, like myself, the convenience of tapping that phone and that option that they have, but there should be an option for people that want to use cash.

We need to have that option, as I said. Technology should expand choice not remove it. Progress should include people not exclude them.

In a country as fair and inclusive as Australia, every single citizen should retain the right to access, use and rely on cash for as long as they choose, because cash is more than a payment method. It is a matter of choice, accessibility, independence and dignity.