News Journalism Payments Bill 2026, News Journalism Payments (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2026

Mrs McINTOSH (Lindsay) (17:52): I rise to speak on the News Journalism Payments Bill 2026. The coalition supports a strong, sustainable and independent Australian news media sector. Quality journalism is one of the foundations of our democracy.

It informs public debate. It holds governments and institutions to account. It gives voice to communities that might otherwise go unheard.

And it ensures Australians have access to accurate, reliable and diverse sources of information. This is especially important in regional Australia, where a local newspaper, radio station or digital outlet may be the only source of detailed reporting on issues that matter to local communities. The legislation before the parliament seeks to establish a new news media bargaining incentive scheme following the Albanese government's decision to abandon the coalition's news media bargaining code.

As we consider these bills, it is important that we understand not only what is being proposed but also the history that brought us to this point. The reality is that Australia did not arrive at this debate by accident; it was the coalition that first recognised a growing imbalance between global digital platforms and Australian news publishers. It was the coalition that commissioned the ACCC to investigate that problem.

And it was the coalition that delivered the world-leading news media bargaining code. In 2019, the former coalition government asked the ACCC to examine the growing market power of digital platforms and the implications for competition, journalism and the sustainability of Australian media businesses. The inquiry confirmed what many publishers already knew: digital platforms had become unavoidable gatekeepers between news organisations and their audiences.

News businesses continued to carry the costs of producing journalism, employing reporters and maintaining editorial standards, yet an ever-growing share of advertising revenue was flowing to global technology companies. The market had fundamentally changed. The bargaining power between publishers and platforms had become deeply unequal.

Initially, the coalition pursued a voluntary code. We wanted commercial agreements. We wanted the parties to negotiate in good faith.

But, when that failed to produce meaningful outcomes, we acted. In 2021, the coalition delivered the mandatory news media bargaining code. The code was based on a straightforward principle: if digital platforms derive significant value from Australian news content and the audiences it attracts, they should contribute to the sustainability of Australian journalism.

The code worked. It delivered more than 30 commercial agreements reportedly worth around $250 million annually to Australian news organisations. Importantly, those agreements were commercial agreements.

Funding flowed directly between news businesses and digital platforms. Government was not in the middle. Government was not allocating funding.

Government was not deciding who received support. The market was encouraged to correct a bargaining imbalance through negotiated commercial outcomes. The code became a global benchmark.

Countries around the world looked to Australia as the pioneer of a new approach to supporting public-interest journalism in the digital age. That achievement should not be forgotten; nor should it be rewritten. The problem was not that the media code failed; the problem was that Meta chose to walk away from the table.

In April 2024, Meta announced it would not renew its commercial agreements with Australian news publishers, and that created a significant challenge—nobody disputes that. But, faced with that challenge, Labor had an important choice to make. The government could have strengthened the existing framework.

It could have explored ways to better enforce the intent of the code. It could have examined measures that ensured platforms could not evade their responsibilities simply by withdrawing from commercial negotiations. Instead, Labor chose a different path.

It chose to dismantle the code and start again. The result is a news media bargaining incentive scheme, now before the parliament, following a two-year delay. Australian news organisations have paid a very heavy price.

Under the new framework, major digital platforms with Australian digital advertising revenue exceeding $250 million will either enter into commercial agreements with Australian news publishers or pay a charge. The charge is set at 2.5 per cent of Australian digital advertising revenue. Platforms must enter into at least eight qualifying commercial agreements to fully utilise the offset arrangements.

Expenditure on agreements with larger publishers attracts an offset of 150 per cent. Expenditure on agreements with small and medium publishers attracts an offset of 200 per cent. In practical terms, every dollar spent supporting a small or medium publisher counts as $2 against the platform's liability.

Where commercial deals are not done, revenue collected through the charge will be redistributed through a statutory news journalism payment scheme. On its face, the objective is sensible. The coalition agrees that digital platforms should contribute to the sustainability of Australian journalism.

The question is whether this framework achieves that objective more effectively than the coalition's code. It is a question that deserves really close scrutiny. The government's own estimates suggest the scheme will generate between $200 million and $250 million in support for Australian journalism through either commercial agreements or payments under the framework.

Those figures invite an obvious question: what is actually better than the system that Labor abandoned? The coalition's code reportedly supported agreements worth around $250 million a year. After several years of consultation, extensive negotiations and an entirely new legislative framework, the government's own estimates suggest the Australian news media will actually go backwards.

That is why the coalition wants to see the charge increased. This is why many media organisations have questioned whether Labor's changes represent an improvement at all. Australians are entitled to ask whether dismantling the existing framework was necessary if the result is a scheme that produces similar outcomes while introducing additional complexity.

That question becomes even more important when we examine how the new scheme will operate. The effectiveness of the framework depends entirely on the accurate calculation of Australian digital advertising revenue, and that is a very critical point. The charge imposed on technology companies is calculated using their Australian digital advertising revenue.

If that revenue is understated, liabilities are understated. If liabilities are understated, the support flowing to Australian journalism is diminished. If liabilities are understated, the incentive to negotiate meaningful commercial agreements is weakened.

The entire framework relies on confidence that revenues are being properly measured and accurately reported, and that is why the coalition believes the Australian Taxation Office must have robust powers to access information and verify the revenue declarations made by digital platforms. Revenue can be allocated in complicated ways. The parliament must ensure that the integrity of the scheme is protected and that avoidance opportunities are minimised.

Without confidence in the calculation of revenue, confidence in the scheme itself is undermined. The coalition also believes careful attention must be paid to the operation of the news journalism payments scheme. One of the most significant differences between Labor's framework and the coalition's code is the role of government.

Under the coalition's code, the objective was to facilitate commercial agreements between publishers and platforms. Under this scheme, where charges are collected, substantial funding will be distributed through a government administered statutory process. Ninety per cent of any revenue collected will be distributed according to a statutory formula.

The distribution is linked primarily to editorial journalistic staffing. Ten per cent will be reserved for grants, with five per cent specifically allocated to the Australian Associated Press. The coalition recognises the value of the AAP and the important role it plays in Australia's media ecosystem.

We also recognise that many smaller publishers face genuine challenges. Regional publishers, local news organisations, community outlets and independent startups—these organisations often operate with limited resources while performing an invaluable public service. They deserve the opportunity to participate in the benefits generated by the scheme.

However, any government administered funding arrangement must be transparent, accountable and subject to appropriate safeguards. There are serious questions about media and multicultural media grants. There's evidence that recipients have not been properly vetted, with funds going to groups which have platformed extremists and undermined social cohesion; that grants have been made to advertising agencies and soft media outlets that don't appear to produce core news or public-interest journalism; and that grants have been strategically used by government ministers at critical points of the electoral cycle in order to secure favourable coverage from media outlets.

This is not acceptable. Public confidence in journalism depends not only on sustainable funding but on confidence that support is being provided fairly, transparently and independently. That principle matters.

Australians want media organisations to scrutinise governments, not depend on them. They want journalists asking difficult questions, not feeling constrained by funding arrangements. That is why transparency and accountability must remain central considerations as the scheme is implemented.

The coalition will continue to monitor the operation of these arrangements carefully. The coalition remains committed to ensuring that those who derive significant value from Australian news contribute fairly to its production. We remain committed to supporting sustainable journalism and strong regional media.

We remain committed to preserving a diverse and independent media landscape. We remain committed to ensuring that policy in this area delivers practical outcomes, rather than simply creating new layers of complexity. While aspects of these bills warrant close scrutiny and, in our view, further improvement, the objective remains an important one.

Australia needs a strong media sector. Australia needs independent journalism. Australia needs news organisations that can continue to serve their communities, hold power to account and strengthen our democracy.

That objective is too important to get wrong. For those reasons, the coalition wants to see this bill strengthen in the best interests of Australian journalism, Australian consumers and our great democracy. I move: That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House: (1) acknowledges the Coalition's News Media Bargaining Code delivered significant commercial support for Australian journalism; (2) notes that Australian publishers have endured more than two years of delay and uncertainty while the government refused to designate social media companies under the Code; and (3) is unconvinced that the News Bargaining Incentive Scheme, as currently drafted, will provide more support for Australian journalists and publishers than was delivered under the Coalition's News Media Bargaining Code".

The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Mr Georganas ): Is the motion seconded? Mr McCormack: I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.