Obligations may be too low
Critics worried the spending requirement could largely preserve what major platforms already spend, rather than force a meaningful lift in new Australian programs.
Communications Legislation Amendment (Australian Content Requirement for Subscription Video On Demand (Streaming) Services)
Current status
This bill became law on Dec 4th, 2025.
Policy area
Transport & communications
What does this bill do?
Major streaming services must spend on new Australian shows, either 10% of Australian program spending or, if they choose, 7.5% of Australian revenue.
Why was it introduced?
SVODA paid streaming service where users choose programs to watch when they want, rather than at a scheduled broadcast time. services had no Australian content obligations, and 2020 reviews found they offered comparatively few Australian stories while audiences increasingly used them as a main way to watch screen content. The bill requires major paid streaming services to spend a minimum share of program expenditure, or revenue if chosen, on new eligible Australian programs.
Broader context
Australia already had local-content rules for traditional television, but subscription streaming services had no equivalent obligation, even as audiences increasingly watched screen stories through platforms that 2020 reviews found carried comparatively little Australian content. Screen-sector pressure and the Albanese government’s Revive commitment led to consultations through 2023 to 2025, and the bill responded by requiring major paid streaming services to put a minimum share of their Australian program spending, or chosen revenue basis, into new Australian programs.
Key criticism
The main criticism was that the bill may be too weak: its spending test could let major streamers meet obligations without materially increasing genuinely new Australian drama, children’s, documentary or other local production. This concern came from crossbench and Greens supporters seeking stronger rules, and from screen producers in earlier consultation, rather than from broad opposition to the bill’s goal.
Who supported it?
Hon Tony Burke MP introduced this bill. It passed on the voices.
Introduced in House 06 Nov 2025
Passed House 25 Nov 2025
Passed Senate 27 Nov 2025
Became law 04 Dec 2025
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 04 Dec 2025
Final passage
Passed without a counted vote
Members called out ‘aye’ or ‘no’ — no individual votes were recorded.
Passage speed
28 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
What does this bill do?
-
Major streaming services must spend on new Australian shows, either 10% of Australian program spending or, if they choose, 7.5% of Australian revenue.
-
The rules apply to large paid streaming services with at least 1 million Australian subscribers, but not mainly user-made or niche services.
-
Eligible Australian content includes drama, children’s programs, documentaries, arts and education, but not news, sport, ads or sponsorship.
-
Streaming services can carry spending shortfalls or surpluses for two years, but unpaid shortfalls can lead to civil penalties and keep carrying forward.
-
The media regulator will get annual reports from covered services and notifications from paid services with at least 250,000 Australian subscribers.
Show source excerpts
-
(1) The Australian content expenditure requirement for a major SVOD service for an SVOD reporting year (the relevant year) is an amount equal to 10% of the service’s total program expenditure for Australia for the relevant year.
Communications Legislation Amendment (Australian Content Requirement for Subscription Video On Demand (Streaming) Services) Act 2025 final Act text -
Major SVOD services are SVOD services that have at least 1 million paying subscribers in Australia, and satisfy certain other requirements. Services that predominantly provide user-generated content, or that have limited appeal in Australia, are excluded.
Communications Legislation Amendment (Australian Content Requirement for Subscription Video On Demand (Streaming) Services) explanatory memorandum -
To be an eligible Australian program, a program must be a drama program, a children’s program, a documentary, an arts program or an educational program, and must be an Australian or New Zealand program.
Communications Legislation Amendment (Australian Content Requirement for Subscription Video On Demand (Streaming) Services) Act 2025 final Act text -
An expenditure requirement can be carried over for 2 years. If it remains unacquitted after 2 years, the providers of the service may be liable for a civil penalty, and the unacquitted expenditure requirement continues to carry over to further years.
Communications Legislation Amendment (Australian Content Requirement for Subscription Video On Demand (Streaming) Services) Act 2025 final Act text -
Providers of certain SVOD services that are regulated under this Part must give annual reports to the ACMA. Providers of certain SVOD services that have at least 250,000 paying subscribers in Australia must also give notifications to the ACMA.
Communications Legislation Amendment (Australian Content Requirement for Subscription Video On Demand (Streaming) Services) Act 2025 final Act text
Context
Broader context for this bill
Australia already had local-content rules for traditional television, but subscription streaming services had no equivalent obligation, even as audiences increasingly watched screen stories through platforms that 2020 reviews found carried comparatively little Australian content. Screen-sector pressure and the Albanese government’s Revive commitment led to consultations through 2023 to 2025, and the bill responded by requiring major paid streaming services to put a minimum share of their Australian program spending, or chosen revenue basis, into new Australian programs.
- 2020
Inquiries highlight lack of streaming mandates
Government reviews identified that major streaming platforms had no local content obligations despite their growing dominance in the Australian media landscape.
Communications Legislation Amendment (Australian Content Requirement for Subscription Video On Demand (Streaming) Services) explanatory memorandum ↗ - 26 Apr 2022
Producers lobby for higher local production quotas
Australian screen industry representatives advocated for significant local content requirements to ensure robust investment in domestic storytelling.
Australian Financial Review ↗ - 18 Nov 2022
Government pledges mandatory streaming quotas
The Arts Minister confirmed that major international and domestic streaming providers would be required to meet new Australian drama production targets.
Australian Financial Review ↗ - 30 Jan 2023
National Cultural Policy sets implementation timeline
The federal government's 'Revive' policy established a framework and deadline for introducing formal Australian content requirements for digital platforms.
Communications Legislation Amendment (Australian Content Requirement for Subscription Video On Demand (Streaming) Services) explanatory memorandum ↗ - March to May 2023
Government consults media industry on quota models
The Department Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts held targeted discussions with broadcasters and streaming services to refine the proposed regulations.
Communications Legislation Amendment (Australian Content Requirement for Subscription Video On Demand (Streaming) Services) explanatory memorandum ↗ - 06 Nov 2025
Government introduces streaming content legislation
The bill established a dual-track investment model requiring large streaming services to dedicate a percentage of their Australian revenue or program spending to local content.
Parliamentary timeline ↗ - 27 Nov 2025
Parliament passes the bill
The legislation completed its passage through both the House of Representatives and the Senate to formalise Australian content obligations for streaming services.
Parliamentary timeline ↗
Legislative route
How did it move through Parliament?
House Senate
Introduced 06 Nov 2025
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
Second reading opened 06 Nov 2025
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Second reading debate 24 Nov 2025
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Second reading debate 25 Nov 2025
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House second reading agreed 25 Nov 2025
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
Consideration in detail debate 25 Nov 2025
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House third reading agreed 25 Nov 2025
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
Introduced 26 Nov 2025
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
Second reading opened 26 Nov 2025
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Senate second reading agreed 27 Nov 2025
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
Senate third reading agreed 27 Nov 2025
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
Passed both houses 27 Nov 2025
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Finally passed both Houses
Assent 04 Dec 2025
The Governor-General gave Royal Assent, turning the bill into an Act.
Key criticism
The main case against this bill
The main criticism was that the bill may be too weak: its spending test could let major streamers meet obligations without materially increasing genuinely new Australian drama, children’s, documentary or other local production. This concern came from crossbench and Greens supporters seeking stronger rules, and from screen producers in earlier consultation, rather than from broad opposition to the bill’s goal.
Parliamentary criticism was mostly pro-bill and aimed at strengthening the scheme, not defeating it.
Loopholes and weak safeguards
Some supporters argued the scheme needed tighter drafting so streamers could not satisfy the rules in ways that failed to deliver balanced investment across Australian content types or protect local intellectual property.
Could still mean less Australian content
Screen Producers Australia previously warned that a weak streaming investment scheme could result in less new Australian content on streaming services if the settings did not drive additional production.
Further sources
Votes
Recorded votes
How the bill itself passed
The bill passed both chambers on the voices, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes for final passage.
Passed House passed the bill
House agreed to the bill's third reading on the voices, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes for final passage in that chamber.
Passed
House passed the bill
Passed on the voices
In a voice vote, members call out Aye or No and the presiding officer judges which side has it. Individual names are only recorded if a formal division is called.
Passed Senate passed the bill
Senate agreed to the bill's third reading on the voices, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes for final passage in that chamber.
Passed
Senate passed the bill
Passed on the voices
In a voice vote, members call out Aye or No and the presiding officer judges which side has it. Individual names are only recorded if a formal division is called.
Parliamentary debate
Who spoke, and what they said
Start here — lead voices
Sponsor speech Supports
Tony Burke
Burke backs the bill and says it should pass because it will require major streaming services to invest in new Australian programs, guaranteeing Australians can keep seeing local stories on screen.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead supporting voice Supports
Allegra Spender
Allegra Spender supports the bill and wants it passed this year because it finally creates streaming content obligations to protect Australian stories and jobs, but she says the quotas are too weak and has proposed amendments to close loopholes and strengthen the scheme.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead non-major voice Supports
Zali Steggall
Steggall supports the bill because she says Australia needs streaming services to invest in local content to protect screen jobs and keep Australian stories on screen, though she argues the scheme is overdue and should be strengthened with clearer rules and better balance across content types.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead voice Mixed
Julian Leeser
Leeser says the Coalition supports the bill’s goal of backing Australian content and the screen industry, but criticises the government for rushing it and says it should be examined through an inquiry without penalising the industry.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
Labor
16 speakers · 16 support
Labor
16 speakers · 16 support
-
David Moncrieff Moncrieff supports the bill and wants it passed because it would make major streaming services invest in Australian content, which he says will strengthen local jobs, representation and cultural identity.
“The people of Hughes are passionate, diverse and proud to be Australian, and they want their stories reflected. They value fairness and contribution. The expect that, when a service operates in Australia and profits from Australian households, it also invests in Australian culture. This bill meets that expectation in a balanced, proportionate and effective way. Australians love their television. They love their film. This bill gives Australians the opportunity to love Australian film and media like that. I commend this bill to the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Madonna Jarrett Jarrett supports the bill and wants it passed because it will require major streaming services to invest in Australian programs, making local stories easier to find and backing jobs in the screen industry.
“I rise in support of the Communications Legislation Amendment (Australian Content Requirement for Subscription Video On Demand (Streaming) Services) Bill 2025. When this bill passes, Australians will see more Australian produced content on their streaming services. Whether you are watching on your television, iPhone, iPad or laptop, it is important that you get to see it and that our government plays a role in supporting Australian content where it can.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Malarndirri McCarthy McCarthy supports the bill and says it will make major streaming services invest in new Australian programs so local stories remain available as audiences shift from broadcast television to streaming.
“The Australian Government committed to ensuring Australians have access to local stories wherever they choose to watch their screen content. This Bill fulfils that commitment.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Peter Khalil Peter Khalil strongly backs the bill, saying it will force large streaming services to reinvest in Australian stories and give the local screen industry the stable work and certainty it needs.
“So we as a government are always going to invest in our culture, our industries and our future. I think this is a really important bill for Australia's cultural identity and for all the creative people and all the young people, as well as older people, who want to continue to work in creative industries, to tell our stories. It's such a special part of who we are. With the arts, it's not just about the economics. It's the heart and soul of any society. It's intangible to a certain extent. It's immeasurable to a certain extent. But you know when you see it and you understand when you see it how important it is to us as a people to be able to tell those stories and how that moves us emotionally. It moves our hearts as well as our minds. I think it's so important to be able to provide this certainty for the screen industry. That is why I am very, very happy to commend this bill to the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Renee Coffey Coffey supports the bill and says it should pass because it will require major streaming services to invest in new Australian programs, protecting local stories, jobs and children's access to content that reflects Australia.
“This bill is one concrete way to give life to that idea. It delivers on the commitment made in Revive to introduce Australian content requirements for streaming services. It delivers on the commitment made by our prime minister and the Minister for the Arts during the election campaign. And it delivers on the commitments from the Minister for Communications and the Minister for the Arts to legislate an Australian content obligation on streaming platforms. It says to every child in Griffith who wants to write, act, animate or direct that there will be space for their story. It says to every worker in our screen and creative industries that their skills and jobs matter, and this Albanese Labor government is prepared to put in place the rules that give them a fair go. It says to audiences that, in a global market with endless choice, Australian stories will not be left to chance; they will be guaranteed.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Susan Templeman Templeman strongly backs the bill and wants it passed because it will require major streaming services to invest in Australian productions, protecting local stories, jobs and the screen industry in the digital era.
“Streaming platforms can and do produce fantastic Australian content. This reform is about guaranteeing that this will continue in the decades ahead. If streaming platforms are where Australian audiences are watching—and, increasingly, they will be—Australian stories must be there too. It's the responsibility of government to guarantee that access, and that's exactly what this legislation will do. By passing this law, the House will send a clear signal that providing Australian content is not a voluntary contribution but a fundamental obligation.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Matt Burnell Matt Burnell strongly backs the bill and wants it passed, arguing that big streaming services should be required to invest in Australian productions so local stories, jobs and creative opportunities are protected.
“Whether you're watching Heartbreak High or Hey Hey It's Saturday, Gladiators or Glitch, you'll know that what's on your screen is part of something bigger—a fair go for Australian stories. Maybe that's the real takeaway here—that our screens aren't just entertainment; they're mirrors. They show us who we are, where we've been and what we can become. Whether you're watching from a lounge in Virginia, a kitchen in Truro or a shed in Angle Vale, you'll always have access to stories that sound like home. That's what this bill guarantees. As The Castle taught us, when you stand up for what's right, 'it's the vibe'—it's the vibe of fairness, creativity and community. It's the vibe of Australia. For that reason, I proudly commend the Communications Legislation Amendment (Australian Content Requirement for Subscription Video On Demand (Streaming) Services) Bill 2025 to the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Jo Briskey Jo Briskey supports the bill and wants it passed because it will force major streaming services to invest in Australian programs, creating jobs and making sure Australian stories remain visible on screen.
“We make sure that, when our kids and grandkids sit down to stream something, they'll see a bit of home—a Hills hoist, a magpie swoop, a sausage sizzle or backyard cricket. They'll see who we are—bold, funny, complicated and beautiful—and they'll know they belong to a country that celebrates its own voices. It's not just one voice but many. From the world's oldest storytellers, our First Nations creators, to the countless cultures that now call Australia home, our stories weave together like a great big patchwork doona, stitched with grit, colour and heart. That's the real magic of Australia—every accent, every background and every yarn adding a new shade to our national story. They remind the world that Australia doesn't just watch culture; we create it. This bill says, loud and clear, our stories, our artists and our future are worth every frame. It's the vibe, and it's unmistakably, unapologetically Australian. I commend the bill to the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Ash Ambihaipahar Ambihaipahar backs the bill and urges the House to pass it because it will force major streaming platforms to invest in Australian programs, protecting local stories, jobs and cultural representation.
“I commend the screen sector and Screen Producers Australia for their continued advocacy, and I commend the many Australian creators whose talent, passion and perseverance has kept Australian storytelling alive even during the most challenging years. This bill is for them. This bill is for our future children. I proudly support this bill and encourage all members of the House to do the same.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Alison Byrnes Alison Byrnes supports the bill and wants it passed because she says streaming services should be required to invest in Australian content to protect local jobs, culture and storytelling.
“I am also proud to rise today in support of this Communications Legislation Amendment (Australian Content Requirement for Subscription Video On Demand (Streaming) Services) Bill 2025. I am a fierce advocate for celebrating and protecting Australian content and Australian artists in all their forms, so I was really pleased to have the opportunity to talk about the buzz happening in the Illawarra right now with some really exciting projects we have seen this year.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Julie-Ann Campbell Julie-Ann Campbell supports the bill and wants it passed because she says streaming services should be required to invest in Australian content so local stories, jobs and the screen industry are protected as viewing shifts online.
“Up until now, there have been absolutely no Australian content requirements for subscription video-on-demand or streaming services. This bill resolves that astounding problem. It's important that, while our viewing habits may be changing, our access to the stories that reflect who we are as a nation is unaffected. This bill means that, whether you're watching a show on commercial television or accessing a program via streaming, you will be able to watch Australian stories being told. It means that, whether you're picking up a channel changer, pressing a button on your phone or swiping, Australian stories can still be told no matter what the screen looks like.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Justine Elliot Justine Elliot supports the bill and wants it passed because it will force streaming services to invest in Australian stories, protect local culture and create jobs, including in regional screen industries.
“In conclusion, this bill ensures that Australian content remains front and centre, and that's what our government is committed to doing. It's about protecting our culture, supporting our economy and guaranteeing that Australian stories continue to be told on the platforms that Australians enjoy and watch all the time—on our streaming services. I commend the bill to the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Louise Miller-Frost Louise Miller-Frost supports the bill and wants it passed because she says streaming services should be required to invest in Australian programs so local stories, jobs and culture are protected as viewing shifts online.
“The Australian government committed to ensuring Australians have access to local stories wherever they choose to watch their screen content, and this bill fulfils that commitment. Since their introduction in Australia, streaming services have created some extraordinary shows. In the last few years, many of them have produced great Australian content. A minority, however, are yet to produce any. This legislation is not a criticism of the streaming businesses in Australia; it's an endorsement of Australian stories, a celebration of Australian creatives and a show of respect for the Australian audience. This bill will guarantee Australians will have access to Australian stories now and into the future. It will ensure that, no matter what remote you're holding, Australian stories will be at your fingertips. Australians will see themselves and know each other, and the world will meet us. I commend the bill to the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Tony Burke ★ Burke backs the bill and says it should pass because it will require major streaming services to invest in new Australian programs, guaranteeing Australians can keep seeing local stories on screen.
“The Australian government committed to ensuring Australians have access to local stories wherever they choose to watch their screen content. This bill fulfils that commitment.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Anika Wells Wells supports the bill and says it should pass because it will force major streaming services to invest in Australian programs, helping local producers and workers and ensuring Australians can keep seeing Australian stories on screen.
“The requirements in this bill will give vital support to our domestic screen sector and our arts workers, by ensuring that quality local stories continue to be produced in Australia. The legislation delivers on our commitment in the National Cultural Policy—Revive to set local content requirements for streaming services. It recognises that Australia's people and their stories are our greatest cultural asset. The goal of this legislation is simple: we want Australians to be able to see Australian stories, no matter where they choose to watch. We want Australia's screen sector to thrive. We want to see new technology bring opportunities for Australian producers, writers and actors, and the many crew members who help bring a show together.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Joanne Ryan Joanne Ryan strongly supports the bill and says it will protect Australian identity by requiring major streaming services to invest in local content.
“I'm proud to stand here in this place today to support this important piece of legislation. The Communications Legislation Amendment (Australian Content Requirement for Subscription Video On Demand (Streaming) Services) Bill 2025 is yet another example of the Albanese Labor government delivering on its commitment to ensure that Australian stories continue to be told, shared and celebrated on Australian screens. It is a commitment rooted not only in policy but in our understanding of who we are as a nation.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Coalition
2 speakers · 1 support · 1 mixed
Coalition
2 speakers · 1 support · 1 mixed
-
Julian Leeser ★ Leeser says the Coalition supports the bill’s goal of backing Australian content and the screen industry, but criticises the government for rushing it and says it should be examined through an inquiry without penalising the industry.
“Let me be clear about the coalition's position. Our position on this bill is simple: we support Australian content, we support the Australian screen industry, and we support Australian content being accessible, visible and easily found on Australian screens. In the ordinary course, this bill would be the subject of an inquiry. We don't accept that the industry should face a potential financial penalty if this parliament conducts such an inquiry. This is an issue within the government's power to correct, and we ask them to do so. I thank the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Anne Webster Webster supports the bill because she says streaming platforms should be required to invest in Australian stories and the bill is a needed first step to level the playing field with local broadcasters.
“This is about Australian stories, and all of Australia needs to hear Australian stories—whether it's documentaries, whether it's creative films—and streaming platforms need to invest in Australian stories. That is what this bill is about, and I will be moving amendments to ensure this happens.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Greens
1 speaker · 1 support
Greens
1 speaker · 1 support
-
Elizabeth Watson-Brown Watson-Brown says the Greens will support the bill in the House because they want streaming services to carry Australian content and help sustain local stories, jobs and children's programming.
“The Greens will support this bill in the House, and reserve our position in the Senate. I want to speak a bit more about the importance of our local screen industry and perhaps one of Brisbane's greatest home-grown success stories. I am very proud to say that Bluey and the Heeler family live in my electorate of Ryan. That's disputed by some. There are people out there who claim that Bluey lives in Red Hill. But I know they live in The Gap or maybe Bardon, or the western part of Ashgrove or Auchenflower or Toowong or indeed Paddington. In any case, I'm proud of what Bluey represents—that is, Brisbane at its best.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Minor parties and independents
4 speakers · 3 support · 1 unclear
Minor parties and independents
4 speakers · 3 support · 1 unclear
-
Allegra Spender ★ Allegra Spender supports the bill and wants it passed this year because it finally creates streaming content obligations to protect Australian stories and jobs, but she says the quotas are too weak and has proposed amendments to close loopholes and strengthen the scheme.
“In conclusion, this bill moves us in the right direction, but we cannot pretend it's enough. Our screen industry is too important, too vulnerable and too full of potential for us to settle for the status quo. Australian stories enrich our culture, strengthen our community and help us see ourselves on screen. The bill lays important groundwork, and I support it, but we should remain ambitious, and I wish I had seen a more ambitious bill. I look forward to working within this parliament and with my community to build for a stronger, fairer and more vibrant screen future that our nation deserves.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Zali Steggall ★ Steggall supports the bill because she says Australia needs streaming services to invest in local content to protect screen jobs and keep Australian stories on screen, though she argues the scheme is overdue and should be strengthened with clearer rules and better balance across content types.
“I welcome the government introducing this bill—the Australian screen industry cannot survive in its current form—but, let's be clear, it's well overdue. There is some complexity. There hasn't been broad consultation on where the bill has finally landed, and there are concerns from all involved as to how it's going to work in application—whether or not there is going to be sufficient certainty around the definitions of Australian content—and about some of the issues that I've touched on in terms of what will be included in that spend. Let's make sure this legislation marks the beginning of a more ambitious, progressive, accountable and optimistic future for Australian storytelling.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Monique Ryan Ryan says the bill tackles a real need to protect Australian stories on streaming services, but argues it is too weak because it sets low spending obligations instead of real content quotas and may do little more than preserve current investment levels.
“That is why this bill matters, but it's also why this bill is really disappointing. It sets a baseline of 10 per cent of program expenditure or 7.5 per cent of Australian derived revenue must go to the production of new Australian programs. This is not a content requirement; it is an expenditure requirement. Major subscription video-on-demand services are required under this bill to meet a certain level of expenditure on new, eligible Australian programs, but there is no requirement to carry or to provide a defined amount of Australian content. This is at odds with the government's own national cultural policy, Revive, released in January 2023, which recommended the government introduce requirements for Australian screen content on streaming platforms to ensure continued access to local stories and content, and that it do so no later than 1 July 2024. This requirement is at odds with the minister's claims in this chamber in the last half hour that a content quota is absolutely critical—we do not have one.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Kate Chaney Kate Chaney strongly supports the bill because it finally makes major streaming platforms invest in Australian programs, which she says will protect Australian culture and help the local screen industry.
“To conclude, this is good, thoughtful, balanced legislation. It recognises that Australian stories are not just entertainment; they are part of the fabric of who we are. They help us understand ourselves and each other and they allow the world to understand us. The government have listened to extensive consultation and years of advocacy and acted, and I commend them for that. I strongly support the bill and the amendment being introduced by the member for Wentworth. I look forward to seeing it strengthen our culture, creative industries and national identity for years to come.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
Full record
- Act title
- Communications Legislation Amendment (Australian Content Requirement for Subscription Video On Demand (Streaming) Services) Act 2025
- Act number
- Act No. 71, 2025
- Became law
- 04 Dec 2025
- Takes effect
- The whole of this Act 05 Dec 2025
- Registered
- 05 Dec 2025
- Administered by
- Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sport and the Arts
- Final law metadata was collected from the APH progress table; commencement rows were parsed from the bill text.
- Status
- Act -- Collected from the APH bill page.
- Originating house
- House of Representatives
- 06 Nov 2025
House · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
- 06 Nov 2025
House · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
- 24 Nov 2025
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 25 Nov 2025
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 25 Nov 2025
House · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
- 25 Nov 2025
House · Consideration in detail debate
Consideration in detail debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 25 Nov 2025
House · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
- 26 Nov 2025
Senate · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
- 26 Nov 2025
Senate · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
- 27 Nov 2025
Senate · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
- 27 Nov 2025
Senate · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
- 27 Nov 2025
Parliament · Finally passed both Houses
Passed both houses
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
- 04 Dec 2025
Assent · Assent
Assent
The Governor-General gave Royal Assent, turning the bill into an Act.