Unclear legal standard
Critics said the phrases “reasonably available” and “equitable basis” need clearer meaning so consumers and regulators can tell whether providers have actually met the obligation.
Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation)
Current status
This bill is currently before Parliament.
Policy area
Transport & communications
What does this bill do?
The bill creates a Universal Outdoor Mobile ObligationThe proposed obligation for mobile providers to make baseline outdoor mobile coverage reasonably available across Australia on an equitable basis. so baseline outdoor mobile coverage is reasonably available to people in Australia on an equitable basis.
Why was it introduced?
Australia already has a universal service framework for fixed voice services and payphones, but it does not include mobile services even though people now rely on mobiles for safety, work and daily communication. The government introduced the bill after USOAustralia’s existing universal telecommunications framework for fixed voice services and payphones, which this bill would complement with an outdoor mobile obligation. reform work, the 2024 Regional Telecommunications Review and a 2025 exposure-draft consultation, arguing that direct-to-device satelliteTechnology that lets ordinary mobile handsets connect directly to satellites, rather than needing a nearby mobile tower or a fixed satellite dish. technology creates a way to extend basic outdoor voice and SMS coverage to regional, rural and remote areas where mobile towers have not been commercially viable.
Broader context
The bill sits in a long-running debate about how Australia should modernise universal telecommunications obligations as landlines age, mobile phones become the default safety device and large parts of the continent remain outside terrestrial mobile coverage. The government says direct-to-device satelliteTechnology that lets ordinary mobile handsets connect directly to satellites, rather than needing a nearby mobile tower or a fixed satellite dish. services make a national outdoor voice-and-SMS baseline feasible for the first time; critics and crossbench supporters argue the framework still needs clearer rules on affordability, device compatibility, emergency access, enforceability and disaster roaming before people in regional areas can rely on it in practice.
Key criticism
The main criticism was not that outdoor mobile coverage is unnecessary. Opposition and crossbench speakers generally supported the goal, but argued the bill may overpromise because key details are left to later instruments and evolving satellite markets. They questioned whether “reasonably available” and “equitable basis” are enforceable, whether most handsets will be compatible with direct-to-device services, whether users will face higher device or plan costs, and whether emergency access and disaster roaming are explicit enough.
Who supported it?
Anika Wells MP introduced this bill. Supportive speeches so far have come from Labor, LNP, Greens, some crossbench members.
Introduced in House 27 Nov 2025
Debate underway in House 11 Mar 2026
Not yet reached Senate —
Not yet law —
Did it become law?
Not yet
Final passage
No final vote yet
The bill has not yet completed passage through Parliament.
Days since introduction
195 days
Updated 10 June 2026.
Meaning
What does this bill do?
-
The bill creates a Universal Outdoor Mobile ObligationThe proposed obligation for mobile providers to make baseline outdoor mobile coverage reasonably available across Australia on an equitable basis. so baseline outdoor mobile coverage is reasonably available to people in Australia on an equitable basis.
-
The obligation initially covers voice calls and SMS, with the possibility of adding other mobile services later as technology and markets develop.
-
Telstra, Optus and TPG are the default providers from 1 December 2027, although the minister can bring the date forward, postpone it, or split the voice and SMS obligations.
-
The government expects providers to use both existing mobile networks and direct-to-device low-Earth-orbit satelliteA satellite operating relatively close to Earth. The bill’s explanatory materials expect these satellite networks to help deliver outdoor voice and SMS in areas without tower coverage. services, especially outside terrestrial mobile coverage.
-
The minister can set standards, rules and benchmarks for matters such as retail price, reliability, call quality, SMS performance, fault repair and customer information, with ACMAThe communications regulator. The bill gives ACMA an enforcement role for the obligation and for any standards, rules or benchmarks made under it. responsible for enforcement.
Show source excerpts
-
The object of the UOMO is to ensure baseline mobile coverage is reasonably available outdoors to all people in Australia on an equitable basis.
Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) explanatory memorandum -
the mobile telecommunications services subject to the UOMO will be voice services and SMS, with the possibility to add new services.
Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) explanatory memorandum -
the default day is 1 December 2027. The Minister may postpone the default day by 12 months. The Minister may postpone the default day under this subsection up to 3 times.
Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) introduced bill text -
The bill is technology neutral with mobile operators expected to leverage their existing and future terrestrial mobile infrastructure, as well as direct-to-device technology delivered by LEOsat platforms outside areas of mobile coverage.
Second reading speech -
The Bill outlines some such matters that could be covered by instruments made under these provisions, including the terms and conditions of supply (including retail price), the reliability of services, quality of voice calls, performance of SMS, timeframes for rectifying faults, action to address congestion and information an MNO must give a customer.
Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) explanatory memorandum
Context
Broader context for this bill
The bill sits in a long-running debate about how Australia should modernise universal telecommunications obligations as landlines age, mobile phones become the default safety device and large parts of the continent remain outside terrestrial mobile coverage. The government says direct-to-device satelliteTechnology that lets ordinary mobile handsets connect directly to satellites, rather than needing a nearby mobile tower or a fixed satellite dish. services make a national outdoor voice-and-SMS baseline feasible for the first time; critics and crossbench supporters argue the framework still needs clearer rules on affordability, device compatibility, emergency access, enforceability and disaster roaming before people in regional areas can rely on it in practice.
- 2024
Regional telecommunications review considers USOAustralia’s existing universal telecommunications framework for fixed voice services and payphones, which this bill would complement with an outdoor mobile obligation. reform
The explanatory memorandum says the 2024 Regional Telecommunications Review considered options for reforming Australia’s longstanding universal service arrangements.
Explanatory memorandum ↗ - 25 Feb 2025
Government announces a universal outdoor mobile obligationThe proposed obligation for mobile providers to make baseline outdoor mobile coverage reasonably available across Australia on an equitable basis.
The government announced that it would bring mobile services into the universal services framework by requiring major mobile network operators to provide baseline outdoor coverage across Australia.
Department consultation page ↗ - 18 Sept 2025
Exposure draft released for public consultation
The department opened consultation on draft UOMOThe proposed obligation for mobile providers to make baseline outdoor mobile coverage reasonably available across Australia on an equitable basis. legislation covering basic outdoor SMS and voice services, with submissions closing on 19 October 2025.
Department consultation page ↗ - 27 Nov 2025
Bill introduced in the House
Minister Anika Wells introduced the bill and described it as a reform to extend universal service arrangements to outdoor mobile services.
Hansard ↗ - 02 Mar 2026
House debate focuses on enforceability and access
Debate included broad support for better regional connectivity alongside concerns about vague standards, direct-to-device readiness, compatible handsets, affordability and emergency calls.
House debate speeches ↗ - 05 Mar 2026
Bill referred to Senate committee
The APH record notes referral to the Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee, with a committee report date of 14 May 2026.
APH bill page notes ↗
Legislative route
How did it move through Parliament?
House Senate
Introduced 27 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 27 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 02 Mar 2026
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Environment and Communications Legislation Committee; Committee report (14/05/2026) review 05 Mar 2026
The bill was referred to the Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee, with the APH record listing a committee report date of 14 May 2026.
Referred to committee
APH bill page notesSecond reading debate 11 Mar 2026
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Key criticism
The main case against this bill
The main criticism was not that outdoor mobile coverage is unnecessary. Opposition and crossbench speakers generally supported the goal, but argued the bill may overpromise because key details are left to later instruments and evolving satellite markets. They questioned whether “reasonably available” and “equitable basis” are enforceable, whether most handsets will be compatible with direct-to-device services, whether users will face higher device or plan costs, and whether emergency access and disaster roaming are explicit enough.
Government speakers argued the bill deliberately uses a flexible framework because direct-to-device technology and wholesale markets are still developing, and said existing emergency-call rules will apply to UOMOThe proposed obligation for mobile providers to make baseline outdoor mobile coverage reasonably available across Australia on an equitable basis. voice services.
Technology and handset readiness
Several speakers warned that direct-to-device satelliteTechnology that lets ordinary mobile handsets connect directly to satellites, rather than needing a nearby mobile tower or a fixed satellite dish. services and compatible handsets are not yet available at scale, so the bill could create expectations before the service can be used by many consumers.
Affordability
Crossbench speakers argued that a universal service is not genuinely universal if people in regional or remote areas need expensive new phones or premium plans to benefit from it.
Emergency and disaster resilience
Critics wanted more explicit emergency-call safeguards and temporary disaster roaming powers, especially after debate about triple zero outages, the 3G shutdown and bushfire-prone communities.
Further sources
Votes
Recorded votes
No recorded votes have been found yet for this bill.
Parliamentary debate
Who spoke, and what they said
Start here — lead voices
Sponsor speech Supports
Anika Wells
Anika Wells introduced the bill as a way to add outdoor mobile services to Australia’s universal service framework.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead supporting voice Supports
Andrew Willcox
Andrew Willcox supported the bill and said the coalition had also taken a telecommunications universal service obligationAustralia’s existing universal telecommunications framework for fixed voice services and payphones, which this bill would complement with an outdoor mobile obligation. policy to the election.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead non-major voice Mixed
Helen Haines
Helen Haines welcomed the UOMOThe proposed obligation for mobile providers to make baseline outdoor mobile coverage reasonably available across Australia on an equitable basis. as a major step for regional connectivity, but said it must be genuinely universal in practice.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead voice Mixed
Julian Leeser
Julian Leeser supported the objective of better mobile services but said the law must catch up in a way that is practical, clear and enforceable.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
Labor
17 speakers · 17 support
Labor
17 speakers · 17 support
-
Fiona Phillips Fiona Phillips supported the bill and said it would strengthen telecommunications resilience, especially for remote and isolated areas.
“I rise today to support the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Dan Repacholi Dan Repacholi strongly supported the bill and said direct-to-device services were already showing promise for people who previously had no signal.
“I rise today to speak in strong support for the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Lisa Chesters Lisa Chesters supported the bill and said regional members should embrace a first-ever universal outdoor mobile obligationThe proposed obligation for mobile providers to make baseline outdoor mobile coverage reasonably available across Australia on an equitable basis..
“It establishes for the first time in our history a universal outdoor mobile obligation.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Anika Wells ★ Anika Wells introduced the bill as a way to add outdoor mobile services to Australia’s universal service framework.
“For the first time, our national mobile network operators, Telstra, Optus and TPG, will need to provide reasonable access to outdoor baseline mobile coverage across Australia on an equitable basis.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Julie-Ann Campbell Julie-Ann Campbell supported the bill as a safety and regional-connectivity measure.
“The bill has a simple premise. It's about keeping Australians connected.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Trish Cook Trish Cook strongly supported the bill and said communities rely on telecommunications for family, business and safety.
“Today I rise to speak in strong support of the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Jess Teesdale Jess Teesdale supported the bill and said equity must include practical access, not just geography.
“On an equitable basis matters too, because equity is not just about geography; it's about who can access the service.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Emma Comer Emma Comer supported the bill and said it is about expanding traditional mobile coverage, not replacing it.
“The Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025 is not about replacing traditional mobile coverage; it is about expanding it.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Tom French Tom French supported the bill and explained that it applies to outdoor coverage, not indoor coverage.
“I rise to speak in support of the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Rowan Holzberger Rowan Holzberger supported the bill and said communities with substandard telecommunications need the industry to do better.
“I rise to support the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Kristy McBain Kristy McBain supported the bill and framed it as a necessary public-interest obligation on profit-making telcos.
“There is no doubt in my mind that our telco providers are beholden to their shareholders. They are for-profit organisations.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
David Moncrieff David Moncrieff supported the bill and said it keeps the promise of connectivity by using a technology-neutral framework.
“This bill is technology-neutral by design.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Claire Clutterham Claire Clutterham supported the bill as a modernisation of the universal service framework.
“This bill, which creates the universal outdoor mobile obligation, will change that by establishing a framework to create this obligation, which complements the existing USO.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Tracey Roberts Tracey Roberts strongly supported the bill as a practical improvement for outer-metropolitan and regional communities.
“I rise today to strongly support the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Susan Templeman Susan Templeman supported the bill with an emphasis on emergency situations.
“I really want to focus on the bit when you need to seek help in an emergency.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Matt Smith Matt Smith supported the bill and focused on the importance of mobile coverage in Far North Queensland and the Torres Strait.
“With this bill and with the opportunities presented, if you can see the sky, you'll have mobile coverage.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Anne Urquhart Anne Urquhart supported the bill and said it would add large areas of new mobile coverage, including regional roads.
“With this bill, Labor is adding up to five million square kilometres of new mobile coverage across the country, including more than 37,000 kilometres of regional roads.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Coalition
14 speakers · 1 support · 13 mixed
Coalition
14 speakers · 1 support · 13 mixed
-
Julian Leeser ★ Julian Leeser supported the objective of better mobile services but said the law must catch up in a way that is practical, clear and enforceable.
“My approach is straightforward. I support the objective of better mobile services.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Tom Venning Tom Venning supported the aspiration of better regional coverage but said the credibility of the reform depends on detail.
“However, the credibility of any reform rests not on what it aims to do but on the detail.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Simon Kennedy Simon Kennedy supported the bill’s intention but used local examples to argue that everyday mobile coverage failures also affect urban and suburban commuters.
“I support the intention of this bill.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Alison Penfold Alison Penfold said the Nationals support the goal of wider outdoor voice and text coverage, but argued the bill would do little for immediate black spots and weak service in her electorate without more tower investment and practical delivery detail.
“The Nationals support the goal of extending voice and text coverage outdoors across more of the country, because improved connectivity for regional Australians is a necessity.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Andrew Willcox ★ Andrew Willcox supported the bill and said the coalition had also taken a telecommunications universal service obligationAustralia’s existing universal telecommunications framework for fixed voice services and payphones, which this bill would complement with an outdoor mobile obligation. policy to the election.
“I rise today to support the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Michael McCormack Michael McCormack welcomed the proposal but argued regional Australia needs delivery, not just a new acronym.
“I welcome what is being proposed here.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Andrew Wallace Andrew Wallace supported the goal of better mobile services but argued the bill relies on technology and compatible handsets that are not yet available at scale.
“The coalition doesn't oppose this principle. What we cannot support is a bill that makes big promises, yet relies on technology that does not currently exist—and still leaves consumers with no real protections.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Melissa McIntosh Melissa McIntosh moved a second-reading amendment saying the opposition supported better regional connectivity but wanted the bill scrutinised further.
“The bill would require major carriers to ensure that mobile coverage is reasonably available outdoors to all people in Australia on an equitable basis, but the legislation contains no clear definition of what 'reasonably available' or 'equitable basis' actually mean.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Sam Birrell Sam Birrell supported better regional telecommunications but highlighted affordability as a central issue for households and businesses in regional and remote areas.
“Telecommunications affordability remains a critical issue, in particular, for households and businesses in regional and remote areas.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Terry Young Terry Young argued that the bill does not solve the practical problem of getting telecommunications infrastructure built in new and growing communities.
“The amendments in this bill miss the entire issue of making sure that these towers get built.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Anne Webster Anne Webster supported the goal of better regional mobile coverage but argued the bill would create a “sometimes outdoor mobile obligation” unless its standards are clearer and more enforceable.
“Coming back to the bill before the House—this will not result in a UOMO, a universal outdoor mobile obligation, but rather a SOMO, a sometimes outdoor mobile obligation.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Jamie Chaffey Jamie Chaffey said regional Australians need reliable telecommunications, not more announcements.
“Regional Australians have had enough of announcements and enough of promises. They just need reliable telecommunications.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Llew O'Brien Llew O’Brien supported the bill’s intent but said regional Australians need clearer guarantees.
“While I recognise the intent of the bill and welcome the requirement for major telcos to provide reasonable and equitable outdoor mobile coverage, I have concerns about whether the bill as drafted will actually deliver regional Australians the services that they need and deserve.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Tim Wilson Tim Wilson supported the importance of telecommunications infrastructure but used the debate to focus on whether the bill would solve practical coverage problems.
“I rise to speak on this bill because making sure Australians have access to the proper telecommunications infrastructure to communicate is a critical part of living in a modern society.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Greens
1 speaker · 1 support
Greens
1 speaker · 1 support
-
Elizabeth Watson-Brown Elizabeth Watson-Brown supported the bill as a response to patchy phone service, while framing the problem as a consequence of privatisation, cost cutting and underinvestment in essential services.
“For too long, Australians, including in my electorate, have put up with dreadful and patchy phone service due to privatisation, cost cutting and government neglect.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
One Nation
1 speaker · 1 mixed
One Nation
1 speaker · 1 mixed
-
Barnaby Joyce Barnaby Joyce used the debate to argue that regional telecommunications has long depended on policy choices about Telstra, towers and universal service.
“This issue in regional Australia is so very, very important.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Minor parties and independents
4 speakers · 2 support · 2 mixed
Minor parties and independents
4 speakers · 2 support · 2 mixed
-
Helen Haines ★ Helen Haines welcomed the UOMOThe proposed obligation for mobile providers to make baseline outdoor mobile coverage reasonably available across Australia on an equitable basis. as a major step for regional connectivity, but said it must be genuinely universal in practice.
“If access to a universal service is limited by income and affordability, then by definition it is not universal.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Rebekha Sharkie Rebekha Sharkie cautiously supported creating the UOMOThe proposed obligation for mobile providers to make baseline outdoor mobile coverage reasonably available across Australia on an equitable basis. but warned it could lack the “teeth” needed for regional communities.
“Even though the universal outdoor mobile obligation is coming, this is not a substitute for continued investment in towers.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Sophie Scamps Sophie Scamps supported the bill and linked it to local mobile black spots and safety risks in her community.
“Today I rise to speak in support of the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Zali Steggall Zali Steggall supported the bill because mobile and triple zero failures show why stronger telecommunications obligations matter.
“I rise to speak in support of this bill, the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
Full record
- Status
- Before Reps -- Collected from the APH bill page.
- Originating house
- House of Representatives
- 27 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.
- 27 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.
- 02 Mar 2026
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 11 Mar 2026
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee; Committee report (14/05/2026)
Referred to committee
The bill was referred to the Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee, with the APH record listing a committee report date of 14 May 2026.
Referred to Committee (5 Mar 2026): Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee; Committee report (14 May 2026)
APH bill page notes