Key points

• The Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025 (the Bill) amends the Telecommunications (Consumer Protection and Service Standards) Act 1999 (the Act) to establish the Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation (UOMO).
• Part 1 of Bill outlines the UOMO. When commenced, this will initially require Telstra, Optus Mobile and TPG Telecom to ensure that mobile coverage (voice and text services) is ‘reasonably available’ outdoors to all people in Australia on an ‘equitable basis’.
• The additional mobile coverage is intended to be provided by low earth orbit satellite (LEOSat) and direct-to-device (D2D) technologies.
• A flexible framework is provided for the Minister to determine coverage areas, obligations, providers, standards, benchmarks and rules in relation to the UOMO.
• The Bill will facilitate funding for the UOMO from the Public Interest Telecommunications Services Special Account, which contains a mix of government appropriations and telecommunications industry levy funds.
• Part 2 of the Bill will insert broad new powers to make standards, rules and benchmarks for carriers and carriage service providers in relation to mobile telecommunication services. These provisions were not part of the exposure draft legislation released for consultation in September 2025 and were added in response to recommendations from consumer stakeholders.
• At the time of writing the Senate Selection of Bills Committee has deferred its consideration of the Bill to its next meeting.

Introductory Info

Date of introduction: 27 November 2025
House introduced in: House of Representatives
Portfolio: Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sport and the Arts
Commencement: The Bill will take effect the day after Royal Assent, but the default start date of the Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation will be 1 December 2027.

Purpose of the Bill

The purpose of the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025 (the Bill) is to amend the Telecommunications (Consumer Protection and Service Standards) Act 1999 (the Act) to establish the Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation (UOMO). The UOMO designates Telstra Limited (Telstra), Optus Mobile Pty Limited (Optus) and TPG Telecom Limited (TPG) as primary universal outdoor mobile providers (PUOMPs), that will be required to ensure that mobile coverage (voice and text services) is reasonably available outdoors to all people in Australia on an equitable basis. The designated mobile telecommunications services (DMTS) to be provided in the UOMO will be SMS and voice services. The Bill will make minor consequential amendments to the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 and the Telecommunications Act 1997 to facilitate the UOMO.

The Bill will also amend the Act to provide that Minister may, by legislative instrument, determine standards and benchmarks and make rules to be complied with by carriers and carriage service providers (CSPs) in relation to mobile telecommunication services (MTS).

Structure of the Bill

The Bill consists of 1 schedule, comprising of 2 parts:

• Part 1 amends the existing public interest telecommunications services provisions of the Act to incorporate the UOMO, and gives the Minister for Communications (the Minister) new powers to set standards, make rules and benchmarks with regards to the UOMO
• Part 2 gives the Minister new powers to make standards, rules and benchmarks that need to be complied with by CSPs in relation to MTS outside of the UOMO.

Background

Shifting preferences in telecommunications

According to the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), there has been a steady decline in usage of landline phones by Australian adults, from 54% in 2017 to 15% in 2024. Over the same period, the usage of mobile phones for calls has increased from 95% to 98%. In regional areas this proportion was even higher, with 99% of respondents using a mobile phone for calls in 2024. ACMA explains that increasing availability and affordability of mobile devices and technologies has resulted in this shift in consumer preferences (p. 8).

Telecommunications in regional Australia

Telecommunications services in regional, rural and remote (RRR) communities have frequently been a priority area. The Parliament established the Regional Telecommunications Independent Review Committee (RTIRC) under the Act in 2005 (p. 3). The RTIRC is established every 3 years and examines the suitability of telecommunications services in RRR Australia. The most recent RTIRC review completed in December 2024, highlighted dissatisfaction with mobile services among respondents from RRR areas of Australia, citing issues with reliability, call dropouts and slow data speeds (p. 56).

The issues with mobile connectivity in RRR Australia can be largely explained by population density patterns. According to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) in its 2023 report:

Given the high cost of investing in mobile infrastructure in regional and remote areas, there are areas where the population density is too low for a business case for the mobile network operators to invest in their networks to address these coverage and congestion issues on a commercial basis. (p. 7)

The current Universal Service Obligation

The Universal Service Obligation (USO) is a legislative requirement under Part 2, Division 2 of the Act. It is the obligation that standard telephone services (STS) and payphones ‘are reasonably accessible to all people in Australia on an equitable basis, wherever they reside or carry on business’ (section 9(1)). Telstra has been determined as the ‘primary universal service provider’ responsible for the service obligations under the USO (section 12D).

The USO was incorporated into a 20-year contract between Telstra and the Commonwealth in 2012 (ceasing in 2032). The Telstra USO Performance Agreement is administered by the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sport and the Arts (the Department). Telstra receives a fixed and unindexed annual payment of $253 million for STS and $44 million for payphones (GST-inclusive). These payments are funded through the Public Interest Telecommunications Services Special Account (PITSSA) which contains a mix of budget funding, and funds collected from the telecommunications industry levy (TIL).

The relevancy of the USO has been scrutinised in multiple reviews. The 2015 RTIRC review found the USO arrangements were outdated and increasingly irrelevant (pp xii–xiii). In response, the Turnbull Government directed the Productivity Commission (PC) to examine the USO’s arrangements in an evolving telecommunications market. The PC completed the inquiry in 2017 and recommended the USO should be wound up in 2020 as it was ‘anachronistic and costly’ (p. 2).

In October 2023, the Government consulted with stakeholders on the delivery of a modern universal telecommunication service framework. There was broad agreement among submissions that the current USO was no longer fit-for-purpose, with some repeating longstanding concerns about the stress that is being placed on legacy networks due to their aging and deteriorating technology (p. 8). There was strong support among a large proportion of stakeholders for moving to a more technology-neutral approach where voice services could be best delivered over a mixture of technologies. LEOSat technology was viewed as a promising alternative for voice and broadband services particularly in RRR communities (p. 9).

The 2024 RTIRC review found that the USO required modernisation and recommended it should be technology-neutral (p. 8). In response to the 2024 review, the Government announced the UOMO in February 2025 which would ‘… require mobile carriers to provide access to mobile voice and SMS almost everywhere across Australia’. Draft legislation was released for consultation on 18 September 2025.

Policy position of non-government parties/independents

The proposed UOMO has faced criticism from the Coalition and the Australian Greens including in relation to timing, coverage and cost. On 25 February 2025, the Shadow Minister for Communications, Melissa McIntosh, characterised the UOMO announcement as a ‘desperate headline… on the eve of the election’:

The government claims this will provide mobile coverage, almost everywhere, but has failed to detail which areas will miss out or the cost. [LEOSat] and [D2D] offers exciting new technology but they are not yet fully tested, trialled or readily available in Australia.

In response to the UOMO draft legislation, the Shadow Minister for Communications and the Shadow Minister for Regional Communications, Dr Anne Webster, stated that the Coalition was ‘shocked’ the Government had ‘… committed no funding to improving regional connectivity … and kicked the UOMO can down the road to 2028’. Dr Webster stated ‘… the only “universal” thing about it is it is full of black holes – funding black holes, commitment black holes and continuing connectivity black holes’. In a press release on 29 September 2025, Dr Webster stated:

The draft UOMO legislation relies too heavily on satellite solutions, ignoring the need for on-ground redundancy.

…

An updated USO must mandate network resilience, including cross-carrier roaming for triple zero calls and mandatory upkeep of taxpayer-funded towers from the Mobile Black Spot Program.

In a statement to Crikey, Australian Greens communications spokesperson Senator Sarah Hanson-Young criticised the UOMO announcement for a ‘lack of transparency … about the costs and risk analysis’.

Stakeholder comments

Public submissions responding to the draft legislation consultation process were largely supportive of the proposed UOMO, though several industry and consumer submissions raised concerns regarding the detail and implementation of the UOMO (discussed further below). Consumer stakeholders recommended that enforceable standards, rules and benchmarks be developed prior to the UOMO commencement. Industry stakeholders suggested a flexible approach be taken to the UOMO due to the infancy of LEOSat markets.

Key issues and provisions

Part 1—Universal outdoor mobile obligation

Key definitions

Proposed subsection 12F(1) of the Act (at item 16 of the Bill) defines the UOMO as ‘the obligation to ensure that mobile coverage is reasonably available outdoors to all people in Australia on an equitable basis’. This includes an obligation to supply ‘each kind of designated mobile telecommunications service (DMTS) such that the service is reasonably available outdoors throughout Australia’ (proposed subsection 12F(2)).

DMTS is defined at proposed subsection 8BB(1) (item 11) as a mobile telecommunications service that enables an end-user to communicate with other end-users by means of voice calls or short messaging service (SMS). The Minister may determine other kinds of DMTS by legislative instrument, following consultation and consideration of technical and market considerations, and potential impact on consumers.

The UOMO will be imposed on primary universal outdoor mobile providers (PUOMPs) (proposed section 12K). The default PUOMPs will be Telstra, Optus and TPG (proposed section 12L), however the Minister may also determine, by legislative instrument, that a specified carrier or CSP is a PUOMP (proposed section 12J) (discussed further below).

Under proposed section 12H, mobile coverage would be considered available ‘to the extent to which each kind of [DMTS] is available outdoors at that location’. A DMTS would be consider available outdoors at a location ‘if the service is supplied such that an end-user who is outdoors at that location can use the service’.

Under proposed subsections 12F(3) and (4) the Minister could also determine, via legislative instrument, the circumstances when the UOMO does not apply and matters which must, or must not, be considered in determining if mobile coverage or a DMTS is ‘reasonably available outdoors’.

Reasonably available

The Explanatory Memorandum (EM) describes ‘reasonably’ available coverage in the UOMO as dealing with situations where it may not be possible for a provider to provide coverage due to reasons such as technical limitations or consumers deciding not to purchase a compatible handset or plan. As such, the UOMO is to ensure that DMTS can be used outdoors at locations where it is reasonable to expect them to be able to be used (p. 20).

The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network (ACCAN) and NSW Farmers both raised concerns with mobile coverage being ‘reasonably available’ under the UOMO in their consultation submissions. ACCAN notes:

… ‘reasonably available’ is not a defined term in the draft legislation … This open-ended language creates significant uncertainty regarding what constitutes ‘reasonable’ mobile coverage. It creates opportunity for providers to circumvent their obligation and disputes over compliance could arise. Service providers may interpret ‘reasonably available’ too narrowly, leading to inconsistent application across different regions. A service provider may also argue that its ability to make the service reasonably available was impacted by an event that was within its control (as opposed to one beyond their control). Additionally, the lack of clear benchmarks could leave consumers without enforceable rights to challenge subpar service. (p. 7)

In particular, ACCAN was concerned with the Minister’s capacity to exempt specific locations or circumstances from UOMO requirements in proposed subsections 12F(3) and (4) and subsections 8D(3) and (4):

As there is a risk that exemptions could be applied too broadly, inadvertently undermining the policy's goal of equitable access, we propose that this power be guided by explicit criteria in the legislation, for example, whether they relate to geographic barriers, cost issues, or technological limitations. (p. 7)

Equitable basis

In their consultation submissions, the National Farmers Federation (NFF), Australian Mobile Telecommunications Association (AMTA) and ACCAN noted that ‘equitable basis’ is not clearly defined, nor is affordability included as a requirement in the UOMO.

AMTA warned that ‘[r]oaming on LEOsat technology in remote parts of Australia is likely to be more costly than standard voice and text services’ (p. 4).

ACCAN recommended the UOMO include providing affordable options for low-income and vulnerable consumers. It warned that LEOSat technology is currently unaffordable to most in RRR and First Nations communities and could exacerbate existing inequities:

… LEOSat technology will predominantly be utilised by consumers living in RRR Australia, where the median average incomes range from $33,800 to $51,999. Furthermore, First Nations communities are already disproportionately affected by the digital ability gap and have a higher reliance on mobile-only connectivity, facing even greater risks of digital exclusion if targeted subsidies are not introduced...

Compounding these affordability challenges is the current lack of low-cost, LEOSat-compatible devices. Currently, most available options are premium smartphones, which places further financial pressure on consumers in RRR and low-income communities. Without the introduction of more affordable devices or targeted subsidies, the high upfront cost of compatible hardware risks deepening existing digital inequities and limiting the potential benefits of LEOSat technology for those who need it most. (pp 11–12)

Proposed subsection 12Q(1) provides the Minister can, via legislative instrument, determine standards which PUOMPS must comply with in relation to DMTS supplied or proposed to be supplied in fulfilment of the UOMO, including ‘the terms and conditions (whether or not relating to price or a method of ascertaining price) of the supply of a [DMTS]’. The EM suggests this provision could be used to ensure PUOMPs provide ‘equitable access to and support vulnerable groups for example by offering a product targeted to low income groups’ (p. 26).

The NFF recommended that the Minister use this power to ‘ensure that affordability is embedded as a core component of the UOMO from the outset’ and that ‘UOMO-compliant mobile services are available at transparent, fair, and regionally consistent prices’ (p. 12):

If the UOMO is to be truly universal, it must be accessible not only in terms of coverage, but also in terms of cost. In [RRR] areas, where market competition is often limited or non-existent, reliance on market forces alone will not guarantee fair or affordable pricing. Without safeguards, there is a real risk that consumers in these areas will be priced out of essential mobile services, undermining the very purpose of the UOMO (p. 12).

Outdoor mobile coverage

Proposed section 8D defines an outdoor mobile coverage area as geographical area within Australia or any area of land, regardless of size and the general Australian outdoor mobile coverage area (GAOMCA) as the area consisting of Australia. The definition of ‘Australia’ in section 7 of the Telecommunications Act 1997 applies (see subsection 5(1) of the Act), so that Australia includes Christmas Island and the Cocos (Keeling) Islands. Proposed subsections 8D(3) and (4) provide that the Minister can, by legislative instrument, determine an area as not being part of an outdoor mobile coverage area or the GAOMCA.

The Bill’s definition of outdoors excludes buildings, vehicles, aircrafts, vessels or areas that are underground or underwater (see the definition to be inserted into subsection 5(2) by item 7). According to the EM, this reflects current limitations in D2D technology, as mobile SMS supplied over D2D platforms is not consistent nor reliable when the user is in a building or vehicle (p. 15).

The Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman (TIO) noted that while current D2D LEOSat technologies require the end-user’s device to have direct line-of-sight to the satellite to function, they anticipated these technologies may one day improve to the point where it would not be unreasonable for the UOMO to apply when an end-user is driving. The TIO recommended the Bill provide scope for the Minister to alter the exclusion of in-vehicle coverage from the UOMO (p. 6).

According to the Local Government Association of Northern Territory (LGANT), only about 30% of the NT’s landmass has mobile coverage (p. 1). The LGANT recommends that the UOMO’s scope is expanded to ‘include indoor coverage and mobile data or commit to developing enforceable standards for these in the future’ so NT communities can support health, education and economic participation (p. 3).

Links to Triple Zero and emergency services

GrainGrowers, NSW Farmers and the NFF raised the lack of explicit references to Triple Zero access and emergency services as part of the UOMO and recommended that it should be embedded as a core capability.

The EM recognises that the Bill does not explicitly reference Triple Zero and emergency services as a requirement for the UOMO. It clarifies there is already a longstanding requirement for providers of public MTS to provide equitable access to Triple Zero via rules set out in the Telecommunications (Emergency Call Service) Determination 2019 made under Part 8 of the Act. Any voice services carried by public MTS are captured, meaning voice services provided under the UOMO will support access to Triple Zero (p. 4).

However, as ACCAN noted, LEOSat-based D2D technologies currently support only SMS functionality and in Australia, emergency services can only be directly contacted via voice calls. ACCAN considered it was essential the Government establish a text-to-000 service while D2D services remain limited to SMS (p. 12).

AMTA recommends consideration of emergency ‘camp-on’ arrangements (p. 10) under which mobile phones can connect to another available network for the purposes of calling Triple Zero if the mobile phone is unable to detect the user’s home network:

This should include consideration of the ability for “camp-on” arrangements to apply, especially in circumstances where there may only be one LEOsat provider offering commercial services. It should also consider the ability of [mobile network operators] to meet the various Triple Zero information obligations that may now rely in part on third party supply arrangements.

Consideration should also be given to setting appropriate customer expectations around the availability of emergency calling, given the service limitations of the D2D service ... (p. 7)

Similarly, the NSW Telco Authority recommended the Bill include a requirement for PUOMPs to enable mobile roaming to customers of other networks if their PUOMP does not cover that area (pp 1–2).

Market impacts

Costs and funding

The Bill’s EM states that it will not have financial impacts as it will use funds in the PITSSA to support the UOMO (p. 7), mirroring how the existing USO is funded (see proposed paragraph 13(1)(ba)). The lack of any cost estimates has been a shared criticism from the Opposition and the Greens. For example, Ms McIntosh stated in February 2025 ‘[t]he government has failed to declare how much the Mobile Obligation commitment will cost and who will have to pay for it.’

A departmental analysis report on LEOSats in 2024 noted that they have significant infrastructure and upfront capital costs and require advanced network management systems. As LEOSat signals cover a smaller area due to their low altitude, more LEOSats are required to provide continuous coverage, and require more frequent replacement than geostationary satellites (p. 13). According to a 2023 report from Nova Systems, at the time of the report, neither Starlink nor OneWeb (major LEOSat operators) were profitable businesses, making their reliance on continual financing more susceptible to external market shocks (p. 126).

AMTA said the following regarding costs and pricing:

… the obligations to expand mobile coverage Australia wide … will likely require significant new investment in infrastructure, spectrum, technology and operational support systems. However, no cost benefit analysis has been undertaken to assess the costs to [PUOMPs] of meeting the obligations. Further, no consideration has been given to the price implications of these costs on services and consumers and whether government funding is likely to be required to help PUOMPs meet affordability expectations. (p. 4)

ACCAN also noted that the UOMO framework will impose additional obligations on PUOMPS along with possible additional compliance costs. It recommended the EM provide detailed clarification on the implications of the UOMO for service pricing and potential government subsidies, given the high costs of LEOSat-based D2D services (p. 8).

Additional funds from the PITSSA may be needed to support UOMO arrangements whether through an increase in the TIL, budget funding, or a combination of the two. Telstra’s consultation submission questioned the funding arrangements of the UOMO:

If UOMO retail prices are set by the Minister regardless of upstream prices, there is an inherent risk of LEO[Sat] [D2D] retail prices being set below cost. In that, case how will UOMO services be funded? Is it the Government’s intention that mobile consumers who rarely or never use the LEO[Sat] [D2D] portion of the UOMO service should subsidise those who use it frequently? Or will the Government make available Commonwealth funding for this purpose? (p. 13)

Vocus, a fibre network provider, criticised the funding arrangements of levies like the TIL as outdated, as they are not absorbed by industry, but are passed onto consumers. It urged the Government to reform public funding arrangements and adopt a competitive, technology-neutral approach (pp 3–4).

Price regulation

As mentioned above, proposed subsection 12Q(1) will provide the Minister with the power to set standards that must be complied by PUOMPs regarding the provision of the UOMO, including pricing. Telstra criticised this inclusion as not part of the existing USO, highlighting that LEOSat-based D2D services are dependent on upstream (LEOSat operator) prices. They recommend that any price regulation should be applied to the LEOSat operators instead (pp. 12–13).

Similarly, AMTA noted that the UOMO falls ‘solely to the PUOMPs to provide expanded coverage in reliance on services provided by third party LEOsat providers’:

This creates significant bargaining asymmetries in favour of LEOsat providers to dictate commercial terms. LEOsat providers have no legal obligation to provide a service that meets the price or service expectations of the UOMO or to even provide a service at all. PUOMPs may have little if any ability to negotiate acceptable terms and will essentially be price takers at the behest of the large global LEOsat providers. (p. 5)

AMTA recommends that the Bill includes a regulatory power for the Minister to ensure obligations on PUOMPs flow through to LEOSat operators; or that the obligation outside of the PUOMPs existing mobile network is conditional on having access to a D2D service on commercial terms (p. 6).

Primary universal outdoor mobile providers

As noted above, at the commencement of the UOMO, there will be 3 default PUOMPs (Telstra, Optus and TPG) but the Minister may, by legislative instrument, determine that a specified carrier or CSP is a PUOMP (proposed section 12J). The Minister will also have the capacity to apply different outdoor mobile obligations to different PUOMPs and also make PUOMPs responsible for different areas in Australia via legislative instruments.

This is a substantial change from the existing USO, which has only one provider (Telstra). This previous arrangement was criticised by some participants in the PC’s 2017 inquiry as anticompetitive and distortive of market signals (p. 98). Under the UOMO, the PUOMPs are the 3 national mobile network operators (MNOs) who own and operate the majority of Australia’s mobile network infrastructure (EM, p. 20). ACCAN was concerned with limiting the UOMO to the PUOMPs and proposed including mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs) as many Australians purchase their services via MVNOs, and their exclusion could create affordability challenges and hinder competition for RRR consumers (p. 9). MVNOs sell mobile services but do not operate a mobile network, buying network access at wholesale rates from one of the MNOs (p. 20).

According to the EM, the ACCC has powers under Part XIC of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 to intervene in wholesale access markets to enable greater competition. As such, the UOMO does not seek to mandate the provision of terrestrial or D2D mobile services at the wholesale level (p. 6).

LEOSat operators

There are only a small number of LEOSat operators in the Australian market. Telstra and Optus have both partnered with SpaceX’s Starlink for their D2D services. Optus is yet to rollout this service to customers. TPG has not yet announced which LEOSat operator will be used for its service, but had conducted trials using Lynk in May 2025.

NSW Farmers and AMTA both raised concerns with potential sovereign risk issues in relying on foreign entities for LEOSat service provision. AMTA warned that, while there are currently several potential LEOSat operators in Australia (all based overseas), there is no guarantee which operators will remain in Australia given that the market will likely only support one or two operators (p. 5). Senator Hanson-Young has also expressed concern that ‘[t]here are real risks for our national interest if large parts of Australia’s internet and telecommunications infrastructure is so reliant on Elon Musk and his Starlink system.’

Spectrum management

The Bill makes no specific reference to the provision of spectrum for the UOMO. Radio frequency spectrum is recognised as a finite resource, allocated through ACMA via licences, usually by auction. D2D services are delivered in two forms, each utilising different frequencies (p. 2):

• Mobile-satellite service (MSS): requires mobile phones with satellite communications capabilities (usually via addition of satellite operator proprietary technology). These use frequency bands already allocated to MSS services.
• International mobile telecommunications (IMT) services: are usable by standard mobile phones without additional hardware. They use frequency bands allocated to terrestrial mobile services with no MSS allocation, which raises potential technical and regulatory issues.

Telstra’s consultation submission expressed concern that the spectrum suitable for the delivery of LEOSat D2D services in Australia was ‘extremely scarce’. Telstra argued that a national spectrum strategy was needed and suggested changes to spectrum allocations to facilitate UOMO services (p. 3).

Similarly, AMTA cautioned that with current available spectrum for LEOSat D2D, it is unlikely to be possible to simultaneously run 4G and 5G satellite networks. AMTA cautioned that if PUOMPs needed to withdraw 4G satellite services to free up spectrum to deliver the UOMO, it could lead to ‘a very poor customer experience, akin to 3G closure, that could force consumers to upgrade their phones to retain access to the UOMO SMS Service’ (p. 12).

Flexible framework

The EM notes that the Bill has been designed with ‘a flexible framework which can be adjusted, by disallowable legislative ministerial instrument, as the market develops and satellite technology evolves’ (p. 3).

For example, proposed section 12G concerns situations where the Minister can, via legislative instrument, split the UOMO into separate obligations (e.g., separating voice and SMS obligations), applying the obligations to different PUOMPs at different times, or in different outdoor mobile coverage areas. Proposed subsection 12G(3) provides that the determination must also specify what must be supplied or done to fulfill the obligation

As discussed above, proposed section 12Q allows the Minister to determine, by legislative instrument, standards in relation to a broad range of matters which must be complied with by PUOMPs in fulfilment of the UOMO. This includes a catchall — ‘any other matter concerning the accessibility of a [DMTS]’ (proposed paragraph 12Q(1)(h)).

Further, the Minister may determine minimum performance benchmarks in relation to compliance by a PUOMP with a standard determined under proposed section 12Q (see proposed subsection 12R). The Minister may also determine, by legislative instrument, other performance benchmarks which must be complied with by PUOMPs in supplying a DMTS in fulfilment of the UOMO (proposed section 12S).

Proposed section 12T will provide the Minister may, by legislative instrument, make rules in relation to the supply, or proposed supply of DMTS in fulfilment of the UOMO and that PUOMPs must comply with.

In its consultation submission Telstra argued that a cautious approach should be taken to the development of standards for UOMO services ‘before the technology has matured’ (p. 10). The AMTA was also concerned that the ‘broad nature of the discretion that the Bill gives to the Minister, with limited checks and balances on the exercise of those powers … creates significant risk and uncertainty for the sector’ (p. 6):

AMTA recommends that where a power is conferred on the Minister to make future determinations it should be subject to a number of reasonable checks and balances, such as the requirement for industry consultation and seeking advice from an appropriate regulator. This should help to ensure that the exercise of Ministerial power is reasonable and consistent with the public interest.

Default start date

The default start date of the UOMO is specified in the Bill as 1 December 2027. However, through notifiable instrument, the Minister may determine an earlier date (see proposed subsection 12M(4)) or postpone the start date (see proposed subsection 12M(3)). The Minister may postpone the start date by 12 months up to 3 times.

Telstra’s consultation submission questioned whether it was appropriate to limit the number of times the commencement can be postponed ‘given the circumstances that will apply by 2031 are entirely unknown at this point’ (p. 13).

Delegation to ACMA and the Department

The Bill will repeal and replace section 73 of the Act which addresses the delegation of the Minister’s powers and functions to staff members of ACMA for Part 2 of the Act, which deals with public interest telecommunications services. This will apply to all of the Minister’s powers and functions in Part 2, not only those in proposed Division 2A inserted by the Bill.

Proposed section 73 provides that the Minister may delegate functions or powers under Part 2 to ACMA and that in performing delegated functions or powers ACMA must comply with the written directions of the Minister. ACMA may also subdelegate to ACMA members or staff of ACMA at the SES Band 2 level or higher.

Proposed section 73A will also allow the Minister to delegate all or any of the Minister’s powers or function in Part 2 of the Act to a staff member of the Department at the SES Band 2 level or higher.

Part 2—Mobile telecommunications services standards, benchmarks and rules

The EM notes that Part 2 will insert new Part 5A into the Act ‘to give the Minister … new powers to make standards, rules and benchmarks that need to be complied with by carriers and CSPs in relation to mobile telecommunications services ahead of the UOMO default day (of 1 December 2027)’ (p. 2). The amendments in Part 2 were not part of the exposure draft legislation released for consultation in September 2025. The EM notes that these new powers were added in response to recommendations from consumer stakeholders such as the NFF (pp 11–12) and ACCAN (p. 11), for enforceable standards, rules and benchmarks to be developed prior to the UOMO commencement (p. 5).

Item 7 of Part 1 of the Bill will insert a broad definition of MTS in the Act. Services will fall into this category where:

• an end-user can use a carriage service while moving continuously between places
• the customer equipment used for or in relation to the supply of the service is not in physical contact with any part of the telecommunications network by means of which the service is supplied and
• the service is supplied to the public.

Proposed subsection 125B(1) (at item 21) provides that the Minister may, by legislative instrument, determine standards to be complied with by carriers and CSPs in relation to an MTS supplied, or proposed to be supplied. This power will be in relation to a broad range of matters, mirroring the UOMO standards in proposed subsection 12(Q)(1), without the provision regarding the terms and conditions of the supply of an MTS.

These ministerial determinations may be of general or limited application and may make ‘provision for or in relation to a matter by conferring a power on ACMA to make a legislative instrument’ (proposed subsections 125B(2) and (4)).

The EM indicates that ‘[i]t is intended that standards determined under proposed subsection 125B would take into consideration wholesale market, technical and consumer issues’ (p. 32).

Under proposed section 125C the Minister will also be able to determine, by legislative instrument, minimum performance benchmarks in relation to compliance by a carrier or CSP with standards made under proposed section 125B.

The Minister may also, by legislative instrument, determine other minimum performance benchmarks that must be complied with by carriers and CSPs in relation to the supply or proposed supply of an MTS by a carrier or CSP (proposed section 125D).

Finally, the Minister will have a broad regulation making power in relation to MTS. Proposed section 125E provides the Minister may, by legislative instrument, make rules to be complied with by carriers and CSPs in relation to MTS supplied or proposed to be supplied.

As with the above provisions dealing with the UOMO, the Minister will be able to delegate ‘all or any of the Minister’s powers’ to ACMA (which may be subdelegated) or SES Band 2 or higher employees in the Department. Those delegated powers and functions must comply with the written directions of the Minister (proposed section 125F).