Bill
Treasury Laws Amendment (News Media and Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code) Bill 2021
passed, as at 2021-03-02. Treasury portfolio.
- Sponsor
- Not recorded
- Portfolio
- Treasury
Recorded stages
- introduced — 2020-12-09
- second reading — 2020-12-09
- second reading — 2021-02-17
- second reading — 2021-02-17
- committee — 2021-02-17
- third reading — 2021-02-17
- introduced — 2021-02-22
- second reading — 2021-02-22
- second reading — 2021-02-22
- second reading — 2021-02-23
- second reading — 2021-02-23
- committee — 2021-02-24
- third reading — 2021-02-24
- other — 2021-02-25
- passed — 2021-02-25
- royal assent — 2021-03-02
Divisions
- The majority voted in favour of an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2021-02-22.167.2) to the usual [second reading motion](https://peo.gov.au/understand-our-parliament/how-parliament-works/bills-and-laws/making-a-law-in-the-australian-parliament/), which is "*that the bill be read a second time*" (parliamentary jargon for agreeing with the main idea of the bill). This means that the text below will be added to the end of the usual motion. This doesn't have any legal consequences, but is significant because it represents the will of the Senate. ### Motion text > *At the end of the motion, add: ", but the Senate:* > > *(a) notes that:* > >> *(i) Australia has one of the most concentrated media markets in the world,* >> >> *(ii) since the Government's changes to media law in 2017, there have been alarming contractions and warning signs of market failure in Australia's media landscape, and* >> >> *(iii) the Bill was introduced 18 months after the ACCC delivered the Final Report of the Digital Platforms Inquiry in June 2019 and does not address all of the ACCC's recommendations to support public interest journalism; and* > > *(b) calls on the Government to:* > >> *(i) do more to support public interest journalism in Australia as a matter of urgency,* >> >> *(ii) deliver a support and transition package to assist news media publishers unduly negatively impacted as a consequence of this Bill, and* >> >> *(iii) make appropriate provision to ensure the viability of AAP newswire as a matter of priority".* — 2021-02-23, Senate: affirmative, ayes 32, noes 30
- Treasury Laws Amendment (News Media and Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code) Bill 2021 - Second Reading - ABC funding — 2021-02-23, Senate: negative, ayes 30, noes 32
- Treasury Laws Amendment (News Media and Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code) Bill 2021 - Second Reading - Media diversity and funding — 2021-02-23, Senate: negative, ayes 10, noes 54
- Treasury Laws Amendment (News Media and Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code) Bill 2021 - Second Reading - Privacy concerns — 2021-02-23, Senate: negative, ayes 30, noes 32
- The majority voted against an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2021-02-24.156.4) introduced by South Australian Senator [Sarah Hanson-Young](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/sa/sarah_hanson-young) (Greens), which means it failed. This was an amendment to an original Government amendment. Senator Hanson-Young [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2021-02-24.156.1): > *It is an amendment to the government's amendment in relation to schedule 1, item 1, page 8, proposed subsection (3)(b). It goes to this point that we've been debating here this morning in relation to significant contributions to the sustainability of the Australian news industry. I think it's fair to say that all the questions this morning have been surrounding this element. As I said, there is a concern that, unless this is specifically referenced, small, medium and regional publishers will be overlooked in that definition of the significant contribution. So all I am asking for is that we clarify that in paragraph (3)(b) with the words 'including by entering into agreements with a significant number of those businesses'—and this is the important amendment—'that include small, medium and regional organisations'. The government has said it intends to ensure that this is the case. I don't see why there would be any problem in ensuring that they are included. I urge the government to accept this amendment. It would put at ease a number of nervous organisations this morning.* ### Amendment text > *AMENDMENT OF GOVERNMENT AMENDMENTS [SHEET PG138]* > > *(1) Paragraph (3)(b), omit "(including agreements to remunerate those businesses for their news content)", substitute "(including by entering into agreements with a significant number of those businesses, that include small, medium and regional organisations, to remunerate those businesses for their news content)".* ### Original Government amendment text > *(1) Schedule 1, item 1, page 8 (lines 10 to 1 — 2021-02-24, Senate: negative, ayes 12, noes 37
- The majority voted in favour of item (1) of [Government amendments](https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:legislation/billhome/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr6652_amend_49f1e4e9-d99c-4b80-84d4-3225e4f6491a%22;rec=0), which means it will now form part of the bill. South Australian Senator [Rex Patrick](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/sa/rex_patrick) (Independent) opposed item (1) and [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2021-02-24.274.1): > *It's a small amendment to what is a very significant bill, a very large bill. I would liken it to the two wires on the service module of Apollo 13. They might seem like just small wires, but after launch of this legislation we're going to find that it doesn't accomplish the mission. We're going to find that the Treasurer will simply be able to not designate Facebook and Google in accordance with the act. That would leave all of the small players, all of the regional players, without the ability to bargain properly against these very large digital companies, these foreign companies. We would, in effect, still have the very thing that Mr Rod Sims of the ACCC was most concerned about, which is a huge imbalance in power between Facebook, Google and the small players. So I would urge the chamber, when this is put, to reject item No. (1) of these amendments because it effectively undermines the whole bill.* ### Item (1) text > *(1) Schedule 1, item 1, page 8 (lines 10 to 13), omit subsection 52E(3), substitute:* > >> *(3) In making the determination, the Minister must consider:* >> >>> *(a) whether there is a significant bargaining power imbalance between Australian news businesses and the group comprised of the corporation and all of its related bodies corporate; and* >>> >>> *(b) whether that group has made a significant contribution to the sustainability of the Australian news industry through agreements relating to news content of Australian n — 2021-02-24, Senate: affirmative, ayes 33, noes 12
- The majority voted against [amendments](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2021-02-24.289.1) introduced by South Australian Senator [Rex Patrick](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/sa/rex_patrick) (Independent), which means the amendments failed. Senator Patrick [explained his amendments](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2021-02-24.289.1): > *These amendments deal with yet another aspect of the situation—the opaque nature of the algorithms and business practices of big tech. A fairly new area of engineering, which I know might be foreign to those present in the chamber, is where independent auditors look at algorithms—it can be algorithms in respect of commercial applications or algorithms used by government—to make sure that those algorithms are performing the functions that they ought to perform and, indeed, not introducing unintended consequences into what are automated processes.* > > *[...]* > > *The ACCC actually has the power to go and look at the activities and, indeed, the algorithms of companies—that was confirmed by Mr Sims at the committee inquiry—and the intent of this amendment is to make sure that the ACCC does so. Whilst they have the power now, there is no requirement for them to do algorithm audits.* — 2021-02-24, Senate: negative, ayes 12, noes 32
Plain-language summary
Written by a model from the explanatory memorandum; not the record, as at 2020-12-09.
This bill creates a mandatory code of conduct to address power imbalances between digital platforms and Australian news businesses.
The code sets out rules for bargaining, including good faith requirements, arbitration through the ACCC, and advance notice of algorithm changes.
The code applies only to digital platforms designated by the Minister, who must consider power imbalances before designating.
- Establishes a mandatory code of conduct for bargaining between news businesses and digital platforms.
- Requires parties to bargain in good faith.
- Allows news businesses to start arbitration by notifying the ACCC if bargaining fails.
- Requires digital platforms to give advance notice of significant algorithm changes.
- Prohibits platforms from treating participating news businesses' content differently from non-participants.
- Allows platforms to make standard offers that bypass the code's bargaining and arbitration rules if accepted.
Australian news businesses and digital platform corporations designated by the Minister.
Sources
em
em supp
em supp
em revised
em supp
billhome
frl act