One Nation's Attempt to Overturn Cash Rules Defeated in Senate
One Nation's push to scrap the Albanese government's new cash acceptance regulations has been defeated in a Senate vote, following accusations that the Coalition backflipped on its previous support for the move. Senator Malcolm Roberts moved a disallowance motion on Tuesday aimed at cancelling legislation introduced by Labor on January 1, but it failed to pass.
Details of the Controversial Cash Mandate
The regulation requires major supermarkets and fuel retailers to take 'reasonable steps' to accept cash for in-person purchases up to $500 between 7am and 9pm. However, cash advocacy groups have warned that this framework is too limited to adequately protect consumer choice or maintain a viable cash economy in Australia.
Jason Bryce from the campaign group Cash Welcome highlighted that the rules apply only to supermarkets and fuel retailers, leaving most large retail sectors completely untouched. Small businesses with turnover under $10 million remain exempt, while larger companies can seek exemptions—a loophole that advocates say significantly weakens the policy's original intent.
Advocates Call for Broader Coverage
Campaigners argue that the cash mandate should cover all major retailers, and ideally all businesses, to preserve genuine choice for consumers. 'Large brands like Bunnings, McDonalds, KFC, Kmart, Big W, AGL, Tyrepower, Telstra, and Optus need to be captured by this cash mandate,' said Bryce.
They also warn that the cost of maintaining cash infrastructure is increasingly borne by banks, consumers, and small businesses, with big corporations avoiding responsibility. Supporters contend that utilities and telecommunications companies should be included to prevent accelerating the decline of cash usage across the economy.
Coalition's Surprising Vote Against the Motion
Despite these warnings, the bid failed after the Coalition chose not to support the motion, even as party figures continued to call for stronger cash protections. A disallowance motion empowers the Senate to scrap government regulations without passing new legislation. Had it succeeded, the move would have immediately removed the only federal requirement for major retailers to accept cash.
Leading the opposition, Liberal Senate leader Michaelia Cash argued that repealing the rule would hurt Australians. 'Right now, Australians can walk into Coles, Woolworths, or a major fuel retailer and pay with cash because of this regulation,' Senator Cash told the Senate. 'If this motion passed, that legal obligation would disappear immediately.'
Cash accused One Nation of seeking to 'fix' a weak mandate by scrapping it altogether. She acknowledged the current rules don't go far enough, but said removing them would make things worse for consumers. 'The mandate is inadequate, and the government deserves criticism for that,' she stated. 'But abolishing the only cash obligation that exists in law is not the solution.'
Rare Political Unity and Accusations of Backflipping
Greens senator Nick McKim backed One Nation's motion, a rare show of unity, arguing that Labor had quietly watered down its original proposal. 'Cash is critical for inclusion, choice, and economic resilience,' Senator McKim said. 'The government replaced a broad mandate with an extremely narrow one.'
McKim also accused the Coalition of backflipping on its position and 'letting Labor off the hook' by voting down the motion. Liberal Senator Slade Brockman had said last week that the Coalition would support the move, but the party has since changed course.
Defence of the Motion and Broader Implications
One Nation senator Sean Bell defended the bid, claiming the rules failed to protect economic freedom and transparency. He questioned why the Coalition had shifted position and hinted at deals struck behind closed doors.
Senator Roberts said the regulation effectively allows most businesses to abandon cash. 'Cash is a basic right for Australian consumers,' he told Daily Mail. 'These rules pretend to protect cash but actually give businesses the green light to stop accepting it.'
He noted that seniors' groups had warned the narrow scope would hurt older Australians reliant on cash for essentials, including pharmaceuticals. Roberts labelled the regulation a 'back-door attempt' to phase out cash, and attacked the government for introducing it by regulation rather than proper legislation.
Outcome and Future Actions
With the motion defeated, the current cash rules remain in force. The Coalition says it will pursue a private senator's bill to expand the mandate, while Labor insists the regulation balances consumer access with business flexibility. The debate highlights ongoing tensions over the future of cash in an increasingly digital economy, with advocates warning that without stronger protections, consumer choice could be severely eroded.
