Mounjaro approved to treat sleep apnoea in Australia
Don't miss out on the headlines from Sleep. Followed categories will be added to My News.
A popular weight-loss jab has been approved to treat a common sleep disorder in Australia, after a new ruling by the medicine regulator.
The Therapeutic Goods Administration has given Mounjaro, also known as tirzepatide, the green light to treat moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnoea in adults with obesity.
Mounjaro, developed by Eli Lilly, was one of the first GLP-1 receptor agonists — a class of drugs initially developed for type II diabetes that became popular as 'off-label' weight-loss drugs — approved in Australia to specifically treat obesity.
That approval has now been expanded to include sleep apnoea, making it the first and only medicine in Australia approved for the debilitating condition, which affects around 780,000 Australians.
Patients' upper airway becomes blocked, repeatedly interrupting breathing while they sleep.
The prescription drug is not available on the PBS — meaning any patients recommended the drug by their doctor would need to pay significant out-of-pocket costs.
In a release issued by Eli Lilly, Woolcock Institute of Medical Research Professor Brendon Yee said news of the TGA's approval was a 'long-awaited development'.
'For the first time, people with weight-related obstructive sleep apnoea can be treated with a medicine that addresses the underlying cause of their condition,' he said.
'This marks a significant milestone in the treatment of this debilitating sleep disorder.'
Professor Yee said about 70 per cent of sleep apnoea patients had obesity.
'Obstructive sleep apnoea is incredibly pervasive – not only does it affect every aspect of a patient's wellbeing and quality of life, it significantly increases the risk of developing other health conditions,' he said.
Eli Lilly said the drug treats sleep apnoea through weight-loss, as this eases 'pressure on the chest and abdomen' and reduces 'excess fat around the neck and throat'.
Its side effects can include an upset stomach, injection site-related side effects and low blood sugar.
The drug was initially approved by the TGA last year as a weight-loss treatment for patients who were obese, or overweight and had at least one weight-related comorbid condition, such as hypertension, cardiovascular disease or prediabetes.
The news comes just one day after the regulator warned patients on popular diabetes and weight loss jabs must be warned about their increased risk of a serious airway complication during surgery.
The TGA ordered the manufacturer's behind GLP-1 and dual GIP/GLP-1 receptor agonists drugs — including Mounjaro and Ozempic — issue new safety warnings about the risk of inhaling food while under general anaesthetic.
The drugs were initially developed and approved to treat type II diabetes, but as knowledge of their weight-loss effect spread, off-label use skyrocketed — prompting significant shortages that are still ongoing and the development of versions approved for weight-loss.
Eli Lilly said all doses of the Mounjaro KwikPen 'remain available' at the time of the drug's latest approval, and they were 'committed to ongoing replenishment of all doses'.
Eli Lilly Australia Associate Vice President Dr Kevin Lim said they were proud to deliver the first pharmaceutical treatment for obstructive sleep apnoea for patients with obesity.
'We remain committed to ensuring that patients receive affordable access to Mounjaro at the earliest opportunity,' he said.
Do you have a story for The Daily Telegraph? Message 0481 056 618 or email tips@dailytelegraph.com.au
Originally published as Weight-loss jab approved to treat common sleep disorder
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Advertiser
2 hours ago
- The Advertiser
The subtle, everyday hurting of LGBTQI Australians
Witnessing acts of casual homophobia usually involved Lea* turning away as a means of hiding from her own feelings. When initially navigating the LGBTQI world and figuring out her own sexuality, she worried about what would happen if she chose to come out. "When I was an anxious teenager still coming to terms with myself, I saw how people treated the only out lesbian at my all-girls school," she tells AAP. "The feelings I had there were fear of rejection, shame and all of that just built into me, and not wanting to come to terms with myself." Regardless of the forum, casual (or in Lea's terms 'acceptable') homophobia is the act of jokingly or subtly victimising LGBTQI people. Instead of directing slurs or physical violence, someone might say "I wish I was gay" or refer to another as "the gay best friend" or even buy someone a gift based on stereotypes of sexual orientation. About three in every hundred Australians identify as LGBTQI, approximately 40 per cent of whom hide their sexuality and/or gender in public spaces, according to the Australian Human Rights Commission. These days, Lea has reached the conclusion that casual homophobia isn't as much her issue as it is the fault of those who practice it. She regards them as immature and in need of a change in thinking. "I just get really disappointed in people who still think there's not the same legitimacy in queer relationships as there are in straight ones," she says. "I'm really disappointed when I have people in my life who still think that being a lesbian means I'm just thinking about tits all the time." LGBTQI individuals endure poorer mental health outcomes than straight people due to a lack of social acceptance, according to Aids Council of NSW co-ordinator Madhuraa Prakash. "LGBTQI people are six times more likely to be diagnosed with depression and two and a half more times more likely to be diagnosed or treated for a mental health condition in general," they say. "It's unfortunate because you want to be able to talk about your life without having to edit yourself. "It weighs on a person to have to do that in your day-to-day life and leads to some bad mental health outcomes." Academic and psychotherapist Pol McCann specialises in microaggression and says although it sometimes stems from ill-intention, it is primarily patronising and performative. At the same time casual homophobia isn't exclusively directed at LGBTQI people either. Mr McCann says he's also heard from straight men who don't align with "typical" feminine or masculine ideas who have been impacted. He spoke with two straight men who were emotional, artistic and bullied by their peers at school. "They were absolutely lovely, smart, engaged guys but you could just tell they still carried the weight of the pain," he says. In the course of his work within the school environment, Mr McCann has spent time with the perpetrators of discrimination too. Some boys would never appreciate the impact they've had on a person's life, as they regard what they've done to be no more than a joke, he says. "The boys who were doing it, were doing it casually and with no malice," he adds. "These guys actually seemed really nice as adults and I don't think they understood how controlling their behaviour was." With June marking Pride Month, LGBTQI advocates like Justin Koonin know raising these issues is important. As co-chair of the NSW LGBTIQ+ Advisory Body, he has been helping develop a strategy to better include minority voices in legislation. Ensuring schools, police, transport officers and health professionals know how to treat the LGBTQI community better is a key focus. "We see the impact of casual homophobia in terms of the reported experience of mental health and wellbeing, and of safety and self-harm in our communities" Dr Koonin says. "You can't control what's in people's heads and you, to some extent, can't control what people can say but you can try and make it clear to people what hurts and what doesn't. "A lot of our work will be on increasing the level of awareness and exposure to the impact casual homophobia has in our communities." Although LGBTQI people need to lobby against casual homophobia, the straight community also has to play its part, Mr McCann says. He considers Wallaby-turned-senator David Pocock a notable voice in the LGBTQI marriage equality debate after declaring he wouldn't tie the knot with his wife until LGBTQI people could. "Pocock is a football star, incredibly handsome, incredibly charming and when he puts that kind of statement out there... that's got a lot more weight than the gay community lobbying for rights," Mr McCann says. NSW, ACT, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania have government LGBTQI advisory bodies but federal parliament doesn't. Although a health advisory has been established in Canberra, Dr Koonin says having a committee similar to NSW would benefit the community. *Lea is an anonymous name. Lifeline 13 11 14 Fullstop Australia 1800 385 578 Witnessing acts of casual homophobia usually involved Lea* turning away as a means of hiding from her own feelings. When initially navigating the LGBTQI world and figuring out her own sexuality, she worried about what would happen if she chose to come out. "When I was an anxious teenager still coming to terms with myself, I saw how people treated the only out lesbian at my all-girls school," she tells AAP. "The feelings I had there were fear of rejection, shame and all of that just built into me, and not wanting to come to terms with myself." Regardless of the forum, casual (or in Lea's terms 'acceptable') homophobia is the act of jokingly or subtly victimising LGBTQI people. Instead of directing slurs or physical violence, someone might say "I wish I was gay" or refer to another as "the gay best friend" or even buy someone a gift based on stereotypes of sexual orientation. About three in every hundred Australians identify as LGBTQI, approximately 40 per cent of whom hide their sexuality and/or gender in public spaces, according to the Australian Human Rights Commission. These days, Lea has reached the conclusion that casual homophobia isn't as much her issue as it is the fault of those who practice it. She regards them as immature and in need of a change in thinking. "I just get really disappointed in people who still think there's not the same legitimacy in queer relationships as there are in straight ones," she says. "I'm really disappointed when I have people in my life who still think that being a lesbian means I'm just thinking about tits all the time." LGBTQI individuals endure poorer mental health outcomes than straight people due to a lack of social acceptance, according to Aids Council of NSW co-ordinator Madhuraa Prakash. "LGBTQI people are six times more likely to be diagnosed with depression and two and a half more times more likely to be diagnosed or treated for a mental health condition in general," they say. "It's unfortunate because you want to be able to talk about your life without having to edit yourself. "It weighs on a person to have to do that in your day-to-day life and leads to some bad mental health outcomes." Academic and psychotherapist Pol McCann specialises in microaggression and says although it sometimes stems from ill-intention, it is primarily patronising and performative. At the same time casual homophobia isn't exclusively directed at LGBTQI people either. Mr McCann says he's also heard from straight men who don't align with "typical" feminine or masculine ideas who have been impacted. He spoke with two straight men who were emotional, artistic and bullied by their peers at school. "They were absolutely lovely, smart, engaged guys but you could just tell they still carried the weight of the pain," he says. In the course of his work within the school environment, Mr McCann has spent time with the perpetrators of discrimination too. Some boys would never appreciate the impact they've had on a person's life, as they regard what they've done to be no more than a joke, he says. "The boys who were doing it, were doing it casually and with no malice," he adds. "These guys actually seemed really nice as adults and I don't think they understood how controlling their behaviour was." With June marking Pride Month, LGBTQI advocates like Justin Koonin know raising these issues is important. As co-chair of the NSW LGBTIQ+ Advisory Body, he has been helping develop a strategy to better include minority voices in legislation. Ensuring schools, police, transport officers and health professionals know how to treat the LGBTQI community better is a key focus. "We see the impact of casual homophobia in terms of the reported experience of mental health and wellbeing, and of safety and self-harm in our communities" Dr Koonin says. "You can't control what's in people's heads and you, to some extent, can't control what people can say but you can try and make it clear to people what hurts and what doesn't. "A lot of our work will be on increasing the level of awareness and exposure to the impact casual homophobia has in our communities." Although LGBTQI people need to lobby against casual homophobia, the straight community also has to play its part, Mr McCann says. He considers Wallaby-turned-senator David Pocock a notable voice in the LGBTQI marriage equality debate after declaring he wouldn't tie the knot with his wife until LGBTQI people could. "Pocock is a football star, incredibly handsome, incredibly charming and when he puts that kind of statement out there... that's got a lot more weight than the gay community lobbying for rights," Mr McCann says. NSW, ACT, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania have government LGBTQI advisory bodies but federal parliament doesn't. Although a health advisory has been established in Canberra, Dr Koonin says having a committee similar to NSW would benefit the community. *Lea is an anonymous name. Lifeline 13 11 14 Fullstop Australia 1800 385 578 Witnessing acts of casual homophobia usually involved Lea* turning away as a means of hiding from her own feelings. When initially navigating the LGBTQI world and figuring out her own sexuality, she worried about what would happen if she chose to come out. "When I was an anxious teenager still coming to terms with myself, I saw how people treated the only out lesbian at my all-girls school," she tells AAP. "The feelings I had there were fear of rejection, shame and all of that just built into me, and not wanting to come to terms with myself." Regardless of the forum, casual (or in Lea's terms 'acceptable') homophobia is the act of jokingly or subtly victimising LGBTQI people. Instead of directing slurs or physical violence, someone might say "I wish I was gay" or refer to another as "the gay best friend" or even buy someone a gift based on stereotypes of sexual orientation. About three in every hundred Australians identify as LGBTQI, approximately 40 per cent of whom hide their sexuality and/or gender in public spaces, according to the Australian Human Rights Commission. These days, Lea has reached the conclusion that casual homophobia isn't as much her issue as it is the fault of those who practice it. She regards them as immature and in need of a change in thinking. "I just get really disappointed in people who still think there's not the same legitimacy in queer relationships as there are in straight ones," she says. "I'm really disappointed when I have people in my life who still think that being a lesbian means I'm just thinking about tits all the time." LGBTQI individuals endure poorer mental health outcomes than straight people due to a lack of social acceptance, according to Aids Council of NSW co-ordinator Madhuraa Prakash. "LGBTQI people are six times more likely to be diagnosed with depression and two and a half more times more likely to be diagnosed or treated for a mental health condition in general," they say. "It's unfortunate because you want to be able to talk about your life without having to edit yourself. "It weighs on a person to have to do that in your day-to-day life and leads to some bad mental health outcomes." Academic and psychotherapist Pol McCann specialises in microaggression and says although it sometimes stems from ill-intention, it is primarily patronising and performative. At the same time casual homophobia isn't exclusively directed at LGBTQI people either. Mr McCann says he's also heard from straight men who don't align with "typical" feminine or masculine ideas who have been impacted. He spoke with two straight men who were emotional, artistic and bullied by their peers at school. "They were absolutely lovely, smart, engaged guys but you could just tell they still carried the weight of the pain," he says. In the course of his work within the school environment, Mr McCann has spent time with the perpetrators of discrimination too. Some boys would never appreciate the impact they've had on a person's life, as they regard what they've done to be no more than a joke, he says. "The boys who were doing it, were doing it casually and with no malice," he adds. "These guys actually seemed really nice as adults and I don't think they understood how controlling their behaviour was." With June marking Pride Month, LGBTQI advocates like Justin Koonin know raising these issues is important. As co-chair of the NSW LGBTIQ+ Advisory Body, he has been helping develop a strategy to better include minority voices in legislation. Ensuring schools, police, transport officers and health professionals know how to treat the LGBTQI community better is a key focus. "We see the impact of casual homophobia in terms of the reported experience of mental health and wellbeing, and of safety and self-harm in our communities" Dr Koonin says. "You can't control what's in people's heads and you, to some extent, can't control what people can say but you can try and make it clear to people what hurts and what doesn't. "A lot of our work will be on increasing the level of awareness and exposure to the impact casual homophobia has in our communities." Although LGBTQI people need to lobby against casual homophobia, the straight community also has to play its part, Mr McCann says. He considers Wallaby-turned-senator David Pocock a notable voice in the LGBTQI marriage equality debate after declaring he wouldn't tie the knot with his wife until LGBTQI people could. "Pocock is a football star, incredibly handsome, incredibly charming and when he puts that kind of statement out there... that's got a lot more weight than the gay community lobbying for rights," Mr McCann says. NSW, ACT, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania have government LGBTQI advisory bodies but federal parliament doesn't. Although a health advisory has been established in Canberra, Dr Koonin says having a committee similar to NSW would benefit the community. *Lea is an anonymous name. Lifeline 13 11 14 Fullstop Australia 1800 385 578 Witnessing acts of casual homophobia usually involved Lea* turning away as a means of hiding from her own feelings. When initially navigating the LGBTQI world and figuring out her own sexuality, she worried about what would happen if she chose to come out. "When I was an anxious teenager still coming to terms with myself, I saw how people treated the only out lesbian at my all-girls school," she tells AAP. "The feelings I had there were fear of rejection, shame and all of that just built into me, and not wanting to come to terms with myself." Regardless of the forum, casual (or in Lea's terms 'acceptable') homophobia is the act of jokingly or subtly victimising LGBTQI people. Instead of directing slurs or physical violence, someone might say "I wish I was gay" or refer to another as "the gay best friend" or even buy someone a gift based on stereotypes of sexual orientation. About three in every hundred Australians identify as LGBTQI, approximately 40 per cent of whom hide their sexuality and/or gender in public spaces, according to the Australian Human Rights Commission. These days, Lea has reached the conclusion that casual homophobia isn't as much her issue as it is the fault of those who practice it. She regards them as immature and in need of a change in thinking. "I just get really disappointed in people who still think there's not the same legitimacy in queer relationships as there are in straight ones," she says. "I'm really disappointed when I have people in my life who still think that being a lesbian means I'm just thinking about tits all the time." LGBTQI individuals endure poorer mental health outcomes than straight people due to a lack of social acceptance, according to Aids Council of NSW co-ordinator Madhuraa Prakash. "LGBTQI people are six times more likely to be diagnosed with depression and two and a half more times more likely to be diagnosed or treated for a mental health condition in general," they say. "It's unfortunate because you want to be able to talk about your life without having to edit yourself. "It weighs on a person to have to do that in your day-to-day life and leads to some bad mental health outcomes." Academic and psychotherapist Pol McCann specialises in microaggression and says although it sometimes stems from ill-intention, it is primarily patronising and performative. At the same time casual homophobia isn't exclusively directed at LGBTQI people either. Mr McCann says he's also heard from straight men who don't align with "typical" feminine or masculine ideas who have been impacted. He spoke with two straight men who were emotional, artistic and bullied by their peers at school. "They were absolutely lovely, smart, engaged guys but you could just tell they still carried the weight of the pain," he says. In the course of his work within the school environment, Mr McCann has spent time with the perpetrators of discrimination too. Some boys would never appreciate the impact they've had on a person's life, as they regard what they've done to be no more than a joke, he says. "The boys who were doing it, were doing it casually and with no malice," he adds. "These guys actually seemed really nice as adults and I don't think they understood how controlling their behaviour was." With June marking Pride Month, LGBTQI advocates like Justin Koonin know raising these issues is important. As co-chair of the NSW LGBTIQ+ Advisory Body, he has been helping develop a strategy to better include minority voices in legislation. Ensuring schools, police, transport officers and health professionals know how to treat the LGBTQI community better is a key focus. "We see the impact of casual homophobia in terms of the reported experience of mental health and wellbeing, and of safety and self-harm in our communities" Dr Koonin says. "You can't control what's in people's heads and you, to some extent, can't control what people can say but you can try and make it clear to people what hurts and what doesn't. "A lot of our work will be on increasing the level of awareness and exposure to the impact casual homophobia has in our communities." Although LGBTQI people need to lobby against casual homophobia, the straight community also has to play its part, Mr McCann says. He considers Wallaby-turned-senator David Pocock a notable voice in the LGBTQI marriage equality debate after declaring he wouldn't tie the knot with his wife until LGBTQI people could. "Pocock is a football star, incredibly handsome, incredibly charming and when he puts that kind of statement out there... that's got a lot more weight than the gay community lobbying for rights," Mr McCann says. NSW, ACT, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania have government LGBTQI advisory bodies but federal parliament doesn't. Although a health advisory has been established in Canberra, Dr Koonin says having a committee similar to NSW would benefit the community. *Lea is an anonymous name. Lifeline 13 11 14 Fullstop Australia 1800 385 578
The Advertiser
7 hours ago
- The Advertiser
The billion-dollar industry with scant consumer protections
Virtually every man, woman and teenager has a mobile phone. Ninety-eight per cent of adults use mobile phones for calls. Behind your phone service is a multibillion-dollar industry critical to education, health, business, leisure, civic life and - in an emergency - life and death. But can we trust our telco providers? And as consumers what protections can we rely upon? Late last month deeply concerning allegations were levelled at Telstra by rival telco TPG/Vodafone which yet again raised red flags about the trust consumers can place in telcos. TPG claims that Telstra - which is Australia's largest telco by some margin - has misled consumers by making false claims about the size of its mobile network in its advertising, website content, annual reports and other sales material. Australians take note of claims made by telcos about their network size, network reliability and network performance in deciding their mobile provider. They do so on the presumption that telcos are honest with this information. Many Australians, particularly in regional and remote areas, sign up for more expensive plans with Telstra because they believe it's the only option for reliable coverage. If these latest allegations are true - and the coverage advantage is not as big as people have been led to believe - regional consumers could be forgiven for feeling betrayed. When consumers are misled, markets are distorted, and trust is eroded. That is why these latest allegations are so serious and should be investigated by the ACCC. Of course, the latest allegations are not the only indication that our trust in the major telcos is brittle. New research undertaken by Essential Media shows that 41 per cent of consumers have limited faith in their telco to act in their best interest -and almost a third said the coverage they received didn't match what they were led to expect. The Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman has recently identified a spike in complaints, including those for poor sales conduct - misleading and high-pressure tactics - as the most common systemic issue it investigates. In parallel, credit assessments in the telco sector remain inconsistent and inadequate. Complaints to the Ombudsman about poor credit checks increased by over 30 per cent in the past financial year, with financial counsellors reporting that many of their clients are routinely signed onto contracts they simply cannot afford. These concerns are not academic, they have a real-world impact everyday for Australians. The fact that we cannot rely on what telcos tell us about their coverage is why ACCAN supports the Government's National Audit of Mobile Coverage, which is gathering real-world data through 180,000 kilometres of on-the-ground testing each year. This information is important as it could help to build an independent coverage map, a key recommendation of the recent Regional Telecommunications Review, giving Australians accurate, unbiased insight into where they can expect service. But independent mapping will not fix all the problems with the nation's major telecommunications carriers. The fact is there is precious little to protect telecommunications consumers. The telecommunications industry itself develops the TCP Code (the sector's consumer protections rulebook) and is required to conduct a review every five years. The TCP Code already offers inadequate consumer protections and is not underpinned by effective compliance, enforcement and penalty arrangements. There are countless examples of consumer harm from this weak regulation. In May, ACCAN voted "no" in a ballot of the TCP Code Review Committee- of which we are a part - on the question of whether the draft Code should be sent to the regulator, the Australian Communications and Media Authority for consideration. Despite this, and despite 22 other consumer groups already walking away from the industry led code process, the ballot was carried. The revised Code has now been submitted to the ACMA for potential registration - a process that raises significant questions about whether the proposed updates meet community needs. Domestic, family and sexual violence and financial hardship have been taken out of the TCP Code, replaced with direct regulation in the last 18 months. This is a recognition of the critical nature of the problems, and the inadequacy of the code system. The current TCP Code fails to provide adequate consumer protections in two critical areas: irresponsible sales and inadequate credit assessments. These gaps result in thousands of Australians being sold plans they can't afford, don't understand, or never needed in the first place. These harms are exacerbated by sales incentive structures that reward telco staff for maximising sales volume and value - an eerily similar model to that called out and reformed in the financial services sector following the banking royal commission. Despite months of consultation, the final version of the draft Code submitted to the ACMA has not meaningfully strengthened these protections. The sales clauses still allow commission-based incentives and fail to impose clear duties to ensure affordability or product suitability. We are concerned that proposals in the Telecommunications (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025 before parliament to make code compliance mandatory will not fully solve the problem - because the issue lies in the content of the industry-led code. The Ombudsman, the ACMA and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) have all criticised the process in which the industry is in charge of writing the nation's telecommunications protections. ACCAN has now joined the 22 consumer groups fed up with weak telecommunications regulation in the Fair Call Coalition. The answer is simple: new Minister for Communications, Anika Wells must reject the farcical process by which the industry (Communications Alliance) writes the nation's primary consumer protection code for telecommunications - and apply robust and enforceable rules in key areas of consumer harm. Consumers deserve and demand appropriate protections - and will be closely watching the leadership brought to bear by the federal government and the regulator to ensure their safety. Virtually every man, woman and teenager has a mobile phone. Ninety-eight per cent of adults use mobile phones for calls. Behind your phone service is a multibillion-dollar industry critical to education, health, business, leisure, civic life and - in an emergency - life and death. But can we trust our telco providers? And as consumers what protections can we rely upon? Late last month deeply concerning allegations were levelled at Telstra by rival telco TPG/Vodafone which yet again raised red flags about the trust consumers can place in telcos. TPG claims that Telstra - which is Australia's largest telco by some margin - has misled consumers by making false claims about the size of its mobile network in its advertising, website content, annual reports and other sales material. Australians take note of claims made by telcos about their network size, network reliability and network performance in deciding their mobile provider. They do so on the presumption that telcos are honest with this information. Many Australians, particularly in regional and remote areas, sign up for more expensive plans with Telstra because they believe it's the only option for reliable coverage. If these latest allegations are true - and the coverage advantage is not as big as people have been led to believe - regional consumers could be forgiven for feeling betrayed. When consumers are misled, markets are distorted, and trust is eroded. That is why these latest allegations are so serious and should be investigated by the ACCC. Of course, the latest allegations are not the only indication that our trust in the major telcos is brittle. New research undertaken by Essential Media shows that 41 per cent of consumers have limited faith in their telco to act in their best interest -and almost a third said the coverage they received didn't match what they were led to expect. The Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman has recently identified a spike in complaints, including those for poor sales conduct - misleading and high-pressure tactics - as the most common systemic issue it investigates. In parallel, credit assessments in the telco sector remain inconsistent and inadequate. Complaints to the Ombudsman about poor credit checks increased by over 30 per cent in the past financial year, with financial counsellors reporting that many of their clients are routinely signed onto contracts they simply cannot afford. These concerns are not academic, they have a real-world impact everyday for Australians. The fact that we cannot rely on what telcos tell us about their coverage is why ACCAN supports the Government's National Audit of Mobile Coverage, which is gathering real-world data through 180,000 kilometres of on-the-ground testing each year. This information is important as it could help to build an independent coverage map, a key recommendation of the recent Regional Telecommunications Review, giving Australians accurate, unbiased insight into where they can expect service. But independent mapping will not fix all the problems with the nation's major telecommunications carriers. The fact is there is precious little to protect telecommunications consumers. The telecommunications industry itself develops the TCP Code (the sector's consumer protections rulebook) and is required to conduct a review every five years. The TCP Code already offers inadequate consumer protections and is not underpinned by effective compliance, enforcement and penalty arrangements. There are countless examples of consumer harm from this weak regulation. In May, ACCAN voted "no" in a ballot of the TCP Code Review Committee- of which we are a part - on the question of whether the draft Code should be sent to the regulator, the Australian Communications and Media Authority for consideration. Despite this, and despite 22 other consumer groups already walking away from the industry led code process, the ballot was carried. The revised Code has now been submitted to the ACMA for potential registration - a process that raises significant questions about whether the proposed updates meet community needs. Domestic, family and sexual violence and financial hardship have been taken out of the TCP Code, replaced with direct regulation in the last 18 months. This is a recognition of the critical nature of the problems, and the inadequacy of the code system. The current TCP Code fails to provide adequate consumer protections in two critical areas: irresponsible sales and inadequate credit assessments. These gaps result in thousands of Australians being sold plans they can't afford, don't understand, or never needed in the first place. These harms are exacerbated by sales incentive structures that reward telco staff for maximising sales volume and value - an eerily similar model to that called out and reformed in the financial services sector following the banking royal commission. Despite months of consultation, the final version of the draft Code submitted to the ACMA has not meaningfully strengthened these protections. The sales clauses still allow commission-based incentives and fail to impose clear duties to ensure affordability or product suitability. We are concerned that proposals in the Telecommunications (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025 before parliament to make code compliance mandatory will not fully solve the problem - because the issue lies in the content of the industry-led code. The Ombudsman, the ACMA and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) have all criticised the process in which the industry is in charge of writing the nation's telecommunications protections. ACCAN has now joined the 22 consumer groups fed up with weak telecommunications regulation in the Fair Call Coalition. The answer is simple: new Minister for Communications, Anika Wells must reject the farcical process by which the industry (Communications Alliance) writes the nation's primary consumer protection code for telecommunications - and apply robust and enforceable rules in key areas of consumer harm. Consumers deserve and demand appropriate protections - and will be closely watching the leadership brought to bear by the federal government and the regulator to ensure their safety. Virtually every man, woman and teenager has a mobile phone. Ninety-eight per cent of adults use mobile phones for calls. Behind your phone service is a multibillion-dollar industry critical to education, health, business, leisure, civic life and - in an emergency - life and death. But can we trust our telco providers? And as consumers what protections can we rely upon? Late last month deeply concerning allegations were levelled at Telstra by rival telco TPG/Vodafone which yet again raised red flags about the trust consumers can place in telcos. TPG claims that Telstra - which is Australia's largest telco by some margin - has misled consumers by making false claims about the size of its mobile network in its advertising, website content, annual reports and other sales material. Australians take note of claims made by telcos about their network size, network reliability and network performance in deciding their mobile provider. They do so on the presumption that telcos are honest with this information. Many Australians, particularly in regional and remote areas, sign up for more expensive plans with Telstra because they believe it's the only option for reliable coverage. If these latest allegations are true - and the coverage advantage is not as big as people have been led to believe - regional consumers could be forgiven for feeling betrayed. When consumers are misled, markets are distorted, and trust is eroded. That is why these latest allegations are so serious and should be investigated by the ACCC. Of course, the latest allegations are not the only indication that our trust in the major telcos is brittle. New research undertaken by Essential Media shows that 41 per cent of consumers have limited faith in their telco to act in their best interest -and almost a third said the coverage they received didn't match what they were led to expect. The Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman has recently identified a spike in complaints, including those for poor sales conduct - misleading and high-pressure tactics - as the most common systemic issue it investigates. In parallel, credit assessments in the telco sector remain inconsistent and inadequate. Complaints to the Ombudsman about poor credit checks increased by over 30 per cent in the past financial year, with financial counsellors reporting that many of their clients are routinely signed onto contracts they simply cannot afford. These concerns are not academic, they have a real-world impact everyday for Australians. The fact that we cannot rely on what telcos tell us about their coverage is why ACCAN supports the Government's National Audit of Mobile Coverage, which is gathering real-world data through 180,000 kilometres of on-the-ground testing each year. This information is important as it could help to build an independent coverage map, a key recommendation of the recent Regional Telecommunications Review, giving Australians accurate, unbiased insight into where they can expect service. But independent mapping will not fix all the problems with the nation's major telecommunications carriers. The fact is there is precious little to protect telecommunications consumers. The telecommunications industry itself develops the TCP Code (the sector's consumer protections rulebook) and is required to conduct a review every five years. The TCP Code already offers inadequate consumer protections and is not underpinned by effective compliance, enforcement and penalty arrangements. There are countless examples of consumer harm from this weak regulation. In May, ACCAN voted "no" in a ballot of the TCP Code Review Committee- of which we are a part - on the question of whether the draft Code should be sent to the regulator, the Australian Communications and Media Authority for consideration. Despite this, and despite 22 other consumer groups already walking away from the industry led code process, the ballot was carried. The revised Code has now been submitted to the ACMA for potential registration - a process that raises significant questions about whether the proposed updates meet community needs. Domestic, family and sexual violence and financial hardship have been taken out of the TCP Code, replaced with direct regulation in the last 18 months. This is a recognition of the critical nature of the problems, and the inadequacy of the code system. The current TCP Code fails to provide adequate consumer protections in two critical areas: irresponsible sales and inadequate credit assessments. These gaps result in thousands of Australians being sold plans they can't afford, don't understand, or never needed in the first place. These harms are exacerbated by sales incentive structures that reward telco staff for maximising sales volume and value - an eerily similar model to that called out and reformed in the financial services sector following the banking royal commission. Despite months of consultation, the final version of the draft Code submitted to the ACMA has not meaningfully strengthened these protections. The sales clauses still allow commission-based incentives and fail to impose clear duties to ensure affordability or product suitability. We are concerned that proposals in the Telecommunications (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025 before parliament to make code compliance mandatory will not fully solve the problem - because the issue lies in the content of the industry-led code. The Ombudsman, the ACMA and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) have all criticised the process in which the industry is in charge of writing the nation's telecommunications protections. ACCAN has now joined the 22 consumer groups fed up with weak telecommunications regulation in the Fair Call Coalition. The answer is simple: new Minister for Communications, Anika Wells must reject the farcical process by which the industry (Communications Alliance) writes the nation's primary consumer protection code for telecommunications - and apply robust and enforceable rules in key areas of consumer harm. Consumers deserve and demand appropriate protections - and will be closely watching the leadership brought to bear by the federal government and the regulator to ensure their safety. Virtually every man, woman and teenager has a mobile phone. Ninety-eight per cent of adults use mobile phones for calls. Behind your phone service is a multibillion-dollar industry critical to education, health, business, leisure, civic life and - in an emergency - life and death. But can we trust our telco providers? And as consumers what protections can we rely upon? Late last month deeply concerning allegations were levelled at Telstra by rival telco TPG/Vodafone which yet again raised red flags about the trust consumers can place in telcos. TPG claims that Telstra - which is Australia's largest telco by some margin - has misled consumers by making false claims about the size of its mobile network in its advertising, website content, annual reports and other sales material. Australians take note of claims made by telcos about their network size, network reliability and network performance in deciding their mobile provider. They do so on the presumption that telcos are honest with this information. Many Australians, particularly in regional and remote areas, sign up for more expensive plans with Telstra because they believe it's the only option for reliable coverage. If these latest allegations are true - and the coverage advantage is not as big as people have been led to believe - regional consumers could be forgiven for feeling betrayed. When consumers are misled, markets are distorted, and trust is eroded. That is why these latest allegations are so serious and should be investigated by the ACCC. Of course, the latest allegations are not the only indication that our trust in the major telcos is brittle. New research undertaken by Essential Media shows that 41 per cent of consumers have limited faith in their telco to act in their best interest -and almost a third said the coverage they received didn't match what they were led to expect. The Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman has recently identified a spike in complaints, including those for poor sales conduct - misleading and high-pressure tactics - as the most common systemic issue it investigates. In parallel, credit assessments in the telco sector remain inconsistent and inadequate. Complaints to the Ombudsman about poor credit checks increased by over 30 per cent in the past financial year, with financial counsellors reporting that many of their clients are routinely signed onto contracts they simply cannot afford. These concerns are not academic, they have a real-world impact everyday for Australians. The fact that we cannot rely on what telcos tell us about their coverage is why ACCAN supports the Government's National Audit of Mobile Coverage, which is gathering real-world data through 180,000 kilometres of on-the-ground testing each year. This information is important as it could help to build an independent coverage map, a key recommendation of the recent Regional Telecommunications Review, giving Australians accurate, unbiased insight into where they can expect service. But independent mapping will not fix all the problems with the nation's major telecommunications carriers. The fact is there is precious little to protect telecommunications consumers. The telecommunications industry itself develops the TCP Code (the sector's consumer protections rulebook) and is required to conduct a review every five years. The TCP Code already offers inadequate consumer protections and is not underpinned by effective compliance, enforcement and penalty arrangements. There are countless examples of consumer harm from this weak regulation. In May, ACCAN voted "no" in a ballot of the TCP Code Review Committee- of which we are a part - on the question of whether the draft Code should be sent to the regulator, the Australian Communications and Media Authority for consideration. Despite this, and despite 22 other consumer groups already walking away from the industry led code process, the ballot was carried. The revised Code has now been submitted to the ACMA for potential registration - a process that raises significant questions about whether the proposed updates meet community needs. Domestic, family and sexual violence and financial hardship have been taken out of the TCP Code, replaced with direct regulation in the last 18 months. This is a recognition of the critical nature of the problems, and the inadequacy of the code system. The current TCP Code fails to provide adequate consumer protections in two critical areas: irresponsible sales and inadequate credit assessments. These gaps result in thousands of Australians being sold plans they can't afford, don't understand, or never needed in the first place. These harms are exacerbated by sales incentive structures that reward telco staff for maximising sales volume and value - an eerily similar model to that called out and reformed in the financial services sector following the banking royal commission. Despite months of consultation, the final version of the draft Code submitted to the ACMA has not meaningfully strengthened these protections. The sales clauses still allow commission-based incentives and fail to impose clear duties to ensure affordability or product suitability. We are concerned that proposals in the Telecommunications (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025 before parliament to make code compliance mandatory will not fully solve the problem - because the issue lies in the content of the industry-led code. The Ombudsman, the ACMA and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) have all criticised the process in which the industry is in charge of writing the nation's telecommunications protections. ACCAN has now joined the 22 consumer groups fed up with weak telecommunications regulation in the Fair Call Coalition. The answer is simple: new Minister for Communications, Anika Wells must reject the farcical process by which the industry (Communications Alliance) writes the nation's primary consumer protection code for telecommunications - and apply robust and enforceable rules in key areas of consumer harm. Consumers deserve and demand appropriate protections - and will be closely watching the leadership brought to bear by the federal government and the regulator to ensure their safety.
Sky News AU
8 hours ago
- Sky News AU
Nationals Leader David Littleproud demand Prime Minister Anthony Albanese rules out kowtowing on US beef imports
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese 'needs to' immediately rule out kowtowing to Donald Trump on biosecurity laws on US beef imports, Nationals Leader David Littleproud has demanded. Government officials reportedly told The Sydney Morning Herald that Australia could alter its biosecurity laws to allow US beef exports without risks to local industry, in a move to appease Trump as he wages his trade war. Australia banned US beef in 2003 after a mad cow disease outbreak before undoing this in 2019 when the outbreak subsided. Cattle raised in Mexico and Canada but slaughtered in the US is still banned, however, this could be changed according to the report. Mr Littleproud raised concerns about Australia's cattle industry on Friday and urged the Prime Minister not to use the sector as a bargaining chip in negotiations with the US President. 'There needs to be certainty. The Prime Minister needs to rule it out immediately,' the Nationals Leader said on Sky News. 'He needs to make sure that he's very clear with Australian producers that our biosecurity standards will not be reduced and that … if we want to get imports that originated from Mexico or Canada, that there's some traceability on it like Australian producers have.' He called for the Prime Minister to be transparent with Australian beef producers as concerns fester about the nation's biosecurity following this report. 'I don't think Australian producers are asking for anything unfair here, they're just trying to protect their production systems, making sure that they can not only feed Australians but feed the world,' Mr Littleproud said. 'The Prime Minister and his department who are mooting these things need to be very, very clear with Australian beef producers that it's not on the table and it won't be on the table at all. 'But when you start getting these reports - you don't start seeing these reports unless there's smoke and when there's smoke, there's fire.' Australia exports more than $4b of beef to the US annually, making it the largest market for Aussie beef exports behind China. After Trump revealed his sweeping tariffs and invited impacted nations to negotiate, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese vowed to protect the nation's biosecurity laws, Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and news publishers against tech giants. 'We will not weaken the measures that protect our farmers and producers from the risks of disease or contamination,' he said in a statement. Cattle Australia chief executive Chris Parker issued a statement highlighting the importance of traceability for foreign-produced beef. 'Our position is that the US needs to be able to demonstrate it can either trace cattle born in Mexico and Canada, or has systems that are equivalent to Australia's traceability, before imports of meat could occur from non-US cattle,' Mr Parker said. 'Cattle Australia is in ongoing communication with the Federal Government regarding this issue and the vital importance that our science-based biosecurity system is not compromised as part of trade discussions with any country.' Mr Albanese is expected to have a meeting with Trump either on the sidelines of the G7 meeting in Canada or in the US later in June where the Prime Minister will make Australia's case for tariff exemptions. Australia faces 50 per cent tariffs on steel and aluminium alongside a broad 10 per cent levy on all goods, which is still paused by the Trump Administration.
