“Expect shenanigans.”

This ominous warning was included when news came on the morning of Tuesday 24 March that the debate on the motion to disallow the Albanese Government’s controversial cash mandate regulations had been scheduled to continue in the Senate that day.

This Tuesday, Australians were treated to a lesson in filibustering 101 by two grown women who should, quite honestly, be ashamed of themselves.

Labor senators Ellie Whiteaker and Corinne Mulholland pushed the debate to a time-out with mostly personal attacks on senate opposition colleagues, with little time spent on the actual issue of cash.

What they did say showed they were among the least informed on the critical details of the issue in the chamber.

Of the 2000-plus words expended by Senator Whiteaker, less than half were about the cash mandate and related matters.

The rest was an exercise in gaslighting and reinforced why everyone from the cash lobby to consumer advocate Choice want these regulations junked and the process to protect the right to pay with cash started again in a fair and transparent manner.

From the moment Senator Whiteaker opened her mouth it was clear she had only a superficial grasp of the issue and did not take the matter seriously.

“On 1 January 2026, Labor introduced a cash acceptance mandate, which means that fuel stations and grocery stores have to accept cash for in-person transactions of up to $500 between the hours of 7am and 9 pm. Done. Problem solved. You’re welcome.”

Let’s take a look at some more of her statements.

Senator Whiteaker: “Until we introduced this mandate, there was no obligation on businesses to accept cash in Australia.”

Response:

(1) Until these regulations were created, retailers carried the responsibility for refusing cash and had to look customers in the eye and tell them they would not accept physical currency. (A lot harder than you think in a country town.) Now, all the majority of retailers have to say is that they are exempt from the government mandate to accept cash.  The responsibility has shifted from the individual to the government. Big difference.

(2) The sweeping use of the term “businesses” is misleading. Most retailers are not covered by this mandate and those supermarkets and fuel outlets that are can apply for exceptional circumstances exemptions. Treasury has confirmed the lack of access to banking facilities could be grounds for an exemption being granted, meaning that these regulations do absolutely nothing to help communities across the majority of regional Australia.

Senator Whiteaker: “They’re trying to get rid of the only real protection that Australians have to use cash for the things that they need.”

Response: 

These regulations only cover fuel and groceries from big retailers and the door has been left open for smaller retailers across the majority of regional Australia to apply for exemptions.  What Australians asked for and expected was a mandate that protected the right to pay cash in any circumstances as other countries have done.

Senator Whiteaker: “Right now, tonight, in this chamber, Senator Roberts and One Nation are moving to take away the only guarantee that Australians have to use cash for the essentials. It’s not protecting cash. It’s not standing up for ordinary Australians.

Response:

(1) Life’s essentials consist of a lot more than groceries and fuel.

(2) It is ordinary Australians – from cities and the regions – who have asked One Nation and other members of the Opposition for help in having the faux cash mandate scrapped and the process started again.

Senator Whiteaker: “If you continue with this disallowance, you are taking away the ability of Australians to use cash.”

Response:

This is a gross untruth and scaremongering.

Senator Whiteaker: “Tonight they are trying to take away the simple cash guarantee that Australians rely on. All Australians should be able to walk into a shop, pull out a pineapple and pay for the basics. That’s what Labor believe, and that is what we have delivered.”

Response:

This is exactly the reason why the disallowance motion was lodged – because Labor’s cash mandate does nothing to ensure Australian’s can walk into any shop and purchase any essential item with cash. Labor has delivered a dud set of regulations that are a long way from being a “cash guarantee”.

Senator Whitaker: “This approach, our approach, has been supported by stakeholders. COTA Australia, representing older Australians, says: Mandating businesses to accept cash for essential goods is sensible reform that will protect older Australians and others who rely on cash from being locked out of everyday life.”

Response:

COTA (Council Of The Ageing) states “essentials”. They probably had something like being able to walk into a chemist and paying for medication or a packet of incontinence pads in mind when they said this. (And many of the pensioners they represent would be lucky to have a “pineapple” to pull out.) Labor’s cash mandate does nothing to protect the right to pay with cash in any shop other than a large supermarket.

Senator Mulholland did not do much better.

Her 2000-word contribution was even less on topic than Senator Whiteaker’s, with less than a quarter related to the cash mandate.

Neither senators acknowledged that areas like healthcare, utilities, transport and telecommunications have been excluded from the mandate, a key point of contention for the consumer group Choice.

This display concluded with the acting deputy president, Labor senator Karen Grogan, failing to acknowledge a One Nation senator attempting to call for a vote before the session was ended abruptly.

The debate has been rescheduled to continue later today.

While Labor is playing politics and attacking the messenger, they are overlooking the important fact that this disallowance motion was put up by One Nation Senator Malcolm Roberts in response to calls from the Australian public to fix the botch job Labor has made of the need to protect the right to pay with cash.

By attacking the political representatives who have acted on those concerns in the way we saw yesterday, Labor is, by extension, attacking the people who are saying ‘if that is the best you can come up with, get out of the way and let someone else have a go’.

We can only hope that the Labor senators decide to show a bit more respect to everyday Australians later today and cut the dirty tricks they are using to try and stop a vote they obviously worried they are going to lose.

The numbers looked good to relegate this defective mandate to history yesterday but if the ALP clown show was about buying time to do deals behind the scenes, it will be a sad day for Australia if this disallowance motion is voted down.

Update: The motion has been listed twice for debate on March 25 and 26 with sessions timing out before the matter was dealt with. It has now been rescheduled to Tuesday, March 31. According to Senate rules, if the vote does not occur on that day, the cash mandate regulations will become void.

This article appeared on The Regional on 25 March 2026.

Stories on The Regional’s website are free to read and always will be.

If you enjoyed this article you can show your support by joining our mailing list
(either by filling out the form on our Home page or sending us an email or message).