Election ads with false facts or deepfakes could be fined
Senator David Pocock, who belongs to no party, wants rules that make election ads tell the truth. A new panel led by a retired judge would rule on false ads within about two days. Ads made with AI, computer tools that can make pictures, voices and words, would have to say so.
Official name: Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Communications) Bill 2025 (No. 2)
- Election ads could not state facts that are false and misleading in a way that matters.
- Fake videos, photos or voice copies of a candidate would be banned unless the candidate agreed.
- Ads made or heavily changed with AI or other digital tools would have to say so.
- A new panel would rule on complaints, usually within two days.
- TV and radio could run election ads in the last three days before voting day.
Who it affects
- Voters: Election ads would have to get their facts right and flag anything made with AI.
- Parties, candidates and campaign groups: The person who approves an ad could face big fines if it states false facts or fakes a candidate.
- Candidates: They would be protected from fake pictures and voice copies made without their say-so.
- TV and radio stations: They could run election ads right up to voting day.
- People sharing posts online: The rules would not apply to private social media posts, or to people who just share an ad.
No ban on lying ads
Federal election law has rules about who must be named on an ad. But it does not ban lies in campaign ads. The only lies it bans are about how to fill in your ballot paper, the form you vote on.
New AI tools make it easy to make deepfakes. A deepfake is a fake video, photo or sound clip that looks or sounds real.
The notes that explain the bill give examples from overseas. In the United States, a phone robot used a copy of President Joe Biden's voice. It told people not to vote in a party's early vote. In Britain, deepfakes went after the two main party leaders, Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer, before the 2024 election.
In 2023, a group of MPs and senators who look at election law called for truth-in-ads laws. They pointed to South Australia. It has had such a law for state elections since 1985. The Australian Capital Territory brought one in during 2020.
Senator David Pocock brought in this bill on 30 July 2025. It is a private bill. That means it does not come from the government.
False ads and deepfakes banned
Part 1 changes the main federal election law, the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918.
It would ban approving an election ad with a written statement of fact that is wrong and misleading in a way that matters. Here, matters means it could change how people think about their vote.
Opinions are not covered. The notes give an example. 'A vote for Paddy is a vote for bad government' is an opinion. 'Unemployment has fallen since the Government was elected' is a fact that can be checked.
The bill would also ban a fake picture or video of a candidate that pretends to be real. The same goes for fake sound, like a copy of their voice, that pretends to be the candidate speaking. These bans apply when the candidate has not agreed.
A court could fine someone up to 1,000 penalty units for each of these. A penalty unit is a fixed dollar amount used to set fines.
Only the person or group who approved the ad could be fined. TV stations, publishers and people who share an ad could not be.
The rules would only apply while a federal election is under way. They would not cover private social media posts, jokes that make fun of people, art, the news, or school and uni work.
Only real news outlets that follow a press or TV rule book would count as the news.
Retired judge rules on complaints
The bill sets up a new panel to check election ads. It would sit inside the Australian Electoral Commission, the body that runs federal elections. The panel would make its own decisions. The commission could not tell it what to decide.
The head of the panel must be a retired judge of the Federal Court, a national court, who served at least 3 years. The minister must ask the top judge of the Federal Court for views. The group of MPs and senators on election law must agree to the choice.
There would be between 3 and 14 other members.
Anyone could complain about an ad. The panel head would pick at least three members to decide the case. They would usually have to decide and publish the result within two days.
If an ad breaks the rules, the panel could ask the person who approved it to take it back, fix it or take it down. If they refuse, the panel could go to the Federal Court. Only the court could force them to act.
Say a group runs a TV ad with a copy of a candidate's voice saying they do nothing in their job. The candidate could complain. The panel could rule within days, and a court could order the ad pulled.
AI ads must say so
Some ads are fully or mostly made or changed with digital tools, including AI. These would have to say so. The note would sit with the details that already show who approved the ad.
Small edits would not count. The notes say swapping a green screen, a plain backdrop, for a coloured background and adding text is not a big enough change. Editing a real photo to show someone being arrested would need a label.
Rules for referendums
A referendum is a vote by all Australians on changing the Constitution, the country's founding rule book.
Part 2 copies the main rules into the law for referendums. Referendum ads could not have written statements of fact that are false and misleading in a way that matters.
Referendum ads made with AI would also need a label. The same panel would handle complaints.
Ad blackout would end
Right now, TV and radio stations cannot run election or referendum ads in the last three days before voting day. Online ads have no such ban.
Part 3 would scrap this ban for commercial, community and pay TV and radio. It would also scrap it for SBS, a public broadcaster paid for by the government.
The group of MPs and senators on election law called for this. It said truth-in-ads rules would make the ban less needed.
Fines for ignoring AEC requests
The electoral commission could fine people up to 200 penalty units for ignoring its requests for facts about who approved an ad.
The group of MPs and senators on election law would have to review the new rules. It would do this within 12 months after the first federal election held under them.
Part 4 lets the minister write rules to manage the change-over.
Waiting in the Senate
The AI label rules would start 28 days after the Governor-General signs the bill. The Governor-General is the King's stand-in in Australia.
The bill names 1 January 2026 as the start date for the truth rules, the panel and the end of the TV and radio ban. That date has already passed.
Senator Pocock put the bill to the Senate on 30 July 2025. A vote on its main idea was proposed the same day. It has not been voted on.
It would need to pass the Senate and then the House of Representatives, the larger house of Parliament, to become law.
Its journey through Parliament
| 30 Jul 2025 | Senate: Introduced and read a first time |
| 30 Jul 2025 | Senate: Second reading moved |