The Senate Must Now Act to Reform e-Conveyancing

With the federal election now behind us and the political dust settling, it’s time for the Senate to turn its attention to a matter that affects every buyer, seller, lender, and practitioner in Australia—the future of e-conveyancing.

Launched in February 2025, the Senate Economics References Committee inquiry into competition in the electronic conveyancing space was a welcome first step. But with campaigning over, and policy paralysis behind us, it’s time for action—not just discussion.

At the heart of this issue is PEXA’s effective monopoly over digital settlements. PEXA currently handles around 88% of e-settlements in Australia, processing more than $800 billion annually. While its platform has delivered efficiencies since its inception, the lack of competition has become increasingly problematic.

Ask any practitioner in Victoria who’s faced a PEXA outage on settlement day, or any client surprised by a non-negotiable platform fee, and the reality becomes clear: the current model is vulnerable.

For years, alternatives like Sympli have waited in the wings. Backed by InfoTrack and the ASX, Sympli is a capable and regulated Electronic Lodgment Network Operator (ELNO). But without mandated interoperability, it cannot operate meaningfully in a system where each transaction is captive to a single platform.

The Senate inquiry presents a unique opportunity to resolve this imbalance. It must recommend that interoperability be not just permitted—but compulsory. The current monopoly structure exposes all users to systemic risk, and it undermines innovation by discouraging competitors from investing in development or service.

Moreover, the implications for consumers are real. Fees are passed on. Delays can cost thousands. A single point of failure in a $9 trillion property market is not just unwise—it’s unacceptable.

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has already expressed concern. Now it’s time for Parliament to follow through.

From a conveyancing standpoint, practitioners are ready to adapt. We already work across platforms, banks, titles offices, and legislation in multiple states. The idea that multiple ELNOs would be “too confusing” for the industry simply doesn’t hold up.

What we do need is clear regulation, standardised technical protocols, and a deadline for implementation. December 2025 has been suggested. That timeline is reasonable, and the industry will meet it if the government gets out of neutral and into drive.

Consumers deserve the freedom to choose. Practitioners deserve competition that rewards service and innovation. The market deserves a system that doesn’t grind to a halt when one operator experiences a glitch.

So now that the Senate’s attention is no longer divided by campaigning, the message from the profession is simple:
Get on with it.