Paul Neville (Hinkler, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

In the days before communications and transport were separated, I chaired this committee. I recognise, although I also know the member for Lowe has some misgivings about it, that this is a very sensible, measured report. I do not think it plays to any particular media interest. It might play to all of them, in the sense of the free-to-airs, in that they are on a level playing field, and it does not specifically mention a fourth free-to-air, as I understand it. What is sensible about it is that it sets an agenda for the switch-off of analog. It seems to me that 2010 corrects any of the problems that existed following the Democrat amendment to the original switch-off date. It reinstates that and a bit more. I think that is important, because the uptake of digital has not been as good as we might expect. I suppose that is because some people are drawn by the quality of the television presentation—high-definition is certainly a beautiful picture to watch—but, then, a lot of other people are quite happy with a standard definition screen. Some like a wide screen. I have a wide-screen analog. I suppose with a set-top box I will be able to move to digital. In fact, I am looking at the options now.

From a practical point of view, not having been part of the inquiry, I think the committee has picked up on a very important thing. The amount of paraphernalia and claim and counterclaim you get when you go into an electrical or a television sales area is unbelievable, from the $49 set-top box right through to the $500, $600 or $700 box that has a hard drive that can record up to 80 hours and an instant playback facility so that, if you miss the first quarter-hour of Four Corners, it can replay that for you. Then there is the quality of picture. The set-top box will convert digital signals down to analog and the like. You have all these options. To go in and see those options lined up there, you start to get an appreciation of what your set-top box will allow you to do. There are other facilities in it, as I understand it, which will allow you to have various camera angles on the crowd. If the uninitiated go and buy a $49 set-top box and find that the box does not do most of the things they want it to, that will obviously leave a sour taste in some people’s mouths.

As the person who was primarily responsible for the black spots program, I remember going to see the Prime Minister and telling him I had a section in my electorate, between Bundaberg and Gladstone, where 5,000 or 6,000 people, 40 years on from the introduction of television, still did not have access to it. He said to me, ‘Paul, surely that’s not right.’ I explained to him that it was right, and that was the genesis—that and another incident near Gladstone—of the black spots program. In fact, Senator Ian Campbell, when he was the parliamentary secretary for communications, acknowledged that. A green movement tried to stop a black spots tower going up in Agnes Water in my electorate, and it dragged on through the courts for nearly three years. I remember the minister writing to the council, saying it would be an irony if the very shire that got the black spots program for Australia ended up not having one itself. However, that has since been corrected.

Apparently, with a digital signal, if you can pick up a bit of the digital signal you can get a very good picture, whereas with analog, if it is on the margins, you do not generally get a good picture. I expect from that that when we put the new transponders onto the towers, assuming they have the same throw, it will be a good thing. It makes sense that if any black spots are introduced between now and 2010 it will be better to go to digital television transmission.

I have often thought—although this is not covered in the report—that for those on low incomes, pensioners, who are forced into such a situation perhaps there should be some subsidy for the set-top box. Now that the cost is down to around $49 it would not burden the government unduly by having to incur a great deal of expense. I also think it is time that we started using datacasting to its full potential. Back in the early days of datacasting we were so cautious not to have a bunfight or create a mess that later governments would have to unscramble. Perhaps we were a little too conservative in taking the brakes off. The committee have set a target of 2008, which I think makes a lot of sense.

Multichannelling has been a hotly debated issue. I suppose if people are going to use their digital televisions and are going to buy better quality set-top boxes in future they are going to want more than just a pretty picture. I know people who are buying set-top boxes now for no purpose other than to get the additional channels—that is, ABC2, the other SBS channel and some of the special radio networks that are being transmitted through that medium, like the jazz channel and so on. I know people are buying set-top boxes purely for that reason. This indicates that, while people certainly want a better picture, many will be happy with standard definition. I think people will want to move to the widescreen format; they will want to move from the 4.3 to the 9.16 format. It makes a lot of sense to transmit in that format.

I have some ambivalence about not allowing a limited form of subscription. I think the roll-out in Australia of the cable network and the satellite network of pay television was not done as fairly as it might have been. I hope that the government, when reviewing these things in future, will look at multichannelling. I accept the argument that people have invested a lot of money in cable as it exists now and in the satellite transmission of pay TV, but I seriously wonder whether there are not other forms of subscription television. We should not close the door on this forever and a day. Obviously with the coalescence of many technologies there are great opportunities for Australia in digital television in terms of better pictures and datacasting. I commend the member for Lindsay for her excellent work on this and I commend the report to the House.

See this speech in context