Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Protecting Services for Rural and Regional Australia into the Future) Bill 2007. I say from the outset that I would always be happy to support any bill that supports telecommunications services for rural and regional areas but, unfortunately, this bill does no such thing. Having adequate telecommunications services in regional areas such as my electorate of Richmond is very important. I certainly support the amendment moved by the member for Grayndler.

Access to telecommunications services continues to have a huge impact on my electorate of Richmond. I am constantly told by locals that services right across the board—from internet access and mobile reception to delays in home and business landline connections—are simply not up to scratch. They cause a huge amount of distress and concern. Even people living in Tweed Heads experience many of the problems I just referred to. Remember that Tweed Heads is only five minutes from the Gold Coast, a major regional centre. It is only 1½ hours from Brisbane, yet right in the heart of Tweed Heads people experience problems. Right throughout the electorate of Richmond there is a very high proportion of elderly people, and their phones and access to the internet can be their lifeline—from a social perspective and very often from a medical perspective. For those people, access to those services is vital. If it were merely a matter of inconvenience, that would be one thing, but the simple truth, which the Howard government and their National Party counterparts have failed to comprehend, is that substandard services can affect people’s lives and even threaten them in the case of the elderly, who need to know that their telecommunication services are working. When they urgently need access to medical services, poor communications can create a huge amount of distress for them.

Substandard telecommunications services can diminish educational opportunities for locals and impact on the productivity and viability of many rural and regional small businesses. Many in my electorate have experienced massive problems due to a lack of internet access or the slow speed of it. The bill fails to deal with the many real problems in this area. Like so much coming from the opposite side of the chamber at the moment, this bill is a politically motivated stunt. It is being debated not out of any real concern for regional services but out of a very real concern that there may be a federal election in the next couple of months. Nonetheless, it is worth looking at the substance of this bill. Its purpose is to amend the Telecommunications (Consumer Protection and Service Standards) Act 1999 and relates to the $2 billion Communications Fund, which was established in September 2005. The bill dictates that only income or interest earned on this fund will be available to implement recommendations of the Regional Telecommunications Independent Review Committee, which will report to the government every three years.

The bill will mean that the principal $2 billion of this fund will not be available to improve services in rural and regional areas; instead, only the interest and income—up to $400 million every three years—will be available. It is clear, when looking at the substance of this bill, that there is little commitment by the coalition, particularly the National Party, to raise the standards of telecommunications services in rural and regional Australia. Otherwise they would be investing this $2 billion in what it is supposed to be invested in.

Rather than governing and conducting themselves in a manner expected by their regional constituents, it is clear that the National Party is more interested in playing the role of ring man for their senior coalition partners, who, as we all know, have never been interested in protecting services in the bush. It is for these reasons that I fully support federal Labor’s amendment to this bill. In essence, it states that the House condemns the government for its failure to invest the $2 billion Communications Fund in a national fibre-to-the-node broadband network. This would mean that the fund would be used for what it was designed for—to ensure that Australians have access to the best available telecommunication technologies, that there is parity of service and metro-comparable pricing for all Australians serviced by the fibre-to-the-node network and that, in particular, Australians in rural and regional areas have improved telecommunication services, including access to e-health and e-education, which are only possible over a fibre-to-the-node network.

I am merely asking here that the continued sell-out of regional areas by the National Party stops, that they finally stand up for what their constituents were promised and honour their commitment in this area. Despite the National Party still protesting publicly that they support rural and regional interests, their constituents woke up to them quite a long time ago. We can also look at other issues such as the original sell-off of Telstra or the coalition’s extreme industrial relations law—all coalition policies having a disproportionately negative impact on rural and regional areas and all supported overwhelmingly by the National Party. But I think the game is up for them now; the truth is out. This measure is further proof they are only interested in maintaining their coalition partnership with the Liberal Party, not in representing the issues and concerns important to people living in rural and regional Australia.

In contrast, federal Labor is committed to ensuring there is telecommunications access for people in rural and regional areas. We will use this fund because we on this side of the House believe that $400 million every three years is not enough to raise communications standards in rural and regional areas. We believe that when you say you are going to spend money on services that help rural and regional areas, the right thing to do is just that. Federal Labor are committed to ensuring that rural and regional areas have access to modern and reliable telecommunications services. In particular, we understand the importance of reliable broadband for regional health, education and business, large and small. It was for these reasons that in March federal Labor announced our policy of a national broadband network to be funded by a public-private partnership. That is a $4.7 billion commitment, $2 billion of which will come from the Communications Fund we are discussing today. Federal Labor’s commitment will ensure that Australians in rural and regional areas receive metro-comparable broadband services where possible, with 98 per cent of areas being serviced by the fibre-to-the-node network.

I am very proud of federal Labor’s policy in this area. We are listening to Australians, in particular those in rural and regional areas, and we understand the real impacts that substandard telecommunications services have on people’s daily lives and on their business lives as well. As opposed to the National Party, federal Labor believe that many rural and regional centres need this sort of investment in order to survive. An initiative such as federal Labor’s national broadband policy commitment is long overdue. Australia’s performance in this area is on par with lesser developed nations, and that is a staggering indictment of the Howard government and its failure to invest in Australia’s future. The continued inaction of the Howard government in this area, as well as its lack of understanding about the importance of this investment, proves once again that it has lost touch with the needs of our nation, particularly the needs of people living in regional areas.

Labor’s broadband policy has had a very positive response from my constituents in Richmond, as I understand it has throughout regional and rural Australia. The response in my electorate was highlighted when federal Labor’s shadow minister for communications was recently in Tweed Heads. Many locals attended a forum on broadband access and the shadow minister spoke about federal Labor’s policy. The interest in this issue and the number of people who constantly contact me about it shows there is a huge demand for this problem to be rectified. People were certainly pleased to hear about Labor’s very positive policy. At the forum we heard familiar stories from parents who are frustrated that their children have difficulties accessing the internet for homework and research. We also heard small businesses speaking about the lost productivity that the unreliable internet causes and how that has severely impacted on their businesses. There were also local families who want to take advantage of new technologies but are unable to do so because of the very slow download speeds that are currently available. Many locals also spoke of the very high cost of accessing broadband, when it is even available at all. Those who could get it were quite distressed about its increasingly high cost. The cost-of-living pressures are already being felt disproportionately in Richmond, where we have the highest incidence of rental stress in the nation, and the high cost for the internet is another one to be added to groceries, petrol, child care and health services, particularly dental health.

As I have said before, the issue of reliable communications infrastructure and services is not new in my area, and I know it is not new in most parts of regional Australia. The simple fact of the matter is that in the 11 years of the Howard government there has been total inaction in this area. In fact, the plight of people in rural and regional Australia has worsened in this time. The reality is that they have consistently been sold out by the National Party on this and so many other issues. The federal Labor Party and the Australians who live in rural and regional areas foresaw the situation we now face with regard to communications infrastructure and services. A reduction in services was one of the reasons why rural and regional Australians wanted the government to keep Telstra under government control. As a representative of these people, I voted against the sale of Telstra. I did it not only because it was the wish of the constituents I represent but also because I knew the sale would lead to a reduction in services—which, quite obviously, it has.

As I said earlier, I am constantly being told that the telecommunications services in the Richmond electorate are not up to scratch, and this has certainly got a lot worse since the privatisation of Telstra. To give an example, I have recently been told about a couple who had a six-month delay in connecting a landline phone. How absurd is that in this day and age? They were also paying the monthly connection fee while they were waiting—so: no phone but still paying the connection fee. Eventually Telstra provided them with a satellite phone which—surprisingly!—has very limited reception. You can just imagine the frustration and distress such a situation has caused. This is an example of the stories I hear from people quite frequently. There are numerous stories as well about service failures for internet, landline and mobile phones in regional areas. This was the anticipated consequence of privatising Telstra, and it was supposedly one of the reasons the Howard government established the $2 billion Communications Fund that this bill we are debating relates to. It demonstrates the ludicrous nature of this bill that there is legislation to establish this fund and then a bill to amend the legislation to ensure the fund is not used. It is certainly one of the more bizarre acts of governing by the Howard government.

By contrast, I again highlight federal Labor’s broadband policy for Australia: the $4.7 billion joint commitment with private enterprise to invest in a fibre-to-the-node technology which will be rolled out to 98 per cent of Australia, with comparable speed for the two per cent where this is not possible. It will deliver this with comparable cost to metropolitan areas, ensuring that people in rural and regional Australia are treated with equity. It is certainly an overdue investment and one which will have a dramatic impact on regional areas, helping them to access e-health and e-education as well as contributing to the continuing productivity and profitability of local businesses, whether they be independent contractors, small businesses or larger franchises and enterprises.

Such a commitment is essential to the continuing viability of so many regional and rural areas—my electorate of Richmond included—which really do depend so much upon small businesses. For an area such as my electorate, there is no doubt that small businesses are the backbone of our local economy. That is why the commitment is so vitally important to them, because this lack of access to the internet has had a severe impact upon so many of those small businesses.

I call upon all coalition members, but particularly those in the National Party, to vote in favour of the amendment put forward by the member for Grayndler. This amendment gives the National Party the opportunity to stand up for their constituents. It is a chance for them to show their communities that, when in Canberra, they will act in the best interests of their local constituents. Supporting the member for Grayndler’s amendment is perhaps one of the last opportunities for the National Party to prove that they do truly represent the bush. We see them time and time again selling it out, so I would certainly like to see them support the amendment and stand up for people in the bush. The National Party, in this instance, do not have to make a choice between being right and being popular by voting for federal Labor’s amendment; they have the chance to be both. However, knowing the past history of the National Party, I have doubts they will do that, but I will certainly call on them to take a stand. It is no good saying one thing once they are back in their electorates and then saying another thing when they are in Canberra and toeing the line of their Liberal Party masters.

As I have pointed out, there has been a very positive response to federal Labor’s broadband plan in terms of it making a real difference to people’s lives. Yesterday the government released another broadband plan; I think it is their 18th now. We saw the minister releasing some draft guidelines for a supposed process to build a high-speed broadband network. This will be of no assurance to the millions of Australians who for years have been crying out for better services in this area. What we see is another stunt by the Howard government in trying to look like they are doing something about broadband, but people have realised that they are not interested in or committed to doing anything about it. This is now the 18th plan and it is just another stunt designed to see the government through to the election. They are not actually committed to solving Australia’s broadband issues at all.

The guidelines that were released failed on a whole range of matters. They did not specify who the network would reach or minimum connection speeds; there was no detail about that. The guidelines were very vague right across the board. Given the government’s disastrous track record, I do not think anyone would take much comfort from the 18th broadband plan that they have put out. It seems that every other week they try and pull some sort of stunt to try to look as though they are serious about this issue. I do not think that they really understand the issue or how important it is, particularly to people in rural and regional areas.

Those of us in the federal Labor Party have been listening for a long time to the concerns of people living in regional areas, and we have responded to them with our broadband policy. We want to make sure that all of those people have equity of access right across the board, whether it be for educational purposes, for business purposes or for medical purposes. It is very important in this day and age that people have adequate access, yet we see that the Howard government, after 11 years in office, are not interested in these issues and are out of touch with the everyday concerns of people.

Let us face it: people have been crying out for years for something to be done in this area, but the government just keep stumbling from plan to plan. Now we see yet another plan, and I am sure we will see another plan in a couple of weeks time—another election stunt from them. In contrast, federal Labor’s policy is out there and we are continuously listening to the concerns of people and continually addressing them. We know it is about making a real investment in the future of our nation to ensure that there is equitable access, particularly for people in rural and regional areas such as those in my electorate of Richmond. Even though they live in a regional area, the people of Richmond deserve to have adequate access particularly to broadband.

Tweed Heads is not that far from Brisbane or the Gold Coast, but the issues that people there have with access to basic services like landlines are absolutely astounding. So many senior citizens have contacted me with their concerns, very distressed about not even being able to get decent access to a landline. In this day and age, if you are living in a major regional centre like Tweed Heads, it is absurd that people are having difficulties accessing decent landline facilities, let alone accessing the internet. People are very distressed and very angry and they are saying that the Howard government is out of touch on so many issues right across the board but particularly on this issue. So many people depend on having a landline service, particularly the elderly. A lot of people move to areas like Tweed Heads after they have retired. Not only is a landline connection their access for social and of course medical needs but, for a lot of them, having decent internet access is their link to the world, to their families and friends, and not being able to access it causes a great deal of difficulty. Some people are very isolated, and it has caused them a huge amount of distress.

In conclusion, I certainly support the amendment moved by the member for Grayndler. I call on the National Party to support it and stand up for once for regional Australia

See this speech in context