Steve Georganas (Hindmarsh, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am very pleased to be able to speak in support of the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Competition and Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2009. This bill is an amendment to the Telecommunications Act 1997. It has been brought to parliament to require Telstra to functionally separate unless it voluntarily structurally separates, and also to prevent Telstra from acquiring spectrum for advanced wireless broadband unless it submits voluntary enforceable undertakings that must be acceptable to the ACCC to structurally separate, divest its Foxtel interests and divest its ownership of its hybrid fibre-coaxial network.

The bill we are debating today is about strengthening the existing consumer safeguards. When we look at this entire debate, it is all focused on ensuring that we strengthen the safeguards for consumers, strengthen their rights, ensure that they have a very competitive telecommunications network and broadband, and ensure that they are getting value for their dollar. It is about improvements to the universal service obligation. It is also about strengthening the increased incentives for providers to comply with the customer service guarantee, the CSG, and more stringent rules on the removal of pay phones.

These may seem like little things, but out in our electorates and especially in my electorate pay phones are a huge issue. People who perhaps are not lucky enough to have mobile phones like we do, and others who cannot afford to keep a mobile phone or even a landline at their home, are required to make phone calls from pay phones. For those people, it is an absolute essential. The stringent rules on the removal of pay phones will certainly be very important out in the electorates and in the areas where people are suffering. This will be a big help to those people. Many people who do not have mobile phones and cannot afford a landline rely solely on these pay phones. If you are a pensioner, if you are old, or if you are sick and you require emergency services, this is your only contact to the outside world. So I welcome the introduction of more stringent rules on the removal of pay phones.

The other area is the customer service guarantee. We need to ensure that we increase the incentives for providers to comply with the guarantee. We have seen evidence of this in many instances and I have many constituents who contact me on regular basis. For example, one of the recent cases was from Flinders Park in my electorate where a whole street was out. There were no phone connections. When we called Telstra on behalf of the constituents, they threw the blame onto Optus by saying it was due to an Optus provided phone in one particular house. Yet the infrastructure was run by Telstra. When we rang Optus, they told us it was not their problem because the infrastructure was Telstra infrastructure. The poor consumer was left in the middle of all this without a phone for close to 10 days. That is totally unacceptable when we know that they have a customer service guarantee that requires them to fix the problem within the metropolitan area within a certain time. That certain time is well under the week and a half that these people waited for. Again, I welcome the increased incentives for these providers to comply with the customer service guarantee and, as I said, the more stringent rules on the removal of pay phones.

This bill has been brought forth to retain the priority assistance requirement of Telstra and requires other providers to either offer a priority assistance service or inform customers of providers from whom the customer can purchase a priority assistance service if they require it. It also enables ACMA to issue infringement notices for the contravention of civil penalty provisions as an alternative to court proceedings. This bill will also enhance the National Broadband Network initiative that was announced in April earlier this year when the government outlined its commitment to the rollout of the National Broadband Network as a wholesale only, open access network. This will drive more effective competition, and that is what we are after—effective competition which will help drive the costs down and ensure that the services are available. This will provide more effective competition in the telecommunications sector, which will lead to better outcomes for consumers and for businesses.

That said, during the transition to the full rollout of the National Broadband Network, which will occur over eight years, the existing telecommunications regime is going to remain absolutely critical to the delivery of competitively priced services. That is why in April this year the government also announced its commitment to reforming the existing telecommunications regulatory regime. A discussion paper which canvassed options for regulatory reform was released on the same day as the National Broadband Network announcement. This followed a consultation process on similar issues during 2008 which saw over 80 submissions received.

There was also a strong response to the most recent discussion paper, with 140 submissions received from a broad range of stakeholders. This included all the major telecommunications service providers, the broadcasters, media companies, the state and territory governments and even some local governments, the ACCC, disability and consumer groups, business organisations and unions. After consulting for 15 months and receiving well over 200 submissions, the overwhelming message from almost every submitter was that the current regime put in place by the previous Howard government does not work effectively to achieve its goals. That is very critical. The overwhelming majority message from everyone that submitted was telling us that the regime that was put in place by the previous government did not work effectively to achieve its goals. When you get those submissions and you hear the views of everyone that submits, it shows that all of this was failing business and failing the consumers, and that reforms were urgently needed in this area.

The telecommunications regulatory reform package represents the most significant reform to the telecommunications regime since open competition was introduced in 1997. This will lead to better outcomes, more competition, more choice and more innovation for consumers and businesses. These reforms are critical, irrespective of the National Broadband Network rollout and the implementation study. Every day we delay these reforms, every day they are taking longer to implement, is another day of higher prices, less choice and less innovation for consumers and businesses, including those in regional Australia who are affected greatly. When I say this, it comes from my experience of speaking regularly to people in my electorate.

Recently all of us, on both sides of parliament, saw the implementation of a $2 fee to have your bill sent out to you. There is no other business I can think of that actually charges you to send you a bill, but I suppose this shows the way that they view their customers. They basically are a monopoly and can do as they please. I had many calls in my office from many pensioners and people with disabilities as well as everyday people arguing the point as to why they should pay $2 to have a bill sent to them. If it is claimed that it takes more work and costs more to send a bill, you can argue the same thing for putting packaging on a bottle of Coke, for example, and charge a premium for that. It is just incredible that they can get away with it. As I said, every day we delay these reforms is another day of higher prices, less choice and less innovation for consumers and businesses all around Australia. So we must improve competition, and this bill is all about improving competition through reforms to the current regulatory services and their framework.

During the transition to the National Broadband Network environment, the existing telecommunications regulatory regime will remain important for delivering services in the interests of Australian consumers and businesses. The vast majority of industry submissions received by the department claimed that the regulatory framework is ineffective. That is due to the ability of parties to engage in regulatory gaming—the tactics of delay and obstruction which lead to uncertainty for all parties. For example, by May 2009, 157 telecommunications access disputes had been notified since the commencement of the regime in 1997. By contrast, only three access disputes had been notified in other regulated sectors including the aviation and energy sectors. That goes to show that there is an issue and a problem in the area. I am proud to say that this government has bitten the bullet and gone ahead with tackling the big issue, the big picture, and ensuring that the consumer will be the winner out of all of this.

The bill will also remove the right to seek merits review of the ACCC’s regulatory decisions. This will provide greater upfront certainty for access providers and access seekers by removing the months and potentially years of uncertainty while they wait for final prices to be resolved. It will provide the ACCC with the power to issue binding rules of conduct so that the ACCC will be able to immediately address problems relating to the supply of declared services. At this point I must congratulate the minister responsible for telecommunications, the Hon. Stephen Conroy. When some issues arose about some SMS advertising, with people being tricked, I suppose, into subscribing to SMS messages through unscrupulous text messaging and advertising, I went to see the minister about it. After some discussion, we now see that the ACCC has been given some real teeth to tackle these areas. We have seen prosecutions in the last six months of many of these particular service providers of SMS messaging. Now, all other service providers in that area have to comply with the stringent regulation that Senator Conroy has brought in. Giving the ACCC more teeth to be able to go out and prosecute these unscrupulous providers has been a very good thing.

The overarching objective of the reforms is to streamline the regulatory process and provide the industry with a greater degree of certainty about regulatory outcomes. This certainly will encourage more effective competition and efficient investment. Again, competition and efficient investment will encourage better pricing. For whom? For the consumer. The bill will also reflect the government’s ongoing commitment to protect consumers’ access to affordable and high-quality telecommunications services. The government has carefully considered the Regional Telecommunications Independent Review Committee’s report of September 2008, formed by the previous government. This package of reforms strengthens the regulator’s ability to enforce existing consumer safeguards. It includes ensuring that Telstra does not reduce the quality and reliability of services on its copper network during the transition to the National Broadband Network. The bill does not remove any of the existing protections for consumers; in fact, it will ensure that the existing protections are better enforced to provide better quality services and more responsiveness to faults.

Many of the reforms address issues raised by the Regional Telecommunications Independent Review Committee. These reforms will be good for all Australian consumers and for businesses, including those in rural and regional Australia who suffer disproportionately from the inequities of the existing regulatory framework. For example, the most recent ACMA published report, for the March quarter 2009, found that for payphones provided under the universal service obligations only 59 per cent of faulty payphones in remote areas were repaired within the three-day period specified in Telstra’s standard marketing plan, and I have to say that the numbers in the metropolitan area were not much higher. For new fixed telephone connections, 84 per cent were provided by the universal service provider within the customer service guarantee time frame for remote areas, compared to 90 per cent in urban areas.

The amendments contained in this bill are focused on retaining and strengthening existing regulations to better protect consumers access to and the reliability of basic telephone services. As Australians, no matter where we live, whether in remote areas or in the city, we have a right to basic telephone services. We have found over the years this was not happening. As I said, I have whole areas six kilometres out of the CBD of Adelaide that cannot get broadband. In today’s world that is totally unacceptable. Under the previous government we failed in this area, falling way behind other countries. It is about time we got our standards back up there.

The amendments also address concerns about the removal of payphones, as I said, and give the independent regulator, ACMA, more-effective enforcement powers through the use of infringement notices. The measures reflect the government’s decision to retain for the time being Telstra’s existing universal service obligation for voice telephony and payphones and to require improvements in service quality by introducing new minimum performance benchmarks for meeting the customer service guarantee. The new universal service arrangements will make it clear for consumers and for Telstra the services, both voice and payphones, that Telstra must supply in fulfilment of the universal service obligation, rather than these decisions being left up to Telstra’s direction. As we have seen over the last 10-odd years, when it has been left up to Telstra’s direction it remains stagnant. This will address the concerns raised in the Regional Telecommunications Independent Review Committee report that the universal service obligation arrangements are vague and difficult to enforce.

The new requirements on Telstra address the widespread concerns that Telstra has too much discretion on removing payphones. Again, if you cannot afford a mobile phone or a landline connection, the payphone in your neighbourhood is your access to the outside world. If a disabled person or a pensioner requires access to emergency services but has no access to a phone then it is a sorry world that we live in. Telstra probably think they are not making enough money from payphones, but I think it is wrong to look at it from an economic point of view. We should encourage them to have more payphones in every suburb, ensuring that the people I spoke about earlier have access to the outside world.

This is a good bill. It will ensure more competition, it will help drive prices down and it will ensure that our broadband is up to scratch when compared with the rest of the world. Without these services we will not be competitive in business, we will not get our education standards higher and certainly we will alienate rural and remote areas even more than we currently do. That is why I commend this bill to the House. Just about everyone supports it because it is vital for Australia’s future.

See this speech in context