Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—I move amendments (1) and (2), circulated in my name, together:

(1) Schedule 1, item 5, page 5 (line 10), omit "1,095", substitute "1,460".

(2) Schedule 1, item 5, page 5 (line 17), omit "1,460", substitute "2,920".

These amendments go to the simple point of increasing Australian content on commercial television. In the Television Licence Fees Amendment Bill we are providing the TV broadcasters with a 50 per cent reduction in their licence fees. This recognises, as we appreciate, the significant commercial pressure faced by the commercial TV industry. But this gift of public spectrum comes in return for the Australian Content Standard, the stated objective of which is to promote:

… the role of broadcasting services in developing and reflecting a sense of Australian identity, character and cultural diversity, by supporting the community's continued access to television programs produced under Australian creative control.

When looking at the latest ACMA compliance results it is clear that free-to-air networks are far exceeding the required 55 per cent broadcast of Australian program hours on their main channels. In fact, they are each broadcasting between 60 and 67 per cent. Yet, the proposed regulation for Australian content on the multi-channels is comparatively very low.

The proposed regulation will only require the networks to screen local content for 12 per cent of the local broadcast hours across their multi-channels. This legislation allows the content hours to be spread across the multi-channels and includes repeats and sports. That is not the best way to protect Australian content producers—the writers, the artists, the technical expertise. That is why the Greens are proposing that we double Australian content. There needs to be a safety net that adequately protects the Australian public from cheap overseas imports, which according to Screen Australia typically cost around 75 per cent less per hour than the Australian equivalents. A recent Screen Australia study found that nine in 10 Australians believe it is important to have a film and television industry producing local content and that the most important benefit was to ensure that we are not overrun by cheap Hollywood imports. Those surveyed agreed that Australian content brings us together as a community and as a nation. Australian content is important for the strength of our democracy. Australian content enables us to express ourselves as Australians.

In 2000, the Productivity Commission stated on Australian content and drama in particular:

If availability of these programs to Australian audiences declined, a loss of social and cultural benefits to the community would be likely. Australian drama can be effective in providing information and education as well as entertainment, for example, by canvassing contemporary community issues and concerns. Documentaries have a direct role in providing information and education.

These are the fundamental cultural objectives of the Content Standard.

With the free-to-air networks so highly protected, the Australian public must not be short-changed by a safety net that is cripplingly low, given that the free-to-air networks enjoy new opportunities for long-term growth once this transitional phase has passed.

These bills give us the opportunity not only to protect but to strengthen Australian content on commercial television. From the Greens perspective, given the now significant reduction in licence fees that will be afforded to the commercial TV networks upon passage of these bills, increasing local content in the manner prescribed in the amendments, an increase from 1,095 to 1,460 minimum hours of Australian programs in one section, and from 1,460 to 2,920 in another, is an acceptable amendment. I commend the amendments to the House.

See this speech in context