Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Minister for Communications) Share this | Hansard source

I would like to thank the members who have contributed to the debate on the Broadcasting and Other Legislation Amendment (Deregulation) Bill 2014. The bill amends the Broadcasting Services Act 1992, the Radiocommunications Act 1992 and the Australian Communications and Media Authority Act 2005 to remove unnecessary provisions and reduce the regulatory burden on the broadcasting industry. The bill forms part of the communication portfolio's commitment to the Australian government's deregulation agenda. It implements a number of measures identified in the Communications portfolio: Deregulation roadmap 2014and addresses issues that have been raised through consultation with the broadcasting industry.

The bill repeals the redundant licensing and planning provisions that regulated the digital switchover and restack processes; amends the Australian Communications and Media Authority’s planning powers to implement more streamlined processes when planning broadcasting spectrum; improves administrative arrangements and provides greater flexibility for free-to-air and subscription broadcasters in relation to their captioning obligations; removes the auditing requirement for the annual returns on program expenditure that subscription broadcasters and channel providers lodge with the ACMA under the New Eligible Drama Expenditure Scheme; and addresses anomalies in the provisions relating to overlapping licence areas for media diversity voices and commercial radio licensed areas and in the grandfathering arrangements relating to license area population determinations; removes the redundant obligation for the ACMA to review classification and time zone safeguards under section 123A and clause 29 of schedule 6 to the Broadcasting Services Act; and makes consequential amendments to schedule 4 to the Broadcasting Services Act as a result of the Acts and Instruments (Framework Reform) Bill 2014.

The government acknowledges the Senate committee's support for removing annual captioning reporting requirements on free-to-air broadcasters and remains committed to moving over time to a compliance model that does not require unnecessary reports, while taking account of feedback from hearing impaired groups. The government will continue to consult with broadcasters and media access advocates on potential reform to annual captioning reporting requirements—noting that all sides agreed that the existing reporting requirements arrangements are overly complex and onerous.

I noted that a number of honourable members have said that the government did not consult with peak bodies in the deaf community. I advise the House that, prior to the bill going into the parliament, the Department of Communications met with the Australian Communications Consumer Action Network on 15 May last year and it met with Media Access Australia, which is Australia's only independent peak organisation devoted to increasing access to media for people with a disability—and therefore is a peak body representing deafness groups. The ACMA met with Media Access Australia in April 2014 and also participated in the 4 June 2014 meeting. I myself met with the Human Rights Commission on 31 October last year and my staff met with Media Access Australia, the Australian Communications Consumer Action Network, the Deafness Forum of Australia, Deaf Australia and the Australian Federation of Disability Organisations on 21 November 2014. I recall one honourable member saying that there had been no consultation with Deaf Australia, and I am advising the House that that is not the case; they certainly were consulted. People with Disability Australia Incorporated were also invited to that consultation but did not participate. As soon as the bill was introduced into the House, we referred the bill to a Senate committee for further investigations. Public submissions were accepted, and the public hearing was held on 2 February.

The government has taken the feedback from all these discussions into account and is agreeing to the review and to consult further on the reporting compliance framework. I can foreshadow that there are a number of opposition amendments which will have the effect of maintaining the annual reporting obligation that it has been the government's view was unnecessary—it was an unnecessary expense and did not add anything to the delivery of captioning. But, in the interest of ensuring the passage of the bill, which has so many other good points, the government is happy to agree to those opposition amendments.

We have to be very clear minded in looking at a lot of regulation. There is a lot of regulation that may well be well motivated but is nonetheless not necessary in order to achieve its objectives. Any regulation that is not absolutely necessary to achieve worthwhile objectives is just imposing a cost on industry that in these challenging times, particularly in the media sector, it can ill afford. So I hope that we will be able, as I said earlier, to come back to this in due course. But there are so many other good things in the bill that I think it is worth getting this legislation through the parliament.

I just note that the 18th report of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights suggests that the proposed automatic exemption from captioning obligations for new subscription television channels may be incompatible with the right to equality and nondiscrimination. The government takes its international obligations very seriously. However, with respect to the committee's conclusion, we do not agree that the amendment is inconsistent with Australia's human rights obligations.

The reality is that channels which qualify for the automatic exemption would have qualified for an exemption under existing provisions, following the completion of an intensive application, consultation and consideration process by the channel and the ACMA. All this amendment does is save the broadcaster and the regulator unnecessary compliance costs without changing the result, which is very much consistent with the government's deregulation. What we are seeking to do here and in many other contexts is to cut back on the red tape—cut back, if you like, on excessive form—while preserving the substance of good policy.

I thank honourable members for their contribution, and I call on all members to support the bill.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

See this speech in context