Brian Mitchell (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Before I get on to the substance of the bill, I will respond to the member for Kooyong's statement at the end there. The reason that the speaking list was free was to give the crossbench time to speak on the bill that was just before the House, and the member for Melbourne upset that by bringing on a suspension motion in the middle of the speeches of the crossbench. That's why their debate ended up being truncated. So I urge the other members of the crossbench: go and have a chat to the member for Melbourne as to why you didn't get to speak on that bill as you had hoped to do.

I rise today in support of the Communications Legislation Amendment (Prominence and Anti-Siphoning) Bill 2023. This bill will amend the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 and the Australian Communications and Media Authority Act 2005 to introduce a prominence framework for connected TV devices and reform the antisiphoning scheme. These two measures implement two key election commitments of the Albanese government. One of these was to support access to local TV services and free sports coverage in the streaming era, and the bill also marks a significant step in bringing the regulatory framework for media services in Australia into the 21st century. We can't believe it, but we're 24 years into the 21st century, so it's high time this was done.

As more people consume media online, there is a risk that our free-to-air broadcasters, who provide essential news, emergency broadcasting, sport and drama, and the many Australians who rely on them will be left behind. There's no doubt that the way Australians consume media is changing, and the options we have for what, when and how we consume now seem almost endless—and, can I say, also increasingly confusing. Some of us here might remember the good old days—not you, Member for Lingiari; I know you're the younger generation. But some of us remember the good old days of a remote control having one button for channels—ABC, SBS, 10, 9 and 7—and a volume button. They were the two buttons you had to navigate. Well, they're long gone. These days, I'm pretty you could fly a spaceship with the technology and complexity that are built into remote controls and TV menus, and navigating them can be an absolutely mind-boggling experience. I do admit to having had some empathy—I know you sometimes wouldn't find much empathy on this side of the House for corporate Australia—for Paramount vice-president Beverley McGarvey, who recently told the Senate that she had difficulty finding her way through the maze of options when trying to find her network on TVs.

So our job as policymakers is to ensure that, as technology evolves in leaps and bounds, the public interest continues to be well served. It is a fact that what is in the best interests of shareholders is not necessarily always in the best interests of the public. We need to find ways to continue to encourage investment in media innovation. We want shareholders to continue to make money to keep making that investment, but without surrendering the public's right to access information and content. The government is confident that we've got the balance right with this bill.

Australian families are enthusiastically incorporating streaming services into their TV-viewing habits. Mine is one of them, with five people in our household, subscribing to at least seven services, all of which come with a monthly fee—cha-ching! But the role of free-to-air TV is as important now as it's ever been. Free-to-air supports an informed democracy. It keeps communities informed during natural disasters, and it reflects our unique culture and perspectives by telling Australian stories to Australians.

In a nation as sports mad as ours, arguably one of the most important roles of free-to-air is as a safety net for free access to televised coverage of nationally significant sporting events. The way we all collectively gathered around the TV to watch the FIFA Women's World Cup and cheer on the Matildas is a perfect example of why free, accessible sporting events matter to Australians—and wasn't it great, colleagues, to see the Matildas here in the parliament this morning? It was just fantastic to see.

However, subscription internet streaming services that are relatively new to the Australian media market are not yet required to meet the same obligations as free-to-air broadcasters in terms of delivering these public policy outcomes. As a result, the playing field is not level, free-to-air broadcasting is disadvantaged and the public interest is at risk. That's why the Albanese-Labor government is addressing the challenge of these competing interests. We are as determined to ensure that all Australians can continue to engage in social, cultural and economic life and participate in our democratic processes, as we are to support the continued growth of and innovation in Australia's exciting broadcast and wider media sector.

See this speech in context