Tony Smith (Casey, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Digital Television) Bill 2010, which was introduced in March, will enable satellite digital broadcasting. As members know, Australia is converting to digital television. That switch-over begins in the Mildura region in less than 50 days—and I am very pleased that my friend and colleague the member for Mallee is here with me in the chamber. The switch-over must run smoothly. I will address the substance of this bill and some of the issues at stake more broadly, and point out some of the critical issues the government have been failing on to date which we call on them to rectify to avoid a television train wreck on switch-over day in the Mildura region.

As I said, this bill will provide for a satellite service when that switch-over from analog to digital television occurs. There will always be a need for a satellite service, and that is why this legislation is before us. This bill will provide the important architecture and licensing regime for the proposed satellite service. As the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy made clear back in March, it will set out the conditions of the satellite service, including authorisations and exemptions for commercial television programming, local content obligations and all of the operational features of that satellite.

We on this side of the House say that every opportunity must be taken to provide Australians with terrestrial television coverage. At the moment many areas in regional Australia have benefited from self-help towers to overcome television black spots. People in those communities have been receiving television reception as a result of those self-help towers. Back in January the government announced that the broadcasters had agreed to upgrade around 100 of the 600 self-help towers to digital, which will mean that, when the switch-over occurs, those 100 communities will receive digital television as they receive analog television today.

Where those towers are not upgraded, households and businesses in those regions will require a satellite service. Of course everyone supports legislation to provide for a satellite service, because it will always be needed, but the point is it should be a last resort and it should be for areas that cannot receive a signal from a television tower. Most recently the broadcasters identified 87 sites that would be upgraded. In some areas there are towers that they have deemed may not need upgrading because they will receive a digital signal but over and above that people will be requiring a satellite service. Of course, a satellite service costs money. The government is proposing some subsidies, but the cost of every satellite service is borne by every household.

As I said at the beginning of my contribution, the switch-over begins in Mildura. I have had an opportunity to visit the Mildura region with the member for Mallee, who will speak after me in this debate. Every day for the last year or so the member for Mallee has warned the government that the area is not yet adequately prepared for the switch-over. The minister maintains that everything will go smoothly on switch-over day. This switch-over day is of critical importance to the people of Mildura.

There has been an education campaign, but we maintain that it has been inadequate. The member for Mallee will outline in great detail the deficiencies that need to be overcome in that short space of time. The people of the Mildura region will have to sprint flat out just to have a hope of having a smooth switch-over. The great risk is that, because of the government’s inadequate planning and preparation, some people in that region will find that switch-over day is television switch-off day for them.

There are not just issues with the cost of a satellite service for households; there are costs and preparation for other households, particularly with respect to cabling and antennas. These have not been widely communicated at all by the minister or the government. Steve Petschel from Teletune in Mildura, who is an expert in the area, has expressed concerns publicly. He said the installers and the workforce are going to be overwhelmed with work at the last minute. He has made that very clear, and the member for Mallee will enlarge on that in his contribution.

At the end of my contribution I will be moving a second reading amendment. In that amendment we call on the government to recognise some of the critical issues and we point out the government’s lack of understanding to date. We want the government to guarantee that Australians receiving analog television today will not lose their signal on switch-over days across Australia as a result of their policy failure and their failed implementation that we have seen on so many levels.

Of course, the satellite licensing regime that is embodied in this legislation must proceed, but we are here today again warning the government that its effort to date is unsatisfactory. The people who will pay the price for that will be those in regional Australia who will have their analog switched off earlier than the rest of us, starting in less than 50 days time in Mildura. On every occasion that the minister has had concerns expressed to him he has dismissed them. He has said that everything will be all right on the day.

The people of the Mildura region deserve certainty. They have not had that from this minister. Those throughout the rest of regional Australia deserve certainty as well. Where it is possible for people in regional Australia to receive digital television from a self-help tower, they should. Where they are receiving a television signal today from a self-help tower they rightly expect that when the switch over to digital television occurs they will be able to receive that same signal without having to go to the expense of paying for a satellite service. The member for Mallee wants the switch-over to go well. He has worked tirelessly on behalf of his constituents. He has pointed out serious problems along the way and some of those, thanks to his effort, have been rectified. But there is still a lot of work to do in the Mildura region, and after Mildura other regional areas will begin the same process as the analog signal is switched off.

Mr Deputy Speaker Schultz, today I move an amendment on behalf of the coalition. That amendment, circulated in my name, is as follows:

That all words after ‘That’ be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:“whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:

(1)

condemns the Government for its lack of understanding of television broadcasting issues across regional Australia;

(2)

further condemns the Government for its inadequate planning and preparation for the switch-over to digital television across regional Australia, beginning in the Mildura region on 1 July 2010;

(3)

warns the Government that its failures to date risks leaving some Australians without television reception; and

(4)

calls on the Government to guarantee that Australians will not lose television reception on each digital switch-over day as a result of inadequate planning and preparation.

I call on the government to take heed of the warnings we are giving today. To date, their effort has not been good enough, and in the coming weeks they will need to lift their game if they are to avoid a television train wreck in the region.

Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support the Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Digital Television) Bill 2010 and, obviously, to oppose the amendment moved by the member for Casey. This is an important bill for regional Australia. It is an important bill to close the digital divide that exists in Australia, a digital divide that is the legacy of 10 years of confusion and inaction by the Howard government. And what we see from the member for Casey is yet another commitment to inaction. That is what his motion represents—more inaction, cementing the digital divide that already exists in Australia that they created under the Howard government. Because they diddled and fiddled and waited all that time, confused and sitting on their hands, they created and cemented a digital divide.

The digital divide threatens to separate Australia into regions which are information rich and regions which are information poor, and in the process it condemns some Australians to lower standards of living, restricting their opportunities and their rights to participate. It was a terrible thing that the Howard government did to this country, not just on digital TV but also on broadband. We know very well about the digital divide there. We know that their inaction, their special deals—a bit here and there—resulted in a system which was riven with inequality. It was a regional divide. And today they are talking about cementing that again with inaction instead of action. Rather than passing a bill, they will be moving a motion that does nothing—inaction, basically

Getting back to the bill, I want to talk about two areas in my electorate which have had really significant TV reception problems for some time. For years under the old analog system both of those problems were serious issues. Craigmore and Hillbank have been experiencing television reception problems for the last 20 years. The Para Escarpment basically lies in the shadow of Mount Lofty, which has caused all sorts of TV reception problems over the years. Some people simply cannot get any signal at all. Despite having spent hundreds and sometimes thousands of dollars on antennas and boosters and the like, they still often cannot receive a signal.

My Labor predecessor in the seat of Bonython, Martyn Evans, improved SBS and ABC coverage by obtaining funding for a tower in Elizabeth South. Sadly, the commercial broadcasters would not come to the party on that occasion because there was some dispute about the local community providing funding for the maintenance of that tower. It created a Mexican stand-off which cost the residents of Craigmore and Hillbank a lot, in that they were not able to watch the tennis or the cricket or the footy on channels 10, 9 or 7. We have a suburb of 10,000 people across northern Adelaide with intermittent or very poor television coverage.

The previous government was well aware of these problems. My Liberal predecessor in Wakefield, David Fawcett, surveyed the area many times, yet we never ever saw concrete action by the previous government to resolve the problems. There was plenty of surveying, plenty of inaction, plenty of ‘if only we could do this or do that’—but never any solutions. The problem with the opposition amendment is that it cements the digital divide; that is what it is all about. When I doorknocked the Craigmore area as a candidate this issue quickly became my No. 1 priority. We got an election commitment from the then Rudd opposition. That became a budget commitment that morphed into proper signal testing in the area, and from June we will have an operational tower which will improve TV reception across Hillbank and Craigmore and give those 10,000 people the same rights as every other Australian. I know there are many in Craigmore and Hillbank who have waited decades for better TV reception. All the technical advice that we have had indicates that this tower will provide that long-awaited coverage. If people want to talk about the switch-over, the proof will be in the pudding. In my case I have found that a problem that existed for 20 years, a problem that my predecessor knew about and surveyed but never actually got a solution for, has been resolved under this government.

So the proof is in the pudding with these things, and I would just urge the public to ignore the opposition’s cries and to march onward into the future with digital television. It is going to be a great advantage. This bill provides regional Australians for the first time with a satellite service that encompasses both national and commercial channels, delivered over a common satellite platform. Access will be through a satellite dish and a set-top box. All Australians living in remote TV licence areas will have access to the new commercial satellite service. And any Australians in regional or metropolitan television licence areas who do not receive adequate digital television services in their terrestrial licence area will also have access. So what this bill does is provide a new layer of protection and a new layer of service to those Australians who have experienced these problems in the past. That will certainly reassure some of my electors in the country areas, particularly those in the Clare Valley. The Clare Valley is a beautiful place, but all the things that make it beautiful: the valleys, the hills, the native fauna or flora—one of those; the flora—

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Trees!

Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, trees. All those things that make it beautiful also make TV reception in the area somewhat problematic. That is a problem I have been made aware of by the Northern Argus, which is a great country paper. I will be doing everything I can to maximise the opportunities for better coverage during the switch-over and to minimise the problems people might face. I think this bill represents action; it represents moving into the future. There will always be concerns and people will rightly have some apprehension about the switch-over, but that does not mean that we should not move forward or that the country should be held back. It certainly does not mean that we should cement in a digital divide in this country which was created by the previous government. We have just got to get on and embrace the future. This bill helps us do that and I commend it to the House.

John Forrest (Mallee, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very pleased to offer some useful comments on the Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Digital Television) Bill 2010. It is vital that this bill gets the support of the chamber because there are 48 days to go before the provisions in it are going to be needed in my constituency. I might briefly take the opportunity to rebut the remarks made by the member for Wakefield. Obviously the particular region he referred to did not have a hardworking member to make sure that the Howard government’s black spot program was implemented. Across my region, three black spot programs went some way towards addressing the television challenges that confronted my constituents, and I want to make some comment about all of that in my remarks today. It has been an interesting journey.

I can recall sitting right here in December 2008, just before Christmas, after the government had tabled its switch-over schedule, and being advised that the transmitter at Yatpool, for Mildura, was to be the first. I groaned, ‘Oh, no!’ and was initially a little cynical as to why Mildura was first. But after a while I accepted that there were good, logical reasons why we should be the first pilot. Mildura happened to have the largest concentration of digital reception of any community across Australia—as high as 78 per cent. There were special reasons for that, which I will address later; it is the flat earth. Whilst initially as a community we resented the fact that we would be the guinea pigs, to use that euphemistic phrase, it made a lot of sense. And together, as a community, we saw it as a huge opportunity to have the huge number of television challenges we confronted finally addressed, once and for all. Digital television offers a huge amount of advantages but we know, as we learnt from the switch-off of the analog mobile phone service, that it does not offer the advantages that the analog signal provided in geographic coverage because analog had the ability to go around trees and bounce off clouds. That creates a particular issue for regional Australia, and we have learnt that as a result of the last 18 months of conversion that we have been through.

My story on television goes back even further than that, to when I was first elected in 1993. At that time Mildura was one of those peculiar licence areas scattered across Australia which were referred to in those days as the solus markets. At the time of full aggregation, through the mid-eighties, the TV channels in these markets were privately owned operations. They were scattered across Australia—I know there was one at Renmark, out of Loxton, one at Griffith, I think, and one at Darwin. It was successfully argued that a locally owned television service could not cope with the competition that full aggregation with three commercial channels would bring and the market pressure that that would put on. Mildura, at that time, had only two channels. It had the ABC and one commercial channel which had recently been purchased by one of the regional networks—WIN Television.

I set about addressing a commitment I had made. In the 1993 election campaign, I said: ‘Send me to Canberra. Send me. I will get some common sense into this. Mildura, like any other community, is entitled to full aggregation.’ There were complaints from tourists—because Mildura is a tourist destination of some note—which came through the various tourist authorities and from individuals. Out of that exercise I learned how much significance Australians place on their sport. Mildura could not get the football or the tennis because they only had one commercial provider and did not have the scope for the transmission. So I called a public meeting and I persuaded what was then the Australian Broadcasting Authority to attend. They were a bit reluctant, because bureaucrats do not like to expose themselves to public meetings. There were over 3,000 people present at that public meeting. They were a bit cranky. I admired the Australian Broadcasting Authority bureaucrats, who tried to explain how they were bound by difficult legal constraints arising out of the peculiar licensing arrangements in Mildura. But we ignored that. Thousands of signatures on petition after petition were tabled in this chamber and sent to the Australian Broadcasting Authority.

Over a period of time I was successful in persuading the authority and the relevant minister at the time to put to tender the provision of an additional licence for that solus licence area. That was not easy to achieve. The existing commercial broadcaster challenged it in the Administrative Appeals Tribunals. There were a range of acrimonious exchanges between me and that broadcaster. I was accused of threatening the important local news service they provided—they argued that the competition of an extra broadcaster would mean that Mildura would lose that service. I was able to persuade the broadcaster that it would give them an enormous market advantage if they saved that news, and to this day Mildura still gets its local news. That gives that network a marketing advantage.

Thankfully, the licence went to tender and was purchased by the other very strong regional broadcaster, Prime TV. Then, as a result of the Howard initiatives, we got SBS shortly after 1998. So we had two commercial channels and we had the ABC and SBS. I was getting there and at each successive election I would say: ‘This is unfinished business. Send me back again. I told you it would take a long time.’ There were legal constraints to getting the third commercial channel—effectively the Southern Cross Television or Channel 10 signal. They have the licence to broadcast AFL football, and if my constituents cannot watch their footy they put enormous pressure on. Out of that, I was able to convince the two commercial operators to form a joint venture to get around the legal constraints, purchase the Channel 10 signal and jointly broadcast it. People were so grateful that Mildura Digital Television started broadcasting the football on 1 January 2006. I thought then, ‘My television problems are now over.’

However, that still left a lot of those communities around the fringes. A particular interest has been Murrayville, a community right on the western boundary. It is on the South Australian border, adjacent to the member for Barker’s electorate, and is not legally within the licence area of Sunraysia. They are in a remote zone and they have to get their access via satellite from a signal that comes out of Darwin—basically they watch Imparja. Murrayville is a terrific little township. They had their 100th anniversary over Easter. It is part of the Mildura Rural City Council. They want and, I always thought, they deserve to be able to watch the local news. It can report on council matters and make that community feel part of a very strong local government area. I am pleased to say that this legislation delivers them exactly that outcome and I was able to announce that at their centenary. There were 4,000 or 5,000 people there and they cheered, because that is how significant their television is to them. A lot of them rely on television for their view of the world. It is the way they become informed—about what happens in this place for some of them, if they are interested—but most particularly it is for the cricket and the football. Of course, down our way it is AFL, but there are some NRL enthusiasts in Victoria. It is also for motor racing. I had not realised there were so many petrolheads with an interest in motor racing. Now all that is all available in Mildura.

That is part of the reason why I sat here and groaned when I saw that schedule, but I have reconciled this. I discussed it with my community and we have come to the conclusion that this is a terrific opportunity for us—a tremendous opportunity. I resolved to work in cooperation with the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Senator Conroy. He knows that. I have operated in every way in extreme good faith and, although it has taken some time to get the bureaucrats to acknowledge it, he has agreed to every single request that I have put to him—including the delivery of service to Murrayville.

This has been some exercise in the last 12 months and we have to make it easier for the future. My remarks here today and my support for the amendment we have moved are, contrary to the member for Wakefield’s interpretation, to reinforce the point and the suggestions I want to make as my contribution today. Spare other communities some of the uncertainty we have confronted. Spare other communities the enormous expense. We need to start off by saying that it is not just a simple matter of purchasing a digital set-top box; it is about purchasing the correct set-top box. Beyond that, you need attention to your cabling. Some of it is 20 years old and has deteriorated. Beyond that again, you need good advice on the installation of the aerial and the direction in which it is pointed.

In the early stages, people thought that all they had to do was buy a box, but they were confronted with ongoing challenges. To this day, that is still happening. It has taken far too long for the task force to get out there and communicate. I know they will be reading my remarks and I do not intend them to be critical in any way. When you are the pilot, there will be hiccups and it takes a long time to get the momentum going. It took too long to have the local representative appointed. That did not happen until this year. They should have been on the ground with communication occurring much earlier. The doorknocking that has occurred has only been happening in the last month and, from today, there are 48 days to go.

I am advised that the concentration is now up to 90 per cent. That still leaves 10 per cent, which is a large number of viewers. In fact, even yesterday I got a phone call from a constituent who said, ‘Why are you always banging on about the TV?’ They did not know that switch-off day is looming in 48 days time. That is one, and for every one there are another ten. When you consider that the predominant regions of regional Australia are to be included in the switch-off by mid next year, the broadcasting authority needs to be out there earlier and there need to be locally appointed raconteurs. Our raconteur is a lady by the name of Kellie Boyce and she has done a great job. She is actually employed by the Mildura Rural City Council, but the position is funded by the federal government. Those people need to be on the ground a lot earlier.

The minister announced very early that those people on fixed incomes and social security would get some assistance with the purchase of their set-top box. In fact, seniors on the age pension were going to have their entire costs met—whatever was required. Sadly, they relied on printed media to get that message out when the concentration of readers is probably less than 20 per cent. Some of those people who were eligible for legitimate support went in and purchased what they were advised they needed, but by that process they disqualified themselves from the assistance. That has left some angst in the community. The minister is aware of that. I have certainly conveyed it to him.

The Australian Communications and Media Authority needs to be out there now measuring signal strength. I was amazed when I drew attention to the problems we were having in Robinvale, which is a very strong community on the Murray River with a district population of well over 10,000 that embraces the member for Farrer’s electorate at Euston. I was writing and making representations because we had some problems with digital reception in Robinvale. I was advised by the engineers that there were no problems at all based on the theory. The reality is that the digital signal gets interfered with so quickly by an obstacle, whether it is a tree or a wheat silo. It is particularly interfered with by mobile phone towers because they use the same technology. To this day I suspect that was the problem in Robinvale. It took too long for that message to be heard, but I am pleased to say the solution has been the installation of a repeater at Robinvale. The early suggestion that half of the township of Robinvale would get their reception from satellite and the other side of the street would get theirs terrestrially was just a nonsense comment that divided the community. That has been addressed.

Ouyen was a particular problem, and I am pleased to say that has been fixed. The networks have installed a transmitter at Ouyen and I was advised this morning that it is operating and they are satisfied with the signal. With 48 days to go, I am very concerned because I am advised that the set-top box for satellite reception will not be in the Mildura community until mid-June, or maybe earlier. That is a short space of time for people to make a quiet assessment of the quality of the two alternative signals. They can use the terrestrial signal if it is unreliable, but they need to be able to make an assessment because they are being asked to make a significant investment. Some of them have already spent a lot of money. In fact, a lot of their investment has been wasted. Setting aside the capital costs of buying a new digital television, the antenna costs can mount to thousands of dollars. The retailers and suppliers have complained that they have had to return to properties time and time again, which has caused extra costs to the customers. To be told after all of that expense that you need to invest another $600 for satellite reception is creating enormous angst. I am very concerned that, come the deadline, there is going to be some cranky, bad media about that.

I have tried my best to work in good faith with the minister and, to his credit, he has responded to every request I have made. I am not churlish enough to speak disparagingly about that. We as a community accept the fact that there were going to be problems. We were always first and they are going to learn from us. This amendment reinforces the comments I am making here—get it right by 1 July in Mildura. I am not persuaded by the assurances that I have had from the minister. He continues to believe that he can get it all done. He continues to believe that, even with the short amount of time that will be left after the digital satellite boxes are available, it can still be achieved. But I am pleading with the minister and I have been doing so for quite a long time now. Open your mind to extending that deadline. Get it right in Mildura. The rest of the nation is watching. The rest of the nation is enthusiastic about the opportunities digital television provides. If you get it wrong in Mildura, they will get to know about it and it will make them nervous about their future opportunities. The minister has heard that call and I think he has learnt, as have I, the task force and the networks.

I am very pleased to offer a few commendations. I was delighted to see the way the networks have cooperated in this venture. They put their normally competitive marketing spirit aside in the interests of viewers. In fact, the minister has asked them to fund a lot of the decisions that have been made—repeaters at Underbool and the replacement of a self-help scheme, a new transmitter at Ouyen and a new transmitter at Robinvale. I understood the reasons why the minister offered them substantial rebates on their licences. I understood immediately when I saw that announced because they are being asked to make significant contributions. They have put their own resources on the table, and they are as keen as the community is to make sure that this transition is as smooth as possible.

I have to confess that my heart is in my mouth, and the shadow minister has also put on the record the way he views the matter. I do not want a wreck; I want a successful outcome. I want to see this used so that Mildura has a wonderful marketing opportunity to showcase itself to the rest of the nation. I have had that spirit of cooperation all along, so I am not going to be churlish about it, but I do ask that for the sake of the future we learn well the lessons that have emerged from the case of Mildura in the last 12 months.

I go back to that period from 1993 right through to 2006, when I finally got the solution for the large suburb of Mildura, and commend and put on the public record the wonderful support I had from Giles Tanner. Giles will probably see these remarks because he is currently the general manager of the digital transmission division of the Australian Communications and Media Authority. Without him, we could not have achieved what people told us was going to be impossible: getting networks to cooperate so that the people of Mildura can have the benefits of complete aggregations.

I am looking forward to a successful outcome. To reinforce the comments I have made here, I have expressed my concerns and seconded the resolution put by the shadow minister. But I do plead with the minister: do not close off the option of making the deadline 1 July; give people an opportunity and a little bit of space to make the assessments they need to make about the quality of the picture. (Time expired)

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of the Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Digital Television) Bill 2010 and strongly oppose the jeremiad amendment proposed by the member for Casey. Digital television has given Australians access to a whole new world of free content and high-definition television. As someone with two young children, I should perhaps declare an interest here. I particularly love the ABC and some of the pay-TV channels and the way that they help out with babysitting and educating children. However, unfortunately there are still some areas in this land of sweeping plains and rugged mountain ranges that do not receive a quality digital signal, and these are usually in the valleys between the sapphire-misted mountains. We are the flattest continent, but we still have significant mountains. That is why the Rudd government has committed to funding a new commercial digital satellite broadcasting service to improve reception for these black spots. I am very optimistic about the rollout in the Mallee. Unfortunately, hearing from the member for Casey and the member for Mallee reminded me of another poem, Said Hanrahan. In it, Hanrahan says, ‘We’ll all be rooned’. Hearing their speeches—‘it ain’t gonna work; it ain’t gonna work; we’ll all be rooned’—was like listening to Bill and Ben Hanrahan. It was like a cacophony of Cassandra voices. But I am a little bit more optimistic, and I have received assurances from Minister Conroy that the consultation and rollout will occur and will be a wonderful thing.

This bill amends the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 and the Copyright Act 1968 to establish the new commercial digital satellite broadcasting service. It creates three new commercial television licence areas for the new satellite service. The licence areas will cover the Northern Territory and Queensland; the ACT, New South Wales, South Australia, Tasmania and Victoria; and Western Australia. The satellite service will deliver both national and commercial channels through satellite dish and set-top box. This is an important step in ensuring that all Australians can access digital television. The digital television services of the national broadcasters will be delivered by satellite using the same satellite platform as is used to deliver the commercial digital television services provided by satellite broadcasting service licensees.

Access to commercial channels will be overseen by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, or ACMA, and managed by a conditional access system administered by regional broadcasters. It is expected that commercial digital television channels on the new satellite service will be provided by existing remote commercial television broadcasting licensees; however, if a licensee is unable to provide one or more digital television channels, they will be required to provide equivalent replacement channels from a metropolitan broadcasting licensee. Satellite licensees will have the flexibility to adjust programming such as local sporting events or advertising more relevant to the local audience subject to commercial agreement.

The bill also introduces a statutory licensing scheme into the Copyright Act 1968 to allow the use of programming provided to a satellite service licensee by the remote, regional or metropolitan broadcaster. The new satellite service will provide news and information sourced from the regional commercial broadcasters operating in the relevant satellite licence area. The regional commercial broadcasters will be required to make available local news and programs to the relevant satellite licensee. If a satellite service ignores its licence conditions regarding digital television and local news, the Australian Communications and Media Authority will have the power to cancel the licence and reallocate it to another provider—an example of that simple concept of use it or lose it.

The Rudd government wants to ensure that digital television is fully available to all Australians, no matter where they live. That is why the conditions this bill places on satellite licensees are so comprehensive. The bill also ensures that commercial free-to-air digital services, including multichannels like 7TWO, Go! and One HD, can be provided anywhere in Australia. Under current rules, commercial broadcasters are not allowed to provide the full range of digital television services in a small number of licence areas where, historically, there have been fewer than two commercial broadcasters.

I began with a reference to Dorothea Mackellar’s poem My Country and I will finish with a reference to that poem. I love the far horizons and the jewel-sea of my country, but the land of the Rainbow Gold does throw up a lot of challenges for media and communications. We are such a huge continent. Queensland, for example, is a very spread out state—even though the population is concentrated in the south-east corner, there are significant cities scattered throughout, like Toowoomba, Townsville, Mackay, Cairns and Rockhampton—so there are challenges for media and communications in terms of rolling things out. However, a good government should not allow the tyranny of distance to prevent some Australians from accessing digital television. This bill will ensure that we have a workable framework in place to secure the future of digital television via satellite for all Australians. I commend the bill to the House.

Bob Baldwin (Paterson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Defence Science and Personnel) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to address the Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Digital Television) Bill 2010. This is a very important bill for the electorate of Paterson, where many of my constituents struggle with very poor or no digital television services. Sometimes they get no digital reception whatsoever. Television is a vital form of entertainment which has become a huge part of Australian culture. Ever since it first reached homes in September 1956, television has been a popular form of entertainment for kids through to seniors. Importantly, television also allows us to see vital weather messages, emergency warnings, news and sport in our local areas. Furthermore, it is important to advertisers, who use TV to showcase their products to a local audience. Its uses are multifold.

Analog transmission has, until now, been used quite successfully by broadcasters to reach their audience. However, as time has passed we have seen significant advances in technology and the advent of digital television. This brings with it some great advantages such as new channels and a clearer picture. However, for many residents in my electorate of Paterson, these advantages are out of reach because the Rudd Labor government has failed to keep local infrastructure up to date. With analog television now to be switched off, my constituents need a guarantee that services will be upgraded and upgraded soon. Time is of the essence. This proposed legislation goes some way to help address problems with digital TV in the Paterson electorate, but I am concerned about value for money, cost, time management and the provision of local content under Labor’s plan.

The Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Digital Television) Bill has been designed largely to establish a satellite service. The service will allow residents in black-spot areas who cannot access terrestrial digital TV to watch via satellite instead. Specifically, the bill will change the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 and the Copyright Act 1968. Some of the major points are as follows. A satellite digital television service will be established under a new licensing agreement, which will include three satellite licence areas. ABC and SBS will be provided on a statewide basis via this satellite, whilst channels ABC2, ABC3, ABC HD, SBS TWO and SBS HD will be provided to five areas, with Paterson to be part of the south-eastern Australian zone. This zone will include New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory. Satellite broadcasts must include content tailored to local broadcast areas. Free-to-air broadcasters will switch off their analog signal by the end of 2013. Also, it is important to understand that only 87 of the 698 self-help retransmission sites will be upgraded by broadcasters under the agreement with the Rudd Labor government.

Mr Deputy Speaker, in order to explain my concerns with this legislation, please allow me to give some background on what has been taking place in the Paterson electorate. Over the past few months I have received more than 1,100 complaints about digital television reception in my electorate. These have come by phone, email and letter—many people have made contact with me to complain about the lack of digital TV reception. I have also personally visited a number of homes to see their television screens with my own eyes. In addition, many people also took time to respond to a detailed survey I distributed across my electorate, which has given me much more information on where specific trouble areas are. To all of those residents who put in the effort to help resolve this issue, I say thank you. To date, the largest number of complaints have come from Anna Bay, closely followed by Tea Gardens, Forster, Boat Harbour and Stroud respectively. These areas contain widespread black spots which need to be addressed urgently through upgrades. However, there are also problem areas in East Maitland, Gloucester and Dungog, which means that all local government areas in my electorate are affected by this problem to some extent.

The Maitland Mercury reported on the woes of one such affected constituent on 28 April this year. The article, by Briony Snedden, reads:

What Dave Ramsay can watch on television depends on the weather.

The slightest shift in wind speed or an increase in temperature can affect the digital reception at his Gresford home, leaving Mr Ramsay to watch a flickering screen with no sound.

He is the most recent to complain about digital reception in the rural outreaches neighbouring Maitland, joining a growing list of disgruntled television viewers across the Paterson electorate.

Mr Ramsay invested in a new digital television last year, only to discover his best chance of watching commercial stations was when it rained and the air was denser and the signal was less prone to scatter.

He said there were no problems with analogue transmission.

‘It’s heartbreaking when you’ve spent the money (on a new TV) and you can’t watch it,’ he said yesterday.

Mr Ramsay said Channel 7 was non-existent during the day, but he could sometimes watch it at night.

Similarly, Channel 9 was impossible to watch during the day, but from 4.30pm began to improve.

But Mr Ramsay said the quality of reception could change in a moment.

‘I have been watching a program and halfway through it pixelates, and there’s no sound,’ he said.

‘Once that happens, that’s it—you’ve lost it.’

Mr Ramsay was a linesman in the air force, and installed antennas and aerials.

But he said when he contacted the stations and the Government about the problem, he was ‘treated like an idiot’.

It is a disgrace that Mr Ramsay feels as though the government regards him as an idiot. There are big and real problems with television in my electorate and we desperately need upgrades before the analog signal is switched off in 2013. In response to complaints such as those by Mr Ramsay, I have written to Minister Stephen Conroy on several occasions to ask for a clear time frame on when local services will be upgraded and what content they will broadcast. His replies have failed to satisfy the questions of my constituents, who genuinely fear they will be left with blank screens when analog signals are switched off.

I discussed these fears directly with local residents at three separate forums earlier this month—held at Dungog, Forster and Soldiers Point—and Senator Mary Jo Fisher also visited residents to hear their concerns direct as chair of the Senate Standing Committee on Environment, Communications and the Arts. The two most common issues raised with me at these forums were reliability and cost. As for the latter, many residents in my electorate of Paterson are elderly and live on very tight budgets. It is these same people who often rely on their television for relatively cheap news and entertainment. If satellites are to be installed at a cost of $650, how are locals going to afford that sort of cash? Yes, Minister Conroy has promised to subsidise, which is expected to be around $400, but that still leaves residents having to fork out $250 and possibly even more if there are installation problems.

As I have repeatedly said, this is why we really need definitive dates for the upgrade of towers and we need them soon so that those who will need to rely on satellite equipment know so. Armed with this knowledge, these residents can plan for the added costs of purchasing satellite equipment and having it installed. The second reason my constituents need to be given an answer soon is so that they do not purchase expensive yet useless equipment. One Vacy woman who attended my forum in Dungog this month explained how she had just bought a new antenna to pick up the digital signal at a cost of $1,100, only to find out that she cannot get any digital or television reception. Had this woman known she would need to rely on a satellite, she obviously would not have wasted all of that money on unreliable technology.

The Rudd Labor government is largely to blame for this waste, and the reason is the Prime Minister has spent a massive amount of taxpayers’ money on advertising his new digital network in local papers. Had all of his advertising money been used on upgrades instead, my constituents could be enjoying quality, uninterrupted television. Instead they have been encouraged by this Rudd Labor government to go out and buy expensive set-top boxes for digital ready televisions, only to get them home and find out the digital network itself is not ready. To make matters even worse, some of the digital televisions now being sold cannot receive analog signals at all, so buyers cannot even switch back to analog, which would at least deliver some coverage. So it is a cruel message for my constituents. The phrase ‘get digital ready’ has been splashed all over our newspapers and television screens, yet residents are getting ready for a network which is clearly not ready itself.

Residents in my electorate need to know now whether to invest in a new television or whether they will simply have to sit back and wait for this satellite service to be delivered. They do not deserve to see misleading advertisements, paid for with their own taxpayer dollars, which advertise a digital network which they will never be able to watch. So they deserve a new satellite service as soon as possible. In fact, they just need clarity.

It is important to remember that residents are not the only stakeholders who need urgent information prepared. The effects of this legislation are wide-reaching. Technicians will need to know the details of the digital rollout in order to prepare their businesses and staff for increased demand. They will also need to ensure that they have enough equipment ready and the right equipment to help deliver this technology to the households that have been desperately waiting for it. Local councils also need to be a high priority, but seem to have been forgotten by the Rudd Labor government. Take for example Dungog council, which only allows one satellite dish per household roof as outlined in its development control plan. Now that many locals cannot access quality television at the moment, they have chosen to pay for subscription TV such as Foxtel or Austar. This means they already have a dish on the roof, and since that new satellite service will also require a dish, households now face the prospect of having two satellite dishes. This means they will either have to submit an expensive development application to council just to have a satellite service installed, or councils will need to make changes to their control plans. There needs to be more consultation on this program so problems can be ironed out in time to ensure a smooth and quick transition.

This digital rollout needs to be thought about from a business perspective. Businesses need to have smart goals—that is, goals that are specifically measurable, attainable, realistic and timely. This is something that all successful groups have in common, yet the Rudd Labor government has failed to do so. Prime Minister Rudd has failed to deliver a specific time frame for digital tower upgrades or satellite rollout. He has failed to explain who will need to rely on the satellite. He has set a date for an analog switch-off but is not doing enough to now guarantee future services.

People in my electorate are already struggling with television reception, and it is clear through the complaints I have received they want action and they want action now. Let me be clear: although ours is a regional area, my constituents deserve quality television, including the latest technology—the same as anyone else in the city. That is why I fought hard to have a television transmitter at Gan Gan upgraded to a digital signal. Unfortunately, the Rudd Labor government has failed to continue such vital upgrades since taking over government, so there are still six self-help retransmission sites which need to be upgraded in the Paterson electorate.

According to this bill, our commercial broadcasters have agreed to pay for the upgrade of 87 self-help sites. That is less than one-eighth of the 698 eligible sites across Australia. Of these 87 sites to be upgraded, four are in the electorate of Paterson. Those sites are: Booral, Stroud, Forster and Smiths Lake. Unfortunately, it seems that the tower at Elizabeth Beach is set to miss out, set to be serviced by satellite instead. And the irony of this is the Elizabeth Beach transmitter sits between the Forster and Smiths Lake transmitters. It is just simply defying belief.

Further, there has been no mention whatsoever of the Dungog nominal transmission site which needs to be upgraded to rectify its signal strength. Similarly, there has been no mention whatsoever of the Gan Gan tower. I fought hard for these upgrades to this tower and the former coalition government invested in omni-directional services, yet they have now been shut off with many residents left in the dark. This raises questions about value for money in Labor’s plan which I am extremely concerned about, and a review needs to happen urgently.

Allow me to use Great Lakes to demonstrate my concerns. The council has been given the option to upgrade its Elizabeth Beach retransmission site at a cost of about $100,000. This upgrade would allow locals to be able to access terrestrial digital TV—local TV. Unfortunately, neither the Rudd Labor government nor broadcasters will pay for it. No, if the Elizabeth Beach site is to be upgraded, the council has to fork out for the upgrades. On the other hand, if Elizabeth Beach is not upgraded, households will be provided with a $400 subsidy for a satellite dish. This would be paid for by the Rudd Labor government, using taxpayer dollars.

The problem is this: there are approximately 950 households that currently rely on the Elizabeth Beach site to watch television. If this tower is not upgraded, and all these residents claim a subsidy for the satellite service, the Rudd Labor government will have to spend almost $400,000. That is four times the amount of taxpayer money it would cost to upgrade the Elizabeth Beach tower. So if the Rudd Labor government simply paid for the tower upgrade, that would be a saving to taxpayers of $300,000 and it would not include any outlay from the council. That is two birds, one stone—three birds in fact, because more of my local constituents would then have access to terrestrial digital television rather than satellite. That means they would have access to specifically local, regional channels such as Prime and NBN designed for the Hunter and mid-north coast, without having to resort to satellite, which will need to service the entire south-eastern Australia zone of NSW, Victoria, Tasmania and the ACT.

This is a blatant example of the Rudd Labor government’s failure to think smart and use taxpayer dollars wisely, as demonstrated in the budget this week. Just this year we have been forced to watch blatant waste through Prime Minister Rudd’s Building the Education Revolution program, which has seen some classrooms erected for more than the cost of a luxury home. In fact, one school in my electorate, Booral Public School, received a double prefabricated classroom for $850,000. For the same price, another school got three classrooms, a basketball court and rainwater tanks. In my experience taxpayers are more than happy to invest in the education of our children, but what they do demand is value for money, which simply has not been evident at all in the BER program. Prime Minister Rudd obviously has not learnt his lesson and I would urge him to rethink the number of retransmission sites which are to be upgraded. Residents in the Paterson electorate deserve to have each and every tower upgraded, in order to give them the best chance at accessing terrestrial local digital television.

This Rudd Labor government will not invest in upgrading all our towers to digital. This is the same government which gave our broadcasters a $250 million discount in licensing fees, but failed to secure upgrades in those areas that really needed them. I am here to remind the Prime Minister that regional areas need urgent technology upgrades. People in the Paterson electorate deserve absolutely nothing less than the same services available to those in the city.

This brings me to another point of importance within the legislation, local content. Of course, Australian governments have always worked hard to ensure that people have access to relevant news and information through our commercial television broadcasters. It is not only for safety that people know what is going on in their local area but also so that people can stay informed about their local community and make a contribution. If you live in East Maitland, for example, I would argue most people would much rather read the Maitland Mercury, the Star or the Newcastle Herald rather than, say, the Canberra Times. While the latter is in no way of lesser quality, the issue here is proximity and relevance. I believe wholeheartedly that it needs to be the same with television—local content for local people; local news, local advertising, local community connection .

The Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Digital Television) Bill 2010 does address the issue of local content and I am pleased that this has been considered. However, the legislation indicates that satellite service providers will be required to present local news and information ‘as soon as practicable’. Therefore I would like to again stress the importance of local news, local sport, local weather, local community service announcements and local advertising. It is vital that the phrase ‘as soon as practicable’ does indeed translate into a timely news service which is aired at a practical time for my constituents.

Clearly, over the past five decades television has become an integral part of life for many Australians. It should be not only enhanced but also protected. Therefore, it is vital that this legislation be made a priority and that action be taken urgently. Of course, our Prime Minister is known for his talk rather than his action. But I am here for the people of Paterson and I will continue to hold the Rudd Labor government to account until clear, uninterrupted television can be viewed on the screens of every household. I have grave reservations about part of this bill and the ability of this government to roll out a quality service to my constituents. I remind the House that this Rudd Labor government stripped $2 billion from the regional telecommunications infrastructure black spot fund in December 2008. That is the sort of money that could have been spent on digital upgrades in my electorate.

Sid Sidebottom (Braddon, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is always a pleasure to speak on the matter of community television, given in this instance the Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Digital Television) Bill 2010, which refers to the commencement of digital satellite broadcasting services. Unfortunately the member for Paterson’s glass is never half full; it is always half empty. He is always full of doomsday predictions. Yet I find it very interesting, as is the case with most criticisms that are levelled at this government by the member for Paterson, that most of the origins of what we are talking about come from the former government. They include the process to bring about digital television in Australia.

Another thing I remind the member for Paterson about is that where we have community TV black-spot translators—and I congratulate again the former government on assisting those communities—many of those areas of reception did not receive analog television reception. There are many, many households around those areas that find it difficult to receive analog reception, who do not get television reception or who have to go to the satellite program to receive any reception at all. This legislation provides digital television and ensures that commitment to every Australian. But, if you listen to the member for Paterson, we are taking television reception away from people. It is absurd. If you go through his argument, that is exactly where it belongs—in the absurd basket.

This legislation will bring us into the 21st century. It deals with the transition to digital TV. Everybody in this House who has had anything to do with television reception—and all of us are affected by it, particularly in rural and regional Australia and particularly in areas such as where I come from in Tassie, where the topography is very mixed—knows that getting TV reception can be a very problematic and difficult situation. This legislation sets out the structural framework and regulations to allow every Australian to receive digital television reception. In instances where you cannot receive terrestrial digital signals, this legislation is intended to provide access to satellite digital television reception—not just reception but the full suite of digital channels available in metropolitan Australia. Without a lot of experience in metropolitan Australia myself, I would add that there are black spots with digital transmission even inside metropolitan areas. The great advantage with this legislation, as my friend the member for Dunkley knows very well, is that it will allow people to receive digital television through satellite. In Australia you cannot totally rely on terrestrial signals—we know that—particularly where I come from. I know the member for Dunkley would accede that point at least, through his very good advocacy for better television reception in Australia over the years. I am happy to acknowledge that.

Why are we moving to digital television? It is something that the former government set in train, quite rightly, and we are implementing it. So I do not want to hear about all the tit-for-tat stuff—that under us there is ruination—when in fact we are complementing what came before us; we have created a framework for it to happen. It will not be without problems, as any reception of television and any changeover will be. You do not need to be Cassandra to predict that. It is important that Australia keeps pace with worldwide changes in technology. Overseas programs, for instance—for those interested who are listening—are increasingly being recorded in the digital format only. That is why you get dotted lines across some of your television screens—the programs are filmed for digital reception. Australian TV shows need to be recorded in digital format to be easily exported overseas. In Australia, TV is currently broadcast via both digital and analog signals. We need to free up broadcast space. It gives us greater options. Turning off the analog signals will free up space that could be used for other services for the community. The present system is costly and inefficient.

Those who have moved from analog to digital or visit people who have digital will know there is no doubt that it improves your viewing experience. The picture and sound quality on digital TV is much better. Pictures on digital television can be seen in widescreen. You still have the free-to-air channels, plus some new ones, so you have more choice. For the consumer it is absolutely terrific. As someone who lives in a valley and has to get analog signals from a community translator, there is a marked qualitative difference in looking at a digital picture—which I have to get via satellite at the moment, through Austar. It is fantastic. To see all the possibilities of channels through the spectrum is wonderful.

Digital television provides vastly improved picture and sound quality, including widescreen pictures, as I mentioned. There is digital audio—again, fantastic—including radio broadcasts. Digital television also offers the benefits of many more channels and content. For example, when you get the old analog ABC, you get ABC and that is it. You would never have heard of ABC1. With digital you have ABC1, ABC2 and ABC3, and they are only broadcast in digital. SBS has SBS2 in digital. The Seven, Nine and Ten Networks have introduced high-definition digital channels. The Ten Network launched a digital-only sports channel, named ONE, in March 2009; the Seven Network launched free-to-air digital channel 7TWO in November 2009. Gradually, each of the free-to-air television broadcasters will be introducing new digital channels and content.

I would say to the member for Paterson, who quite rightly takes seriously the comments of his constituents about their television reception: yes, people are having problems. They are having problems whether they are receiving analog or digital. There are lots of reasons why people are experiencing problems. For a start, if you do not have the appropriate antenna, appropriately positioned and appropriately connected, you will have trouble receiving signals, whether they are analog or digital. You could have the best digital TV in the world, but with a poor antenna connection or poor direction you are in trouble. I am talking about the tools of the trade. Clearly, if you are going to invest in a set-top box and/or a digital television, like anything in the consumer world it is about buyer beware—take care, inform yourself, take advice. You cannot blame the government for a poor antenna or a cruddy old TV, as the member for Paterson was implying. That is silly stuff. We as consumers have to take responsibility, otherwise the nanny state has gone mad.

Commercial TV broadcasters are in a very lucrative business. The government has been working with them to reconvert analog terrestrial sites to digital, 87 of them—only 87, said the member for Paterson. I would like them all done because I looked on the list and mine is on there. I was really pleased to find that. They will be rebroadcasting to digital, converting to digital, and that is fantastic. But I have to say that even in my own township of Forth, which will get a digital conversion, it will not allow everyone in my valley to receive TV. They are going to the satellite, and that is what we are doing with this, warts and all.

There are going to be implementation issues, there is no doubt about it, but they can include an issue as small as someone not having the right equipment or not taking the right advice or, worst of all, not seeking the right advice. We have got to be responsible for our commercial decisions. There is a website, and I know not everyone is on the web but for broadcast’s sake I would like to point out that www.digitalready.gov.au is sitting there on the net ready for people to click in and try and get as much information as possible. Ring antenna experts, ring your TV mechanics, ring and go to your TV stores and take care. Do not buy the first thing they offer you. For a start, find out if digital television reception exists in your area. The member for Paterson was blaming us for someone buying a television set when they did not even have digital television transmission. I mean, fair is fair. Those selling things in stores have got to be responsible too, and if people do not have digital TV transmission and reception then selling people a digital television is questionable. If you do and they have got an analog thing, you have got to make sure they can receive an analog signal and then make sure that the antenna is right. So people must take care, because half the problem is blaming the tools, rather than the signal itself.

Those areas that currently have a community translator—black spots, if you like—will receive a subsidy from us. I believe it is around $400 but I am not sure whether it is has been absolutely set at that. This is to help people convert to digital, to get a set-top box, a satellite box, and then the dish and installation. We are going to assist in that process. I hope that our contribution is the greatest proportion of the cost involved. I hope that our subsidy will allow people to do that. I know the technologies are getting better and better each time and I know that those people doing installations will be doing critical mass installations. I agree with some of the other speakers that it is absolutely important that those people involved in the digital conversion have this transitional time frame to take note, to take care, to get informed and be prepared with their equipment to go out and start installing and implementing. I know those people listening to this are taking that on board, and it is very important. The person getting the new digital service has a responsibility too as a receiver to make sure we are doing the sensible thing.

People might be thinking, ‘Sid, you haven’t spoken about satellite reception.’ Effectively what we are doing is creating the regulatory framework to allow people to receive essentially what metropolitan Australia is now receiving by terrestrial digital signals. I think that is absolutely marvellous, that there is going to be equitable reception of those services. We are regulating, in a pretty regulated market I have to say, to say what is going to happen with our satellite footprints. I think there are three major zones or footprints. Mine is south-east Australia and it comes into my part of beautiful, beautiful Tasmania. What are we going to do about our local news? As the member for Paterson quite rightly said, as one of the two things he got right, we value our local programming, and I suppose we value our local ads. On local news, this legislation sets out how we are going to get that. When I first heard about this I said, ‘This is a logistical nightmare how to work this out.’ But boffins in the trade know a lot more than I do, and essentially what it is doing is mandating that local news will be available, say, an hour after it is transmitted by the normal commercial digital channels. It will be available to me through the red spot so that I can home in on my local news and see my mug on the telly, and others, to share in good news. I get the impression that I will be able to get others’ news as well. There will be a news channel floating around that I will be red-spotting on and I think that is a clever, sensible and practical way for me to get my local news. So I congratulate those people that have worked within the industry, and they include the commercial channels, for making this possible. It is the same with local content. There are regulations within this, and I will not trouble people with all the details of it, but those arrangements for local content are mandated in the legislation.

I would point out too that some communities are a little bit concerned about how are they going to get their digital signal. It is not a question of whether—we will get it all right. And it is not weather, which the member for Paterson was going on about. I suggest that is problems with the antenna. There are 87 sites that the government has negotiated with the commercial channels for conversion of existing self-help sites. I notice that in my region Forth, my lovely little village, is one of them. Paloona up the road in the Forth Valley is another. Then there are Ringarooma and the upper Derwent Valley, in the seat of Lyons, Hillwood and Meeandah and Lesley Vale.

They are fortunate to be able to receive a commercial conversion, which is not to say that everyone there is going to get the signal. But—and this is the great thing about this legislation and also honours our election commitment—everyone will receive digital reception, because they will be able to access a satellite system. I note too that something like 44 digital-only terrestrial transmission sites that are owned and operated by the broadcasters may receive conversions from the commercial channels—they are called gap fillers—to enhance the digital signal and increase what is called the wider digital footprint. I notice that Currie on beautiful King Island is one of those, as are Derby, Maydena and St Helens in Tasmania—all beautiful spots, by the way, in which to receive your television reception.

Unlike the member for Paterson, I think this is wonderful news. I am asking people who are going to convert their households to digital television reception to take care, note the availability or otherwise of the signal and when it is available and, of course, take advice, because you are purchasing reasonably expensive equipment that is going to last you a long time. Remember that, as with a lot of things, sometimes you need experts to help you and there will be a lot of people in the commercial sector who will be able to give you advice along with the technicians who are going to undertake the conversions. I congratulate the government on the legislation. I really look forward to getting digital television in my valley along with everyone else. This also honours the commitment that all Australians will receive an equitable signal from digital television.

Jamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

For that sales job I think the member for Braddon has an alternative career on the Digital Switchover Taskforce as the salesperson for digital switchover around Tasmania, in particular. He certainly has a passion for digital TV. I agree with part of what the member for Braddon said. It is a wonderful service and it will benefit many people. Many people now get the benefit of the additional stations and the additional content that we are seeing. As a young family we have a great use for ABC3, the kids channel, which in a previous life I was very passionate about ensuring. I was very pleased when it went ahead and I again congratulate Mark Scott on his initiative with that.

However, unfortunately, as with so many Rudd government programs, the problem here is not the idea but the implementation of the program itself. That is why I very strongly support the member for Casey, the shadow minister for broadband, communications and the digital economy, in his second reading amendment to the Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Digital Television) Bill 2010 which condemns the government for its lack of understanding and its inability to implement what is a very important digital switchover. In my electorate, the electorate of Mayo, which has similar issues to those of the electorate of Braddon with topography and the like, there is no greater example of the failure of the Rudd government to implement this digital switchover in a coherent and well thought through and planned fashion. Unfortunately, that means that yet again more taxpayers’ money will be wasted by a government that simply cannot implement a program.

In my electorate two areas in particular have a challenge with digital television. The first is Yankalilla where, pleasingly, thanks to the good work of Senator Mary Jo Fisher, as was revealed recently in a Senate committee, five retransmission towers will be upgraded. That is good news. We are now seeking meetings with the broadcasters to ensure that that happens quickly—not in 2013 but quickly. I congratulate Mayor Peter Whitford, his deputy and the Yankalilla Council for the work they have done in ensuring that Yankalilla will be picked up in this process, as it seems it will be. Yankalilla, not far from Adelaide but in a very hilly part of South Australia—a beautiful part of South Australia—has many valleys and peaks and has traditionally had problems with television. In fact, it only got analog television not that many years ago, thanks to black spot funding for the self-help towers there. It is a relief for those people who will be able to get digital TV.

Some people in Yankalilla, particularly in the Inman Valley, will require the satellite service. I think the satellite service does have some value, and in that respect I support some of the actions of the government. There is of course a concern about the cost for people installing the satellite service. Some clarity of how much it will cost them will be important in the next little while so that people can start to plan around whether they will be able to get those services or not. Some people will get far better television coverage than they have ever had before, which is a good thing and will give them more opportunities.

So, with Yankalilla, it does appear that the broadcasters have done the right thing and have come on board. I congratulate them for that, because unfortunately the Rudd government has completely ignored the concerns of that area. The Yankalilla Council last year had a public meeting, which I attended with my state colleague Michael Pengelly. An invitation was sent to Senator Conroy; he did not attend. An invitation was sent to all the South Australian Labor senators and none of those people attended. There was a representative from the Digital Switchover Taskforce and she did a sterling job representing the political masters of the government. That is not actually her role, but she did a tremendous job in fulfilling it that night and answering what questions she could. However, the government’s approach shows a complete lack of understanding of regional and rural Australia and its needs when it comes to issues like digital television and the services that people expect in metropolitan areas which should be delivered in regional areas, particularly in areas like Yankalilla, which are not that far away from metropolitan Adelaide.

The second area where we have an ongoing concern is in the Adelaide Hills Council district. It is the Forreston repeater station, which covers Forreston obviously, Cudlee Creek and, more importantly, Gumeracha—in the sense that there are more people in Gumeracha, not that they are more important. That issue is not yet resolved. These places were on the B list which was tabled at the Senate committee I mentioned earlier. It is claimed they will be covered by upgrades to current towers, or gap fillers. However, there is no clarity about this at this point in time.

We are seeking to meet with Free TV and the broadcasters to see whether we can get some clarity about how they think the people in these areas are going to be covered. We are hoping to ensure that they will be covered. The people at Gumeracha are very conscious that they cannot get digital TV right now. They are 20 kilometres away from the Mount Lofty television tower which services the whole of Adelaide but they cannot actually get digital TV from that tower. It just shows the problem with the topography, which is an ongoing issue. However, it makes sense that, if these areas are going to be picked up, they should be picked up now so that communities can be relieved of these concerns and we do not have ongoing uncertainty.

I disagree with the member for Braddon: I think people do have an expectation when they buy these products that the government is telling them to buy—with ads on television, in newspapers and so forth—that they will be able to use them, particularly in a place not that far from a major broadcast tower. So there is a need for that issue to be resolved more quickly.

The member for Casey, the shadow minister, who is doing a very good job on this issue, visited my electorate only two weeks ago. We sat down with the Adelaide Hills Council and local concerned residents and we talked about an action plan to ensure that the government is aware of these problems and an action plan to ensure that we know that the implementation of digital TV for these people will go ahead. We are planning to talk to Free TV with the Adelaide Hills Council and ensure that they are picked up and that these people will be able, sooner rather than later, to get the great benefits that digital TV offers.

Digital TV does offer excellent benefits for consumers. It offers more content and it offers a genuine future for TV going into this century. It was initially the idea of the former government, and it was a good idea. It is a good thing that the Rudd government is implementing it. Unfortunately the implementation is the problem, as it is with so many other programs—the insulation program, the solar panels program, the Deputy Prime Minister’s memorial hall program. The fact that these programs have been implemented so badly that they are costing much more money than initially thought is reflected by the dip in the opinion polls for those on the other side in recent times. Unfortunately we have seen that with the digital TV implementation also.

Again, people in regional and rural Australia are the ones who first miss out, because there is just no understanding of their issues on that side. There are so few on that side who live outside the city confines.

Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What about me?

Jamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Except, of course, the member for Wakefield. I know he also has several digital TV issues in his electorate. I heard his contribution earlier on. He is trying, with a forced smile, to endure what is happening with this issue. I know he is very concerned privately about not getting digital TV in certain parts of his electorate, which is a very beautiful part of South Australia—not quite as nice as the Adelaide Hills, but a nice part of South Australia.

Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I’ve got better wines!

Jamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He does have some areas which have some very high-quality wine. I will agree about that with the member for Wakefield, although in my electorate of course we do have Langhorne Creek and Adelaide Hills wineries.

Government Members:

Government members interjecting—

Jamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We are in bipartisan agreement that we have very high-quality red wine in South Australia.

The second reading amendment moved by the member for Casey, the shadow minister, is a very good one and it highlights the issues that are not being addressed by this government. The amendment reads:

… the House:

(1)

condemns the Government for its lack of understanding of television broadcasting issues across regional Australia;

(2)

further condemns the Government for its inadequate planning and preparation for the switch-over to digital television across regional Australia, beginning in the Mildura region on 1 July 2010;

(3)

warns the Government that its failures to date risks leaving some Australians without television reception; and

(4)

calls on the Government to guarantee that Australians will not lose television reception on each digital switch-over day as a result of inadequate planning and preparation.

I think that is ultimately the point here—that this government just cannot implement a program. The Australian people are seeing that day in, day out. That is our greatest concern, and it is a concern that I am sure the Leader of the Opposition will rightly point out in the very highly anticipated address he will make tonight to the Australian people. This government cannot implement a program. It is spending far too much money because it cannot implement programs. It is costing the future generations of our country massively with its debt. This issue highlights that particularly. The digital TV implementation is as bad as the implementation of the insulation program, the Green Loans Program and the solar panels program. It is going to be another one of these issues which unfortunately cost the Australian people too much money, too much in higher taxes. We have seen a great big new tax this week to pay for all these failures.

I commend the second reading amendment moved by the member for Casey. With those few remarks, I will conclude.

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You’d love to keep going for another minute. You really would!

Jamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If you insist, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will keep going. The failure of program implementation by this government is so vast that I could keep going for longer—long enough surely for Mr Speaker to be ready to hand over to question time. Mr Speaker?

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! It being approximately 2 pm, the debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 97. The debate may be resumed at a later hour and the member will have leave to continue speaking—if he is so inclined, but I think he is happy—when the debate is resumed.