Michelle Rowland (Greenway, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Communications) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Television and Radio Licence Fees) Bill 2016 proposes to amend the television Licence Fees Act 1964 and the Radio Licence Fees Act 1964 to reduce the licence fees paid by commercial television and radio broadcasting licensees by 25 per cent. It is instructive to look at the history of licence fees and at how we have arrived at this point. Labor supports the passage of this bill and considers the proposed reduction in licence fees to be a sensible step towards improving the international competitiveness of Australia's media sector and promoting the production of local content. It is instructive to briefly revisit the history of broadcast licence fees to understand how things have changed in this area and why this bill before us is important.

As the Productivity Commission stated in its report of the inquiry into broadcasting, licence fees 'seek to recover some of the value inherent in commercial broadcasting licences from commercial broadcasters and provide a return to the public for their use of scarce radiofrequency spectrum'. Commercial television and commercial radio broadcasters are required to pay broadcasting licence fees, which are levied as a proportion of their gross earnings from televising or broadcasting, as the case may be, advertisements or other material or matter during the return period. Under the Broadcasting Services Act, a person or entity providing a commercial broadcasting service on radio or television must hold a commercial radio or television broadcasting licence. Under the Radio Licence Fees Act and the Television Licence Fees Act, a licence fee is payable annually by the holder of a commercial radio broadcasting licence or a commercial television broadcast licence respectively. The sector-specific licence fee levied on commercial broadcasters has formed part of the social compact that has been a central theme in how broadcasting policy and legislation has been approached in Australia. This compact provides broadcasters with privileged access to use the airwaves, the radiofrequency spectrum—the highly valuable, finite and public resource used to transmit programming. It also affords other marketing advantages that, in turn, provide commercial broadcasters with unique access to a mass market of television viewers and radio listeners across Australia.

Historically, this business model delivered strong revenue and profits in an environment that is less competitive than what we have today. In exchange for these privileges, broadcasters were required to pay licence fees and were also subject to regulation that aimed to promote a range of public interest objectives, such as promoting a sense of Australian identity, character and cultural diversity; encouraging fair and accurate coverage of matters of public interest and appropriate coverage of matters of local significance; respecting community standards concerning program material; and protecting children from exposure to program material that might be harmful to them. In 2014-15 the Australian Communications and Media Authority collected roughly $153.9 million in licence fees from the commercial television sector.

I would like to turn to the issue of competitive pressures in the sector. The rise of the internet as a channel to aggregate and distribute content has had a significant impact on the media landscape. The structure and economics of media are changing, and broadcasters are facing increasing competition from new breeds of content providers who do not use the broadcasting spectrum and are not subject to the same level of regulation. For example, over-the-top content providers such as Netflix, Google and Facebook do not pay tax in the same way as Australian media companies and are not subject to detailed Australian media regulation requiring investment, for example, in local content, talent or production staff.

As noted recently by Network 10 to a Senate inquiry, Australian media companies are now competing directly against the foreign internet companies that are exempt from local media regulation, do not pay television licence fees and pay minimal corporate tax, despite taking billions in advertising revenue in this market.

It was further noted by Ten:

PwC forecasts that by 2020 internet advertising will dominate the advertising sector, reaching $10 billion, or approximately 50 per cent of the sector.

Unfortunately, local journalism and local production will not benefit from this growth, with an estimated 70 to 80 per cent of total Australian digital advertising revenue going overwhelmingly to two foreign technology companies, Google and Facebook …

The challenges facing the television sector were also highlighted by PwC, who forecast the share of total advertising revenue between 2013 and 2017 for the commercial television sector will fall from 29 to 27 per cent, while the internet share is forecast to rise.

Commercial Radio Australia has also emphasised that the reduction in licence fees is a welcome relief to Australian radio broadcasters who continue to carry regulatory obligations and costs well in excess of unregulated online competitors. The radio sector incurred roughly $24.83 million in licence fees across 273 licensees for the 2014-15 period. As noted by Commercial Radio Australia, it is important that pricing of spectrum licences for commercial free-to-air broadcasters be considered 'in the broader context of heavy regulation, local and Australian music content requirements, advertising restrictions and mandatory tags required of radio broadcasters, as well as the key role of radio in emergency situations'.

I would now like to return to Labor's support for a strong broadcasting sector. When Labor were in government we recognised the convergence driven challenges faced by commercial television broadcasters. Labor in government announced a rebate of 33 per cent for 2010 and 50 per cent for 2011. The 50 per cent reduction was extended to the end of 2013 by regulation and confirmed in legislation at the time. In announcing licence fee reductions in February 2010 then Minister Conroy conveyed that Labor were committed to reviewing the future role of licence fees in the face of significant change and also articulated the importance of a strong and vibrant broadcasting sector, saying

Broadcasters have a unique role in preserving our national culture and the commercial television sector invests hundreds of millions of dollars each year in the production of local content.

I think it is also instructive at this point to have a look at some of the comments made by then Minister Conroy on 21 February 2010 on the Insiders program. He was being asked by the host about how networks are struggling to meet their local content requirements. Then Minister Conroy said:

What we're seeing around the world is firstly that there is a long-term structural decline in commercial TV's business model. That's acknowledged around the world.

In the UK in response to that a couple of years ago, they slashed licence fees. In Canada licence fees are around 1 per cent. So Australian commercial TVs are still paying the highest in the world even after this cut.

What we're seeing is the advent of IPTV that's coming on-stream as part of the national broadband network, but it's arriving on existing networks today. Enormous competition is coming to the commercial TV sector.

At the same time, the Government has taken from them an enormous amount of spectrum which we we'll be auctioning in the next few years which will be of enormous benefit both in a straight-dollar return from the auction, but more importantly, the productivity-enhancing boost that will come from allowing this spectrum to be used far more efficiently than it has been used in the last few years.

I contend those comments stand true today.

Labor remain committed to preserving a strong and vibrant broadcasting sector and recognise the positive effect that a competitive sector has on local jobs and our sense of Australian identity. We also recognise the competitive pressures facing the sector and the need for meaningful and effective measures by government to ensure broadcasters can continue to invest in local content and production.

Reducing licence fees is a sensible step. This brings me to the reasons that Labor considers justify support of this bill. In light of revenue declines and the regulatory asymmetries that I have outlined, commercial broadcasters have argued that the licence fees they pay are excessive, particularly when compared to their overseas counterparts. International comparisons have shown that the licence fees imposed on Australian broadcasters are higher than comparable overseas jurisdictions. For example, licence fees in Australia are currently 4.5 per cent of revenue. This is compared to 0.41 per cent in the UK, 0.27 per cent in New Zealand and only 0.05 per cent in the United States.

This bill proposes to reduce the fee by a further 25 per cent, which would bring it down from 4.5 per cent of gross revenue to 3.375 per cent. This reduction has been estimated to reduce the financial burden on industry by $163 million over the forward estimates. I note the ongoing spectrum review, which now appears to be continuing into another year. This has been a source of ongoing concern for the broadcasting sector. There remains a lack of certainty about how the revised spectrum legislation will operate in practice and the arrangements for broadcast spectrum moving forward, particularly on matters of pricing. We urge the government to ensure the legislative package it ends up bringing before the parliament is cohesive and does provide certainty for stakeholders moving forward.

There is, of course, an argument that current licence fees reflect the value of public spectrum and other advantages enjoyed by commercial free-to-air broadcasters. I have no doubt this debate will continue for some time to come. Nonetheless, for the reasons that I have outlined, the current schedule of licence fees should be adjusted in a manner that is both sensible and proportionate. As you well know, Mr Deputy Speaker, the job of parliament is to promote the public interest and, given the centrality of the broadcasting sector to our system of democracy, any substantive decision impacting this sector will require careful consideration that is both informed by evidence and guided by the enduring policy objectives that we aim to promote. Labor is satisfied that the evidence supports the proposed measure whilst preserving and indeed promoting the policy objects central to the Broadcasting Services Act through the provision of support for a sector that invests in local Australian content and jobs. For these reasons, Labor supports the passage of this bill.

Ted O'Brien (Fairfax, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The context for the measures in the Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Television and Radio Licence Fees) Bill 2016 is change—change driven by the information revolution; change in communications technology; change that is having a dramatic impact on the competitiveness of traditional media platforms. This bill is part of a broader package of reforms that has as its aim the freeing up of our traditional platforms to better compete in a vastly changed environment dominated by the internet—a truly instant and global means of communication. This measure, the first in the package to be brought to the parliament, sees a 25 per cent reduction in the licence fees paid by commercial television and radio stations—fees that have long been based on a proportion of gross earnings. This measure, which was part of the 2015-16 budget, reflects the government's acceptance that those earnings have been under increasing threat as the reach of new technologies widens.

The onset of these challenges has been rapid, especially in light of the long period of stability that preceded it. For at least 120 years from 1803, when the first Australian newspaper was published, until the first radio transmission in 1923, access to news reporting was restricted to the printed word, and our timetable here in Australia was pretty much the same as was experienced by the rest of the world—based on the invention of the printing press in the 15th century. That is a very long time with just one platform. It was radio that began the phenomenon of instant accessibility, but even that took some time to develop, with the first live call of the Melbourne Cup not until 1925, and it was not until the 1930s that test cricket was broadcast. This was at a time when the total number of people listening could be measured in tens of thousands. In fact, the first issue of licences attracted just 1,400 listeners. Radio obviously grew exponentially, and then in the 1950s—in 1956, to be exact, the year of the Melbourne Olympics—we entered the television age. So the familiar format of the media businesses that have dominated our access to news and entertainment ever since came into play: print, radio and TV. These formats, through which most people have consumed their news, gossip, information and entertainment—whether it was the racing form, the TV guide or the footy results—were left unchanged until relatively recently.

While the internet came into play, at least in a technical sense, in 1989—and that is not quite 30 years ago—as with radio and television it has taken some years for the power of that transformative technology to take root and become a part of our lives. Over the past decade in particular, it has transformed the media landscape like no other development—some would argue, in fact, no other development in the history of humankind. With access to the internet increasingly via our handheld devices, established media formats that have so dominated our lives—print, radio and TV—will never again enjoy the dominance they have had to date. They are still in the mix, but each has been dramatically challenged for audiences and for revenue and thus for profitability and thereby just survival. News, entertainment and information have become so globalised and so accessible, so quickly, by this new suite of technologies that the business models of our traditional media platforms have been transformed. In fact, they have been turned on their heads.

In this era of change, adaptability is the only viable strategy. Newspapers are adapting by increasingly moving content online, and the printed version of newspapers is now under a far bigger threat even than that which was created by television. Fairfax has quite openly flagged that the weekday editions of The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age, two of the oldest, best known titles in the country, will soon most likely go digital. Rupert Murdoch has said that News Corp is not in the business of printing words on dead trees, as it doubles its efforts on content creation. Even in my home region, the legendary Sunshine Coast Daily newspaper only recently stopped printing it Sunday edition. Radio is responding. It is streaming, as is television, but the threat to radio and TV is arguably as great as it is for newspapers.

The challenge for all is to keep their businesses as going concerns. For all the traditional platforms, this boils down to revenue. The globalised internet has brought globalised players and global business models that exploit the fact that, with this format, the internet, they no longer suffer that long-held challenge, that long-held trade-off that other media outlets have made over the years between richness and reach—richness of content and reach to audience. And, having broken that, the internet continues to grow and steal more and more market share and revenue from the traditional platforms. For the traditional media companies, making a buck has become harder and harder.

Morgan Stanley recently conducted a study and suggested that this financial year global internet businesses will achieve about 35 to 40 per cent of advertising revenue in Australia, around $4 billion to $5 billion of a $14 billion market. By 2020 the possibility is that their share—we are talking here about the likes of Google, Facebook and Instagram—could be over 50 per cent. Morgan Stanley is inevitably right. This takeover is gathering pace. The share of the internet based multinationals grew by 25 per cent last year, and clearly it is going to keep growing. Everything we have seen in this area over the past decade suggests that internet based media is almost a tsunami for the traditional platforms. The record, let alone the predictions, underscores that fact. In 2012, for example, online advertising revenue was the equivalent of total advertising revenue for both newspapers and magazines combined. In 2012, the ad revenue share of newspapers had declined from almost 40 per cent a decade ago to less than a quarter.

Radio and TV revenues have been more stable, but they know they are next, and their growth in revenue is in the process of stalling as the competition for advertising and audiences escalates. The prediction in the Morgan Stanley work was that TV will flatline and radio will maintain modest growth in revenues for a few more years and then decline. These forecasts do not constitute a viable business outlook, especially for companies in a sector that the market typically rewards for their future growth predictions, their future growth expectations. Something has to give if we are to continue to have a vibrant, homegrown traditional media sector that is built around an Australian, not a global, audience.

As members in this chamber are aware, the government is proposing a range of measures to assist our traditional media companies to deal with these extraordinary challenges. The measure in this bill, which significantly reduces licence fees, is one of a suite of measures, several of which will be dealt with in a subsequent bill. Calls from the industry for relief from licence fees have been growing over recent years, and they have a compelling case for reduction, at least at two levels. One is the need to free up more capital to remain competitive against those companies that are beyond the reach of our licence fee system. The other is on the basis of a comparison of the level of these fees charged in other countries. The member for Greenway, who spoke prior to me, alluded to this. In Britain, for example, the fee paid is under 0.2 per cent. Our current maximum rate is 4.5 per cent for television, down from nine per cent in 2013, and our current maximum rate for radio is 3.25 per cent. You can see that the 25 per cent reduction enabled by this bill is both a significant one and a very much warranted one.

The reduction that this bill proposes is not the reduction to zero that the industry generally calls for. The responsibility of the government on this matter is not solely to the industry; we also have a responsibility to the taxpayer. This measure will have a bottom line budgetary impact of $163 million over the forward estimates. It would have been nice to have been more generous, but the state of the budget and the need for fiscal repair, given the debt and deficit legacy of the former Labor government, mean that this measure is the best the government believes can be accomplished at this time. This bill should not only assist the industry but also give it confidence that the government knows and understands the scale of the challenges it faces. We have indicated that we will continue to look at this issue in the context of broader reforms that the industry seeks, and those will be dealt with in another bill.

Stephen Jones (Whitlam, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Development and Infrastructure) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Labor supports the Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Television and Radio Licence Fees) Bill 2016. Let us go through some of the context regarding the current state of Australia's media industry. Broadcasting, through radio or television, is regulated to some degree. The spectrum that broadcasting uses is a public resource, and it is sought after for a lot of purposes. The spectrum used to broadcast television and radio programs, if auctioned off today, would yield an enormous financial gain for the people of Australia.

Following the switch from analog to digital television in 2012-13, the ACMA was able to reallocate spectrum and conduct an auction of some of the newly available spectrum, which gives us a sense of the value of the spectrum that this bill contends with today. The resulting auction back in 2012 saw the spectrum yield $1.96 billion to the coffers of the Australian people.

Government's role is to ensure that regulation achieves a public interest within the operations of commercial and media market dynamics. It is important to strike the right balance and to take action where necessary. There is no doubt that there is a fundamental shift in our media landscape. The member for Fairfax has just spoken about it, and the shadow minister spoke about it in her address-in-reply. The challenges faced by Australia's media companies here and around the world are well known. The availability of news and information through online media has changed the structures of the industry and is creating significant disruption to existing business models.

It is often the case with disruption to industry—in this case, our traditional television broadcasters—that they do not see the changes coming or the consequences for their industries. Our media industry is in the midst of this disruption with the expansion of subscription, video on demand and over-the-top streaming services like Netflix, to name just one. Our media viewing and consumption habits are also changing. While TV remains the dominant source of news in Australian households, the number of consumers watching free to air commercial TV has fallen a massive 15 per cent since 2008 alone. This is due partly to the growth of subscription and on-demand services, such as Quickflix, Presto, Stan and Netflix, according to a recent ACMA report, Digital Australians: expectations about media content in a converging media environment. It said that from 2011 watching free to air TV still represents the largest share of our TV consumption at around 59 per cent of average time spent watching TV or video content. Watching online content, such as catch-up TV or other free online video content, via a subscription service or a pay per view content now accounts for 16 per cent of time spent viewing TV.

In February 2016 Roy Morgan research reported that more than one in seven Australians now watch no commercial television or normal weekday television at all. That is twice the number in 2008. Seven years ago only 6.9 per cent of Australians over the age of 14 did not watch any commercial television on a normal weekday, and there was very little difference between age groups. Since then the proportion of Australians who do not watch any commercial television has doubled.

We can see from these statistics that consumption patterns are changing, and they are changing rapidly. While we may still sit down together to watch the evening news as a family, it is also increasingly the case that we access these news services via our mobile phones, a tablet or some other online device. With 11 million Facebook users and nine million YouTube users, over half of all Australians have reported using online and social media as a news source. We can see that we cannot stand still as regulators blind to the fact that as the environment is changing very rapidly around us so must the regulatory environment. It is worth noting that there are new streaming and audio providers, such as Apple Music, which was launched in 2015 to join audio apps such as Spotify and Pandora, which have also rapidly changed the way we consume audio media.

The tax avoidance practices of many of these multimedia broadcasting services do need to be investigated. Google, for example, makes around $2 billion in advertising revenue in Australia but avoids paying tax in Australia by shifting this revenue to an offshore entity through Singapore to Google Asia Pacific. Labor would like to see some more action from the Turnbull government to address this issue of multinational tax avoidance. The so-called digital information revolution is creating some winners and some losers, and many are focused merely on surviving. Our traditional media companies are in this category. The maelstrom is the only reason this House should consider the bill today, which implements a 25 per cent reduction in the annual licence fees payable by the commercial radio and television free to air broadcasters. This change in the environment is the only reason we should be considering this bill today. Television broadcasting licensing fees are levied on gross revenue, and this measure in the bill will reduce the levy from 4.5 per cent to 3.375 per cent. I understand that many within the industry would like to see the licensing fees go altogether, but I remind the House that these are the fees that the industry pays for access to valuable spectrum.

We should continue to engage with the industry over what reforms are necessary. There have been a number of proposals put by the industry, quite forcefully, about the need for changes in the regulatory environment, regulations that were set up in an entirely different environment. These matters are not before the House but they are a part of the context which the Labor opposition is considering when offering its support for the legislation before the House.

Nola Marino (Forrest, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As we in this place are all aware, the regional commercial broadcasting industry has certainly been making its case for change, for some time, in this House. The government's Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Television and Radio Licence Fees) Bill 2016 amends the Television Licence Fees Act 1964 and the Radio Licence Fees Act 1964 to permanently reduce the licence fees payable by commercial television broadcasting licensees and commercial radio broadcasting licensees by 25 per cent.

This, as you know Mr Deputy Speaker Broadbent, is in response to those constant and persistent representations by commercial broadcasters and a genuine awareness of all of us in this House and in parliament that their environment has significantly changed. Commercial television broadcasting licensees and commercial radio broadcasting licensees are required, under the relevant acts, to pay broadcasting fees, which are levied on an annual basis as a sliding percentage of the licensees' gross earnings for that particular year.

For television, the maximum rate of licence fees payable is 4.5 per cent of gross earnings applicable to licensees with revenues in excess of $100 million. The current rate of television licence fees were set following an amendment to the Television Licence Fees Act 1964 in 2013, which provided a permanent 50 per cent reduction in commercial television licence fees. In relation to radio, the maximum rate payable is 3.25 per cent of gross earnings applicable to licensees with revenues in excess of $11.5 million. There have been no changes to the rate of radio licence fees since 1991. What we do know is that there has been a massive change in the media landscape during the last few years. We have seen total disruption through the internet. This bill will permanently reduce the rate of broadcasting licensing fees by 25 per cent per annum, effective for licence fees payable from the 2015-16 financial year, giving effect to a measure contained in the 2016-17 budget.

This fee reduction recognises that the Australian media market has changed significantly—dramatically, in fact—since broadcasting licence fees were introduced. With the move to online and on-demand content fragmenting the market for media services and significantly increasing competition, commercial television broadcasters are the largest funders of Australian content and remain a key source of news for Australians, especially for those of us who live in rural and regional Australia.

The reduction in broadcasting licence fees contained in this bill will allow commercial broadcasters to more effectively meet the challenges of an increasingly competitive global environment and continue to be able to invest in high-quality content. The bill will also amend the Radio Licence Fees Act to permit regulations to be made for licence fee rebates, mirroring a provision already contained in the Television Licence Fees Act.

When I look at the regional broadcasters and I look at the south-west of Western Australia, where my electorate is, my regional broadcasters produce local news, news that is relevant to our audiences in our market. There is nothing like being a local person and turning on your local TV station and watching news about people and places that you actually know. They also constantly update their news services.

For us in rural and regional Australia they provide jobs in our regional communities, jobs for people like journalists, editors, camera operators, broadcast engineers, IT technicians, and sales and administration staff.

But even more significantly, they are often the wonderful starting point for a lot of our reporters who go on to greater things at a national level. It is the training ground for local reporters. They have great aspirations, but they need a starting point. Where do they start? In local and regional areas. They start in local media.

These regional broadcasters also provide incredible support for local regional communities. They engage with their communities. They are directly connected. They are at every local major event. We see them out on the ground—the regional broadcasters are going to cover it. You know they are going to be there. They pay licence fees to ACMA as well to comply with the code and captioning obligations. They also pay tax in Australia. Because of their affiliation agreements, they pay affiliation fees to networks as well.

They are engaged in an absolute battle, as we know. I think everybody in this House understands the battle that our regional broadcasters face, whether it is to simply exist or for the advertising dollars, with the likes of Foxtel and through all the internet services that are both local and global. These operators are in their licence areas. It is an extremely aggressive, competitive space. It is changing constantly and it has a multitude of players.

The government decision to reduce the fees recognises these facts. It recognises that the Australian media market has changed unbelievably since the broadcasting licence fees were first introduced. In the current media environment the move to online and on demand content is absolutely fragmenting the market for media services. It is increasing the competition for audiences and for the advertising dollars. I look at WIN TV, Prime and GWN7 in my part of the world, and Southern Cross TV. It is placing increasing pressure on our commercial broadcasters—these same broadcasters that are regulated and paying licence fees, whose main competitors, including online operators like Netflix and Apple, pay no licence fees. You only have to look around—YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, Amazon Prime, Google Play, Presto, Apple iTunes, Foxtel Go, Quickflix. It is a matter of what is next. This is not the end—it is only the beginning of more and different services that are going to be provided.

These services do not provide my community with local news and they do not provide my community with regional employment in the south-west of Western Australia. My regional broadcasters cover things like local AFL footy finals and major sporting events, then we see this on our local news bulletins. They cover things like the local emergencies. During the Yarloop and Waroona bushfires my local regional stations were giving us updates all the time. We even see local ads. That is exactly what we want to see in our part of the world. We do not want to see an ad for a product or service that is in Perth or over east or wherever; we want to see what is available in our south-west. That is what our community broadcasters do. They even deliver community service announcements that are relevant to us where we live, where we work, where we retire and where we invest.

But there are more changes ahead. We only need to look at young people to see how their habits have changed. As the members in this House know, I do a lot of cybersafety presentations in schools and community groups. We have heard statistics quoted today about the change in people's habits. We know that there are fewer and fewer people reading physical newspapers. There is an increase in the number of people who want their information and news live, now, at the moment it is happening. And they are receiving their news online in various forms.

Of course, this has put significant pressure on our local community newspapers. In our small communities, what people, and even younger people, do read is the very small and often free local newspaper. There is one in a little place called Brunswick, which is known as the 'Moos paper', because it is very much a dairy community and it does get read. It is all about local people and local events, and it means something. That is the connection that is required, and that is what regional broadcasters provide—the connection with community.

The 2016-17 budget included a measure to permanently reduce the rate of broadcasting licence fees by 25 per cent a year, and this bill gives effect to that budget measure by amending the Television Licence Fees Act 1964, as I said earlier. These amendments will provide that commercial television and radio broadcasting licensees must pay a fee that is 75 per cent of the amount otherwise due to be paid in a given year. The bill also introduces a measure to address an anomaly between the two licence fee acts relating to the making of regulations.

The bill also amends the Radio Licence Fees Act 1964 to address inconsistencies and to provide flexibility in the future administration of the licence fee regime as it applies to commercial radio broadcasters. The measures contained in this bill will build on the government's media reforms contained in the Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Media Reform) Bill 2016, which will repeal redundant media control rules and enhance local content obligations on regional commercial television broadcasters.

We do know that the Australian public is best served by a strong and vibrant free-to-air commercial broadcasting sector. These reforms provide tax relief to assist Australian broadcasters so they can be better positioned to invest in Australian content and local jobs and to maintain their presence in rural and regional Australia. I commend the build the House.

Pat Conroy (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to talk about the Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Television and Radio Licence Fees) Bill 2016. Labor is supporting the bill for the reasons ably outlined by my colleagues, the members for Greenway and Whitlam. I am pleased to make a contribution.

I would like to focus on regional broadcasting and one aspect of that—the appalling television reception that many of my constituents face. It is an issue that is constantly raised with me when I am out and about in the community. The key issue is that television reception in many parts of my electorate was substandard before the transfer to digital television, and it has become even worse since then. The main complaint is very regular cut-outs when they are watching television; another is that particular channels barely work or do not work at all; another is poor reception when it rains or when it is very hot. This is just not good enough.

I would like to put this in context. In the year 2016, many of my constituents are having major difficulty in watching television in their own homes. This is 2016; this is not 1966. To put this into further context: the southern part of my electorate is barely one hour's drive from the Sydney CBD; the northern border of Shortland is about a two-hour drive from Sydney. And yet many of my constituents—only one hour from Australia's largest and most international city—cannot get television reception. This is completely unacceptable.

Many of my constituents who are facing this problem are elderly and many live on their own. For these people television is a fundamentally important part of their everyday lives. The television is the main source of entertainment and news. It is how they connect with their community and the outside world. It is actually an aspect of democracy that is little remarked upon. If the main source of news that people in my area rely on to make informed decisions about who they vote for in elections is not available, then this is a hindrance to them expressing their democratic rights. Imagine how distressed these people feel and the isolation they feel when the primary source of entertainment and news does not work properly. The fact is that elderly constituents of mine feel isolated, and this makes me incredibly angry as their member of parliament. It is not just my elderly constituents who face this problem; many young families have also contacted me with the same problem. Some in the big capital cities may respond, 'Well, this isn't a problem, because they get plenty of service through smart televisions, iPad apps and paid television.' Well, many of my constituents cannot afford pay television and many of my constituents suffer from appalling internet services and therefore cannot stream from online services. That is why, since being elected to parliament in 2013, I have campaigned very strongly on improved communications in my region, whether it is television reception, mobile phone coverage or the NBN.

Last year, I wrote to the then Minister for Communications, who is now the Prime Minister, and asked him to refer digital television reception problems to the Australian Communications and Media Authority for investigation so this issue could be raised with regional broadcasters. He did not act, yet this was not out of ignorance, because I am sure the Prime Minister knows about television reception issues in the Hunter region and I have photographic evidence that he does. This is a picture of him with the former member for Paterson, Bob Baldwin, just two weeks before he became Prime Minister. He was visiting Mr Baldwin to announce $800,000 to address digital television issues in his electorate. It is interesting that of the five Hunter electorates, all of whom have television reception issues, the only one the Prime Minister could be bothered to turn up to and to help address the issues in was the Liberal electorate held by Bob Baldwin. It was a desperate and ultimately futile attempt to try and keep him in that seat.

We know what needs to be done. The government and the minister are aware of these issues, particularly in regional Australia. They need to work with industry to plan how to best address these ongoing issues. They have committed funding previously and the need to do more, along with the broadcasters, to solve this problem. This bill is giving a licence fee cut to those broadcasters, and I call on all broadcasters, particularly the regional broadcasters, to really invest in the infrastructure so that constituents of mine, in the great seat of Shortland and the surrounding areas, have access to one of the fundamental rights in a modern, economically rich country, and that is television reception.

To conclude, I say to my constituents: I will continue to campaign for greater telecommunications services in my area, whether it is decent internet speeds, mobile phone reception or whether it is free-to-air television reception; I will not rest. We are one to two hours from Australia's largest city, we are the seventh largest city in our own right, we live in a well-developed economically prosperous nation and to be without these services is a disgrace.

Rebekha Sharkie (Mayo, Nick Xenophon Team) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I support the passage of the Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Television and Radio Licence Fees) Bill 2016 through the parliament. Finally, the government will give some much needed assistance to our Australian free-to-air broadcasters. They invest heavily in local Australian content, they provide Australian jobs and they serve as a training ground for Australian talent. As our world evolves, technology involves with it. The biggest competitors to our commercial broadcasters are now multinational content companies such as Netflix and Apple. These companies pay no licence fees. They do not invest in local content, and they produce little to no Australian jobs.

Even with this legislation, Australian licence fees will still be some of the highest in the world. In this new world, with the advancement of technology, licence fees are a thing of the past. This legislation is a step in the right direction, but it is a small step, and I think we should acknowledge that. While our free-to-air broadcasters bleed money, their biggest competitors internationally are profiting—companies like Google, Facebook and Netflix. They pay very little tax in Australia, and it is time this government got real about making these companies pay their fair share. A reasonable tax on these multinational corporations would go some way towards recouping the revenue cost from the abolition of licence fees.

Should the government decide to act on this issue, the revenue raised from making everyone play by the rules on a level playing field could be used to help the forgotten member of the broadcasting industry—community broadcasting. Community television and radio provide a valuable service to interest groups not catered to by commercial broadcasters. They contribute to the diversity of the broadcasting sector.

Adelaide Hills has a number of community broadcasters. I would just like to touch upon television before I talk about radio. Adelaide community television station Channel 44 has downsized significantly in recent years. The station not only provides colourful programming but it also fills a niche not served by mainstream television and is also a training ground for the aspiring television presenters of tomorrow. Where is the support of this valuable community resource?

In regional areas especially, community radio provides a colourful contrast to the major stations. Couple this with the fact that they are able to cater much more specifically to local areas, and you have a very valuable community resource that I believe is overlooked in urban areas. In my electorate alone we have a multitude of community radio stations: Hills Radio, in the Adelaide Hills; Happy FM, down Victor Harbour, in Fleurieu Peninsula; Fleurieu FM; Kix Radio, on Kangaroo Island; and Triple Z, in McLaren Vale. These are just some of the stations that entertain and inform in my region, and they are run by volunteers. I know of the value they bring to our community and, yet, in terms of content and community involvement, these community radio stations are still being ignored by government.

The cost of lost revenue in the legislation before us is $163 million over four years. Currently, community radio stations around Australia need just $8.8 million over the next four years to invest in infrastructure to help them to grow and adjust in the digital world—that is $2.2 million per year. That $2.2 million could continue to support over 1,000 fulltime jobs in Australia. That $2.2 million would allow 22,000 volunteers Australia-wide to provide worth in their communities. That $2.2 million could help students cut their teeth on community radio to gain valuable experience. I did that at 21 years of age. I thoroughly enjoyed my time in community radio and learnt so much. That $2.2 million could provide safety and security to our local communities, as community radio stations are often the first to broadcast emergency warnings. Also, they provide local sport content. Their range of programming is endless.

This is particularly relevant to my electorate of Mayo, which has been devastated by the recent storms in South Australia. Through community radio stations, SES warnings were broadcast out to people in my community. In regional areas, community radio provides such a valuable service that it cannot afford to be lost, especially when the cost required to support the industry is so little.

Community radio may be seen as the little brother to commercial stations. It is small but it is mighty. Over five million people in Australia listen to community radio each week. This number continues to grow. The services provided by community radio have their own distinct flavour, and this creates a great, diverse range of content for listeners. That diversity is at risk.

The government has shown willingness to help out our free-to-air broadcasters. It has shown no willingness to curtail the free ride of multinational online services and it has shown even less willingness to support our community based broadcasters. I support the legislation before the parliament, but my heart sinks when I think of the lack of commitment shown towards the community broadcasters, both television and radio. Community television and radio face the same challenges as the commercial stations, and they should be supported as we enter the digital age.