Sam Birrell (Nicholls, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm very pleased to speak on the Communications Legislation Amendment (Prominence and Anti-siphoning) Bill 2023. There are two parts to this legislation, and I'll address them, but I just want to give a bit of background about people from regional areas such as myself and a bit of the history of what got us to this point now.

I grew up in the Goulburn Valley, as people around here know, in the great little place of Murchison, near Shepparton. Back in the eighties we had two channels; we had the ABC, which was channel 3, and we had the local commercial TV station, which was called Gmv-6. Those were the choices I had when I grew up. It's a far cry from what we have now. I can remember watching great shows such as Magnum P.I., CHiPs, and The A-Team, and then you could go over to the ABC, channel 3, and watch Monkey Magicall those great shows from the eighties. It was a great childhood, I must say.

Aggregation then came, in the 1990s, and with the advent of SBS we had five channels. Bruce Springsteen released a song in 1997 called '57 Channels (And Nothin' On)'. Young fans in the Goulburn Valley must have thought, 'Wow, that's this utopia where there are 57 channels!' We certainly never had anything like that. But 'the Boss' obviously thought more channels was a good thing until they showed the same boring shows not worth watching.

Now, with multichannel broadcasting, a television watched in Shepparton, Numurkah, Murchison or any of those places around my area will receive around 40 free-to-air channels, and I think that's been a good thing, because it's more diverse viewing for people, particularly for young people. Some people used to say television was a bad thing, but I think it is a good educational medium. Those Australians who can afford to pay now also have access to cable or satellite TV, with another eight channels. So, there are some provisions in this bill about new TVs that are sold and whether they have the free-to-air apps already loaded. I think that's fine, provided that it doesn't increase the cost of TVs, which I have a concern about.

One part of this bill seeks to address the complexity and improve the discoverability of free-to-air streaming services. Another part of the bill looks out for people who aren't able to afford pay TV or streaming services and makes sure there'll still be a free-to-air option to watch key Australian content. I think that's really important. It's particularly important for people in regional areas, who often don't have the financial resources or don't have access to the cable or internet streaming that people in metropolitan areas do. It's important that we make sure those people, and we as a nation, can still come together and watch some of these great sporting events, because, let's face it, the Olympics unites us as a nation, and we want everyone to be able to access sporting events such as the Olympics, AFL and all sorts of other key sporting events that become water cooler conversations at work: 'Who won the footy?' or 'How terrible was Collingwood over the weekend?'—or how difficult the West Coast Eagles are finding it, member for Forrest!

But anyway, the important thing is that sporting events that are supposed to stop a nation continue to stop a nation—for everyone, not just for those who can pay. One of the events that does stop the nation is the Melbourne Cup. It has stopped the nation since the late 1800s, and I think it's a great national event. But it's not going to stop the nation this year, because this place will be sitting on Melbourne Cup Day. I think the tradition of the Melbourne Cup stopping the nation is a sad thing to lose. I'll ask those opposite if they might reconsider whether this parliament should sit on Melbourne Cup Day. But that's for another time.

The most important thing about the legislation is that it adapts to growing technologies, and that's what we have to do here in this place. We have to look at the technologies that are coming onto the market—and they're good technologies; streaming technologies are good technologies: Netflix, Amazon Prime, Stan, Disney and the like. All these things are good things. But we've got to make sure that people who don't have access to these streaming services or pay TV—by dent of their simply not having the reception or the internet bandwidth, because they might live in regional areas, or not being able to afford pay TV or streaming services—get to join with the rest of us in enjoying great sporting events such as the summer and winter Olympic Games. We all came together as a nation to watch Cathy Freeman win that 400-metre race in 2000—and for the Paralympic Games, which are amazing because we're coming together to celebrate people with disability. Then there are the Commonwealth Games, which were going to happen in Melbourne but, unfortunately, due to the dysfunctional Victorian government, that is no longer happening—at a great cost, might I add. AFL men's and AFL women's—isn't it great that now we're coming together to watch women's sport in a way that I could never have thought when I was growing up. Women's sport was basically netball and that was it. Now you can turn on free-to-air TV and you can watch the AFLW, and you can watch soccer, the rugby codes, cricket, tennis and motor racing. It's very important. I wanted to make that contribution. It's very important.

We're supporting the government on this legislation. This is what parliaments should do: react to growing technological developments, making sure all Australians get a fair go and are able to come together and watch TV. But I particularly wanted to make the point that part of our culture as a nation is coming together to celebrate these sporting events, particularly when Australian teams are involved. I commend the bill to the House.

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

I rise in support of the Communications Legislation Amendment (Prominence and Anti-Siphoning) Bill 2023 proposed by the honourable member for Greenway. In a fast-changing media, news and entertainment landscape, this amendment clearly demonstrates the commitment of the Albanese government to modern media reform. The reform delivers on our election commitment and guarantees Australians access to local TV and free sports coverage in the streaming era.

Unlike the member for Nicholls who had two channels he could choose from, I grew up in country Queensland, in St George, and I had one channel. I was actually in grade 4 when we got television. When I turned it on, I had that Hobson's choice—it was either the ABC or the national broadcaster. Thankfully, the ABC was pretty good entertainment and pretty informative.

In 2024, the days of turning on the TV and choosing between the ABC, Channel 7, Channel 9, Channel 10 and SBS are long gone. Now, Australians are reaching for the remote control with a profusion of streaming services to choose from. Consequently, the Albanese Labor government has recognised the importance of bringing Australia's regulatory framework for media services into the 21st century. Nearly 70 per cent of us have one streaming service and the average Australian subscribes to two. The question, 'What are you watching on Netflix?' has become as common as water cooler conversations in the nineties about what happened on A Country Practice the night before.

The proposed amendments will protect the cultural significance of modern Australian stories, like A Country Practice. The Albanese government is committed to supporting access to local Australian TV services. This will bolster a strong local media industry and enable all Australians to engage in shared experiences and shared economic and cultural lives. This is crucial in any country, but especially in the most multicultural country on earth, where more than half of us were either born overseas or have parents who were born overseas. This is a significant change from Australia at Federation, where nearly 95 per cent of Australians were born in this country, and if they had any connection with a country overseas it was most likely Great Britain.

The first part of this bill introduces a prominence framework for internet-connected television devices. In simple terms, this means ensuring that local free-to-air TV services are easy for viewers to find when they switch their TV on. This ensures that local TV services can continue to play a prominent role in Australia's public and cultural life, preserving our digital water cooler, if you like—or, at the risk of murdering a metaphor, a shared country practice.

Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Consider it murdered.

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

Thank you, Deputy Speaker, for your guidance. I do point out that, sadly, in Brisbane—the member for Ryan would know this—we don't have a local community broadcasting station anymore. That used to be a voice in the media landscape that was much appreciated in giving some of those non-mainstream voices a platform. That's something for community broadcasting to hopefully sort out.

Australians are a resilient mob. We are tested with bushfires, drought and, in my home state of Queensland, cyclones and devastating flooding such as occurred at the end of last year. Australians always turn to our trusted free-to-air broadcasting services during disasters for up-to-date emergency broadcasts, and we rely on the same services for information about the communities we live in—local news, local information and local sport. They also entertain us, showcasing Australian creativity with Australian stories for all ages. Can you imagine a world without Bluey and Bingo—another proud Queensland export to the world, I would point out?

The key part of the new framework is the requirement for regulated TV device manufacturers to adhere to minimum prominence requirements—if you like, having a Bluey button. The Australian Communications and Media Authority, or ACMA, will determine what constitutes a television device. Under the amendment, regulated television devices must provide access to regulated television services; automatically install and update regulated television services, present a prominent live television tile, tab or link; present a separate application, tile or tab on the home screen, ensuring that those tiles or tabs are the same size as those for other paid streaming services available on the device; and, obviously, present the television channels in a logical order.

This amendment will provide Australians with easy and uncomplicated access to trusted news, emergency, and entertainment channels. A Network Ten executive recently said she needed 45 minutes and the help of an engineer to be able to find a Channel Ten app and download it onto her new television, despite being pretty tech savvy. The executive said:

So the entire point to the prominence conversation is to remove the friction … What we're saying is the consumer should know that we're available, it's free …

The prominence requirements will not apply retrospectively to existing television sets and will not constrain device manufacturers from promoting or recommending other content and other services. They also will not affect the search or customise functions of a device. Put simply, the amendments will enhance consumer choice and give Australian free-to-air broadcasters a level playing field. This gives Australians more choice and more control as well as easier access to crucial information, which is particularly important in places like the electorate of Moreton that flood reasonably regularly.

The second part of this amendment focuses on modernising the antisiphoning scheme, an important part of the media reform agenda of the Labor government. For close to 30 years, Australians have enjoyed free-to-air broadcasts of a range of significant sporting events. A review of the scheme found that the objective remains relevant and appropriate—that is, guaranteed free access to televised coverage of events of national importance and cultural significance. Many of these have been moments of 'where were you when', such as at the Atlanta Olympics in 1996 when Kieren Perkins won his second gold in the 1,500-metre freestyle final from lane 8, having actually been the slowest qualifier into the gold medal race. He only made that final by a mere 0.24 seconds, as he was a bit sick at the time. How about when Cathy Freeman won gold at the Sydney Olympics, which was recently voted Australia's great sporting moment, or when Leo Barry—I'm saying this as a Queenslander—took that mark for the Swans in the 2005 AFL grand final? I know that people still talk about the Diamonds' Caitlin Bassett having scored that clutch goal in the final seconds of double overtime when Australia beat New Zealand 58-57 in the 2011 Netball World Cup in Singapore, and I'll never forget when Johnathan Thurston, that great Australian, kicked a field goal for the Cowboys in the 82nd minute to defeat the Broncos 17-16 in 2015, which I will go on the record as saying is the best ever Rugby League grand final. These achievements have become cultural touchstones, as has Steven Bradbury's surprise skate over the line to win Australia's first Winter Olympics gold medal. I particularly mention Steven Bradbury because he trained in my electorate at Acacia Ridge. If you know my electorate, it's amazing that we produced a gold medal at the Winter Olympics.

Camaraderie comes from shared experiences, such as staying up at night to watch the Wallabies, the Matildas or the Socceroos. These are the stories that we share around the water cooler at work, in the schoolyard, at the shops, or in the market square. They are the things that hold our community together. Thanks to the antisiphoning scheme, we can all watch and support our favourite athletes and teams. It gives us a language to speak. The scheme provides free access to a range of nationally important and culturally significant events, aka the list. Under this scheme, subscription television licensees—this is, pay per view—are prevented from acquiring broadcast rights unless a free-to-air provider has the rights. The Albanese government has undertaken a comprehensive review of the scheme and the list of events in collaboration with stakeholders and public consultation. This review found that the scheme's purpose is still appropriate in terms of forces that will hold this whole show together—this show called Australia—but obviously we also now need to incorporate online services.

Currently, streaming services are not part of the scheme, leaving open the risk that they could acquire the rights to iconic sporting events ahead of free-to-air broadcasters. This would limit Australian viewers' access to iconic events such as some of those I mentioned earlier. The Albanese government does not want Australian viewers to have to put their hands in their pockets to watch sports that they have traditionally viewed for free, which are paid for by advertising and all those other mechanisms. We believe that all Australians, no matter where they live or what they earn, should have a fair dinkum opportunity to watch iconic sporting events. Such infrastructure helps build community. The reforms will expand the scope of the restriction to include online services as well as subscription television broadcasting licensees.

Last year Australia co-hosted the FIFA Women's World Cup, making the Matildas a household name—and I believe they're playing in Canberra next Tuesday night—thrilling the nation and inspiring young football players, girls and also boys. I saw that at the games I went to in Brisbane. Over 6.2 million people watched Australia's semi-final against England on free-to-air television. The penalty shootout against France in the game preceding was truly an iconic moment. Luckily it was one that all Australians had the opportunity to watch.

The effect of free-to-air broadcasting of major sporting events goes beyond the enjoyment of the shared experience and the strengthening of our collective identity. It has immeasurable impact at the grassroots level, with community based sport participation benefiting, as I'm sure you know well, Deputy Speaker, as the chair of the committee looking into diabetes at the moment.

Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Indeed.

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

Safeguarding the opportunity to watch sport will strengthen these outcomes. Big sporting moments create more people signing up for community sport. More people involved in sport makes us a healthier and stronger nation.

The reforms will prevent media content service providers from acquiring the right to broadcast an event on the list until a free-to-air broadcaster has acquired the right to televise the event. This extends the scope of the scheme, which currently only restricts subscription television broadcasting licences. The revised scheme would also extend the automatic delisting period from six months to 12 months.

Another aspect of the reform is to extend the list to reflect changing community expectations. Historically the list was focused on men's sporting events—pre the Diamonds and the Matildas, to name a few. Involvement in women's sport at the community level is growing rapidly around Australia. My cricket clubs, rugby clubs and even football clubs, traditionally male domains, tell me how wonderful it is to have more female players and how the clubs become stronger, better for the family and better for the community. No doubt these trends have been bolstered by the success of the Australian women's cricket team and intense interest in sports such as the Super Netball, Women's Big Bash League, the AFL Women's League and the National Rugby League Women's Premiership. The revised list will include events such as the final series of the AFLW, the NRLW and the women's Ashes.

The other focus will be on sports that involve athletes with a disability. As a member of the Brisbane Olympic and Paralympic Games Organising Committee, I'm particularly glad to see that the Summer Paralympic Games are included on the enhanced list. This important evolution reflects community interests and expectations. It also bolsters the nearly half-a-million-dollar Labor government initiative to identify talented Australian Paralympic athletes in the lead-up to the 2032 Olympic Games in Brisbane. We're all familiar with the phrase 'you can't be what you can't see', and this inclusion will ensure that budding Paralympians are able to cheer their athlete heroes on free of charge. So these important amendments contribute to a strong and sustainable media sector. The antisiphoning scheme and listed amendments will ensure the continued opportunity to watch, free of charge, the iconic events that reflect our national identity and our national diversity.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour, and the member will be granted leave to continue, if he wishes to do so.