Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts) Share this | Hansard source

In response to Senator Murray’s contribution, media is a very complex issue. It is largely comprised of people who have views such as those expressed by Senator Murray and by those whom I might otherwise characterise as seeing the bigger picture, the interrelationship between the restrictions and regulations of certain media and the interaction with unregulated media and the way in which that has developed over the past several years, and is accelerating and developing even more quickly.

The first point I want to make is, in terms of the considerable number of amendments, you really are damned if you do or damned if you don’t, to use that old parlance. If you take an intractable view towards legislation of this scope and complexity and you put in place a Senate committee, I think it is the height of arrogance to have absolutely no regard whatsoever for the recommendations of your colleagues. I have done that, I have looked critically at what I regard as some sensible recommendations. I have listened to my colleagues and have thought that they have some sensible things that could add to this package of bills. That is why I wanted to have a Senate committee and why I asked for one. It probably would have happened in any event, but it certainly happened on my motion. I am very pleased that it did happen and I am very grateful for all the contributions. I make no disparaging comments about anyone’s contribution to that committee. I think it is an important part of the process.

I know I am not going to convince those who have their minds made up and have a certain view about the significance of restricting some media but not others. All I can say is that one has to approach this on the basis that, in effect, this industry has not been changed—there have been some changes in digital but there has been no substantial change to the industry structure and restrictions—for over 20 years. That was before there was, largely, any other unregulated media. It was when pay TV was in its absolute infancy and the internet was certainly only appreciated by academics, and there certainly was not the extraordinary growth and plethora of opportunities to be informed through these other platforms.

To assume that you continue to need to quarantine what is referred to as ‘old media’ and do absolutely nothing to assist their regulation and the way in which they need to invest in all of the new digital technology is fanciful, quite frankly. If you speak to these people, if you go out to studios and look at what kind of commitment is required from free-to-air broadcasters, for example, in order to take advantage of these new digital services and to provide them for consumers—ultimately, this is all about giving consumers what they now expect and want.

Senator Murray has said that he is all for competition. That is terrific! But how do you compete with losing most of your eyeballs to some other sort of platform, particularly young people whose first choice certainly for entertainment, and frequently for finding out any information and interacting with their peers, is all online? It is not by sitting and watching linear television. On top of that, the free-to-air stations are required to provide, and they are the principal providers, 55 per cent of Australian content. What they are providing is all about our culture. To require them to do that but have absolutely no comprehension about how they need to access appropriately these new digital platforms, invest in this new technology, is not appreciating the way in which media is now both distributed and consumed.

That brings me to the next point, and I will be very brief. If there had not been an opportunity for people to get information from other sources—and I know that it can largely be from traditional sources that are also providing their content online. That is changing exponentially. There are surveys to prove it and I can produce a reference to that later in this debate—if there were not those additional sources, plus up to about five stations that the ABC has in metropolitan areas and in a great number of regional areas, plus ABC TV, SBS TV and a pay TV industry that has been developing apace and out-of-area newspapers such as the Australian and the Financial Review, which are not even included in any of this, one starts to understand, Senator Murray, that it is a much more complex picture than simply confining all your attention in a very narrow focus to the old, regulated platforms of print, newspapers and free-to-air television. That simply does not reflect the way in which media is now consumed and accessed. It will ultimately consign Australia’s free-to-air media, and certainly the media on the old platforms, to a very challenged environment and possibly even a slow death if they cannot grow and invest and deploy their assets appropriately.

The biggest issue in this debate, apart from moving to digital—and that, to me, is the centrepiece of this debate—is to ensure that the safeguards against excessive concentration are robust, that at least those changes be achieved and that they be done in a context of providing new services. I think I said that on about the first day I was in this portfolio, and I have said it continually since. The government’s media discussion paper in this matter very clearly articulated that it would only be appropriate to be looking at changes to cross-media and foreign ownership, in my view—and ultimately that has been the view of the government and my colleagues—in the context of ensuring more diversity and new services. That has been the objective of the whole exercise.