Senate debates
Thursday, 12 October 2006
Broadcasting Services Amendment (Media Ownership) Bill 2006; Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Digital Television) Bill 2006; Communications Legislation Amendment (Enforcement Powers) Bill 2006; Television Licence Fees Amendment Bill 2006
In Committee
10:52 am
Michael Ronaldson (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source
I said before that I respected Senator Murray. I respect his integrity and I respect his intellect. Clearly what Senator Murray was trying to elicit from witnesses during the two days was some evidence to substantiate his claim about some change in the nature of our democracy if these bills were to pass—that somehow democracy as we know it will suddenly tumble down in front of us.
Senator Murray was consistent—I will give him his dues—because he raised these matters from the ACCC right through the rest of the two days. Senator Murray does not give credit lightly, and I respect him for that. When he gives credit to someone, you must take due notice of it. We had Mr Anthony Bell, the Managing Director of Southern Cross Broadcasting, appear before us. Mr Bell said in evidence:
Southern Cross Broadcasting supports the proposed reforms on cross-media ownership. There appears to be little realistic substance behind arguments to retain the status quo and, in many cases, these arguments are based on self-interest and fear of competition rather than what is appropriate for the community.
Later on during Mr Bell’s evidence Senator Murray said:
Mr Bell—
and I would ask you to reflect on the comments I made before about Senator Murray’s comment that people should not be taken lightly—
we are well served as a committee by having people with your long experience and, I would guess, expertise talking to us. With that long perspective in mind, I want you to give me your broad response to this legislation. We legislators are primarily concerned with this legislation from two perspectives in my view. One is with respect to consumers and the other one is with respect to our democracy. My question is: do you consider this package as a whole to actually assist the health, improve the health or support the health of our democracy?
And the response—from someone whom Senator Murray had already acknowledged as a man of great experience:
I certainly do not see it as a threat to the health of our democracy in any way.
In those two days of inquiry Senator Murray did not acknowledge, from my recollection—and I know he will correct me if I am wrong—the expertise of any other witness.
No comments