Senate debates

Thursday, 19 October 2006

Questions without Notice: Take Note of Answers

Answers to Questions

3:30 pm

Photo of Dana WortleyDana Wortley (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of answers provided by the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, Senator Coonan. Here we are only a week after standing in this chamber debating the Broadcasting Services Amendment (Media Ownership) Bill 2006 and already we see the cracks appearing. What a week it has been for the minister, who has seen her government’s ideological obsession with having the cross-media ownership rules pass through the parliament at any cost—all that to now be upstaged by the media giants who have been salivating at the mouth in anticipation. I would suggest that the events of the past week have finally brought a few realities to the minister. I would guess the minister is now beginning to see that consumer-benefiting competition is not something that media moguls have a strong interest in. I would also think the minister is beginning to see that she can no longer hide behind digital technology and hope that nobody sees what the intentions really are.

The Prime Minister and Senator Coonan are trying to hose everything down. They are telling us all to take a cold shower. This morning we heard the puzzling assertion by the Prime Minister that the impending frenzy of media takeovers is unrelated to the new legislation. For the Prime Minister to say that the activity occurring in media organisations’ boardrooms is unrelated to the passing of the new legislation is a bad joke. That is not what we are reading in our newspapers, and I draw your attention to the following headlines: ‘Media makeover already underway’; ‘Cashed-up PBL starts deal frenzy’; ‘Feeding frenzy looms’; ‘Magnates open wallets as opening blows struck’; ‘Media moguls lead way as stocks keep soaring’; ‘Media moguls on the prowl as new laws change rules’; ‘Packer’s $4.5b first shot in media war’; ‘Trading frenzy catches Fairfax’; ‘Cashed up and hunting bigger game’; ‘Investors tip media frenzy, Coonan tries to calm fears’; and, from the Northern Territory News, ‘Media knives out as carve-up begins’.

The Prime Minister was trying to create even more smoke and mirrors by saying, ‘A certain concentration is needed in a nation of 20 million’ for ‘economic reasons’. It would be interesting for him to expand on this statement a little, when profits to the media industry are at record levels. And so with criticism all around them what do the government do? They continually revert back to the internet as a great saviour for their bungling of media diversity in this country.

Given that this government is so keen to cite the internet as a cornerstone of diversity and given that YouTube has been given so much press of late, I think we need a section on YouTube dedicated to the Howard government. But what name could we give such a section? One that springs to mind is ‘denial’. The government is in denial mode, so that is the key word that we could use—www.howardindenial.com is my suggestion for the YouTube link. Here people could view all sorts of footage of the Howard government’s out-of-touch rhetoric, and I feel confident in saying that such a website would receive a significant number of hits. Maybe the link could be a spin-off from that infamous line ‘the truth is out there’, made popular by a certain television series, because the truth is now out there for all of the country to see. The truth behind the government’s motivation for this legislation is out there. The reality is that this legislation was not designed with the Australian public media consumers in mind, it was not drafted to improve the value and superiority of Australia’s media and it was never going to enhance diversity.

On Lateline, when Tony Jones asked the minister: ‘Alan Bond aside, are you the best friend the Packer family ever had?’ the minister ducked answering the question. The minister seems to be doing a lot of ducking in answering questions over the media changes. It is clear that the minister is no friend of the Australian public when it comes to ensuring a diversity of media voices of influence. This latest round of legislation highlights that this government has completely left the building when it comes to being in touch with Australia. The government’s bill was rammed through the place with the support of Senator Joyce and Senator Fielding. (Time expired)

Question agreed to.

Comments

No comments