Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

There are no specific criteria in the bill for which the minister must have regard when varying a switch-over date in a particular market. This is consistent with the existing legislative framework as currently the government has no specific criteria to address before making regulations to extend the simulcast period. The success of the switch-over program is dependent on two factors. I actually agree with almost all that Senator Minchin had to say on the importance of government stepping up to the plate. The government has a very comprehensive program and that will be starting to be rolled out. You will get a demonstration of it in Mildura, and you will see exactly what the government is prepared to put on the table to ensure that nobody ends up without a TV signal.

I know that Senator Minchin is kindly offering the olive branch to ensure that we do not plunge ourselves into an electoral defeat. That is very kind of Senator Minchin. I am not sure I can take him too seriously though; I am really not. That means I do have to question the motive behind the amendments, because I am sure it really is not to save us from ourselves. This government is committed to ensuring that no-one’s TV goes blank. That is why we will have a comprehensive information package and advertising campaign and a support package. All of these things will flow from the parliament passing this bill. But this is where I would disagree with Senator Minchin, although I should not say ‘disagree’ because he does concede the point—human nature is human nature. If we take away the incentive for other stakeholders to step up to the plate—and let us be clear that they have demonstrated over seven to eight years that they have been unwilling to step up to the plate—then no amount of government advertising by itself and no government program by itself will succeed in ensuring that the switch-over is a smooth transition. As I said, these amendments take us back to the future. They take us back to where we were under the previous government: all good intentions—and, as Senator Minchin has indicated, this is basically bipartisan—but no action, no commitment and no drive.

We have the Freeview box being launched because this government set a deadline. We have a commitment from the stakeholders to deliver on switch-over because this government set an unequivocal deadline. To now take the backward steps of removing that deadline—which is what this would do—would truly return us to providing an incentive for slothfulness.

Senator Minchin raised a very important point—as did Senator Macdonald—about black spots. ACMA is conducting an extensive analysis of black spots across the country. To put it simply: with analog TV, as the signal gets weaker, you get the ‘snowy effect’. Senator Williams, I am sure you are familiar with what I am talking about. On the other hand, with digital TV you get what they call the ‘cliff effect’—you either get it or you do not. It really is like that. So there are very legitimate issues that need to be pursued.

This bill is a key part of driving everybody to be honest about wanting to get those problems solved. If the amendments are passed, it will significantly reduce the incentive for key stakeholders to participate in identifying the black spots to ensure that people in rural and regional Australia do not actually get cut off. While I believe that Senator Minchin is well intentioned in seeking to move these amendments, they will not actually achieve what he is setting out to achieve because they essentially return the incentive to those who have not been willing to step up to the plate in the past. We will not be supporting the amendments.