Nick Minchin (SA, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

Mr Temporary Chairman, I note that amendments (62) to (69) all deal with the issue of the Communications Fund, but I seek leave to move them in the following manner, as set out in the running sheet: amendments (62) to (64) and (66) to (68) and then, separately, (65) and (69), because the nature of the question to be put to the chamber is different in relation to (65) and (69). Do I have leave to act accordingly?

Leave granted.

I move opposition amendments (62) to (64) and (66) to (68):

(62)  Clause 11, page 15 (lines 10 and 11), omit:

• The balance of the Communications Fund is to be transferred to the Building Australia Fund.

(63)  Clause 11, page 16 (lines 12 to 14), omit note 1.

(64)  Clause 14, page 18 (lines 15 to 18), omit notes 1 and 2.

(66)  Clause 19, page 23 (lines 1 to 7), omit paragraph (b).

(67)  Clause 19, page 23 (lines 13 to 17), omit paragraph (d).

(68)  Clause 19, page 23 (lines 20 to 22), omit note 2.

I will speak to opposition amendments (62) to (69) together because they all relate to the Communications Fund. I referred to this very important matter in my speech in the second reading debate. One of the most significant initiatives of the coalition government was to set aside in perpetuity an amount of $2 billion in the Communications Fund, as I recall, to be managed, separately and independently, by the Future Fund board and to be preserved and set apart and unable to be tampered with for any partisan reason by any government of the day. It was set aside in perpetuity to provide in perpetuity the earnings from the fund—which, if you estimated at five per cent a year, would give you $100 million a year—to meet the telecommunications needs of rural and regional Australians.

Rural and regional Australians are the most underserved when it comes to telecommunications, as we all know, by virtue of the evident geography of this country. We set up—and I am pleased to see the government has continued—the regular Glasson reviews of the state of telecommunications in rural and regional Australia. The whole design was to ensure that, based on the findings of the regular Glasson reviews of telecommunication needs in this country, there was then available to meet the identified needs coming out of the regular reviews $100 million a year—every year in perpetuity—to assist rural and regional Australians approach metro equivalent telecommunications services. And that was going to be there forever, as I said.

The government are purporting to say, ‘We’re going to rip that $2 billion out of the Communications Fund and dump it into our Building Australia Fund. We’ll then run it down and it will be gone forever. But don’t worry about that because we’re going to provide in the budget $100 million a year. Trust us; it’ll be there.’ Well, frankly, rural and regional Australians do not trust the government when it comes to the ongoing provision of that $100 million a year. It may have appeared in this budget to get them through this electoral cycle, but, given that we are rapidly seeing the advent of deficits, you can bet your bottom dollar that the first thing to be cut out of the budget by a Labor ministry will be the $100 million per annum for rural telecommunications needs. It would be highly vulnerable to an expenditure review committee looking for easy money in a situation, like the one we are rapidly approaching, of deficit budgets. In stark contrast, the coalition’s provision was of an in perpetuity fund providing, separately and independently, $100 million to ensure that rural and regional telecommunications would be preserved in perpetuity.

What we have here is a proposal by the Labor Party to breach the walls surrounding this Communications Fund and to grab the money. It will all be gone—the $2 billion—in a flash, and then rural and regional Australians will be left to rely on the charity, at their whim and pleasure, of the Labor government. As I said, having sat around the expenditure review committee myself for many years, you can bet that the first thing that will be targeted will be that $100 million for rural and regional telecommunications. We know that the Labor government has slim regard for the needs of rural and regional telecommunications users, having cancelled the OPEL contract in relation to broadband for rural and regional Australians. So rural and regional Australians need the protection provided by the ongoing status of this Communications Fund.

These amendments seek to prevent this Labor government from getting its hands on the Communications Fund and from dissipating it within a few years. Therefore we urge the Senate to support these amendments to preserve the Communications Fund. This is the opportunity for the Senate to say to all those living outside metropolitan Australia that we do care for your vital telecommunications needs; we do understand how important this is to you. In my speech on the second reading debate I cited the fears of the New South Wales Farmers Association were the Communications Fund to be abolished. So I plead with the Senate to support all those that we represent outside the major cities of Australia who need this fund—to preserve it and protect it by supporting these amendments.