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

Thank you, Mr Chairman. I will speak on the coalition’s position on this bill. What the Senate did was agree to amendments to this bill which we believed did significantly improve the bill. They provided for a mechanism by which the minister would be required to establish readiness criteria before at any stage switching off the analog signal in any area of Australia and, as well, provided for a mechanism by which there would be regular reports to the people and the parliament on the efforts to ensure that ‘black spots’, as they are called, are kept to a minimum with respect to the transmission of the digital signal.

What the government has done in the lower house is reject the Senate’s amendments and then impose an alternative government amendment with respect to the Senate’s position on the black spots matter. In our view, the government is entirely wrong in rejecting the Senate amendments with respect to digital readiness criteria. The government is seeking to preserve a position which gives the minister extraordinary authority to determine—on no established public criteria whatsoever—when he, as in this case, is ready to switch off any particular area he likes.

The bill does not set any timetable for particular regions or any schedule. It just says that the minister will have the freedom to determine to switch off the analog signal in any area at any time without any mechanism by which the readiness of that particular region can be assessed. We do not believe that that is good enough. We believe that that gives far too much power to the minister. That was an argument that the Senate accepted and adopted.

However, the government in the lower house has rejected that set of amendments—the ones described here as (1) and (3). We regret that very much. We think that these are amendments that the government should have accepted. We think that it is very disappointing that the government is not prepared to establish publicly the criteria that it will follow before it ever switches off any particular area. Nevertheless, in the circumstances that we are faced with, and not wanting to be accused of holding back the move to digital in Australia—a proposition that was initiated by our party in government; we are the ones who set Australia on the path to digital TV—we will not propose that those particular amendments be insisted upon.

However, I give notice that we will be paying very close attention to the minister’s behaviour, particularly with respect to the first two areas targeted for switch-off—that is, Mildura and regional and rural South Australia, which is dear to the heart of me and the Chairman of this Committee. If it is in our view the case that either of those two regions—the two targeted for switch-off before the next election—are not ready for switch-off, then we will move disallowance of the legislative instrument upon which the minister must rely in endeavouring to switch off any particular region. So I give notice to the government.

I want to reassure tonight the people of Mildura and rural and regional South Australia that, despite this government washing its hands of any responsibility for publicly declaring criteria that it will follow in relation to the switch-off of the analog signal, we will be ensuring that those regions are ready. If we believe that they are not, we will be moving disallowance in this Senate of the legislative instrument upon which the minister relies to switch off their analog signal.

If I may, I wish to speak to all of the matters before us tonight—it is better that I do that at once. We reject government amendment (4) and will therefore need to make a consequential amendment as per sheet 5701, which I will deal with in due course. What the government has done in the lower house is delete our proposed amendment with respect to the reporting requirements that the Senate placed on the government with respect to infrastructure relating to the transmission of the digital signal and impose an alternative amendment of its own. We believe that our initial amendment is a much more satisfactory and appropriate amendment and we will be insisting that our amendment stand. We will be suggesting to the Senate that it reject the government alternative.

Our amendment provides for a much more regular report on digital black spots. It was an amendment that we devised in close consultation with the broadcasting industry and with a view to the consumers of the television signal, who must at the end of the day be held supreme in this debate. It is their viewing that we are concerned about and their capacity to receive the digital signal that we want to preserve. We believe that our amendments are a much better way of ensuring that there is regular reporting to the parliament and to the people of Australia on the endeavours of the government to ensure that transmission infrastructure is upgraded to take the digital signal.

At the end of the day, what is fundamental in this transition to digital TV is that no-one in Australia who currently receives an analog signal will miss out on a digital signal. It is fundamental to this that we do not have a situation in which thousands of Australians are suddenly faced with a blank screen when the minister, of his own accord, decides to switch off the analog signal. That is unacceptable. What we have put in place through our amendment, which we do insist on, is a much better mechanism by which the government is held to account than what is proposed by the government in its alternative. So we reject the government’s amendment. We maintain our initial amendment. We urge the Senate to vote on this matter in support of the amendment that the Senate passed originally and to reject the government’s very second-hand and very poor alternative.