Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for the Murray Darling Basin) Share this | Hansard source

In his response, the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Senator Conroy, highlighted a particular lodgement of an undertaking by Telstra. The minister did not deal with the fact that these amendments—and I am happy for senators to consider them separately, by any means, if that would influence their thinking—would also, most importantly, require the minister’s directions to the ACCC to be tabled and be a disallowable instrument.

The minister and the government have structured this legislation so that when the ACCC is asked to take into account certain matters they are limited to what is specified by the minister in writing. We are simply proposing that those written instructions of the minister be a disallowable instrument. Not only would you get the transparency of it being made public—and the minister talked about publishing on the website—but also you would get the opportunity to debate the merits of the minister’s determination and the manner in which he decides to limit that ACCC consideration. That is the real heart of the issue here.

I acknowledge the comments of Senator Ludlam and Senator Xenophon. Sadly, they are taking a narrow view on this. They are viewing it through one area of debate that has taken place in the chamber over a period of time, rather than recognising that if you want to hold to principles of such matters being disallowable you should stick to those principles. You should stick to those principles regardless of who is in government and regardless of what you think the opposition tactics of the day will be. If you are looking at it in terms of the short term you should note that the composition this place is set to change quite markedly in just six to seven months time. However, I would ask the minister to respond to the matter of why his instructions to the ACCC should not be subject to disallowance.