Scott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

asked the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, upon notice, on 16 March 2011:

With reference to digital television access in remote communities:

(1) Can the Minister confirm writing to around 140 remote Indigenous communities that run analogue television self-help transmission facilities, on or about 1 April 2010, to advise them of the options they had for converting to digital.

(2) Is it a fact that one of the options provided in that letter was for the communities to set up a digital self-help television transmission facility.

(3) In regard to a letter I received on 21 December 2010 indicating that the special equipment required to set up a Viewer Access Satellite Television (VAST) fed digital terrestrial facility would only become available in January 2011, could the department state exactly what assistance it might have provided those Indigenous communities to assess the option of setting up their own digital self-help transmission facility.

(4) As a comparison, can an outline be provided of what the department and the Government have done to financially assist and inform homes within those communities to assess the option of converting to the new VAST satellite.

(5) Is it a fact that, for 16 of the above remote Indigenous communities in North and far North Queensland, pressure is being exerted for them to finally decide, by 28 February, whether the households within those communities will convert to Direct-To-Home (DTH) from the new VAST satellite platform or set up their own digital terrestrial self-help transmission facility.

(6) In developing the new VAST satellite platform and the Satellite Subsidy Scheme (SSS), announced nearly a year ago, what assessments had the department undertaken on remote Indigenous communities to develop knowledge about the:

(a) average number of television sets and recorder devices in homes which would need to be converted to digital;

(b) way in which Indigenous people watch television, particularly during the summer months when it is very hot inside homes;

(c) extent of insertion of local material into local self-help television transmissions; and

(d) extent to which indoor, cheap set top aerials only are needed for current terrestrial television reception.

(7) I understand that the per home subsidy available to homes in, so called, remote Indigenous communities in Queensland to convert to the VAST satellite is $980, however, if an Indigenous home is located elsewhere in Queensland (for example, Quilpie or Normanton) the subsidy will be either $550 or $700 respectively – can an explanation be provided regarding the reasons for the difference, including exactly what consultation took place with remote Indigenous viewers when determining these figures.

(8) At Estimates in May 2010, the department stated that the only currently available model of a VAST set top box cost approximately $269 (a cost now estimated at $280), whereas the Minister stated at the same time that an equivalent High Definition terrestrial set top box cost approximately $80, indicating that portable indoor aerials for terrestrial television reception are clearly less expensive than satellite dishes and mounts – is it therefore a fact that the total private and public subsidy cost of homes in remote Indigenous communities converting to digital via satellite is nearly always likely to be significantly more expensive than converting by terrestrial means.

(9) Is it a fact that, after the satellite subsidy period expires, all new or replacement homes in remote Indigenous communities will be faced with the full, extra cost of VAST direct from satellite reception and that this will nearly always be more expensive than equivalent digital terrestrial reception.

(10) Is it a fact that no businesses or public facilities in remote Indigenous communities, such as schools, health clinics and community facilities, will be eligible for the VAST satellite conversion subsidy.

(11) What cost benefit studies has the department undertaken to compare, for example, the 10 year, full private and public cost of converting remote Indigenous communities (including new homes and businesses) to digital via VAST satellite or self-help digital terrestrial means and can details of any such cost benefit study be provided.

(12) What is the view of the department regarding the ongoing private cost of maintaining satellite dishes and, in particular, smart cards for the VAST set top boxes in remote Indigenous communities.

(13) Has the department conducted a detailed survey following the two recent cyclones in far North Queensland regarding the impact of cyclonic winds on individual DTH satellite dish installations.

(14) If Queensland local councils and remote Indigenous communities are being required to choose between DTH VAST or digital terrestrial self-help by 28 February and remote Indigenous homes in Queensland will be invited to opt into the Government’s per home subsidy scheme to assist them in converting to satellite on 20 April, what is the Government doing to assist remote Indigenous communities to develop robust digital self-help facility designs and to compare the overall benefits of converting to digital via VAST satellite or digital self-help terrestrial means before these deadlines.

(15) Will the Government consider allowing remote Indigenous communities to pool their per home satellite subsidy payments and use this total amount to help pay for the establishment of a digital terrestrial self-help transmission facility; if not, what exactly is the basis for such a position.