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

Yes, quite right. I am looking forward to it, Senator Macdonald—not. However, I will concur with you that this is not the process that the government should have followed and nowhere have we seen a rational justification for why it has been done. Unlike the coalition, however, we did not reject this package out of hand. We think it is our obligation to protect media diversity in Australia. We have proposed some sensible amendments to the other package of bills, which the government this afternoon has accepted, and we believe that that is the way forward.

This is a diminished set of reforms. The story of convergence is not done yet. In fact, every day that we delay, some of the reforms that were proposed and reviewed in depth by the two reports become more urgent. We could in fact emerge from this process not simply with a regulator for print and a regulator for broadcasters but more than one regulator for print. Multiple press councils was in the government's original drafting. I am pleased that we have been able to at least close that loophole. We now believe that the remaining bills are in fact in the public interest, will help protect media diversity and should be passed by this parliament.

For tonight, however, the package that is before us involves only the two broadcasting bills, acknowledging that the government has undertaken to make some commitments on reviews for local content and a commitment for spectrum for community broadcasters. Nonetheless, and understanding that Greens amendments in these matters would otherwise be lost, we believe that these bills are at least a step forward and that they enshrine the important place of our national public broadcasters as they continue to break new ground and provide an essential service to Australians online here in Australia and now in the region.