Jane Hume (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

No, I will not start all over again! It is fantastic. As a senator for Victoria, it is an incredible honour to be able to speak on these broadcasting amendments today.

Indeed, times have changed over those many, many years—certainly, Network Ten's announcement just a couple of weeks ago that they were going into administration was terribly shocking but, I suppose, unsurprising. This government, the Turnbull government, and industry leaders have been warning for a very long time that Australia's media industry is under considerable pressure and desperately needs reform. While the government has sought to progress those important reforms, such as the abolition of the two-out-of-three rule since March 2016, Labor's response has been to frustrate and to delay the passage of that legislation. Labor has displayed a callous disregard for the impact of their actions and the impact that their actions are having on this industry, an industry that desperately needs reform, that is crying out for reform. Labor's gamesmanship has limited the options for organisations like Ten. The government's media reform package has the historic and unprecedented support of the entire Australian media industry, yet Labor continue to ignore these pleas. But the good news is it is not too late. Today we give those opposite a great opportunity to abandon that politically motivated opposition and show that they care about the Australian media industry and the men and women whose livelihoods depend upon it.

The government's reforms are vital measures that will unshackle Australia's media industry from redundant laws and allow it to best respond to the increasing international competition that it faces. Just last month, Network Ten's CEO, Paul Anderson, warned that the media sector was under extreme competitive pressure from foreign owned tech media giants. Mr Anderson has repeatedly pointed out that the current media rules, particularly the two-out-of-three rule, spoken about so eloquently by Senator Bushby, are stifling growth and threatening jobs. There is an awful lot of talk about media diversity, but the greatest threat to media diversity in this country would be the failure of our media organisations.

Previous speakers tonight in this chamber have spoken about the 75 per cent reach rule and the two-out-of-three cross-media control rule and how they will change under this legislation. They have also spoken about the rules that will not necessarily change: the five-four rule, the one-to-a-market rule and the two-to-a-market rule. I am not going to get into the weeds and discuss those changes in any great detail, but what I would like to do is talk about this legislation in the context of the overall broadcasting and content reform package that the government is introducing. These are landmark reforms that aim to protect children from gambling advertising, modernise and assist the broadcasting sector and also recognise the changing consumer viewing patterns for high-quality Australian content. The reforms that this government is introducing demonstrate that the government is actually listening to the community, in particular to the community's concerns on gambling advertising, and is acting to protect children while at the same time fostering a vibrant, competitive and sustainable media industry. These reforms, as I mentioned, enjoy the unanimous support of Australia's media industry, which is quite a breakthrough in this difficult sector.

Free-to-air broadcasters play a very important role in providing access to high-quality Australian content, such as sporting events, current affairs, drama and children's programs, to all Australians; however, they are operating in an increasingly competitive and challenging environment due to the entry of online service providers. Audiences now have unlimited viewing opportunities across more platforms than ever before. So this industry is crying out for modernisation. Audiences are increasingly fragmented, and the advertising revenue that is available to commercial broadcasters is falling as competition in this sector increases so dramatically. The coalition's broadcasting content reform package will modernise regulation and help position the broadcasting sector to adequately deal with existing and future challenges far more effectively.

There are six key elements to the broadcasting reform package. First and foremost is the abolition of broadcasting licence fees for television and radio, which will allow broadcasters to better compete with emerging media platforms, in particular online platforms. The second element is the introduction of a price for the use of spectrum by broadcasters that better reflects its use. The third element is protecting Australian children by banning gambling advertising during sports broadcasts and children's viewing hours. Fourth is amendments to the anti-siphoning scheme and list. The fifth element is a wideranging and comprehensive review of Australian children's content. And the final element of the package is a $30 million funding package for subscription television to support the broadcasting of women's sports and niche sports.

These reforms will ensure the ongoing production of very high quality Australian content and will strengthen the competitiveness of Australia's broadcasting sector. But the package also acknowledges that the broadcasting sector is facing increased competition and that the measures, such as the new gambling advertising restrictions, placed pressure on broadcasters. Hence the government's decision to abolish the broadcasting licence fees and also to make sure that the new restrictions on gambling advertising apply to all platforms, whether they be free to air, subscription or online. These changes in fees are very significant reforms for the broadcasting industry, and they build on the media reforms that we have already announced and that are before the parliament tonight.

I want to go through a couple of these other reforms that are an adjunct to this legislation. The broadcasting fees and the licence fees really are a relic of an analog media era and they cannot be justified in this increasingly competitive environment. The fees were introduced at a time when commercial broadcasters were in a completely different and highly privileged position to provide media content, and there was far more limited competition during that era. Today, the opposite of that is true. Commercial television and radio broadcasters compete on an entirely different playing field, with a range of subscription and digital providers, for audiences and for advertising dollars. The broadcasters are caught in this incredible pincer movement. Their revenues are flat or are declining, in real terms, as online and on-demand services draw audiences away from that traditional broadcast content. At the same time, costs are rising, and the capacity of broadcasters to contain that further cost growth is limited, given the need to invest in programming and technology across those multiple media platforms.

To enable broadcasters to compete in this modern media environment, the government, as part of this package, will abolish broadcasting licence fees—currently about $130 million per year—starting with the payment that would be payable in December 2017. Instead the government will introduce a price for broadcast spectrum that far more accurately reflects its use. The government has already reduced the licence fees that the broadcasters pay by 25 per cent. It did that in the 2016-17 budget. This was a very important first step in recognising the changing media environment, but it did not go far enough. The licence fees, as I have said before, are a relic of an era when commercial broadcasters were in a very privileged position to be highly profitable as a consequence of holding one of a very limited number of commercial broadcasting licences.

Owning a broadcasting licence no longer grants that same privilege of exclusive provision of content. Audiences can now choose to get their content from so many of those multiple services, and it no longer makes any sense at all to impose an outdated tax on businesses whose competitors pay no such fees. This is a levelling of the playing field in the new era we now find ourselves in. There is no longer a case for licence fees. There is no point in reducing them further, and they should be abolished entirely. The rationale for maintaining the tax on commercial broadcasters has been entirely eroded. We could drop the fees to a lower level—that is true; that would potentially be an option. Nonetheless, it would constitute the maintenance of a tax that really is no longer justified at all. That is item No. 1 in the broader package of reforms.

The second very important measure is spectrum pricing. The new spectrum price for television and radio is to be set at a total of around $40 million. The first spectrum payment is to be paid in the 2017-18 year. Unlike broadcast licence fees, the spectrum fee is not paid on revenue. Rather, the price takes account of the type of transmitter that is used and the amount and the type of spectrum that is used and its location. It is a very similar approach that applies to other spectrum users. Overall, the vast majority of broadcasters will pay considerably less in spectrum fees than they currently pay in licence fees, an announcement that has been met with enthusiasm from the industry. The fee relief will enable broadcasters to better compete with their online competitors, invest in their businesses and produce greater Australian content. However, there are a small number of broadcasters that will face a small net increase overall in the charges. The government's intention is to support those broadcasters to ensure that they are no worse off, by providing a five-year transitional support package.

Broadcasting licence fees are just one of the many taxes that are imposed on Australian broadcasters. This particular tax was implemented at a time when broadcasters held that very privileged position in the content market, and, just as the broadcasters no longer hold that position, the ongoing imposition of this additional tax really cannot be justified. There is absolutely no rationale any more for broadcasting licence fees if broadcasters are not earning those excessive economic returns. Their new competitors, such as Netflix and YouTube, do not pay them at all. Importantly, many commercial broadcasters, particularly radio broadcasters, are very, very small businesses. There are currently 274 commercial radio broadcasting licensees in Australia. Many of these operate at only the local level and they serve a very, very important role, delivering news and entertainment to the thousands of communities across Australia. Finally, Australia's commercial broadcasters provide Australian audiences with free access to truly iconic and cultural sporting events, to news, to current affairs and to high-quality entertainment. It is very important, therefore, that our regulatory frameworks do not impede the ability of Australian businesses to continue to fulfil this very, very important role.

The way the spectrum fees are set is at a level that far better reflects the value of that spectrum. The fees will, of course, vary depending on the kind of transmitter that is used and the location of that transmitter.

Senator Ian Macdonald interjecting—

It is very late. The approach is the same as many other spectrum users.