Andrew Murray (WA, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, Senator Helen Coonan. The minister said that she is aware of media and market speculation that the presently Australian owned PBL, one of the two largest media companies in Australia, may be selling off its major media assets, including Channel 9, to United States private equity investors. Is the minister aware of the restrictions surrounding foreign media ownership in the United States? Is it true that United States precedents indicate that if—and it is an ‘if’ because approval is not easy—an Australian or an Australian corporation wanted to buy a major TV channel in the United States, they would be unlikely to get approval for more than a 25 per cent holding? What rules, regulations or laws do you have in place that ensure American buyers of our media assets are treated in the same way that Australian buyers of American media assets would be? What reciprocal rights are there for us in the USA, or are you just going to give their carpetbaggers a free rein?

Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Murray for the question—although, I note the certain pejorative tone to it, which is certainly not his usual style. Since giving an answer earlier to Senator Conroy, I have received a release from the Australian Stock Exchange regarding PBL relating to some clarification of what it proposes. It certainly does not appear to be proposing what is contended in Senator Murray’s question. The arrangements clearly relate to some financial arrangements on behalf of PBL and to securing a cash flow. It says:

The transaction is conditional upon any regulatory or other approvals that may be required by PBL.

In another part of the statement, it says:

In announcing the transaction, Mr Packer said, ‘Over the last 12 months, we’ve strongly indicated our desire to invest in new opportunities—

there does not seem to be any crime in that—

The restructure will provide the capital and flexibility necessary for the company to achieve its ambition to expand its gaming interests. A clear benefit of the restructure will be that the foreign teaming of the gaming and media businesses with the latter’s use of non-recourse debt protecting PBL shareholders from additional capital risk incurred in the funding of any expansion through acquisition.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Conroy interjecting—

Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order!

Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The statement goes on to say:

In response to Senator Murray, I would not describe this transaction, if in fact it is approved under the FIRB rules—and, I note, relaxation of the FIRB rules appear to be unequivocally supported by the Labor Party—as a grab for media assets. As to speculating about what is going to happen in the United States or in any other jurisdiction around the world, I decline the invitation, thank you, Senator Murray. What I am about here is putting in place some media rules for this country that are going to benefit consumers, that are going to take us into the 21st century, that are going to give us an opportunity to take advantage of new technology and new opportunities and that are going to allow companies to invest so that consumers can get the benefit of what you can get in other parts of the world.

Far from considering this as some media grab, I urge you to have a look at the clarification provided by the company about what it intends to do. It is clearly about providing a quarantining of media assets and, in those circumstances, protecting the PBL shareholders.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Conroy interjecting—

Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Conroy, I have called you to order a dozen times today.

Andrew Murray (WA, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Is the minister aware that it can be difficult to identify the beneficial owners that would have an influence over our media lying behind a consortium of foreign private equity funds? Is the minister concerned that investors in such funds do not appear on the register and are not readily identifiable? Does the minister know that private equity funds do not just come from legitimate sources but that there is literally hundreds of billions of dollars in criminal money looking for an investment home, sourced from gambling, drugs, prostitution, people trafficking, pornography and criminal activity? What rules, regulations or laws do you have in place that ensure Australia knows exactly who the beneficial owners of our media will be? Can you assure us that none of our media could end up controlled by funds that are influenced by criminal money, money sourced from anti-democratic groups, from theocratic or fundamentalist groups or from proscribed organisations?

Alan Ferguson (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Ferguson interjecting—

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Housing and Urban Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Carr interjecting—

Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Ferguson and Senator Carr, talking across the table is disorderly.

Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you to Senator Murray for that supplementary question. The tone of Senator Murray’s question and the paranoia inherent in it is quite extraordinary. Senator Murray, I would have thought you would have been better served by addressing your question to Senator Ellison, because he in fact has CrimTrac and traces such matters as money laundering and transactions if they are illegitimate. It is entirely inappropriate to be attributing to a transaction that has been announced as a possibility and one that would be subject to all of the regulatory safeguards that we have been talking about for weeks and months on end some nefarious purpose and some nefarious source. I do not think it does you any credit, Senator Murray. What you need to do is look at the stringent safeguards that we have in place— (Time expired)

Andrew Murray (WA, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. The reason why I shouted is that, with the racket, it is just about impossible to hear, including the minister’s answer, at the end of this chamber. It might not be apparent to you at that end of the chamber but it is getting really difficult at this end, and I draw your attention to that.

Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I call Senator O’Brien.