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

My question is to Senator Fifield, representing the Minister for Communications. Before last September's election, the then opposition, now government, guaranteed there would be no cuts to the ABC or SBS. Then came the cancellation of the $220 million Australia Network contract and the so-called $43 million down-payment cuts to the two broadcasters. All along the government has maintained there will be no programming cuts and that cutting back-office and admin functions would be sufficient. Does the government seriously expect us to believe that the cuts that now cumulatively amount to around nine per cent of the ABC's overall annual budget will not lead to cuts to programming?

Senator Bernardi interjecting—

Senator Bernardi says it is a good thing. If so, will the minister give the Senate a guarantee to this effect?

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have good news for you, Mr President, and Senator Ludlam and colleagues—that is, the government is absolutely committed to the health and vibrancy of the ABC and SBS.

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Pause the clock. Minister.

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government is also committed to ensuring that we repair the budget situation which we inherited courtesy of Labor and the Australian Greens together in coalition in government. It is important to make clear that the ABC and SBS are in no way, shape or form being singled out. All government bodies have been asked to play a part in achieving our goal of fiscal repair. Earlier this year, you would be aware, Mr President, that the government, in cooperation with the ABC and SBS—

Opposition senators interjecting—

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Pause the clock. Minister.

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I was saying, the government, in cooperation with the two public broadcasters, conducted an efficiency study of the national broadcasters' back-of-house operations, and the purpose of the efficiency study I think is well known. It was to assist both the ABC and SBS to manage their businesses more efficiently, to examine their costs of operations and to identify savings through increased efficiencies and reduced expenses without impacting on the quality and extent of program content. The government's position was not that the ABC and SBS should be immune to savings but that those savings should be achieved and effected in an informed manner, hence the purpose of the efficiency review.

As Mr Turnbull indicated—

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Pause the clock. Senator Ludlam on a point of order.

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

Mr President, my point of order, if I may, is on relevance. I asked directly whether the government would guarantee there would be no programming cuts. The senator has only 11 seconds left on the clock. That is a very simple 'yes' or 'no'.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Ludlam. The minister does have 11 seconds left to answer the question. I remind the minister of the question.

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government cannot direct the ABC as to what to do with their funding. Programming decisions are, as they always have been, matters for the board and management of the ABC. (Time expired)

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

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Minister, the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, in draft, allegedly contains clauses relevant to the operation of state owned enterprises which are seen as a barrier to unregulated trade and competition. We also understand that states' parties can submit a list of exempted enterprises. Has the government placed the ABC and SBS on its exemption list or is the government intending to use the Trans-Pacific Partnership as a lever to privatise or part-privatise the operations of the ABC and SBS?

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As colleagues would appreciate, negotiation of the Trans-Pacific Partnership is a matter for Minister Robb in the Trade portfolio. To the extent that I may have anything to offer or that Minister Turnbull may have anything to offer in his capacity as the Minister for Communications then I will happily take that on notice.

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

You could have ruled it out, but not to worry. Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Finally, the government is also reportedly considering forcing a doubling of the quantity of advertising that SBS has to run. Could the coalition provide an estimate of the amount by which this will dilute the amount of money that SBS can charge for its advertising and by how much this dilution of ad revenues will also hit other commercial broadcasters?

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The efficiency review which I referred to earlier did have some comments and recommendations in relation to the potential rebalancing of SBS advertising. That is a matter that the government has not taken a decision on.