Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The opposition will be supporting the Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Digital Radio) Bill 2015. Digital Radio has been a part of the communication landscape in Australia since the Labor government implemented it in 2009. On 1July 2009, the Labor government delivered commercial digital radio licences to Adelaide, Brisbane, Melbourne, Perth and Sydney. Designated community radio broadcasters started broadcasting from these areas in May 2011. Adding to these services, digital radio trials in Canberra and Darwin mean that around 64 per cent of the Australian population live in areas currently covered by digital radio transmissions.

The legislation that regulates these broadcasts, namely section 215B of the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 and section 313B of the Radio Communications Act 1992, need to be constantly reviewed to ensure the rules and standards that govern digital radio are working as intended. To this end, the Minister for Communications is required to initiate a statutory review process and, over the last couple of years, has done that. The process has been a consultative one and subsequently a discussion paper has been developed.

In July 2015, the government released the report that emerged from these reviews and the bill we are considering today draws on the recommendations of that report. Whilst the matters in this bill are uncontroversial and will attract the opposition's support, we note that this bill has not enacted a number of the other recommendations that may require a greater level of scrutiny before we agree to support them. We look forward to the early engagement of the government as they prepare any further amendments to the regulatory structure for digital radio. This bill contains the more non-controversial elements arising from the report and has been widely supported by industry.

The bill makes a number of minor amendments to the regulatory structure around digital radio in Australia. Specifically, the bill proposes to: repeal the restricted datacasting licence category; remove the minister's role in setting a 'start-up day' in regional licence areas; remove the requirement for a six-year moratorium on the allocation of additional digital commercial radio broadcasting licences in a licence area; define amendments to 'non-foundation digital radio multiplex transmitter licence'; and make minor consequential amendments to both acts. These amendments reflect redundant provisions in the act or remove the parts of the act that have proven unnecessary since digital radio services commenced in 2009.

I commend the bill to the Senate.

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

The Australian Greens support the Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Digital Radio) Bill 2015 for much the same reasons that Senator Gallagher has just outlined. In fact, the Greens had agreed to let this bill go through in non-contro so it is interesting to see at sneaking into government business. Nonetheless, it is a sensible bill. It is housekeeping but it does underline the importance of digital radio broadcasts in the Australian market. I did want to take the opportunity while we are here to underline—as I have done over quite a number of times going back years under several different governments—the importance of the community radio sector and community radio broadcasters in particular. It is good that Senator Fifield is here for the debate because this is a pretty serious fight really that can actually be avoided or a disaster that can be avoided. There is a certain feeling of Groundhog Day here because I have gone through this process and probably delivered a nearly identical speech when Senator Stephen Conroy was the communications minister. The situation was eventually fixed, as I suggest Senator Fifield is going to be able to do is well.

It relates to the DRP, a three-letter acronym that stands for the Digital Radio Program, which supports community radio broadcasters to actually stay in the mix as the sector transmissions across to digital. Nobody is suggesting the analogue radio broadcast services are about to be ripped out from under them. This is a pretty slow burn. It is very different to the way the TV broadcasters switched over. Nonetheless, digital transmitters are becoming much more prevalent as are, much more importantly, receivers.

As cars get upgraded to play digital radio and people invest in digital radio handsets in their homes and businesses, it is essential that our community radio stations around the country are there at the outset and are not playing catch up, are not traipsing along after people have already found their favourite stations or worse that they are simply blacked out and are not there when people switch over to digital radio spectrums. We must ensure that the community broadcasters are in their rightful place alongside the commercial radio broadcasters, the ABC and the SBS. I hope that this proposition is non-controversial—that they belong there and that they perform an immensely valuable public service. They are, in fact, a key component of media diversity.

From rumours and reporting, this is a debate that is about to be reignited again—I have not seen any formal announcements yet—that the government is actually going to rip open the debate again about media ownership and media concentration in this country. What more important role could community broadcasters play at this time? When we talk about media diversity, that is whom we are talking about: independent voices, non-English-speaking backgrounds, people with a diversity of political views, people coming from a variety of different cultural perspectives on our airwaves, telling unique Australian stories that will not be heard on the big public broadcasters, ABC and SBS, and will not be heard on the commercial stations.

Here is the problem: the Digital Radio Program, the DRP, was underfunded under the previous government and it took, from recollection, more than a year to get this tiny amount of money put back into the budget. As this was a program that was started by Senator Coonan in 2005 as a broader part of the media reform packages pursued by the former Howard government, it is non-controversial. There is cross-party support in this place for supporting our valuable community broadcasters to do what they do, and so what we see here, I am assuming, is an oversight rather than malice. But what has occurred is that the indexation pause that took place in the 2014 federal budget—that unloved, friendless, hated budget that attacked nearly every corner of society and ultimately, you could argue, cost the former Prime Minister his job—which obviously hits a number of portfolios, created a gap between the costs of digital radio and the amount of public funding support that accumulates over time, and so a gap is opening up; a wedge is opening up. This happened under Senator Conroy—obviously in a different political context but with the same outcome. It forces the community broadcasters around the country into this rather appalling 'hunger games' scenario, where they are asked to decide which of them will go off the air. It is that bad. It is which stations will no longer be heard on the public airwaves.

I do not assume that that is the outcome that Senator Fifield is seeking. In fact, we have not heard from him or given him the opportunity to hear directly what the government's position is, but I am going to assume in good faith that you are not hoping, through the indexation pause from 2014, to knock community broadcasters off the air in our cities and regions. I do not think that is what you are proposing. But, as the Community Broadcasting Association of Australia has made abundantly clear, when you froze the indexation it opened up a gap. What the sector is asking for is for the 2015-16 levels to be maintained but to be indexed, so that they travel upwards at the same pace as costs travel gently upwards over time. And that means $3.686 million-plus indexation. It is not going to allow them to employ any more staff. It is not going to allow them to create new and unique creative and diverse content. It is simply going to allow them to keep the doors open and to stay on air. As the Labor Party fixed this when they were in government, when Senator Conroy was minister, in the context where the broadcasters were running a campaign on air against the government, seeking base funding to stay alive, I hope that it does not come to that again. I believe that this is an oversight rather than malice. That indexation pause needs to lift in the context of the size of the Commonwealth budget and, more importantly, the services that community broadcasters provide: services to media diversity, services in terms of training up volunteers in the next generation of broadcasters, across all those different skill sets. We need to express our support rather than just pay it lip-service—pay them the $3.8 million that they are going to need and lift that indexation pause so that they do not have to feel like they need to engage in some kind of broadcast campaign to alert their audiences to the threat that is looming and, more importantly, do not have to go campaigning behind the scenes to the Expenditure Review Committee and lobby. That is the last thing they should be doing. They should be producing great content and supporting the health of the community broadcast sector.

I hope Senator Fifield, whom I tipped off—and I tipped off his advisers over the last couple of days that I was going to bring this issue to the chamber—will have something good to say for us so that we can all stand down, get on with the process of passing this bill and let our community broadcast sector do what it does best. I thank the chamber.

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank colleagues for their contribution to the Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Digital Radio) Bill 2015. I will come to the point that Senator Ludlam raised in his contribution at the outset in relation to community radio. Community radio will continue to receive funding. The particular measure that Senator Ludlam was referring to was actually a terminated program of the previous government, so the reason that funding is reducing is as a result of the decision by the previous government—just for the record. Senator Ludlam has, indeed, raised the concerns of community radio with me. I have met with representatives of community radio and I have undertaken, in the context of the budget, to look at the concerns that they have raised. Obviously, I cannot indicate what may be the result of the budget process but, nevertheless, I have met with them and have undertaken to look at their concerns.

I should also, as we are talking about radio here, indicate that I for one think that radio in the broad, in all its different forms, has a very good future. The most recent data on audience listenership shows that radio is, indeed, very strong. I think one of the reasons for that is that there is a certain intimacy and immediacy to radio, which is not necessarily easily replicated by other mediums.

I think all of us, certainly when it comes to music, are in demographic lock. We are all stuck in particular musical periods, which tend to relate to what was on radio between the ages of about 16 and 21. It is hard for any of us to break out of what I refer to as a demographic lock. In my case, that tends to be eighties music, and I know that there are others in this place who are similarly afflicted. I am very much in that situation. But also, just as we have that collective and common experience of hearing music at the same time on radio across the airwaves, if we hear a particular song it reminds us of a particular summer, what we were doing and where we were. Likewise, it is often radio that brings us news of a significant event in the life of a nation or the world.

That is something that radio does: it allows us to continue to have those sorts of collective and shared experiences. As people are increasingly consuming media through applications at a time of their own choosing, I have had a bit of a worry that we might not have so many of those shared experiences, but I am confident that we will because radio is in an extremely strong situation. I can only hazard, Mr Deputy President, what demographic lock you might be in in terms of your musical tastes. You might share that with us a little later—no, I am sure you have strong musical preferences, Mr Deputy President. I digress, but I just did want to take this opportunity to talk about the ongoing importance of radio.

As colleagues have canvassed, this bill seeks to amend the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 and the Radiocommunications Act 1992. It contains a package of measures which are designed to reduce regulatory complexity and deliver a simpler, more flexible process for the planning and licensing of digital radio services in regional Australia. In July 2015, the Australian government released a report, called the Digital radio report, on the statutory review of digital radio issues which was conducted by the Department of Communications in accordance with section 215B of the Broadcasting Services Act and section 313B of the Radiocommunications Act. The bill's measures are largely drawn from the recommendations of the Digital radio report and propose to amend the BSA and the Radiocommunications Act to deliver a simpler, more flexible process for the planning and licensing of digital radio in regional Australia.

The bill's measures include, as some colleagues have touched upon, repealing the restricted datacasting licence category; removing the minister's role in the setting of the digital radio start-up day for regional licence areas; removing the requirement for a six-year moratorium on the allocation of additional digital commercial radio broadcasting licences in a licence area following the commencement of digital radio services in that area; amending the definition of 'non-foundation digital radio multiplex transmitter licence' to ensure that the definition operates in a manner consistent with the relevant policy objective; and making minor amendments to the BSA and the Radiocommunications Act to repeal spent digital radio provisions.

The restricted datacasting licence category was introduced in 2007, but no licences under this category have ever been issued. Removing this category will simplify the digital radio regulatory framework.

Removing the minister from the setting of digital radio start-up days will streamline the process and remove unnecessary government intervention in the commencement of digital radio services in regional areas.

The moratorium period was intended to provide encumbered commercial radio broadcasters with a level of stability and certainty during their digital radio investment phase. However, the prospect of a moratorium period has not provided sufficient incentive for commercial radio broadcasters to establish permanent digital radio services in regional licence areas. Removing the moratorium period implements a recommendation of the Digital radio report.

The measures in this bill are supported by digital radio stakeholders in the commercial, community and public broadcasting sectors. Passage of this bill will simplify and streamline Australia's digital radio regulatory regime. With these amendments, the government is further delivering on its commitment to cut red tape, so I commend this bill to my colleagues.

A couple of weeks ago, Commercial Radio Australia had a function in this building. I raced from the ABC Showcase, which I had been speaking at beforehand, to get to the Commercial Radio function. I recounted there that initially I myself had wanted to go into radio, back when I was, I guess, in the middle of my university studies. I had a connection indirectly with the owner of what was then radio station 2UE. I was fortunate to go along to 2UE and spend the day there to see what life in radio or as a journalist might be like. I spent some time with Rod Spargo, who was the general manager of the station, who is a legend in the commercial radio industry.

I was spellbound by the stories of the challenges of managing on-air radio talent, sitting in the newsroom as the clock was ticking down to a bulletin, seeing the journalists playing basketball with a bin, throwing paper in—all sorts of things—as they were 10 seconds then five seconds to the on-air broadcast. I thought: 'This is fabulous! I'd love to be in this environment!' I sat down at the end of the day with the proprietor of the station, hoping to be told, 'This is the industry for you,' and I was really crestfallen when the proprietor said to me: 'Young man, don't go into radio. Do something useful with your life.' It is arguable whether I have or have not, but, anyway, what could have been a brilliant radio career was cut down in its prime!

As I said, I do think radio does have a good future. I also recounted to that particular Commercial Radio conference that I am pleased that my relationship with their industry has been regularised. I am no longer the Minister representing the Minister for Communications; I am now the Minister for Communications in this place. I likened in a parliamentary sense the role of being a minister representing a minister to really being the parliamentary equivalent of being in a not entirely committed relationship. Anyway, I am pleased that now that has been regularised. As I said, I commend this bill to my colleagues.

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Minister, for that interesting contribution.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.