CHAIR —Welcome. Do you have any comment on the capacity in which you appear before the committee?

Mr Stevenson —I am a project officer with the Biodiversity Group, but I have just come back from being the conservator or senior conservation officer on the Cocos (Keeling) Islands for three years and on Norfolk Island for six years, under Parks Australia.

Mr NEHL —Lucky man! Nine years in paradise.

Mr Stevenson —That is one way of looking at it. It has its advantages and its disadvantages.

CHAIR —That is very interesting. Do you have anything you wish to change or add in your submission, and do you wish to make a short opening statement to your submission?

Mr Griffiths —I would mention that in our written submission we made reference only to the Indian Ocean territories in which Parks Australia has an interest, but we should have also mentioned the fact that we have a national parks presence on Norfolk Island as well. The reason we did not mention Norfolk Island was almost like a deja vu of the conversation before this, in that people in the Indian Ocean territories seemed to have known about your committee's work and were prepared and had done some work so that, when the notice came out, they were ready with a submission; whereas the people on Norfolk were caught a little by surprise, and we did not actually get some information from them in time to make a formal submission. So I ask that Hansard record that we also have a national park as well as a botanic garden on Norfolk Island, and that the same sorts of issues and problems that we adverted to in our submission, as far as the Indian Ocean territories are concerned, are also experienced on Norfolk Island: problems of remoteness

and difficulties of communication.

CHAIR —Certainly. We will now have questions.

Mr NEHL —Do you have any comment to make about the proposition that was put forward in the recent inquiry into communications and transport in Antarctica? Do you have any thoughts on the need for a multi-ship operation and an airstrip so that we can have some air communication as well?

Mr Griffiths —That will be Mr Pitt's responsibility. We in Parks and Environment have no responsibilities directly for the Antarctic territories.

Mr Pitt —We certainly have an interest in telecommunications relating to the expansion of ship operations and, of course, to the possibility of intercontinental and intracontinental air transport. However, it is very early days, and it has only been in the past few weeks that the government has released its response to the Antarctic Science Advisory Committee's Foresight analysis report.

Mr NEHL —That was 18 May?

Mr Pitt —Yes. So we do not have any concrete statement that we could provide that might assist you in your deliberations.

Mr NEHL —Do you accept that, in relation particularly to Antarctic territories—but it applies equally to the other islands—the physical presence is equally as important as the telecommunications?

Mr Pitt —I do not feel qualified to comment on the importance of physical presence versus any other. I do know that we have telecommunications facilities at the moment that do support air operations: those of our own and also those of other nations, on occasions. I do not envisage the expansion of telecommunications to be a major factor in any future endeavour we might undertake in relation to transportation.

Mr NEHL —I do not think I made myself clear. I was trying to say that you have satellite communication, Internet and all these things, but what emphasis do you place on the physical communication by ship and by air—if we get an airstrip in? From my point of view, it is of vital importance that we do get a multi-ship operation and an airstrip—and I know exactly where I would put it at Davis—so that we can improve the level of science that goes on. I see that what I have called the physical is a vitally important part of the communications system generally.

Mr Pitt —We have got the stations in place at the moment which provide the majority of infrastructure that would be necessary to meet any requirements that you have stated. We already provide search and rescue facilities for helicopter operations, fixed wing

operations and shipping operations. The fact that some of those may increase in the future will not change the need for telecommunications infrastructure from what we have got at the present time.

Mr NEHL —I am trying to broaden it beyond that.

Mr Pitt —For example, we have a very good high frequency communications system and a very good VHF communications system in place, which provides for the number of flights which we conduct across the three continental stations at the moment, and for the ships that are operating in the ice off the stations. That is quite robust. Looking at the potential to take advantage of other nations' work in the future, the Russians and the Chinese are working diligently at the moment to improve their ability to provide air transportation to the Antarctic. They have already examined what we have in place around Davis and have seen it to be largely all that they would need to meet their future requirements. I do not know that ours would be much different.

Mr NEHL —Can I be a little more direct, Mr Pitt? Do you believe we should have a multi-ship operation: yes or no?

Mr Pitt —Personally, I certainly do.

Mr NEHL —Good. Do you believe we should have an airstrip somewhere, say at Davis, so we can have air communications?

Mr Pitt —I think there would be a tremendous advantage from having air transportation; but there are also many difficulties associated with it which I have not clarified. It is my branch that has the responsibility for conducting a scoping study into the viability of air transportation. I admit quite openly that we favour getting air transportation. The only difficulty we confront is the economic and environmental considerations which go along with that, and they may move things in a different direction from the one which I would prefer.

Mr NEHL —I think we are in unity.

Mr Pitt —Yes.

CHAIR —More environmental than economic, or what?

Mr Pitt —I would not say that at the moment. A lot will depend on the type of runway that we were looking to construct. For example, if we were to look at some of the less robust runway systems and not have major infrastructure around that runway—buildings and the like—then the environmental considerations and financial considerations may be on a par. However, if we were to go for a rock runway it could be argued that the environmental considerations would be the greater concern. We have not done the studies

yet. It is now looking as if the financial cost not just of construction but also of maintaining such a runway would be quite high. So it is a difficult question to answer at this time.

Mr NEHL —Given the crucial importance of reliable communications with the Antarctic region, how do you rate Australia's links with those used by other nations such as China, Japan and the United States?

Mr Pitt —We have got a very good telecommunications system, one which is admired by many. In fact, the Japanese have been working with us to see how they may improve their own system to achieve the same standard. We have got a very sophisticated system in place and it is very effective and admired by many.

Mr NEHL —In terms of the expeditioners who are wintering down there, is there any possibility that we might consider leasing satellite television circuits so that we could provide direct television to the stations down there?

Mr Pitt —We have not considered that. Our focus has been primarily on ensuring that the activities that are undertaken, the scientific endeavours, are met first. While we look after the expeditions as best we can, the cost of enhancing the bandwidth in order to carry television and the like has been seen to be a little bit beyond our capability to cover from within the division.

CHAIR —Speaking of a division, funny you should say that because the bells are now ringing for a division in the House. It will mean you lose your right of privilege should you say anything scandalous. It is all still recorded and everything. Do you want to continue?

Mr NEHL —Yes, let us do that.

CHAIR —Continue on, but just do not say anything slanderous. There is a division and we must go; I apologise.

Mr NEHL —We await your return.

CHAIR —I do not have any questions particularly on communications. I was interested in the parks and gardens because I visited Cocos.

ACTING CHAIR (Mr Nehl) —Thank you. Mr Pitt, your submission complains about AAP news feed costs. What about the use by expeditioners of newsagencies via the Internet? Would this provide an equivalent—

Mr Pitt —They get a very good service through the Internet if they choose to access it. Not all expeditioners have a computer, although many do take a personal computer with them. We have a small number of computers on station which they can use

for their own purposes and if they choose to access those Internet sites that provide news, that is fine. However, not all expeditioners are as comfortable with computer technology as we perhaps might wish them to be. Therefore, the ability to provide them with a daily newspaper of sorts, one produced using the services of a broadcast, has been the standard means of disseminating the information. The difficulty with gathering information off the net and then putting it into a hard copy format is simply one of copyright and one which we have not addressed in any detail within the Antarctic Division itself.

ACTING CHAIR —The issue of news is a very important consideration in communications. I can well remember on both the voyages I have done on the Icebird that the AAP feed came in by telex. And even though we were a short time away from Australia, only six weeks on the second voyage, the arrival of the telex with the news was avidly sought, particularly by my friend and now leader, Tim Fischer, who went into withdrawal if he could not hear the news.

I can recall being at Davis when the Iraqi war broke out. I have a photograph of the station leader and the communications person with a copy of that day's Australian newspaper which had been sent by fax and then photocopied and put together. Does that still happen?

Mr Pitt —Yes, it does, but that depends on the motivation and commitment of an individual in the station to do that. When there is a particularly newsworthy activity under way most people would be a paying a lot of attention and it might generate that activity.

ACTING CHAIR —What is the cost of the AAP news feed?

Mr Pitt —In the order of $43,000 per year.

ACTING CHAIR —It is significant. You mentioned copyright on the Internet news service that might be there. Is it not then possible to tap into the Internet, find a news summary and print it off?

Mr Pitt —I suspect it is. I have not examined that closely and I would need to find out a bit more to be able to answer you.

ACTING CHAIR —I suppose it depends on each station and the people who are there. I would have thought it would have been a reasonable expectation that the station leader or somebody else would accept the responsibility of providing it, after all, you are talking abut 25 people or so during the winter—

Mr Pitt —Where I am unable to comment is on the impact of copyright as a result of doing that for a broader group than an individual reading the service that they have paid for on the Internet.

ACTING CHAIR —Perhaps we might find out just what the copyright situation is. Have expeditioners attempted to use the Internet as a telephone service? Similarly, can expeditioners visiting remote equipment sites utilise data transmission for voice?

Mr Pitt —To my knowledge they have not used the Internet for voice communications. I cannot explain why. I was on a round trip this last season. I visited all the stations and spoke to all the expeditioners and at no time—we were communicating with our families—did anyone state that they had had any success in doing that. They had heard that it was possible but for whatever reason they did not do it. It may just be they did not have the software in their personal computers to permit that to be undertaken. I am not sure.

ACTING CHAIR —Communications have improved an enormous amount. I can recall when I first went there in 1986, while there was telephone satellite communications on the ship and there was the opportunity of using a satellite phone at Casey, it was incredibly expensive. The economic method of communication was by radiophone but sunspots made that very dicey. So communications have improved a lot.

Given that Macquarie Island in law is part of Tasmania, do you believe that STD charges should apply to calls to and from the island?

Mr Pitt —Yes, I do. There is an anomaly in the way in which Macquarie Island is treated at the moment under the present legislation. I believe that is something which we in the Antarctic Division need to take up further with our friends in Telstra.

ACTING CHAIR —This committee and this inquiry will be prepared to take that up too because it appears to be just total discrimination. It is part of Tasmania. It is part of an Australian state. Island communities which are parts of other Australian states, such as Torres Strait islands, get the same thing and so Macquarie Island should be treated on the same basis. You can expect some support from this committee on that.

Mr Pitt —Thank you.

ACTING CHAIR —I might just come undone on this next question because I was being very dogmatic to one of our colleagues on Norfolk Island regarding stamps. What input and what profit-sharing arrangements exist between Australia Post and the division relating to philatelic sales of AAT stamp issues? Are you aware of surcharges paid on AAT stamp sales from mainland agencies? Are the AAT stamps normal Australia Post stamps with an Antarctic theme or are they stamps issued—and I could not see how they possibly could be—by the division or the stations?

Mr Pitt —These are standard issue Australia Post stamps.

ACTING CHAIR —Good. Thank you very much. I have won my argument with

Mr Neville. Please go on.

Mr Pitt —They are very popular because there are still some first day covers out which people like to get to the Antarctic where they can be stamped with the special frank.

ACTING CHAIR —What about the profit sharing? Is there any?

Mr Pitt —There is no profit sharing to my knowledge that the Antarctic Division has with Australia Post. The moneys that are paid are entirely Australia Post's. I do know that the stations themselves, quite separately, offer the ability to have a special station stamp for a particular expedition put on an envelope. They do charge a small fee for that. That is not an Antarctic Division or Australia Post activity.

ACTING CHAIR —Are there any international agreements involved in postal communication with Antarctica?

Mr Pitt —Not to my knowledge. It is treated as a territory of Australia. The rates of postage that would apply in Australia also apply there.

ACTING CHAIR —It is still the 45c stamp?

Mr Pitt —Yes.

ACTING CHAIR —In general terms, what is the level of financial support provided by your department to fund the communications imperatives of the station? Do you provide it all?

Mr Pitt —We have provided the equipment on the ground at each of the stations to permit our systems to connect to Australia through the Intelsat series of satellites and Inmarsat series of satellites. The costs are many and varied: the earth terminals at each station are $1.2 million; the computer network that we have on each station that interfaces with those terminals is about $150,000 for each station; the call accounting equipment is $25,000 per station; and, on top of that, we pay $480,000 for the leased circuits that we have going to each station which provide the interface between them and the Antarctic Division in Kingston in Tasmania.

ACTING CHAIR —Who is that paid to?

Mr Pitt —That goes to the carrier, which is Telstra. Our system is considered part of the public telecommunications network and we have to achieve standards set by Telstra. We do that using our own staff and they travel to the Antarctic on an annual basis to check the equipment and make sure it is functioning properly. Quite a deal of the Antarctic Division's funds are spent on telecommunications each year looking after

equipment which is not practical for the carrier to get to because of the unique location and geographical difficulties.

ACTING CHAIR —If one is to really apply USOs and community service obligation, why should Antarctica be treated differently to Boree Creek?

Mr Pitt —I would argue that, because we have put a large amount of infrastructure in place, although it is part of the public telecommunications network, we have as a division paid a fair share—that the work undertaken by the expeditioners is in support of government directives and that they are in conditions of some hardship. I believe that the fact that on occasions it is possible for people in Australia to communicate with expeditioners in the Antarctic at a rate that is cheaper than the expeditioners in Antarctica can communicate back to Australia is out of balance.

In relation to your reference to Boree Creek, although their postal services may be infrequent, they are perhaps more regular. Their ability to take respite is more easily achieved and they are charged, once they do get the ability to communicate, at about half the rate that the Antarctic expeditioners are. And the Antarctic expeditioner is sitting in an Australian territory which I believe is appropriately able to be appended to the telecommunications act.

Mr NEHL —So you would agree with me that there is discrimination and inequity in the treatment?

Mr Pitt —I may not use those words, but there is certainly an imbalance.

Mr NEHL —That is a very moderate way of saying so. I would imagine we still have meteorological bureau people down there who are carrying out extremely important weather research.

Mr Pitt —Yes.

Mr NEHL —Who pays their telephone bills or communication?

Mr Pitt —If they are communicating from three of the stations, it is covered under the Antarctic division's general agreement. The fourth, Casey, where there is a additional circuit in that, is also covered under the agreement that we have made for the leased circuits that we have in place.

Mr NEHL —In view of the restrictions on funding for the division—and we never get enough, do we?—is there a case that the meteorological bureau should pay its own bills?

Mr Pitt —I think that the partnership that we have with the meteorological bureau is an excellent one and there is mutual benefit in the arrangement. Therefore, this is a cost,

albeit being paid out of the Antarctic division's funds, that is not unreasonable.

Mr NEHL —Does the department play a significant role in negotiating with communications services for the provision of improved services to AAT?

Mr Pitt —Yes, very much. My staff are continually working with Telstra's technicians to improve the telecommunications network. There is a plan to improve the net over the next two years. We are in negotiation for reduction of costs. We have a very good relationship with Telstra on that aspect of our business.

Mr NEHL —Thank you very much for that. I wonder, Mr Griffiths, can you tell us, given Australia's responsibilities to marine environmental protection, are there any special needs or programs for managing the national marine parks in the external territories?

Mr Griffiths —Do you want me to put a communications slant on that or is that a more general question?

Mr NEHL —Both.

Mr Griffiths —Firstly, we need to look at the number of marine parks that we have declared under our legislation. The situation may well be different in each one. We have got—and I am just looking at my list of national parks—the Lihou Reef National Nature Reserve. We have got Ningaloo Marine Park, and Commonwealth water is part of that. We have got Elizabeth and Middleton reefs. We have got Mermaid Reef and Solitary Island Marine Reserve. We also recently declared the Great Australia Bight Marine Park off the waters of South Australia. Each of those parks or reserves that I have just listed have a variety of marine conservation programs in them, consistent with the obligations that we have under the legislation. The amount of dollars that we would spend in each park would be geared into the management and conservation needs of each one of those.

Some of those parks are so remote that they require very little management—nature looks after them for us in a sense—whereas others have a higher degree of visitation. Particularly, I guess, Ashmore and Cartier in the north may be ones where we are required to spend some hundreds of thousands of dollars to protect the marine biodiversity of that particular park. We are just now starting to develop a marine conservation program for the Great Australian Bight Marine Park. That was declared three months or so ago and we are working with the South Australians, who have a park covering the waters out to the three nautical mile limit, which are the state waters. Our park complements that and goes further on out to the edge of the EEZ and we are working with them to try to get to a cooperative arrangement in place to protect the very extensive biodiversity of that particular park.

Mr NEHL —Perhaps you could tell us what communications you actually need, or use, in the administration of those parks and reserves and what shortcomings there are?

What communications do you have now, and what communications do you need to enable you to do your job properly?

Mr Griffiths —I might ask Mr Stevenson, who is perhaps better qualified then I, to answer that, perhaps looking particularly at, I guess, Ashmore and Cartier. The Ashmore Reef National Park would be the one where we have the greatest need to communicate with what is going on up there and the people that visit that park on our behalf.

Mr Stevenson —Yes, we have two areas there where we have officers that patrol regularly. We have a contracted warden who is stationed for 8[half ] months of the year on Ashmore Cartier reef. Its basic location is close to Indonesia.

Mr NEHL —Can you tell us a little bit about it so we have it on the record?

Mr Stevenson —Ashmore Cartier reef is between the north of Western Australia and Indonesia and it is regularly visited by Indonesian fishing vessels. It is a nature reserve and, to protect the seabird colonies and the turtle component particularly of the biota there outside the cyclone season, when the Indonesian fishermen are likely to come down, we have an officer who is stationed there from about mid-March through until the end of December. It is quite expensive to maintain that officer there. He has to provide his own boat basically. It is a low sand atoll with three small islands there. He parks his boat in the lagoon for that period of time and operates in relation to communications.

Mr NEHL —Is there a local population there?

Mr Stevenson —There is no fixed community.

Mr NEHL —He is on his own?

Mr Stevenson —Yes. The size of the main island is less than the size of Parliament House. There are two smaller islands which you could probably spit over if you had a good wind behind you. It is impossible to operate there for any period of time. The fishermen who come down from Indonesia have a tradition of collecting seabirds from the island in large numbers. They dry them there and take them back—in the past. This is not a practice since it has been declared. It took us some time to work out how we could best patrol that area and enforce the legislation that applies to that area.

The satellite communication is satisfactory in that area, I understand. It is the same with our officer who operates in the Coral Sea territories. I understand that there are only four residents of the Coral Sea territories who are stationed on Willis Island for the met bureau. They have permanent officers there. When I say permanent, they have a year or two that they are stationed there. It is a very isolated position, comparable in many ways to Antarctica. They have a good satellite phone link there, so that they feel that there are no problems.

Our officer who goes out there in association with the naval patrol boats that go out there also has a satellite phone, even when he is sitting on one of the islands counting seabirds, so his communications are satisfactory. As far as we are concerned, the major problems still lie with the three populated territories, where the communications links that we are talking about are the sorts of things that we wished that we had had.

Mr NEHL —We intend, if an election is not called in the meantime, to visit Christmas and Cocos (Keeling) the week after next. Is there any way in which Parks Australia can assist us while we are there?

Mr Stevenson —Certainly. Perhaps if the secretary of the committee would like to give me a call, we will make sure that we have staff on both of the islands. We will basically be at your disposal if you want to see the two sets of parks and to visit the island in a wider sense and talk to staff.

CHAIR —We are a bit interested in seeing North Keeling, too. You would have to take us across there?

Mr Stevenson —Yes. North Keeling is a problem. The practical access is between 30 and 40 days a year. It is over the horizon—it is 25 kilometres away. There is a three-metre swell 330 days of the year. Unless you want your kidney stones shaken out, it is a problem.

Senator CROSSIN —It is a bit like when you go to Green Island, off Cairns, is it?

Mr Stevenson —I would say that is probably a luxury run in comparison with a run to North Keeling.

CHAIR —This guy does not get seasick, so it does not worry him.

Mr NEHL —And I have been by dinghy from Darnley to Murray Island and back.

CHAIR —It is magnificent—

Mr Stevenson —Do you like swimming ashore, though? That is the problem.

Mr NEHL —I have no difficulty with that, except in Antarctica!

CHAIR —Anyway, we will—

Mr Griffiths —We will do whatever we can. To the extent that we need to make arrangements beforehand to charter a boat or whatever, we can do whatever you want. We can work out a program together.

CHAIR —Staying within our time. If you can just jog my memory, Mr Stevenson, on Christmas Island, Parks were doing some work with the mines, weren't you—replanting?

Mr Stevenson —We are doing a lot of rehabilitation. The old phosphate mines left a lot of holes in the rainforest canopy. There are problems with one of the major endangered species there, the Abbott's booby. After many years of study we discovered that the birds that are nesting within a certain distance of these holes in the canopy are not able to breed effectively. Because they are very large birds they are not really good at perching, even though they do perch in the tops of trees, and if they cannot land to feed their young they have got problems. So we have been trying to fill in these holes in the canopy. All of this will be explained to you, I am sure, by the staff on Christmas Island and they would be more than happy to take you through an explanation of their operations there.

CHAIR —Thank you very much.

Mr NEHL —I have a final question for Mr Pitt. In terms of communications with the stations at Macquarie, what else do you need that you have not got?

Mr Pitt —An airstrip.

Mr NEHL —We know we need another ship and we need an airstrip, yes.

Mr Pitt —We are particularly interested in increasing the bandwidth of communications that we have available. The speed and volume of communication that we are able to get back to Australia is limited and we are looking to upgrade that in the future. The impact of your committee's work on this will be of great interest to us because if we are able to get the continental stations included under the universal service obligation, then the cost of that will be reduced, which will ease our particular financial burden.

Mr NEHL —I do not know what the chairman thinks, but I would see no difficulty in this committee, as a result of this inquiry, making a very strong recommendation that that should happen.

Mr Pitt —Thank you.

CHAIR —And thank you all for attending.

Mr NEHL —Thank you very much indeed.

[10.46 a.m.]