Mr ELLIOTT (10.30 p.m.) —At the outset I indicate my support for the Broadcasting Amendment Bill (No. 2) and the Radio Licence Fees Amendment Bill. I listened with interest to the contribution from the honourable member for Mitchell (Mr Cadman), although much of the time he strayed a fair bit from the provisions contained in these Bills. But one of the things that he said—I note that he indicated at the outset that the Opposition would support the measures, as did the honourable member for Bass (Mr Smith)—related to the process that we are going through in relation to the more extensive Broadcasting Services Bill. He criticised the fact that that would take some months to be considered.

  Earlier in the debate the honourable member for Bass commended the Government on the process of this matter and noted that, with this Bill being tabled as it was last week by the Minister for Transport and Communications (Mr Beazley) to allow for an extensive period of discussion, that would give an opportunity for the great range of interest groups covered by the whole range of issues in broadcasting policy and operation to have a chance to have an input into that discussion paper before it comes back to be considered by the Government and the Parliament in the new year.

  I would have thought—I think the honourable member for Bass made this comment—that it offered the scope to produce a better Bill than may have been the case otherwise. That is probably true. The Bill as it stands goes a long way towards the blueprint for broadcast policy in this country in a way that will serve Australia well. But there is certainly scope for the industry and all the great manifestation of players that exist throughout this industry to make a contribution to that debate and thereby ensure that what is finally adopted fits well with both the respective players and the great range of the Australian populace that is obviously concerned to ensure that the measures adopted are those from which they also draw comfort and satisfaction.

  The measures outlined in these Bills really start that first process going and recognise the practical difficulties that particularly regional radio has, and that I guess the radio industry as a whole has, at this point in time. The Government has decided, quite rightly, to act in that area and at the same time to ensure that the measures adopted with the passage of this legislation can be blended into the Broadcast Services Bill when it comes back to the House next year.

  That is important for a number of reasons. It would be easy to say that it is important only because we want to ensure the viability and stability of the radio industry. That is certainly one of the motivations behind the measures, particularly in relation to the reduction in radio licence fees. But it goes somewhat further than that.

  To suggest that all the difficulties that the radio industry has in Australia today are due to Government policy is a very unfair interpretation to place on what has actually happened in that industry. Indeed, if one takes account of the experience of radio over the last decade, one could argue very strongly that the auction system, the tendering process that the honourable member for Mitchell alluded to as being appropriate to adopt, is one of the reasons that much of radio is in the predicament that it is in today. Certainly, if one takes the Sydney market as an example, absurd prices were paid for radio stations as part of that manic flavour of the month mentality that existed through the 1980s as people—particularly some notable people—sought to get into that industry, believing that it would be a great new financial windfall. It was driven not so much by economic considerations as by broader ego considerations and perhaps a whole host of other things that we will not try to enunciate tonight.

  Nevertheless, the industry has gone through that process and almost all commercial radio faces the predicament of falling revenue because of the economic downturn, but just as significantly because of the debt servicing that people have had to go through. The problems of people exiting the industry because of financial failure and so forth does mean that the Government is right to seek to act in those areas at this time.

  The honourable member for Mitchell also referred to the radio frequency spectrum, which is certainly an interesting area. There is no doubt that the report that the Standing Committee on Transport, Communications and Infrastructure brought forward on that issue opens up a lot of exciting opportunities in that area. It is fair to say that, whilst it is an incredibly complex matter to try to debate or articulate in any logical sort of fashion in a debate in the House, it gives very exciting opportunities for Australia. We know that Australians generally have a great thirst for technology and are willing to take advantage of that. In fact, these Bills recognise that in a number of ways because what we are actually saying is that there is scope for new and more players and the development of niche marketing in radio that perhaps has not been fully appreciated in the past because of the fairly fixed sort of structure that has been operating.

  These measures tonight represent an important part of the restructuring that is going on. The Broadcasting Services Bill that we will deal with next year will really go very much further in that process. I have no doubt that the opportunities and the flexibility that the honourable member for Mitchell sought in this area in his contribution tonight are well and truly catered for in the various proposals in the two parcels of legislation that the House will consider over this period.

  I think the period of discussion and debate is a worthwhile one because one of the things one learns as soon as one starts to look at these areas is that changes in technology are so rapid—and almost beyond belief for someone who does not have any particular understanding of the technology. A period of debate will not be unhelpful. Far from it; it will very much help to get the environment and the setting right so that those who seek to participate in radio, be it in regional areas or broader community interests, will be able to do so.

  Of course, that raises the other points about what we seek to do with these measures relating to licence fees. Over a period I have had many representations from radio operators who have expressed great concern. As the honourable member for Burke (Mr O'Keefe) outlined earlier, a lot of people have put to the broadcasting working group the difficulties experienced by people in regional radio because of the limitations and the time delays that have occurred in dealing with those processes. So I will talk about those at some length.

  Looking at the fee structure first of all, the levels that were set in 1988 reflected the very speculative sort of valuations on FM channels rather than sustainable commercial values. With that experience we are able to say that it is reasonable to have a reassessment of that process now. The current fee structure has also had the failing that it could not be applied to FM allocations other than new independent services and conversions where a new FM service entered the market. Its progressive scale relied on brackets which could produce inequities at the bracket margins and which were naturally subject to inflationary bracket creep.

  The new access fee arrangement recognises a more efficient way of enabling particularly new players to come into the radio industry. It will be a more equitable means of encouraging that access. Certainly in terms of the competitive environment, as we get more players in the radio industry, it lends itself very much to that sort of approach.

  The calculation of the FM access fee takes into account the number of commercial radio services operated in a given service area and the relevant average gross earnings for these services. The honourable member for Mitchell felt that those sorts of economic considerations should be left out of it. But I think experience has shown that this type of approach, particularly for radio and particularly in the current climate in the radio industry—and particularly because of the new opportunities that exist for people to get into the radio industry—is one to be fully taken advantage of.

  It is clear when one looks at the media issues generally that the opportunities for people to run radio stations as time goes on will be very considerable indeed, with technology developing as it is. The old times when someone would be more likely to set up a small newspaper or the like, or seek to develop other sorts of media interests, will give way to the technology that radio and optic fibre and other things offer.

  A number of speakers have referred to the development of cable TV. Even in that area, if one was to take a 10-year spectrum, one would be very brave indeed to assert that any one particular mode of pay television will apply right through that decade. Clearly that will not be the case. The changes which will occur in technology will be immense in that field.

  In trying to establish a framework, in this particular package of Bills we have said that we recognise that particular difficulties face the radio industry, particularly regional radio operators. We have acknowledged that in some cases there is a limited opportunity for people to participate with the public broadcasters who often, as the honourable member for Bass pointed out, have not had their services fully appreciated. This applies particularly to ethnic broadcasters, as I think the honourable member mentioned. That is certainly true. A number of positive and encouraging things have been achieved in that area, and the changes outlined here certainly will facilitate much of that process.

  As I said, the combination of measures here gives scope to the radio industry to be more commercially viable and vital. It also ensures that the Tribunal has a role. It has had a tendency in these areas to get somewhat bogged down and to become unduly complex. It will be able to streamline its processes in this regard and it will be able to have more effective regard for public interest criteria.

  The sort of debate that goes on between competition and efficiency is more adequately reflected in the Bills before us. The Tribunal, in taking account of the changes in the law in that area, should be able to ensure that the whole administrative process for the granting of licences is one that it is able to carry out more efficiently and effectively. As to the delays that the honourable member for Mitchell spoke about earlier, the passage of these Bills will give the Tribunal much more scope to deal with applications for licences more efficiently than in the past. One hopes that the streamlining of that process will lead to those participants getting involved more readily.

  There are other provisions in the Bills relating to the supplementary licence set-up. Certainly the difficulties that the existing law has created in that area have been put to the broadcasting working group. The Bills go some way towards that. There are other recommendations contained in the broadcasting services Bill which will fundamentally influence that process. Again, the combination of those measures will go a long way towards meeting the concerns expressed in that particular field.

  As I say, I think these Bills are very positive. They will be very important for many regional areas of Australia. They will be particularly beneficial in providing the certainty that the industry has been seeking. It is all very well to say that it is all caused because of this problem or that problem, but what the industry was saying in the lobbying it did in the past was that it had a particular predicament and that it would like to see the Government enunciate its policy clearly in this area. It did not believe that these measures should wait until all the other consequential matters of the broadcasting services Bill were fully developed. I think it was right in seeking that.

  The Government and the Minister have acted very appropriately in bringing forward these particular Bills. Hopefully they will have the effect of ensuring that the great competitive environment that can and will develop in radio is facilitated by this process. Certainly the commercial viability question, which is important in this exercise, will be dealt with more speedily. The Tribunal's role, which should facilitate efficient consideration of licence requests, will be undertaken more readily as well.

  For those reasons I think the Bills are a very positive step for our broadcasting policy generally, particularly when one considers them together with the blueprint for the industry outlined in the broadcasting services Bill. The community at large will have great opportunity to debate it. Certainly all the people I have heard discussing this issue are very happy to have the opportunity to have input into the deliberations on the Bill. It will mean that the final product that is developed, as occurred in telecommunications, will be one the whole industry can feel it has had input into.

  It is fair to say that, if the Minister had come along without a proper process and introduced this Bill and if Parliament was asked to adopt it without proper consideration, the consequential effects would have been most unfortunate for the Parliament and, more importantly, for the people of Australia, because that would not have ensured that the whole range of interest groups which are concerned about broadcasting policy and our media interests generally would have been able to contribute. Many of them have great expertise, as we found not only in the Standing Committee on Transport, Communications and Infrastructure, but even, in more recent times, in the print media inquiry. We found a lot of people there with a lot of expertise who are certainly prepared to put their views, quite forcefully on occasions. With those few words I am pleased to support the Bills before us, and I trust the Parliament will give them a strong endorsement.