Mr WARWICK SMITH (Minister for Sport, Territories and Local Government and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Sydney 2000 Games)(10.43 a.m.) —I thank the shadow minister for the indication that the opposition will be assisting with the passage of these several amendments for this major legislative package which will establish a new telecommunications regime in this country. I acknowledge the shadow minister's own role in developing the legislation while he was minister, and I think the outcome here today is certainly a very constructive one.

In response to the PCS or 1800 megahertz distribution and sale, that will be proceeding. There will be a requirement, if the market does in fact take up that opportunity, which I believe they will, for there to be new transmitting capacities. The regime we are putting in place to take account of the extensive consultation and a range of concerns about the erection of mobile phone towers is to ask carriers to extensively pursue the collocation opportunities, and we would imagine that collocated facilities and towers with the capacity of new services to also be attached to them will be one avenue.

There will be more stations required, but they will be physically different in many respects, in size, to mobile phone towers. I am advised they will be smaller and only be erected under the new consultative arrangement. They will be subject to state laws, with local governments being involved far more than they have been at present with mobile phone towers. The new provisions do actually formally require this collocation unless it is technically feasible not to do so.

We believe that the regime that will be developing and the emergence of this new technology—which you correctly say will not have the same range; PCS means personal communications systems—will mean that there will be a need to have repeaters closer together, but they will be qualitatively different to mobile phone towers as such and many of them may be able to be attached to mobile phone towers, for which they will be developing collocated arrangements. They will be subject to state and local laws. In that sense, on the issue you are referring to about the concerns of residents about the environmental and aesthetic impact of such facilities, the regime will be much more responsive than the regime that has existed prior to this. That is a concern we have taken into account, and we believe in practice we will get outcomes that will be sensible.

Briefly, you did mention the other point about price discrimination. The government doesn't believe that a prohibition on price discrimination is a sensible policy in an open market as it will severely inhibit the emergence of additional competition in local call markets. I think I have addressed that in the past, but I just want to respond to that, to set the principle down again.