Mr WARWICK SMITH (Minister for Family Services) (12:19 PM) —in reply—It is my task to sum up the debate. In doing so I thank honourable members for their contributions. The amendment bill is in two parts, as members would know, because of the constitutional requirements of section 57, in that the NRS Levy Imposition Bill 1997 is required to be dealt with separately because it is a taxation matter.

I am pleased that the government have been supported in these matters by the opposition. We certainly welcome that. The amendments primarily relate to the funding of the national relay service, the NRS. That, as members would know, is a service to provide people that are deaf or have a hearing or speech impairment with access to a standard telephone service on terms and circumstances that are comparable to those under which other Australians have access to standard telephone services. It is obviously a sentiment that all in the parliament and in the broader community would accept as a necessary matter.

The member for Dobell (Mr Lee), some would say an eminent former communications minister, who has some knowledge in these areas, expressed strong support for the process. Indeed, I can indicate that in a former position I held, as ombudsman, I had some dealings with him during that period in the earlier development of TTY services and I know his personal commitment to the delivery of these services to people that need them.

He raised the issue of the expiration of the current contract on 30 June 1998. I am informed that the tender process will obviously be a normal process, that expressions of interest have already been called and also that that was done internationally and not just in Australia. It is a contract that is worth somewhere in the vicinity of $10 million to $12 million a year to provide these services. A decision will be made about that by my colleague the Minister for Communications, the Information Economy and the Arts, Senator Alston, in April this year.

The member for Dobell also mentioned the issue with regard to TTY public phones offered by Telstra. That is part of Telstra's overall universal service obligation plan. I can indicate that I have first-hand knowledge of Telstra's commitment to disability issues, right across its employment practices and also in its services to the community, and I know that they will be continuing with their commitment to roll out the TTY services. He mentioned a specific instance in his own electorate and I am sure that he would have contacts within Telstra to take that matter forward if he wished to do so.

The final matter that the member for Dobell raised related to the captioning and subtitling on the ABC and SBS, and whether or not that should be extended to commercial television networks. That has been an ongoing matter of discussion with the commercial television networks. The Federation of Australian Commercial Television Stations would be the appropriate body to take that matter up with. But I think it would be fair to say that the community, particularly those that utilise the national relay service and that are so impaired, would find the extension of such a service to be a welcome move.

My colleagues Mr Hardgrave, the member for Moreton, and Mr Reid, the member for Bendigo, who have both now left the chamber, had some obviously knowledgeable and wide-ranging remarks about a whole series of matters in relation to telecommunications. The future mode of operations point that was made by the member for Bendigo is a fundamental. The building blocks for the telecommunications industry are the exchanges. If exchanges are upgraded, then obviously the utilisation of the newer technologies—digitisation and so on—becomes achievable. That is why the government, in agreement with Telstra, is keen to see the development of ISDN services and so on that we have talked about on other occasions. But the commitment of extensive amounts of capital to ensure that all parts of Australia have the latest technology and latest exchanges is the fundamental building block, as I say, to the success of a telecommunications system in this country.

The member for Bendigo mentioned briefly the REACH program. My colleague Senator Alston announced—I think it was last week—in a press release that we have negotiated with Telstra for a continuation of the REACH program for a period of time to ensure the uplinking capacities in regional areas—and, Mr Chairman, you will be pleased to know that that also benefits Tasmania. I think we are all pleased about that and we would thank the minister and Telstra for their accommodation of those particular needs. It is the appropriate thing to do.

The global operations centre in Melbourne and the impact on jobs in Bendigo was made quite clear by Mr Reid. He also mentioned that the Telstra Friends in his area were 200 in number. All I can say is that he is lucky, and I wish I could be so lucky to have 200 friends! But that is obviously a very good group and they service the needs of the community broadly in a whole range of areas.

This is an important amendment. It is appropriate that it be proceeded in the way that we have indicated. I thank those members who have contributed positively to the debate. The whole parliament supports the delivery of these services. It will be done by way of a tender; it will be arms-length. The reasons are spelt out in the second reading speech, which I delivered some time ago. It also establishes a funding mechanism which is contributed to, under a formula, by the carriers.

I would also take the opportunity to thank the carriers for their continued commitment to people with disabilities. I refer to all carriers, because I know that they all have a commitment to employment practices and services that they deliver that take account of people with disabilities. I saw that in a previous incarnation as ombudsman and, interestingly now as the minister responsible for disability services, I continue to have an interest in this area. So I commend them for the work that they do and, therefore, commend the bill.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Quick) —If no member wishes to consider the bill in detail, I will put the report question forthwith. The question is that this bill be reported to the House, without amendment.

Question resolved in the affirmative.