Mrs DE-ANNE KELLY (12:23 PM) —I rise to speak on the Telstra (Transition to Full Private Ownership) Bill 2003. This bill amends the Telstra Corporation Act 1991. It will repeal the provisions which require the Australian government to retain 50.1 per cent equity in Telstra. As well, the bill includes provisions for future regular and independent reviews of the adequacy of regional telecommunications services. This will be part of the regulatory framework that protects consumers and promotes competition.

Madam Deputy Speaker Gambaro, you would be aware that some years ago Telstra service was very poor. I can well recall in my own electorate long periods before repairs were effected or new services connected. I can recall elderly people or those who were disabled—perhaps not in remote areas but certainly in areas outside the city—having to wait up to three weeks for repairs or to have a service connected. There were scores of complaints to my office every fortnight from people in Dawson, who quite rightly expected a better telecommunications service. At that time any consideration of the full sale of Telstra would have been unthinkable until services improved and there were guarantees that rural and regional people could be assured of sharing in technology and improved service into the future. At that time the people of Dawson were very chary of any talk of a full sale, and I took careful note of their concerns and complaints. However, five years is a long time. In that period of time, the National Party has pressed very hard for considerable changes and, to the government's credit, those changes have been implemented.

I would now like to go back through the entire process of change for Telstra, because it is very significant. In 1997 there was the Networking the Nation program, with $250 million from the first sale of Telstra. This was to improve telecommunications infrastructure in regional areas through a process of community grants. The second tranche of the sale of Telstra provided $150 million for untimed local calls in extended zones in remote Australia. There was $25 million for additional mobile phone coverage on major highways and $70 million in funds for the Building Additional Rural Networks program. There was a local government program providing $45 million and the remote and isolated islands program, which provided $20 million.

Over $600 million was provided to improve information and communications tech-nology services. There was an independent telecommunications service inquiry established in 2000 to assess telecommunications service levels. The government responded to this inquiry and funded a consumer protection package to ensure that all Australians have access to a decent telephone service. This included strengthening the customer service guarantee to reduce new service connection times, strengthening the universal service obligation in relation to the provision of temporary services, and the national reliability framework, which requires Telstra to proactively monitor and address faults in its network. That also addressed mobile phone coverage for towns with populations of over 500 people, and up to $50.5 million was provided to improve mobile coverage in other areas of Australia.

In some areas of Dawson you would never have thought of receiving mobile coverage. People are now able to access a sound mobile service—provided, of course, that they have the appropriate carrier, antenna and so on. The overview also added $50 million to the Internet Assistance Program for better quality and faster access to dial-up Internet services, and $52.2 million for the National Communications Fund to build networks for the health and education sectors. There was a further inquiry undertaken in 2002—the regional telecommunications inquiry—to report on whether telecommunications services in rural, regional and remote Australia were adequate and to determine what more needs to be done to ensure that all Australians share in the benefits of future service improvements and developments in technology.

That was a significant concern in my electorate—not only that services would be improved but that there would be some way of ensuring that that improvement did not slip and that, when there were developments in technology and better ways of delivering a telecommunications service in the future, rural Australians were not left on the goat track rather than the superhighway. It was a very real concern to them that they would be frozen in time, as it were.

I will deal with the comments of the Independents shortly—those fine people who managed to vote against the government's work in Iraq, which I am extraordinarily proud of. This was a government that went to some of the poorest, most overridden and brutalised people on the planet and defended them. The Independents did not, but I will deal with the Independents shortly and I will continue to deal with them. Their cowardice will get them nowhere.

I want to talk now about Telstra. The government made a very significant response to the Estens inquiry. The Telecommunications Act, introduced in 1997, established a deregulated, competitive telecommunications regime that has resulted in many new telecommunications companies setting up and large reductions in prices and a better service outcome for phone users. There are very strong safeguards for telecommunications users, including the introduction of the customer service guarantee I mentioned previously in my address, which dictates connection and repair times. If you are in a rural or regional area, it is very important to know that there is the guarantee that your phone will be either connected or repaired within specific time frames. There is also the national reliability framework in place, which requires Telstra to address all faults in its network.

The government has also introduced a $2.1 million satellite phone subsidy scheme and legislation which ensures that all Australians have available to them either a 64-kilobit-per-second service over ISDN or a 64-kilobit Internet downlink by satellite. A subsidy of up to 50 per cent of the cost or $765—whichever is less—is available for the cost of hardware and installation of such a satellite service. The government has also maintained the general price cap, which ensures that low-income phone users are adequately protected from the effects of phone line rental increases. Line rentals can increase by up to four per cent, but call costs must decrease by CPI, 4.5 per cent.

As I mentioned before, the government has just announced its response to the regional telecommunications inquiry, and that will see a network reliability framework to identify Telstra's worst performing exchange areas—and there are still many of them. Could I also say that the government has accepted all 39 of the recommendations in the Estens inquiry and has said that they will be implemented. With respect to the network reliability framework, Telstra will commit to remedying those exchanges by the end of 2003. There will also be a licence imposed to guarantee that the benefits of the Internet Assistance Program continue into the future.

Telstra must also formally commit to upgrading old radio concentrated telephone systems and improving services by fixing dial-up speed issues for underperforming pair gains—something that has been a concern in various areas of the country. An amount of $15.9 million will be spent further extending mobile phone coverage to small populations and along major highways, $4 million will extend the satellite phone handset subsidy and $10.1 million will be provided to support information technology training and support for rural and remote areas.

Mobile phone services—and I have to say this also to my constituency—have never been part of the universal service obligation, even when the opposition were in government, much as they talk about it now. There has never been any obligation for Telstra or any other carrier to provide a mobile phone service. It is the government which has stepped in and funded better mobile access. However, as I say to people who drive along the Bruce Highway and go between two hills or a set of rocky outcrops in my electorate, there are areas where it is never going to be feasible to ensure that there is mobile access. There are even areas in major population centres, in my electorate and in major cities, where there is not mobile phone access. However, with the funding being put forward, reasonable mobile equipment, a carrier and an antenna, most people in reasonable population centres should be able to get a mobile phone service. If people are in an area where there is no mobile service, Telstra will support and assist in the funding of a satellite mobile phone—which will ensure that people get mobile coverage wherever they are. So, even for those in the most remote areas, there are opportunities to tap into a mobile service with the assistance of Telstra and the federal government.

I want to move now to the issue of data. A key feature of the government's response to the Estens inquiry is the national broadband strategy, which includes $134.4 million for a Higher Bandwidth Incentive Scheme to ensure that people in regional areas have access to broadband services at prices comparable with the prices in urban areas. But I think the most important reassurance in Estens—certainly for my constituents—is the announcement that Telstra Country Wide will be maintained for regional and rural Australians via a licence condition. There is no doubt that, since Telstra Country Wide has been in place, the number of complaints to my office has dropped. Five years ago, or even three years ago, there were scores of complaints every week. Now we would get maybe one every two to three weeks. That is because of Telstra Country Wide's excellent response. It does not matter whether it is an inquiry about mobile phone service, a connection or a phone that is not working, Telstra Country Wide—I must say, in all fairness in this debate—act very quickly to address the inquiry. In some cases, as I have said, there are areas where it is just not going to be possible to have mobile phone service, but Telstra Country Wide contact the constituent and give them accurate information in a very timely manner. The greatest reassurance that my constituents have is that Telstra Country Wide will be maintained. I think that is very important. It is part of the future-proofing, which people were rightly concerned about.

I want to turn now to the subject of those who have been busily sending out surveys. There are surveys, and there are lead surveys. I certainly believe in listening and acting on the concerns of constituents—

Mrs DE-ANNE KELLY —Well, let me tell you what you do about a real survey if you want real results. What you do is what I have done. First of all, you send it out without your own letter attached telling them how to fill it in. I think actually if you treat your constituents as dills and tell them how to fill in the survey, or what you are going to do, or how you should do it, or what you think, or a whole lot of extraneous material, you are going to get a result that you want instead of the result your constituents want—which is to have their say.

I sent out a very comprehensive survey—69,000 forms to every household in Dawson. I sent this out six months ago. As I said, I did not attach a letter telling people in Dawson how to fill it out. My people are very intelligent, capable country people. They will make up their own minds.

Mr Windsor —Did you ask them about the sale?

Mrs DE-ANNE KELLY —Yes, I did; what a pity! But, unlike the Independents, I do not feed my electorate the sort of information I think they need. I am actually there to hear what they have to say—not to feed them, lead them and draw them on. I actually think that what the Democrats and the Independents are doing is really quite dishonest. The Democrats, by the way, in a big electorate like Dawson, where there are 135,00 people, are sending out 20,000 forms.

Mr Windsor —You're the one who said you'd never support the sale.

Mrs DE-ANNE KELLY —No, I did not say that. I want to talk about somebody, an Independent, who supported Saddam Hussein. This person is now telling my constituency how I should behave. Let me tell you what I did for my constituency: I supported a compassionate government that went in and liberated some of the most oppressed and brutalised people on the planet. It will be to the eternal shame of the Independents that they supported Saddam Hussein, and that will be used in the election against them.

I want to return to an honest survey—not one where you feed your electorate or where you guide them, lead them or give them statistics so that they will fill it out a certain way. I asked them: is your telephone service generally satisfactory? Did they `agree' or `disagree', along a whole continuum of answers. Seventy-seven per cent of Dawson people agree that their telephone service is satisfactory; 23 per cent disagree, as they are entitled to do. Another question was: do you receive good coverage from your mobile phone provider? Again, there was a range of answers—55 per cent agree that they do and 45 per cent disagree, which I think reflects the fact that mobile phone service is not along every single yard of every single highway in Australia. The survey also asked: should there be no further sale of Telstra? I asked people these questions right up front. Yes, people did not agree that there should be a further sale of Telstra. However, the very same people then went on to say—

Mr Windsor —What was the percentage?

Mrs DE-ANNE KELLY —I will deal with percentages soon, but I would like to deal with an honest survey that actually finds out what people think, that does not tell them what they should think. In the National Party we like to hear what our constituents have to say, not tell them what they should say. But those self-same people, in almost the same percentage, then said that they would support a further sale of Telstra if the proceeds were used for government debt reduction. While 81 per cent of people did not support the sale, 66 per cent—

Mr Windsor —Eighty-one per cent!

The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms Gambaro)—Order! I have exercised a great deal of tolerance. I wish to remind you that this is the House of Representatives chamber and I ask you to reduce the level of noise in the chamber; otherwise, I will take further action.

Mrs DE-ANNE KELLY —Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. However, when asked how they would like to see the proceeds of a further sale of Telstra spent, 66 per cent of people said they would like to see it used for government debt reduction. By the way, remember that these are the people who did not want it sold, but they would like it sold if the proceeds were put to a good purpose. Again 66 per cent would like to retire government debt and keep interest rates low; 76 per cent would like to see the proceeds used to build jobs and opportunities. The reality is that people are far more open to the full sale of Telstra when they have the opportunity to say how the funds should be spent.

I also gauge, as I said before, very carefully what people in Dawson think. I go around to hundreds of functions every month. I ask people what they think, I listen to what they have to say and I monitor complaints to my office. I do not lead my electorate. I like my electorate to lead me. I have got a lot of respect for their intelligence. What a pity other members of parliament do not have the same respect for the intelligence of their constituents.

There is no way in truth that I could say that Telstra services have not improved. They have improved to an extraordinary extent. But that is not enough. People need to be sure that those services will improve in the future and will remain at a level that gives them security in their telecommunications service. The future-proofing of services and infrastructure has demonstrated that people can be sure that they will share in a sound telecommunications service into the future.

I have also written to a great range of my constituents right across the electorate to tell them what has been done and to ask them their views. In response to that personally written letter which was widely distributed to each constituent—in the form of `Dear Mr and Mrs Smith'—asking people to contact my office with their views and concerns, do you know how many responses were made to my office? I have had 10. The Independents and the Labor Party have been going on and on about this. I have contacted my constituents twice—not once. I did not lead but told them what has been done and asked for their opinion on a second occasion, for them to contact the office—to write in, ring, tell me, email, whatever they like—and we have had 10 responses.

For those who want to go out and campaign on this issue, please do. I would be delighted if you wasted your time and efforts. Go out and tell people in my electorate what they should think—they will really appreciate that! Independent, fair-minded North Queenslanders love to be told by a slick southerner how they should think! I do not do that. I go out and ask them what they think. I then ask them again to make sure, and I listen very carefully to what they say. I wrote to them again and said, `Tell me what you think,' and I received 10 responses. As I said, people want to see the money well spent. That is what they want. They would like to build jobs and opportunities for the future. I welcome those who want to turn the next federal election into a referendum on Telstra. That is a campaign I very much look forward to, because I am happy to go out to my constituents to tell them and to assure them they have a sound telecommunications system. (Time expired)