Mr TANNER (8:26 PM) —The opposition has only had very limited notice of the amendment moved by the member for Calare. I indicate to the House that we will be supporting this amendment but we do so with the caution that we have not had the opportunity to consider it in fine detail. However, we do support the sentiment behind the amendment wholeheartedly. There is a very clear concern, I believe, in the community about the decision by 2UE and 2GB to, effectively, merge many of the underpinnings of their news gathering and news dissemination activities. That potentially has a very significant anticompetitive effect on the media market in Sydney, particularly the radio talk market. There is no doubt that there is a gap in the legislation that exists at the moment that does need to be reconsidered.

We do have a reservation on this issue with respect to the parallel, or connection, with the editorial separation regime that the government has put in place with respect to its cross-media ownership mergers arrangements in the bill. We believe that would be both ineffective and, ultimately, a potential threat to freedom of the press. There is a parallel here. This is a different situation, because we are dealing with two organisations in the same form of media and in the same situation: they are both radio outlets. So there should be no confusion between those two, although there clearly is a parallel.

The opposition will be supporting the honourable member for Calare's amendment because it does at least seek to address this particular problem, although we do reserve the right to consider this proposal further should it emerge in the Senate. This is not the last word from the Labor opposition on this particular proposition, because we have had very little notice of it and we would like to give it greater consideration to consider the possibility that there may be a need for refinement of the words. There may be some issues there that have not yet been adequately addressed.

Leaving that aside, we strongly support the principle expressed in the amendment and the observations made by the honourable member for Calare. There is a clear problem here that needs to be addressed. Given that the parliament is debating legislation that is squarely about the issue of media diversity and given that we as an opposition are committed absolutely to maintaining and improving the level of media diversity in Australia, we believe that it is appropriate for the House of Representatives to approve the amendment moved by the honourable member for Calare.