Mr PRICE (12:31 PM) —On behalf of the Standing Committee on Procedure I present the committee's interim report entitled Media coverage of House proceedings, including the chamber, Main Committee and committees, together with the minutes of proceedings and evidence received by the committee. I am pleased to have this opportunity to present the Procedure Committee's interim report, which was released out of session on 29 June. The report covers an important aspect of the inquiry: access by the parliamentary press gallery to proceedings in the House, Main Committee and committees of the House. The report addresses both television images and still photography.

As this is likely to be the last report of the committee, I would like to place on record deep appreciation for the committee staff, in particular Judy Middlebrook and Peter Fowler, both of whom have made an outstanding contribution to the extensive work of the committee. I know that if our chair had been present she would have wished to make the same comments. I would also like to acknowledge the contribution of the chair, the honourable member for McPherson, and other members of the committee.

As part of its inquiry, the committee invited members of the press gallery, media managers, AUSPIC and staff from the Broadcasting section of the Department of Parliamentary Services to a roundtable discussion. The discussion covered current guidelines on media access and coverage, as well as proposals for amending the guidelines. I extend special thanks to Mr Neil Pickering from the Broadcasting section of the Department of Parliamentary Services for his support in providing technical information. Earlier, the committee had held a roundtable discussion with a range of persons, including your good self, Mr Speaker, the Deputy Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition, the Leader of the House, the Manager of Opposition Business, the whips and the Clerk. I would like to place on record the committee's appreciation for all those who attended, and especially for their contribution to this report.

The committee recognises that the policy governing access by the media and the implementation of that policy can most effectively be managed by one person, the Speaker. The television bureaus expressed the view that they are dependent on footage produced by the DPS and that they are disadvantaged in comparison to still photographers, who are allowed to take their own images. Not surprisingly, representatives from the print media pointed out that still photographers are disadvantaged when compared with television broadcasters, because they are limited mainly to images of question time.

The committee considered proposals by the television bureaus that would have allowed them to have their own camera operators in the galleries. There is an occupational and health difficulty with this proposal, associated with the physical presence of camera operators in the galleries, particularly at question time. A visit to the galleries with press gallery camera operators highlighted the fact that the eight television cameras operated by the DPS already occupy the best vantage positions for covering the chamber. They cover all angles and, being housed in the walls, do not interfere with public access.

The committee considers that one way of meeting the requirements of the television bureaus was better use of the so-called iso, or isolated, feeds. DPS broadcasting staff could take footage as requested by a television bureau on a cost recovery basis. This could supplement the current composite feed—as seen on channel 1 of the House Monitoring Service—which is made available at no cost to the gallery.

The committee hopes that television broadcasting of public hearings by the parliamentary committees can be extended and applauds Sky News initiatives to increase the coverage of proceedings generally. Increasing the number of committee rooms with cameras would assist in this regard. The committee recommends that the Speaker revise the guidelines to permit access by still photographers to, as well as question time, discussions of matters of public importance, divisions and adjournment debates. If this proves satisfactory after a three-month trial period, perhaps further extensions of access could be considered. The committee was informed that technological changes to still cameras are not reflected in the relevant guidelines. The committee recommends that this should be corrected.

The committee has yet to finalise its views on all aspects of this inquiry and hopes that by presenting an interim report feedback will be provided which can be taken into account in the final report. The media is the principal way ordinary Australians are informed about parliamentary proceedings. The Leader of the Opposition has expressed the view that restrictions on the media need to be freed up. This report goes some way to that end.

What is clear is that the dialogue with the media was most worth while and there is merit in continuing that process to better appreciate its needs. This will, I suspect, not be the last report to recommend further changes to media guidelines. On behalf of the committee, I would like to thank the members of the press gallery, the media managers and others who helped us understand the issues. (Time expired)