Senator ALSTON (Minister for Communications and the Arts)(5.09 p.m.) —I think I was halfway through a speech on this subject, but I suppose I cannot let the opportunity pass without saying that I presume the Democrats were aware in moving amendment 50 that there were very substantial legal obligations entered into by the government with both Optus and Vodafone to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. No doubt they would have been aware of that. Once again, this seems to be yet another example of their being utterly oblivious to economic reality and pushing a line—not ideological these days, but simply a line that presumably they think will somehow appeal to a few disgruntled citizens at sone future point in time.

I have given all the reasons why we are opposed to the amendment. I did not hear Senator Allison respond to any of those, so presumably there is no need for me to go over them again. As far as any problems for the handicapped are concerned, I heard Senator Allison say, and I wrote it down, that the Deafness Forum told the Senate committee that those with hearing aid implants cannot use mobile phones and the same applies to those with pacemakers. If that is the case, what is the difference whether you have got analog or digital? It has got nothing to do with maintaining the analog service.

Senator Schacht —There is a difference with digital.

Senator ALSTON —Well, she did not say it, if that is what she meant. Assuming that she is talking about digital, retention of the AMPS network is not expected to provide any benefits to hearing aid or pacemaker wearers as solutions to interference problems experienced when the digital phone technology was introduced have been found and are being implemented. Hearing aids that comply with Australian standard 1088.9 enable the use of a digital mobile phone to within one metre of the aid. Aids that comply with AS1088.9 are already available on the Australian market. Any person requiring the greater immunity this aid offers from all electronic and electrical interference, not just digital mobile phones, could upgrade now.

The Spectrum Management Agency is writing to the Therapeutic Goods Administration asking them to consider mandating the standard. Mandatory requirements would be phased in over a two- to three-year period to ensure that aids that do not comply with the standard are not made obsolete overnight.

The future development of AS1088.9.C.2 will allow a hearing aid wearer to use a digital mobile phone, placing the phone against the ear, not using the hands-free attachments that are currently available for some models of phones. Aids that meet these specifications are now being developed. Pacemakers used in Australia, if subjected to electromagnetic interference, will revert to backup, that is, the pacemaker's baseline program. The pacemaker will not stop working. Once the interference goes away, the pacemaker will revert to its normal program. Pacemakers that offer higher immunity from electromagnetic interference from digital mobile phones and other radiocommunication transmitters have been developed and show marked improvement in immunity levels.

For those reasons, we are opposed to this amendment. I stress, which I do not think Senator Allison did, that she is saying that, if you do not have coverage from 1 July, which is only a few months away, AMPS ought to be able to continue. It is simply a backdoor way of doing what the earlier amendment was designed to do but probably it would cause more chaos in the process.