Senator BROWN(12.48 p.m.) —In my contribution to this debate on 26 June, I stated the concern of the Australian Greens that this legislation allows a change to the media cross-ownership rules. We do not believe that such a change should be entertained at a time when there is a major review of those rules taking place in secret, behind closed doors, under enormous pressure by the media organisations and the media magnates. We think it should all be out in the open and, if there are to be changes to the rules, there should be a public discussion before such changes are made. I will not reiterate the arguments I put before, but I want to move the following second reading amendment:

At the end of the motion, add:

"but the Senate is of the view that Australia's cross-media ownership rules should not be changed until a full, open and independent public inquiry has been held".

That would mean, in effect, that this change is sensibly held in abeyance until there has been that open scrutiny of what it means in terms of not only the change itself but flow-on changes which are alarming those people who closely watch the intricacies of these rules.

I put that amendment and I hope that the Senate will support it. It is a big issue in Australia. We have arguably the most concentrated media ownership of any nation in the world—certainly of any similar country. We have seen the number of owners reduced dramatically over the last couple of decades.

I see this change, which I am sure the government will say is one at the margins, being a further erosion of that diversity of ownership; if not an erosion per se, it opens the door to further constriction and confinement of the diversity of ownership. That is not a good thing for the fourth estate; it is not a good thing for democracy; it is not a good thing for society. I commend this amendment to the Senate.

Debate (on motion by Senator Herron) adjourned.

Sitting suspended from 12.51 p.m. to 2.00 p.m.