Senator MARK BISHOP (12:55 PM) —The list of communications policy failures of this government is long, and the failures have serious consequences for all Australians. As time goes by and this government nears the end of its second term, the consequences of those bad policies are becoming apparent. In a number of cases, the opposition has warned the government that its policies were bad and that the implications of the failure of those policies were serious. Many of those policies have had the effect of stifling the Australian IT industry to the detriment of our economy.

Today I wish to discuss the oppressive impact of a number of this government's communications policies. Those policy failures relate to digital television and the absence of new services; the government's failure to put a workable and viable datacasting regime in place; Telstra, and the government's failure to ensure that Australians receive adequate service; the ABC, and the government's ongoing attempts to undermine and destroy the national broadcaster; Australia Post, and the government's decisions that have detrimentally affected this corporation in its financial capacity to properly fulfil its role; and, in relation to spectrum auctions, the government's failure to achieve forecast revenues, which demonstrates its fiscal irresponsibility and mismanagement.

Cancellation of the datacasting spectrum auction demonstrated the government's inability to put in place a workable and viable policy framework for the new services. On the policies that the government has sought to implement over the past few years, we have warned the government that a considerable number of them would fail and that they were flawed. We recommended viable alternative policies, which the government rejected. These deliberate policy decisions of the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, Senator Alston, with all of their weaknesses, have been out in the open for public scrutiny.

This government is stifling Australia's development. Communications policy and consequent technological advancement are critical to the generation of wealth and employment and the generation and sustenance of new industries. The Howard government seems to be scared of new technologies and opposes market solutions, so it has chosen to restrict communications industries. However, these industries, as we all know, are one of the keys to the future. Technological industries provide the infrastructure and act as a feeder industry by stimulating other industries. The government's regulatory framework for digital television has been and continues to be a resounding failure.

One of the critical measures of success of digital television policy is the take-up rate of digital equipment. The Broadcasting Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2001 amends the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 to permit broadcasters to broadcast demonstration tapes on new equipment to encourage take-up of digital equipment by retailers. This amendment, to be discussed in the near future, evidences the failure of digital take-up, and the government has been forced to amend its own legislation. Still today, following the introduction of digital television six months ago, a minuscule number of Australians have access to the new range of services that digital television was supposed to offer. The introduction of digital television in Australia could not have been handled more unsatisfactorily. Back in August 1999, the minister stated:

It is obvious that Australians are not yet privy to these promised services and that there is no datacasting industry and no prospect of one in the near future. The reason why Australia does not have a datacasting industry is that the government put in place a regulatory framework that was so restrictive that no-one could come up with a viable business plan. The failure of government to come up with a reasonable policy has led to no new entrants in the emergent industry, thus preventing additional economic growth and a range of new products, services and choices for consumers.

Potential datacasters and the opposition warned the government that its policy was bad, and doomed to failure. Those potential datacasters consequently did not bid in the government's datacasting spectrum auction and the government had to cancel the auction last month. The government has effectively managed to stifle a new industry and all the opportunities for the economy and consumers that are associated with such.

The Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts is also responsible for the government's majority share in Telstra. This has proven to be a particularly useful instrument for the minister to make him look good. On the occasions when Telstra has made a positive announcement the minister takes credit for it. On the more numerous occasions that Telstra has slipped up or made an announcement that is politically unsavoury, the minister has affirmed Telstra's independence to operate and make its own decisions as a corporate entity. Just last weekend, the minister was pleased to take credit for the changes resulting from Telstra's call zone review. The changes will benefit some customers but fail to address the more fundamental inequities in the existing call zone arrangements. Still, however, the minister supports the full privatisation of Telstra. If the minister is in a position to take credit for the announcement, he must have exerted some influence over Telstra in its decision making process. Yet the minister still considers it appropriate to fully privatise Telstra. In that case, the government of the day will no longer be able to exert any influence over Telstra and consequently it will not be able to ensure benefits like this for Australian consumers.

The minister continues to advocate the privatisation of Telstra in spite of the fact that Telstra's service provision is so clearly inadequate in a number of areas. To fully privatise Telstra now would be a breach of the government's 1998 election commitment that the government would not fully privatise Telstra until an independent legislated inquiry certified the adequacy of Telstra's service levels. So the minister pulled together the Besley inquiry, which was neither independent nor legislated, and which still concluded that Telstra's service levels are inadequate, particularly in remote and rural areas of Australia. The government has failed to adequately respond to the Besley inquiry but will still proceed with the full privatisation of Telstra at the earliest opportunity.

The ABC is another agency for which Senator Alston is responsible. The chain effect of inappropriate board appointments has had a deleterious impact on the national broadcaster. Inappropriate board appointments have led to an even more inappropriate choice of managing director by that board. The managing director, in his short time at the helm, has demonstrated to date that he has no clear vision for the ABC's future—unless that vision is destruction of everything worth while about our national broadcaster. This lack of vision is evidenced by the imprudent manner in which Mr Shier undertook his misguided restructure of the organisation. With the advice of several consultants, Mr Shier embarked on his project of redundancies and new appointments. As a consequence, staff morale at the ABC is at an all-time low. The broadcaster's cupboards are bare of quality Australian programs. What is more, there is nothing promising in the pipeline to fill the void that has been created. In fact, the most successful aspect of the ABC's operations has been ABC Online, and even that was at the innovation of the previous managing director Mr Brian Johns.

Australia Post is another agency that comes within Minister Alston's portfolio. The government has tried to come up with a useful policy for Australia Post as well. In pursuit of its ideological obsession with competition, even where it is unwarranted and likely to be detrimental to Australians, the coalition last year sought to deregulate the postal industry further when it introduced the Postal Services Legislation Amendment Bill 2000. When its ideas proved unpopular with the electorate, the government did one of those backflips that it was famous for. In the year or so since the announcement of Australia Post deregulation, the government has changed its mind. It has backed off, for the time being at least. Deregulation of a successful public institution that provides vital community and economic services was the government's best attempt at innovation and changing with the times. It was one of the few occasions on which the government had tried to introduce reform. Yet, as soon as there was a little criticism of, a little media attention to, the deficiencies of the policy, the government got scared and ran away from what it believed in, at least for the election year.

This is just another example of the coalition's lack of vision. It seems that whenever it has a policy idea, it is a bad idea. Because the idea is bad, it is criticised and the government backs off for electoral reasons. In its recently delivered 2001-02 budget, the government proposes to take a secret $200 million special dividend from Australia Post. The GST cost Australia Post something in the order of $90 million to $100 million last year and the government's plans for further deregulation of the postal service, when reintroduced, will cost Australia Post something in the order of $200 million annually in forgone revenue, according to questions at estimates.

The government has exerted sustained pressure on Australia Post over the last 12 months or so. Surely this is not the most effective policy approach for Australia Post that the minister can come up with. On the occasions when the government has pursued its policy and not done a backflip, the policy has failed. Recent spectrum auctions have highlighted the government's inability to manage the economy and its failure to implement a workable datacasting regime. In last year's budget the government increased its estimate of the total revenue it expected to receive from four spectrum auctions to $2.6 billion. Not only was it inappropriate and fiscally irresponsible to place a public value on proceeds expected from special auctions, but those revenue forecasts were also overly inflated. The 3G mobile spectrum auction contributed under $1.17 billion and the government was left with a hole in the budget of at least $1.3 billion when it was forced to cancel the subsequent datacasting auction. The government failed the Australian economy and the Australian people once again.

In conclusion, Senator Alston has demonstrated a remarkable level of incompetence during his time as minister for communications. Recurring policy failures in almost all areas of communications policy point to the government's lack of vision and foresight. As I have detailed in this speech, the list is long and it is a reflection on the minister and the government.

These notable failures will impact on the Australian economy and Australian consumers in the years to come. The government has failed to adequately introduce digital television, and the absence of new services is proof. The government has failed to put a workable and viable datacasting regime in place. The government has failed to ensure that Australians receive adequate service from Telstra. The government has consistently attempted to undermine and destroy the ABC, while Australians value that institution. The government has made decisions that have detrimentally affected Australia Post and its financial capacity to properly fulfil its role. In relation to spectrum auctions, the government has failed to achieve forecast revenues and demonstrated fiscal irresponsibility and mismanagement. Cancellation of the datacasting spectrum demonstrated the government's inability to put in place a workable and viable policy framework for these new services. In conclusion, it is fair to comment that this government and this minister have repeatedly failed Australia in the area of communications policy.