Mr McGAURAN (Arts and the Centenary of Federation) (10:30 AM) —in reply—I wish to thank the member for Perth, Mr Stephen Smith, and the member for Herbert, Mr Lindsay, for their contributions, both very worth while and constructive, during this debate on the Radiocommunications Legislation Amendment Bill 1999 . Sadly I missed the contribution of the member for Perth because I was in the chamber itself on House duty, but, as I understand it from private conversations, it was essentially that the legislation has a qualified pass. Is this the Labor Party hedging their bets again in that they cannot see any obvious faults, failing or misdemeanours in this legislation but, nonetheless, they reserve judgment until a Senate committee can examine it in fine detail?

Far be it for me to deprive Her Majesty's loyal opposition from fulfilling its full responsibilities to properly scrutinise government legislation and hold the executive accountable, but I think it is fairly self-evident that this legislation, being of a technical housekeeping nature, exactly fixes any uncertainties or ambiguities even, dare I say, loopholes in the legislation.

If the opposition's concern is that there has been insufficient consultation and there needs to be an extended further period which they will provide by way of reference to the Senate committee, I am quick to assure the opposition that many months consultation has taken place with industry in the preparation of the amendments that now form part of the Radiocommunications Legislation Amendment Bill 1999. I think it is extremely well drafted legislation. It is exactly what the industry needs to provide certainty for their very considerable investments and, because of the consultation period, the opposition can be assured that we are happy to provide any information that the Senate inquiry and indeed, the Senate itself, may require of us. I can assure the member for Perth, who himself is a very thorough and, indeed, exacting individual in his approach to work, that we have crossed all the t's and dotted all of the i's.

Allow me to summarise, Madam Deputy Speaker, the legislation before the chamber. The government is very proud to establish, in a way our predecessors never did, a pro-competitive telecommunications regulatory framework which encourages new entrants, promotes diversity of services and providers, allows for vigorous but fair competition and protects the interests of consumers.

How stark is the contrast with the previous Labor governments? They were slow to reform; it was almost impossible to protect the interests of consumers in relation to the partial entry of new competitors. Look, let us not be distracted. They are gone, they are buried and they are not coming back for the foreseeable future. Consistent with this policy of the government, the government supports the introduction, where practical and technically feasible, of new and innovative services and efficient usage of associated radio spectrum frequencies.

As many members know, I would hope, the regulatory framework for spectrum management is set out in the Radiocommunications Act of 1992 and associated legislation. The major principles underlying the Radiocommunications Act of 1992 include technological neutrality and indeed, in general, neutrality on the uses to which the spectrum is put.

The bill before the chamber contains various minor amendments that have been requested over several years by the Australian Communications Authority, and the ACA's predecessors, in consultation with the telecommunications industry and consumers. They are, as is obvious, largely unrelated but designed to clarify some possible ambiguities, to finetune aspects of some parts of the act, to increase flexibility, to address some potential loopholes, and to reduce some red tape. The amendments make the existing act clearer and work better. In short, they reflect the good housekeeping nature and efforts of this government. I commend the bill to the chamber.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mrs Gash) —If no member wishes to consider the bill in detail, I will put the report question forthwith. The question is that this bill be reported to the House without amendment.

Question resolved in the affirmative.