Jim Turnour (Leichhardt, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise today to support the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Competition and Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2009. Today is a good day for the Australian people and a good day for the Australian economy. Today we are seeing the Rudd government introduce nation-building legislation, regulatory reform that is about building the National Broadband Network, about ensuring that we can build the nation into the future. Telecommunications are the railways and highways of the 21st century. In the same way that road and rail opened up the country and drove productivity over the last 200 years, we are going to see telecommunications continue to drive productivity over the next century.

Telecommunication links are particularly important to cities like Cairns and regions like Cape York and the Torres Strait in my electorate of Leichhardt. You do not build two roads or two railways to a city. Similarly, in a decentralised country like Australia you need one good quality telecommunications network at the wholesale level. You can then allow retail competition to work effectively. That is what this legislation is about: creating the right environment for the NBN to be rolled out and for people and businesses in the community to get the access to the telecommunications network that we all need. The NBN will provide the network we need, but the regulatory reforms create the right retail competition that is required.

This piece of legislation is a critical element of the Rudd government’s commitment to reform the Australian telecommunications environment. Our telecommunications industry is due for a shake-up. The industry has been calling for fundamental changes for many years and ultimately it will be the consumer—residents and businesses—that will benefit. The bill proposes a package of reforms to deliver a more efficient telecommunications market, with appropriate consumer safeguards, as the National Broadband Network rolls out. It represents the most significant reform of the telecommunications regime since open competition was introduced in 1997. When you consider that the OECD ranks Australia 16th in terms of broadband penetration per 100 inhabitants and as the fourth, fifth and ninth most expensive for low-speed, medium-speed and high-speed average monthly subscription broadband prices respectively, it is clear that we need to improve our existing telecommunications regulations. It is in the interests of Australia’s consumers and businesses.

I listened to the member for Dunkley’s contribution earlier as the spokesperson for the opposition. It highlighted the clear difference between the Rudd government and the opposition because, clearly, they are way out of touch on that side of this chamber. You do not have to get out into the community and talk to too many people before you understand how unhappy people are with telecommunications in this country, how they are annoyed about the lack of service and the cost of that service. They are tired of governments bleating about wanting to drive productivity and create a national broadband network, about supporting business out in a community by getting the telecommunications network its needs and about people getting the decent education and health services they need through improved telecommunications. They want a government to take action, and that is what the Rudd government is doing.

The member for Dunkley was talking about the minister and running a lot of spin terms, talking about cartoon characters and cryogenics and he suggested this is a spiritless issue. He even suggested the minister was down in his electorate seeking to get a candidate down there. Well, I hope he is, and I think he should send the member for Dunkley’s speech out into his electorate because I do not think there would be too many people in his electorate who would be very happy with his contribution. I saw the member for Herbert here earlier and I understand he is on the speakers list for this debate, so I am looking forward to his contribution. I can assure all the members opposite that I get out and doorknock and run mobile offices in my community, so I know that anybody who lives in rural and regional Australia—I see the member for Capricornia is here as well—understands how upset and unhappy people in those areas are about telecommunications in this country. They are cheering today when we are introducing this bill because they want to see regulatory reform.

The opposition, particularly the Liberal Party, are out of touch on this issue. I understand that the National Party is talking about supporting this legislation in the Senate, that Senator Joyce is talking about supporting this legislation. So when Liberal spokespeople talk about the coalition they are really talking about the Liberal Party’s position on this. I am looking forward to getting back to my electorate after the sittings this week and next week and talking about this legislation and the opposition’s position on it. I will be letting the community know the fact that they are opposing the introduction of legislation that is going to ensure we get regulatory reform, roll out a decent National Broadband Network and deliver good quality telecommunications services to places like Cairns.

The purpose of the reform package, of which this piece of legislation is a key part, is to improve competition, strengthen consumer safeguards and remove redundant red tape. I look forward to it having a positive impact on regional Australia. I represent an electorate in regional Queensland and know the consumers of telecommunications services in regional Australia are more exposed to any shortcomings in the effectiveness of consumer safeguards such as the universal service obligation and the consumer service guarantee than those in urban Australia. The proposed strengthening of the consumer protection framework will reduce the potential for rural consumers to experience falling service qualities. I had an example of this in the last week or so up in Cape York, when somebody had their phone down and it was going to take an extended period of time to get it fixed. This legislation will address these sorts of failures to meet universal service obligations, enabling them to be met and action to be taken within an appropriate time.

The four reforms also mean a step forward for the government’s delivery of the superfast National Broadband Network. The NBN will be the single largest infrastructure investment made by any Australian government. We are very proud to be a nation-building government. The opposition left a legacy of 18 failed broadband plans in 11½ years. Before the 2007 election the opposition were prepared to deliver high-speed broadband only to those living in the five mainland state capital cities, ensuring an ongoing digital divide and clearly not representing the needs and interests of regional Australia.

The OPEL plan was a second-class plan for rural and regional Australia. It was dreamt up by the former Prime Minister, Mr Howard, because he knew that our National Broadband Network plan was resonating in the community and that people wanted action. The reality is that wireless is being delivered out there by Telstra, Optus and others, and OPEL would not have been delivering anything additional. It would basically have been delivering a second-rate service to rural and regional Australia. I see that the Leader of the National Party is in the chamber. I am looking forward to his contribution on this bill, and I hope he is on the speakers list. The wireless broadband plan that was being put forward by the opposition would not have delivered decent services to rural and regional Australia.

The Rudd government is very serious about delivering a fibre-to-the premise network to places like Cairns. No time is being wasted in progressing the NBN. The government will do whatever needs to be done to ensure delivery. Minister Conroy’s announcement in September of industry reform is one of the important steps on the road to achieving this. These are major reforms but I am hopeful that the government and Telstra can reach a good outcome that will benefit the future of telecommunications in Australia. I have spoken to some Telstra shareholders. They saw the share price being eroded more under the previous CEO and leadership than it has been since this announcement. This is a great opportunity for Telstra to get involved in the NBN. This is a great opportunity for Telstra to seize this and become a partner with government and others in terms of delivering good quality broadband services in the future, and it is a great opportunity for shareholders to increase their wealth into the future.

This bill will address Telstra’s vertical and horizontal integration. Telstra remains one of the most integrated telecommunications company in the world. Telstra owns the only fixed-line copper network that connects almost every house, the largest cable network, half of the largest pay-TV provider and the largest mobile phone network. Telstra clearly has dominance in the market and a failure to address Telstra’s level of integration has not lent itself to an effective and competitive telecommunications regime. Australia is paying for this in terms of being behind the eight ball internationally when it comes to the cost, quality and so forth of telecommunications services.

Telstra, as a vertically integrated company, provides both wholesale and retail services. As a result, Telstra has both the incentive and the ability to favour its own retail businesses over those of its wholesale customers. The overwhelming message from the industry and the ACCC is that the current arrangements to address the issues arising from Telstra’s vertical integration are inadequate. We heard the opposition spokesman criticising Graeme Samuel and the ACCC. The ACCC have backed the government’s reforms and want to see the government take action and break the dominance of Telstra within the market. They are tired of the complaints and of the follow-ups that they have to make in relation to telecommunications in this country. The legislation that the Rudd government is putting forward will address Telstra’s vertical integration by allowing Telstra to voluntarily submit an enforceable undertaking to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to structurally separate. The government’s clear preference is for these structural issues to be addressed on a voluntary basis.

In addition to this vertical integration, Telstra is also horizontally integrated, as it owns and operates multiple different platforms—copper, cable and mobile. This is in contrast to most other developed countries, where there are restrictions on incumbents owning both cable and traditional fixed-line telephone networks. The Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Competition and Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2009 will address this anticompetitive environment by requiring Telstra to choose its future path. Telstra will be prevented from acquiring spectrum for advanced wireless broadband while it remains vertically integrated, owns a hybrid fibre-coaxial cable network and maintains its interest in Foxtel. Reforms to address Telstra’s high level of integration will mean greater competition, more choice and more affordable prices for people living in regional and remote areas.

This bill will reform the competition regime. If we are to promote competition in our telecommunications industry, we need an appropriate regulatory framework. That is why the government is proposing a series of changes to the Trade Practices Act. I understand that many of the submissions received from industry on the discussion paper released by the government in April this year claimed that our regulatory framework is ineffective due to the ability of parties to engage in regulatory game playing and abuse. Litigation is used to obstruct the process in order to delay regulatory outcomes. Telstra has been using lawyers to basically stop the ACCC from doing its job of ensuring that we can get good quality price-effective services delivered in rural and regional Australia.

The bill will streamline the arrangements through which telephone companies access wholesale services. The ACCC will be able to determine upfront terms and conditions for a three- to five-year period, following consultation with industry; determine principles to apply for longer periods; and make binding rules to immediately address problems with the supply of regulated wholesale services. The bill will also seek to reform arrangements in the Trade Practices Act so that the ACCC can address breaches of competition law and conduct damaging to the market. The ACCC will no longer have to consult with a party before issuing a competition notice, a process previously prone to delay and obstruction. These reforms can stop Telstra holding up needed action in the courts.

We need to make sure that people understand the differences between the government and the opposition on this issue. The government is bringing in regulatory reform because we want to ensure that the competition regulator, the ACCC, can do its job in relation to ensuring that people out there who have complaints and concerns can actually get action on them and we can also get a competitive retail market with a decent National Broadband Network underpinning it as the wholesaler of telecommunications services. We heard the opposition spokesman, the member for Dunkley, criticising these arrangements, criticising the ACCC and effectively barracking for the lawyers, who have been part of the prevention of the rollout and the delivery of decent telecommunications services in this country.

The Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Competition and Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2009 will strengthen consumer safeguards, particularly as we transition to the full rollout of the National Broadband Network. Reforms to key consumer safeguards include the universal service obligation, the customer service guarantee and priority assistance—all of which were flagged in the discussion paper feedback. The bill will strengthen the universal service obligation to ensure all consumers continue to have access to high-quality basic telephone services, including payphones, during the transition to the NBN. As the primary universal service provider, Telstra currently has obligations in terms of installation, removal and relocation of payphones. The government understands that there is considerable community concern about the ongoing removal of public payphones. I know this is something that is important to many of the Indigenous communities throughout Cape York in my electorate that rely heavily upon payphones as a means of communication.

Under the new legislation the minister will specify the standards, terms and conditions of services, connection and repair periods, and reliability requirements. Telstra will be required to meet new minimum performance benchmarks. Failure by Telstra to meet the requirements, including the minimum benchmarks, will expose Telstra to a civil penalty of up to $10 million or an on-the-spot fine issued by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, potentially up to $2 million. The new universal service arrangements will make clear for consumers and Telstra the services Telstra must supply in fulfilment of the universal service obligation rather than those decisions being left to Telstra’s discretion.

Priority assistance is another arrangement that has been discussed as part of this process. The government is acting upon the feedback to ensure such services are not impacted. Priority assistance arrangements require the highest level of telephone service to residential consumers who have a diagnosed life-threatening medical condition. I know of a number of residents in my electorate of Leichhardt who access this service and understand how important a lifeline it is to them. The legislation will require telephone companies to either offer priority assistance services or inform the customer where they can purchase these services.

So we are taking action. We are not going to sit on our hands and do nothing—

See this speech in context