Monique Ryan (Kooyong, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

When we think about what has shaped the cultural identity of most of the people fortunate enough to sit in this place, we think of the stories told on our screens. We recall with fondness Skippy the Bush Kangaroo, A Country Practice, Hey Hey It's Saturday and, particularly for those of us who grew up in Melbourne, Neighbours. Old people like me think of Seven Little Australians and The Sullivans. Some of us picked up career inspiration from shows like The Young Doctors, and some of the more wily members of this house likely picked up a few tips on how to win friends and influence people from Prisoner, Total Control, or even Underbelly.

Those shows did more than just entertain us; they reflected who we are on screen. We recall films like Picnic at Hanging Rock, The Getting of Wisdom and Breaker Morant, which captured our unique continent and our history. Those productions didn't just create memories; they created jobs—thousands of them—in writing, acting, directing and the trades that underpin our arts sector. Those stories mattered. They told us who we were and who we could be. They gave us Australian voices, Australian artists and Australian landscapes. They built an industry that trained generations of creative professionals, legends like Jack Thompson, Jacki Weaver, Kylie Minogue and Peter Weir, and they exported a unique talent to the world.

Today, that cultural foundation is under threat. Australians are consuming less Australian content than ever before. For the first time, in 2023 less than half of Australians watched free-to-air TV, where local content has historically dominated. Last year, more Australians watched subscription video on demand services like Netflix than live free-to-air or broadcast video on demand. On the other hand, nine out of ten of us use an online streaming service, where global giants like Netflix, Disney+ and Prime dedicate only a small fraction of their catalogues to Australian content.

The proportion of Australian-made drama and children's programming commissioned to these platforms has been steadily falling for years. Instead, our screens are dominated by high-quality, well funded, aggressively marketed overseas content, while local stories struggle to find a local audience.

It's not because Australians don't want to see or hear Australian stories; in fact, well over two-thirds of us think it's important to have new and diverse Australian dramas and documentaries. We're not watching our own stories because the playing field on these global platforms is tilted in favour of global content. For years now, overseas streaming giants have operated here without any obligation to invest in our culture. They take billions in subscription revenue from Australian households but return only a fraction of that to Australian creators. Quotas for local content have long been mandated for commercial free-to-air television. We've also mandated that subscription television services providing drama channels must meet local drama expenditure requirements, and commercial free-to-air broadcasters have been subject to licensing fees, so it is by no means a novel that users of our airways pay for their use or are required to show certain forms of content. For some time, though, the outlier has been the subscription services, which are currently essentially unregulated in Australia.

That is why this bill matters, but it's also why this bill is really disappointing. It sets a baseline of 10 per cent of program expenditure or 7.5 per cent of Australian derived revenue must go to the production of new Australian programs. This is not a content requirement; it is an expenditure requirement. Major subscription video-on-demand services are required under this bill to meet a certain level of expenditure on new, eligible Australian programs, but there is no requirement to carry or to provide a defined amount of Australian content. This is at odds with the government's own national cultural policy, Revive, released in January 2023, which recommended the government introduce requirements for Australian screen content on streaming platforms to ensure continued access to local stories and content, and that it do so no later than 1 July 2024. This requirement is at odds with the minister's claims in this chamber in the last half hour that a content quota is absolutely critical—we do not have one.

The concern is that in the absence of content quotas we will see the odd big-budget production based in Australia, with lots of bucks spent here over a short time, but not the ongoing grassroots support of the industry that it so desperately needs. The government has set the bar very low in requiring a 10 per cent program expenditure or 7.5 per cent of Australian derived revenue for new Australian programs. That's not nearly enough. It's significantly lower than the level previously suggested as desirable by the Albanese government and advocated for by industry. The interim report of the Senate Standing Committee on Environment and Communications' inquiry suggested two models for local content requirements: a progressive model requiring up to 30 per cent obligation for services with more than five million subscribers; or a revenue model in which specified services would have to spend 10 per cent of their Australian revenue on new local drama.

Many nations which we would consider to be our peers impose significantly greater levies or investment obligations than we are proposing in this bill. Compare the requirements set out in this bill to those of France, where streamers must invest at least 20 per cent of local revenue in French content. Across the European Union, catalogues must include at least 30 per cent European works. Those nations understand that local stories and local jobs matter, and that without strong protections local voices will be drowned out by global giants.

Media reporting suggests the government believes that all but one current streamer already meet the expenditure requirements outlined in this bill. If that is true, it suggests that, rather than encouraging additional expenditure in Australian content, this legislation will act only to ensure that the current levels of spending are maintained. If those reports are accurate, it's inadequate and it's disingenuous of the government to project that this legislation is a step forward. That's why I and my crossbench colleagues called on the government earlier this year to deliver on its promise and to legislate for streaming platforms to invest at least 20 per cent of Australian revenue in Australian stories as a matter of urgency. I note that a 20 per cent requirement was also proposed by the Australian Writers Guild and by Screen Producers Australia.

If we want Australian stories told and Australia's creative industries to thrive, it's absolutely critical that our most popular streaming platforms serve them up to Australian audiences. We have to stand up for what we believe to be important. Australian culture is important to us all.

Our creatives are bold. They're adventurous. They're challenging. But this legislation is none of those things. We should double the requirement in this bill, to match the ambition of our peers and the expectations of our creatives, and we should improve the legislation so that there is no wiggle room for streaming services to apply Hollywood accounting to how they ascribe proportionate value to programs. The Senate inquiry heard from Screen Producers Australia of its concern that the legislation in this current form is unclear on how proportionate value would be calculated. The regulator needs to be able to see the platform's books. This can't be a matter of self-reporting and of self-regulation by the industry.

This isn't just about culture; it's about jobs. Investment in Australian content supports writers, actors, producers and technicians. It sustains regional economies. It builds pathways for young Australians who dream of telling their stories on screen. But it's also about telling the world about us. It's about increasing trade and tourism to this country.

Australians deserve to see themselves front and centre on their screens. We deserve shows that speak to our lives, our communities, our history and our country. Our creative workers deserve a fair share of the revenue flowing to global platforms, and because we and they deserve this, it is critical to set content production requirements that protect, promote and progress our cultural identity for this generation and for every generation to come.

See this speech in context