• Margaret Simons

10 May 2007Labor hasn't released its policies on key media matters, writes MARGARET SIMONS, so we're left hoping Graeme Samuel holds his nerve

MEDIA policy wasn?t mentioned at all at the ALP National Conference last month ? a fact that was gleefully seized upon by the Minister for Communications, Senator Helen Coonan, to suggest that Labor doesn?t have a plan and that this proves ?Labor is making a habit of creating policy on the run and is continually being caught out.?
?Labor thinks that it can make it all the way to election day with glib lines and no detail on anything,? says Coonan.

Which may be spot on, or may be unfair. It?s hard to know. The last time commentators like me were beginning to suspect that media was a policy free zone for Labor, we were hit amidships by the bold plan for a national Broadband network.

We should be cautious before assuming that Shadow Minister Stephen Conroy hasn?t done the hard yards ? even though there is nothing in Conroy?s recent statements to show engagement with other parts of media policy, and the broadband policy is short on crucial detail, about which more later.

Earlier this year, as part of its planned cost cuts, Labor announced it would not proceed with setting up Digital Australia, the outfit Coonan has charged with driving the uptake of digital television. Coonan is already recruiting to this body, so will Labor sack the recruits if it takes government? What is its alternative plan to ensure we make it into the digital age? We don?t know.

Calls to Shadow Minister Stephen Conroy?s office last week did not reassure. Earlier this year Conroy?s office promised that media policy would be released ?after national conference?, with the impression that it would be soon after. Now his new media spokeswoman, Sophie Mitchell, is giving no hints on timing. ?The policy will be released when it will be released,? she said and made it clear that asking more questions was a waste of time.

There are understandable strategic reasons for delay. Good policy on the key media issues would almost inevitably annoy the media moguls, since it would lead to them facing more competition and threats to their business models. Making enemies of media moguls is not a good move in an election year.

The kindly interpretation of Labor?s silence on media policy would be that it is being prudent. The less kind interpretation is that Senator Conroy ? the ?factional dalek,? to quote Robert Ray ? has been too busy with internal politicking to develop good policy.

I am a charitable person, so here are a few of the things that I am sure Conroy is quietly considering:

First, should there be a fourth free to air commercial television network? Mark Latham thought so at the last election, and indeed the only reason we haven?t got one is because it would mean more competition for the existing, declining, commercial free-to-air channels.

Secondly, should government buy and give away free digital set top boxes, to allow for the almost immediate transition to digital broadcasting and the opening up of the spectrum to new entrants? This solution has been suggested by the television retailer Alex Encel. It may or may not be a good idea, but nobody in government has given a good argument against it. For more on this, see here.

Next, should a Labor government allow immediate multichanneling by existing free to air broadcasters, meaning Kerry Stokes will almost certainly use this to give Channel Seven a back door into pay television?

And will Labor promise to fund the ABC at levels in accordance with the recommendations of the government-commissioned KPMG report? How will Labor implement its promise to introduce an arm's length means of appointing the ABC board, to end the sad history of stacking by governments of both colors?

Labor opposed the relaxation of cross media ownership regulations. That horse has now bolted, but what plans has Labor got to mandate media diversity into the future? What, apart from faster broadband, will Labor do to encourage new entrants into the media industry?

As for faster broadband, while Labor?s policy has clear strengths, there are also many questions that neither the opposition or the government seems keen to answer. Telstra has been conducting a fevered and unprincipled public campaign, using its billing mailouts to campaign against regulation. Given that Telstra may well be the media behemoth of the future, this is more than worrying.

Communications minister Coonan has been trying to counter Labor?s promise to build a national fibre to the node broadband network. She came close, a few weeks ago, to stitching up a deal on regulation to get Telstra to build the network, but that has been foiled by Graeme Samuel, head of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, who overruled her on pricing.

We should be glad about that, although Telstra is naturally furious. In the wake of Samuel?s decision, Telstra launched another episode in its vituperative public campaign, describing Samuel as an ?unelected bureaucrat? (what an insult) who was jeopardising the noble attempt by Telstra to invest in the national interest.

But, as one of the correspondents on the broadband industry blog Whirlpool (link) puts it, ?When given the choice between an un-elected regulator with specific scope to protect Australian consumers, and an un-elected corporation with a history of manipulating markets to protect profit margins, I'll take the regulator designed to protect Australian consumers.?

In an election year, when both sides have everything to lose and one of the nation?s biggest companies is in full campaign mode, an ?unelected bureaucrat? is more likely to protect good policy and proper process than desperate politicians.

It is easy to feel sorry for Coonan. She is under huge pressure. Labor?s broadband policy has hit her amidships and has seized the public imagination. The prime minister is reportedly keen for her to come up with a rival plan, which can only mean a backflip on her previously tough attitude to Telstra.

But before we waste too much sympathy it?s worth remembering why the government is in this fix. When it sold Telstra there were plenty of warnings about the difficulties of allowing the privatised entity to be both a monopoly wholesaler and a retail business. Nothing was done to address these issues. Telstra was not forced to separate its two businesses, nor was serious consideration given to keeping the vital infrastructure in government hands.

Telstra is intent on catapulting its monopoly advantage into the future, and in an election year both sides of politics are likely to cut deals. Labor hasn?t spelt out what it will do with regulations to keep Telstra in check, other than talking vaguely about ?review and relaxation.? Meanwhile the government has said there will be no changes until 2009 ? but given the length of time any fibre network would take to roll out, that really isn?t so far away.

If the government ? or Labor ? give in to Telstra or overrule the ACCC on regulation it will set an appalling precedent, meaning that any big company prepared to conduct a slick and aggressive political campaign can, in an election year, bend public policy to its advantage.

The truth is, regardless of who builds the network, Telstra will necessarily be both part of the solution and the biggest part of the problem.

Perhaps it is too much to hope for a comprehensive media policy from Labor, but the pressure should be on both Coonan and Conroy to drop the rhetoric and give us some detail on what they plan to do with regulation, and particularly what they will do to force Telstra to separate its infrastructure from its retail business.

Meanwhile we should hope that Graeme Samuel hangs tough. ?

Margaret Simons is a freelance journalist and author. Her new book about the media will be published later this year by Penguin.

Photo: Andrew Dean/iStockphoto.com

READER COMMENTS

No mention, Margaret, of the community television sector, and how BA and Federal Government are taking them to the cleaners over analogue ? digital transition and beyond!!

Andrew Carroll
Briz31 Limited