Bills Digest No.
59, 2019–20
PDF version [870KB]
Owen Griffiths
Law and Bills Digest Section
27
November 2019
Contents
The Bills
Digest at a glance
Purpose of
the Bill
Structure of
the Bill
Background
Committee
consideration
Policy
position of non-government parties/independents
Position of
major interest groups
Financial
implications
Statement of
Compatibility with Human Rights
Key issues
and provisions
Date introduced: 16
October 2019
House: House of
Representatives
Portfolio: Communications
and the Arts
Commencement: On
Royal Assent
Links: The links to the Bill,
its Explanatory Memorandum and second reading speech can be found on the
Bill’s home page, or through the Australian
Parliament website.
When Bills have been passed and have received Royal Assent,
they become Acts, which can be found at the Federal Register of Legislation
website.
All hyperlinks in this Bills Digest are correct as
at November 2019.
The Bills Digest at a glance
Introduction
The Communication Legislation Amendment (Deregulation and
Other Measures) Bill 2019 (the Bill) represents the third time a version of
this proposed legislation has been considered by the Parliament. This publication
draws on and updates earlier Bills Digests prepared for previous iterations of
the Bill. In particular, R Jolly, Communications
Legislation Amendment (Deregulation and Other Measures) Bill 2017,
Bills digest, 103, 2016–17, Parliamentary Library, Canberra, 2017.
Key provisions
The key provisions of the Bill will:
- Remove
a requirement for persons taking control of regulated media assets to notify
the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) (which duplicates an
existing notification requirement) (Schedule 1).
- Amend
the National Broadband Network Companies Act 2011 to allow NBN Co to
dispose of surplus non-communication goods (Schedule 1).
- Remove
the requirement for ACMA to consult with an advisory committee before declaring
a submarine cable protection zone (Schedule 1).
- Correct
an error in the Telecommunications Act 1997 which relates to the admissibility
of evidence in certain proceedings (Schedule 1).
- Alter
the amount of transitional support payments to Network Investments Pty Ltd
(Schedule 2).
- Change
the requirements for ACMA and the Australian Competition and Consumer
Commission (ACCC) to provide certain reports to the Minister to table in
Parliament (Schedule 3).
- Make
minor amendments to communications legislation to repeal redundant provisions,
provide consistent use of terms and update the use of terminology (Schedule 4).
- Repeal
a number of pieces of redundant and spent legislation (Schedule 5).
- Remove
specific consultation requirements in the making of procedural rules by the ACCC
(Schedule 5).
- Facilitate
industry-based management of telephone numbering by giving the Minister the
power to specify a numbering scheme manager and setting out numbering scheme
principles (Schedule 6).
- Remove
a requirement that ACMA publish a notice in the Commonwealth Gazette
when it determines, varies or revokes a program standard or datacasting
standard (Schedule 7).
- Remove
the capacity of NBN Co to issue statements of non-installation of optical-fibre
in new real estate developments (which operate to remove obligations on
developers to install fibre-ready infrastructure) (Schedule 8).
Purpose of
the Bill
The purpose of the Communications Legislation Amendment
(Deregulation and Other Measures) Bill 2019 (the Bill) is to make amendments to
a broad range of legislation relevant to the communications sector. These
amendments are intended to ‘minimise the regulatory burden on the broadcasting
and telecommunications sectors, and to simplify regulation by removing
redundant or otherwise unnecessary provisions’.[1]
The Bill’s provisions include amendments to:
Structure of
the Bill
The key amendments of the Bill are contained in eight
schedules. These are:
- Schedule
1–Streamlining Regulation
- Schedule
2–Broadcasting licensee support payments
- Schedule
3–Monitoring of the telecommunications industry
- Schedule
4–Technical amendments
- Schedule
5–Spent and redundant legislation
- Schedule
6–Numbering arrangements
- Schedule
7–Publication requirements and
- Schedule
8–Installation of optical fibre lines.
Background
Legislative context
The Bill is the third time a version of this proposed legislation
has been considered by the Parliament. In December 2015, the Communications
Legislation Amendment (Deregulation and Other Measures) Bill 2015 (2015
Bill) was introduced into the House of Representatives.[2]
After the Senate agreed to an Australian Labor Party (Labor) amendment in
relation to NBN Co’s reporting obligations, the 2015 Bill was returned to the
House of Representatives.[3]
The House of Representatives disagreed with the Senate’s amendment and the 2015
Bill lapsed at prorogation of the 44th Parliament.[4]
A Bills Digest prepared by the Parliamentary Library on
the 2015 Bill (published before the Senate’s amendment) is available.[5]
In March 2017, the Communications
Legislation Amendment (Deregulation and Other Measures) Bill 2018 (2018
Bill) was introduced into the House of Representatives.[6]
The 2018 Bill passed the House of Representatives after some amendments by the
Government and revisions to the Explanatory Memorandum which included amendments
to reflect consideration by the Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of
Bills (discussed below). However, following its introduction into the Senate,
the 2018 Bill lapsed at the prorogation of the 45th Parliament.[7]
A Bills Digest prepared by the Parliamentary Library on
the 2018 Bill (published prior to the Government amendments in the House of
Representatives) is available.[8]
Some provisions have been removed, altered or reordered
between the three versions of the Bill. For example, the amendments in ‘Schedule
2–Broadcasting licensee support payments’ in the Bill were not contained in the
earlier versions. ‘Schedule 2–Complaints handling by the ACMA’ which was
contained in the 2018 Bill (as introduced) is no longer in the Bill.
Deregulation
The Bill represents part of the Coalition Government’s ongoing
deregulation policy intended to reduce the cost to Australian businesses of red
tape by repealing legislation and regulations considered unnecessary and
counter-productive.[9]
The extent to which rules and regulations have imposed excessively onerous
burdens on the communications sector has been noted in the past. The final
report of the Convergence Review Committee, commissioned in 2012 to examine
Australia’s rapidly changing media landscape, concluded that many elements of
the current communications regulatory regime are outdated and unnecessary,
while other rules are becoming ineffective as the communications landscape
evolves.[10]
The communications portfolio was a particular target for
red tape reduction with two Department of Communications’ discussion papers noting
that the sector was ‘subject to substantial levels of regulation’ and that it
is ‘timely to consider whether the current communications regulatory framework
remains appropriate for the modern communications environment’.[11]
In 2015, then Minister for Communications, Senator Mitch
Fifield, commented that the Government had delivered significant progress in
the implementation of the Government’s regulatory reform agenda in the communications
sector.[12]
The Minister added that during 2014 and 2015 the Government had introduced more
than 65 communications sector measures aimed at simplifying regulation and
removed more than 3,400 pages of unnecessary regulation. This had ‘delivered an
estimated cumulative annual savings of $340 million for businesses and
consumers in the communications sector’.[13]
In 2018, the Senate Select Committee on Red Tape tabled
its report on Policy and Process to Limit and Reduce Red Tape, which
broadly considered regulatory burden in Australia and the Government’s deregulation
agenda (but did not specifically address the communications sector).[14]
The Select Committee concluded that, while the Government had shown a
commitment to deregulation and red tape reduction, ‘the business sector
unequivocally argues that the Deregulation Agenda is yet to deliver the
substantive outcomes it set out to achieve’.[15]
It made a number of recommendations for further reforms to limit and reduce
regulation which included ‘a whole-of-government stocktake of Commonwealth
regulation every three years’.[16]
Committee
consideration
Senate Standing Committee for the Selection of Bills
The Senate Selection of Bills Committee previously recommended
that both the 2015 Bill and the 2018 Bill not be referred to a committee for
inquiry.[17]
On 14 November 2019, it also recommended that the Bill not be referred to a
committee.[18]
Senate Standing Committee for the
Scrutiny of Bills
The Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills
(Scrutiny Committee) has raised a number of issues regarding the Bill and the
previous versions of the Bill. These are noted in the key issues and provisions
section for the relevant Schedules below.
Policy
position of non-government parties/independents
Australian Labor Party
Labor supported the passage of the Bill in the House of
Representatives, but criticised the scope of the amendments and the time taken
to pass reforms in the communications portfolio. The Shadow Communications
Minister, Michelle Rowland MP, commented:
[T]his is a straightforward bill that forms part of a
rudimentary housekeeping exercise. As such, Labor will not oppose this bill.
But the reality is this: these amendments actually do little to reduce the cost
of regulation on the broadcasting or telecommunication sectors. As I noted
earlier, the government has actually spent the last three years increasing the
regulatory burden on telecommunications companies, and this bill does nothing
to reverse that trend. While earlier deregulation bills actually did deliver
more significant cost savings for industry, in comparison this bill looks by
and large inconsequential. What we would like to see is the government
developing a genuine and timely reform agenda to advance the interests of
citizens, consumers and the communications sector.[19]
Labor moved a second reading amendment which highlighted
its concerns with the communications sector in the context of the Bill. These
concerns included a lack of substantial reform in the portfolio, funding cuts
to public broadcasting and a lack of progress in spectrum reform. However, this
proposed amendment was negatived.[20]
Australian Greens
The Australian Greens do not appear to have commented on
the Bill or the 2018 Bill. When the 2015 Bill was before the Parliament, former
Australian Greens Senator Scott Ludlam indicated his party was likely to
support the passage of that Bill:
It appears to the Australian Greens that this is basically
housekeeping. It is an omnibus bill that sweeps up a number of different areas,
particularly, streamlining the broadcast licensing regime; removing some of the
licensing categories that I understand have never in fact been used in the
entire time that they have been on the statute books; and maybe allowing ACMA
to target its limited resources a little bit more directly at the areas where
it needs to wave a stick or intervene.
The amendments on the telecom side around the ACMA and the
ACCC's powers also appear to the Australian Greens to be reasonably
sensible—again, streamlining recordkeeping, removing tariff fixing directions
powers and a number of other fairly innocuous amendments, as far as we have
been able to ascertain. I might put a couple of questions to the minister on
the numbering arrangements when we get to the committee stage, but again I do
not think there is anything here that we need to detain the Senate with
overlong. This is sensible legislation that will clean up provisions that are
either impediments to smooth functioning of the telecommunications and
broadcast sector or are in fact completely redundant and have been placed in
the statutes back in the mists of time and clearly have not been used and have
not been all that necessary.[21]
Minor parties/independents
Other minor parties and independent members and senators
do not appear to have commented on the Bill at this stage.
Position of
major interest groups
There appears to have been little commentary made by the
telecommunication and broadcasting stakeholders regarding the Bill or its
previous iterations. The proposed change to an industry-managed telephone
numbering management framework has prompted a proposal by the Communications
Alliance to become the numbering scheme manager. The Australian Communications
Consumer Action Network has indicated it is willing to support this approach
with some conditions. These matters are detailed in the key issues and
provisions section concerning Schedule 6 below.
Financial
implications
The Explanatory Memorandum states that the Bill will not
have ‘a significant impact on Commonwealth expenditure or revenue’.[22]
Presumably, the proposed efficiencies for regulatory agencies may positively
benefit the Commonwealth and telecommunications and broadcasting industry
stakeholders.
Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights
As required under Part 3 of the Human Rights
(Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011 (Cth), the Government has assessed the
Bill’s compatibility with the human rights and freedoms recognised or declared
in the international instruments listed in section 3 of that Act. The
Government considers that the Bill is compatible.[23]
Parliamentary Joint Committee on
Human Rights
At the time of writing, the Parliamentary Joint Committee
on Human Rights (PJCHR) has not considered the Bill. The PJCHR considered that the
previous iterations of the Bill did not raise human rights concerns.[24]
Key issues
and provisions
Schedule 1–Streamlining Regulation
Control notification requirements
Part 5 of the BSA outlines the rules regarding
control of commercial television and radio broadcasting licences, datacasting
transmitter licences and newspapers that are ‘associated’ with commercial
television or radio broadcasting licence areas (known as regulated media
assets).
This Part of the BSA requires that certain persons
must notify ACMA when changes to the control of regulated media assets occur. Section
63 of the BSA requires individual licensees and publishers to notify
ACMA within ten business days when a person becomes, or ceases to be, in a
position to exercise control of the licence or newspaper. Section 64 requires
the person who comes into a position of control of a regulated media asset also
to notify ACMA within ten business days of the change.
While these requirements are directed to different
entities, the Explanatory Memorandum characterises them as ‘unnecessarily
duplicative, requiring that the ACMA be notified twice about the same change in
control of the regulated media asset’.[25]
Accordingly, item 1 repeals section 64 and items 2, 3, 4 make
consequential amendments.
Classification
Section 123 of the BSA requires that industry groups
representing commercial broadcasting licensees, community broadcasting
licensees, providers of subscription broadcasting and narrowcasting services
and providers of open narrowcasting services develop codes of practice that
apply to the broadcasting operations of those sections of the broadcasting
industry.
Under subsections 123(3A), (3B), (3C) and (3D), these industry
codes of practice must require that those licensees and providers apply the
film classification system provided for by the Classification
(Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 (Classification
Act) when broadcasting films, rather than the code-based television
classification guidelines that apply to other television programmes broadcast.
The Explanatory Memorandum observes that ‘the film and television
classification schemes have converged to the point that they are largely the
same’:
Duplicative classification rules in industry codes of
practice and the BSA are inefficient for broadcasters, requiring broadcasters
to have regard to multiple classification frameworks for the different kinds of
content delivered over the same platform ... Accordingly, item 5 of Schedule 1 to
the Bill would remove the application of the Classification Act to films
broadcast on television by these licensees by repealing subsections 123(3A) to
(3D). The repeal of these provisions would allow a single classification scheme
for all television programs, including films.[26]
Item 5 of Schedule 1 will repeal subsections
123(3A) to (3D) removing the application of the Classification Act to
films broadcast on television by these licensees. Items 6–8 of Schedule
1 propose to repeal licence conditions that place restrictions on broadcasters
in relation to the airing of films that have been classified as RC (Refused
Classification), X18+ or R18+ by the Classification Board. With the repeal of
the licence conditions, breaches in relation to the airing of these types of
films will be treated as code of practice breaches, rather than licence
condition breaches.
Disposal of NBN Co non-communication
goods
Part 2 of the NBN Companies Act includes
restrictions on the operations of NBN corporations. In particular, section 19
provides that an NBN corporation must not supply goods that are not for use in
connection with the supply by an NBN corporation of an eligible service. The
Explanatory Memorandum notes:
This restriction means that currently an NBN corporation
cannot sell off surplus assets (like office equipment and vehicles) unless it
also supplies eligible services to the person who buys the asset. As a result,
an NBN corporation’s ability to dispose of surplus assets at market rates is
unduly restricted.[27]
Item 9 repeals section 19 and substitutes proposed
section 19 which will narrow this restriction to allow an NBN corporation
to supply goods where it did not obtain the goods for the purpose of supplying
the goods or where it considers the goods to be excess to requirements.
When this amendment was proposed in the lapsed
Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Access Regime and NBN Companies) Bill
2015 (Access Regime Bill), some industry stakeholders were wary of changes to NBN
Co’s legislative business activity restriction.[28]
For example, a submission from the Competitive Carriers Coalition acknowledged
that while NBN should be able to dispose of surplus goods, the business
restrictions were put in place to ensure the company provided specific services.
It stated:
Once it has rolled out in a location, NBN enjoys a powerful
monopoly over access to fixed line communications services to consumers in
those locations ... NBN should remain strictly focused on the purpose for which
it was created—addressing areas of market failure in wholesale markets.[29]
Admissibility of evidence
Under section 521 of the Telecommunications Act,
ACMA has substantial information-gathering powers to obtain information and
documents from carriers and service providers. A person who contravenes a
requirement in an ACMA notice under section 521 may be subject to a civil
penalty.[30]
This can be dealt with under section 570 which provides for pecuniary penalties
payable for contraventions of civil penalty provisions. Section 524 provides for
the application of the privilege against self-incrimination for persons required
to provide information, evidence or documents to the ACMA under section 521.
Item 10 corrects an error in paragraph 524(2)(d) of
the Telecommunications Act. The amendment provides that information or
evidence provided to ACMA is not admissible in evidence against the individual
in ‘proceedings under section 570 other than proceedings for recovery of
a pecuniary penalty in relation to a contravention of section 521’ (underlined
words inserted).
Submarine communications cable
protection zones
Under the Telecommunications Act, ACMA can declare
by legislative instrument protection zones for submarine communications cables
installed, or proposed to be installed in Australian waters.[31]
In so doing, currently ACMA is required to consult with an advisory committee.[32]
The advisory committee may make recommendations in relation to ACMA proposals
regarding protection zones. If the advisory committee does not make
recommendations in relation to a proposal the committee must give the ACMA a
statement setting out the opinion of each committee member in relation to the
proposal.[33]
Items 11–17 of Schedule 1 will remove a requirement for ACMA to consult
with such an advisory committee in relation to these proposals.
The Explanatory Memorandum states:
Requiring the ACMA to establish and consult with a formal
advisory committee for the purposes of declaring, varying or revoking a
submarine cable protection zone is unnecessary and adds to administrative
costs. In all instances, the ACMA is obliged to consult the Environment
Secretary and the public before establishing, varying or revoking a submarine
cable protection zone. The ACMA can also establish an advisory committee at its
own initiative if it sees this as a more cost-effective way of soliciting
stakeholder feedback. The ACMA would be expected to consider any feedback
obtained through consultation in making a decision to declare, vary or revoke a
submarine cable protection zone.[34]
Schedule 2–Broadcasting licensee
support payments
One of the purposes of the Broadcasting Reform Act was
to establish a transitional support payment scheme for commercial broadcasters
during the transition to the interim transmitter licence tax arrangements. In
particular, a number of listed companies were to be paid financial assistance
for each financial year during 2017–18 to 2021–22.
Item 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 2 amends the amount to
be paid to Network Investments Pty Ltd from $632,000 to $819,000. The Minister
for Communications, Paul Fletcher’s second reading speech observed that ‘one of
Network Investments' transmitters was inadvertently excluded in the model used
to calculate the payments’. He stated ‘Schedule 2 of the bill corrects this
error, and Network Investments will be no worse off as a result of the
transition from a revenue-based broadcasting licence fee to an interim
broadcasting-spectrum tax arrangement’.[35]
Part 2 of Schedule 2 makes a number of amendments to the Broadcasting
Reform Act to allow for supplementary transitional support payments to be
made to Network Investments Pty Ltd to account for the financial years in which
the lower payment was made.
The amendments made by Schedule 2 were not contained in
the 2018 Bill or the 2015 Bill.
Schedule 3–Monitoring of the
telecommunications industry
Part XIB of the Competition Act sets out the
obligations which apply to the telecommunications industry with regards to
anti-competitive conduct and record-keeping.
Item 3 of Schedule 3 proposes to repeal Divisions 4
and 5 of Part XIB. Division 4 of Part XIB allows the Australian Competition and
Consumer Commission (ACCC) to collect certain tariff information from
telecommunications carriers and carriage service providers (CSPs) that hold a
substantial degree of power in the market. Division 5 sets out the tariff
filing requirements that apply specifically to Telstra.
The Explanatory Memorandum characterises the requirements
to provide tariff information under Divisions 4 and 5 of Part XIB as imposing
an ‘unnecessary regulatory burden on business’:
The information captured by these Divisions is readily
available to the ACCC through other avenues, including through public sources,
and in this circumstance requiring the information be provided directly by
carriers and CSPs to the ACCC is unduly burdensome for industry. It is also
apparent that the tariff information provided under these Divisions is of
limited benefit in assisting with ACCC investigations of potential
anti-competitive conduct within the telecommunications industry.[36]
Division 6 of Part XIB currently provides that the ACCC
can make rules to require carriers and CSPs to keep and retain records and to
provide reports on certain matters. These include ascertaining whether the
‘competition rule’ has been, or is being, complied with or whether tariff
filing directions have been, or are being, complied with (subsection 151BU(4)).[37]
The ACCC introduced record keeping rules (Division 12 Record-Keeping and
Reporting Rules) in December 2004 under Division 12 of Part XIB and it has
revised these rules on a number of occasions in response to changes in industry
trends.[38]
Item 5 of Schedule 3 will insert proposed
subsections 151BU(4A) and (4B) to make it a formal requirement that
the ACCC review its record-keeping rules within one year of commencement of the
Bill and then at least once every five years to ensure that they ‘remain
up-to-date, reflect changing markets and consumer behaviour and minimise the
regulatory burden on industry’.[39]
In reviewing the rules the ACCC would need to take into account whether
information is publicly available, whether consumer demand for goods and
services about which the information relates has changed and what use the
information will be for consumers, industry, the Minister and the Parliament.
Under section 151CL of the Competition Act, the
ACCC must review and report each financial year to the Minister on competitive
safeguards within the telecommunications industry. Items 22–25 of
Schedule 3 will amend section 151CL regarding the release of these reports.
Instead of being required to provide it to the Minister (and subsequently the
Minister being required to provide the report to the Parliament), the ACCC will
be required to publish the reports on its website as soon as practicable, but
no later than six months after the end of the financial year. The Explanatory
Memorandum states:
This requirement would enable market information contained in
the report to be made available to the public, the telecommunications industry
and Parliamentarians in a timelier manner. The report provides an overview of
market developments and industry compliance. The report would be more valuable
if it is made widely available quickly... The proposed amendment would also align
with the movement towards publishing online industry information collected by
agencies.[40]
Division 12 of Part XIB of the Competition Act (which
consists solely of section 151CM) requires the ACCC to monitor charges paid by
consumers for listed carriage services and goods and services used in
connection with those carriage services. The ACCC must provide a report each
financial year on these matters and include in the report information on
Telstra’s compliance with the price control arrangements under Part 9 of the Telecommunications
(Consumer Protection and Service Standards) Act 1999. The report must
be provided to the Minister and tabled in each House of the Parliament.
Items 26 and 27 of the Schedule 3 amend the
ACCC’s monitoring and reporting function with the intention to deliver a ‘more
flexible regime’.[41]
As amended, section 151CM will require the ACCC to monitor, and report each
financial year on charges paid by consumers in the telecommunications market.
However, the ACCC will have discretion as to which charges to monitor and
report on ‘having regard to which goods or services are most commonly used by
consumers’. Instead of providing the report to the Minister and the Parliament,
the ACCC will be required to publish the report on its website as soon as
practicable and no later than six months after the end of the financial year
concerned.
Section 105 of the Telecommunications Act requires
ACMA to monitor, and report, each financial year to the Minister on all
significant matters relating to the performance of carriers and carriage
service providers with particular reference to: consumer satisfaction; consumer
benefits; and quality of service. Items 29–31 will amend section 105 to
limit the scope of the ACMA report required under that section. Under amended
section 105, ACMA will only be required to monitor and report on:
- the
operation of Part 14 of the Telecommunications Act (which deals with National
Interest Matters) and on the costs of compliance with the requirements of that
Part and
- the
costs of compliance with the requirements of Part 5-1A of the Telecommunications
(Interception and Access) Act 1979 (regarding data retention).
The Explanatory Memorandum outlines the policy rationale
for this change:
When first introduced, the requirement for an annual ACMA
report under section 105(1) provided a high degree of oversight of the
telecommunications sector in the wake of increased competition and the
introduction of a new regulatory framework. This policy rationale is no longer
compelling, close to 20 years later, where there is a mature telecommunications
market. It is preferable to provide the ACMA with greater flexibility to
prepare targeted reports that it considers would provide the most benefit to
government and industry.[42]
Consistent with the other amendments in Schedule 3,
reports would no longer be provided to the Minister. Instead, ACMA would be
required to publish reports on its website ‘as soon as practicable and no later
than 6 months after the end of the financial year’ (proposed subsection
105(6)).
Scrutiny Committee
While the structure and ordering of the provisions in Schedule
3 of the Bill has changed from the earlier 2018 Bill, the amendments made appear
to be the same. In relation to the 2018 Bill, the Scrutiny Committee
highlighted that amendments in Schedule 3 ‘propose to remove requirements in
the [Competition Act] and the [Telecommunications Act] for the
Minister to table documents in Parliament ...’. It stated:
While the bill ensures that some of this information will be
published online, the bill proposes to remove legislative provisions which require
that this information be made available to the Parliament (and therefore the
public at large). The committee notes that removing the requirement for certain
information to be tabled in Parliament reduces the scope for parliamentary
scrutiny. The process of tabling documents in Parliament alerts
parliamentarians to their existence and provides opportunities for debate that
are not available where documents are only published online.[43]
The Scrutiny Committee requested the Minister's advice as
to why the requirement for these documents to be tabled in Parliament was
proposed to be removed.[44]
In response, the Minister advised that the changes would ‘enable market
information to be made available to the public, the communications industry and
Parliamentarians sooner' and that the 'reports will also be more readily
available to the public because online publication will be required'. The
Minister also noted that reports on consumer safeguards in the
telecommunications industry prepared by the ACCC at the direction of the
Minister and annual reports concerning the operation of the ACCC and the ACMA
as statutory bodies will continue to be tabled in Parliament.[45]
The Scrutiny Committee requested that the key information
provided by the Minister be included in the Explanatory Memorandum.[46]
This was added to the 2018 Bill’s Explanatory Memorandum and is contained in
the Explanatory Memorandum of the Bill.[47]
Schedule 4–Technical amendments
Schedule 4 makes minor amendments to the Australian
Broadcasting Corporation Act 1983 (ABC Act), the Special
Broadcasting Service Act 1991 (SBS Act) and the BSA to
repeal redundant provisions, provide consistent use of terms and update the use
of terminology.
For example, subsection 79A(5) of the ABC Act and
subsection 70A(5) of the SBS Act contain definitions of the terms
‘election’, ‘election period’, ‘Parliament’ and ‘referendum’. However, the
terms are not used in the relevant sections. Items 1 and 17 of
Schedule 4 will respectively repeal these definitions. Item 6 will
insert a definition of broadcasting service into the SBS Act
which provides it has the same meaning as in the BSA. Item 8 will
change a reference to radio and television to ‘broadcasting’ in subsection 6(1)
of the SBS Act which sets out the organisation’s principal function. As
amended, subsection 6(1) of the SBS Act will read:
The principal function of the SBS is to provide multilingual
and multicultural broadcasting and digital media services that inform,
educate and entertain all Australians, and, in doing so, reflect Australia’s
multicultural society.
Schedule 5–Spent and redundant
legislation
Schedule 5 repeals a range of communications portfolio
legislation which is described as ‘spent or otherwise unnecessary’. In particular,
the Explanatory Memorandum notes that as the amendments and repeals in the
Amendment Acts listed in Schedule 5 have taken effect, the amending legislation
is no longer required.[48]
The repeal of two pieces of legislation, the AUSSAT Repeal Act 1991 and
the Telstra (Transition to Full Private Ownership) Act 2005,
necessitates further consequential amendments in Schedule 5. Other items in
Schedule 5 amend or repeal particular provisions in legislation.
Item 2 of Schedule 5 will repeal section 152ELB of
the Competition Act. This section requires that before making any
procedural rules, the ACCC must publish a draft of the procedural rules on the
Commission’s website and invite and consider public submissions within a set timeframe
(at least 30 days). The Explanatory Memorandum states:
This provision is unnecessary in light of the standard
consultation requirements in section 17 of the Legislation Act 2003,
which require a rule maker, subject to certain exceptions, to be satisfied that
appropriate and practicable consultation has been undertaken prior to making a legislative
instrument. Section 17 sets out the standard consultation requirements for all
Commonwealth legislative instruments.[49]
However, the consultation requirements in section 17 of
the Legislation
Act 2003 are not prescriptive on rule-makers and section 19 provides
that a failure to consult by a rule-maker ‘does not affect the validity or
enforceability of a legislative instrument’. While the repeal of section 152ELB
may harmonise the Competition Act with other Commonwealth legislation
rule-making provisions, it would appear to remove specific requirements for
public consultation in the making of procedural rules by the ACCC.
The Scrutiny Committee commented on this issue in the
context of the 2015 Bill. It noted that the consultation requirements in
the Legislation Act (then titled the Legislative Instruments Act 2003)
were less prescriptive and leave more discretion to the rule-maker about what
level of consultation is required. The Scrutiny Committee therefore sought
advice from the Minister about what had led to the conclusion that section
152ELB was unnecessary.[50]
In reply the Minister considered that one of the
significant benefits of the Legislation Act is that it does not purport
to prescribe in detail exactly how consultation should occur, which provides
for consultation that is both targeted and flexible ‘to ensure that the
consultation meets the needs of stakeholders and also that unnecessary costs to
the Government and stakeholders are minimised’.[51]
However, the Scrutiny Committee stated that ‘while repealing
the current bespoke consultation requirements in favour of the general
consultation requirements in the [Legislation Act] may allow for
increased flexibility, the committee reiterates its comments ...’.[52]
It also requested additional material be added to the Explanatory Memorandum. This
was added by the Government to the 2015 Bill’s Explanatory Memorandum and has
been included in subsequent versions of the Explanatory Memoranda.[53]
Nonetheless, the Scrutiny Committee repeated its concerns
on this matter in relation to the 2018 Bill.[54]
It stated:
The committee takes this opportunity to reiterate where the
Parliament delegates its legislative power in relation to significant
regulatory schemes the committee considers that it is appropriate that specific
consultation obligations (beyond those in section 17 of the Legislation Act
2003) are included in the bill and that compliance with these obligations
is a condition of the validity of the legislative instrument.[55]
Further additional material was added to the Explanatory
Memorandum for the 2018 Bill at the request of the Scrutiny Committee which has
been repeated in the Bill’s Explanatory Memorandum.[56]
Schedule 6–Numbering arrangements
The regulation and organisation of numbering has been the
responsibility of ACMA. Under the Telecommunications Act, ACMA is
required to make a plan which deals with the numbering of telecommunications
carriage services and the use of numbers in connection with the supply of these
services.[57]
The Telecommunications Numbering Plan 1997 specifies rules for the allocation,
transfer, surrender, portability and use of different types of numbers in
connection with the supply of carriage services.[58]
Rights and responsibilities relating to numbers are contained in a number of
legislative and regulatory instruments. Industry codes and guidelines and
contractual arrangements between parties also affect how numbers are managed.
Schedule 6 will set up a framework under which the
responsibility for numbering, with the exception of emergency numbers, may be
transferred to industry and be undertaken by a numbering scheme manager (who
will be approved by the Minister). The numbering scheme manager will be able to
be a person or a body corporate.
Item 1 proposes to repeal the reference to ACMA’s
role in regulating telecommunications numbers by means of a numbering plan in
the simplified outline of the Telecommunications Act. The item will
substitute the statement that the numbering of carriage services may be managed
by a numbering scheme manager appointed by the Minister or administered by ACMA
under a numbering plan.
Item 10 will insert a new subdivision
(Subdivision AA) into Division 2 of Part 22 of the Telecommunications
Act to deal with the management of the numbering scheme by the numbering
manager. Proposed section 454A in this subdivision will allow the
Minister to determine the numbering scheme manager by legislative instrument.
Before determining the numbering scheme manager the Minister must consult with
ACMA and the ACCC. It is proposed that the Minister will be able to direct the
numbering scheme manager to amend the rules of the numbering scheme or to
change its processes (proposed subsection 454E(1)) and that ACMA and the
ACCC will also be able to give directions to the numbering scheme manager
following consultation with the Minister and the manager (proposed
subsections 454E(3) to (6)). The numbering scheme manager must
comply with these directions (proposed subsection 454E(7)). Failure to do
so could result in the imposition of a civil penalty (proposed subsection
454E(8)).
The numbering scheme manager must administer the scheme in
accordance with ‘numbering scheme principles’ (proposed subsection 454C(1)).The
proposed numbering scheme principles are detailed in proposed section 454C.
These are extracted below:
The numbering scheme principles are as follows:
(a) there must be an adequate and appropriate supply of
numbers for carriage services;
(b) future
needs for numbering must be planned for, having regard to community needs,
industry needs and global trends;
(c) numbering
arrangements must be effective and efficient and support the effective and
efficient supply of carriage services;
(d) numbering
arrangements must have regard to recognised international standards and ensure
that numbering in Australia operates in conjunction with international
numbering arrangements;
(e) there
must be fair and transparent access to numbers for all carriage service
providers, and numbering arrangements must support competition in the supply of
carriage services;
(f) the
interests of users of carriage services must be protected, including in
relation to the use and portability of numbers;
(g) the
numbering scheme’s provisions for the portability of numbers must be consistent
with any directions made by the ACCC to the ACMA under subsection 458(2) in
relation to portability of numbers;
(h) the numbering scheme must support the use of emergency
call services;
(i) numbering
arrangements must meet the requirements of Australian law enforcement and
national security agencies;
(j) numbering
arrangements must provide for the collection of charges imposed under the Telecommunications
(Numbering Charges) Act 1997;
(k) the Register (see section 465) must be kept up to date;
(l) the
rules and processes of the numbering scheme, including a plan for numbering of
carriage services:
(i) must be adhered to by
the numbering scheme manager; and
(ii) must be published and
available at no charge;
(m) the
numbering scheme must include compliance mechanisms to provide for enforcement
of scheme rules;
(n) the
numbering scheme must make effective complaints processes available to both the
telecommunications industry and users of carriage services;
(o) the
recovery of costs in relation to the management of the numbering scheme must
reasonably reflect costs and must be fair and transparent;
(p) public consultation must be undertaken before any
significant change to the numbering scheme;
(q) any additional principles determined by the Minister by
legislative instrument.
The Explanatory Memorandum notes that emergency numbers
will remain the responsibility of ACMA given their importance to the community.[59]
This is reflected in item 2 which amends the definition of emergency
call service in section 7 to reflect ACMA’s role and item 9
which amends section 454 to provide that ACMA will specify emergency service
numbers.
Scrutiny Committee
The Scrutiny Committee’s consideration of the Bill has
highlighted issues with Schedule 6.
Parliamentary scrutiny and adequacy
of review rights
The Scrutiny Committee noted that if a numbering scheme
manager is determined under proposed section 454A the scheme for the
numbering of carriage services will no longer be set out in a disallowable
legislative instrument. This means the scheme will no longer be subject to
parliamentary scrutiny and oversight. It also raised the issue of review rights
under the proposed arrangements for a numbering scheme manager:
The committee ... notes that the current Telecommunications
Numbering Plan 2015 contains rights for both internal review of decisions by
the ACMA as well as independent merits review by the Administrative Appeals
Tribunal.
While the committee notes that the numbering scheme
principles under proposed section 454C include that the numbering scheme must
make effective complaints processes available to both the telecommunications
industry and users of carriage services, there is no information on the face of
the bill or the explanatory materials as to what that complaints process will
entail. The committee further notes that a complaints process is quite
different to a system for merits review. The latter typically provides for
review by an independent tribunal or decision-maker who is empowered to make a
substitute decision on the basis of their view of what the correct or
preferable decision should be. It is also unclear as to whether a person will
be able to seek effective judicial review of decisions made under the numbering
scheme.[60]
The Scrutiny Committee requested the Minister’s advice as
to:
- the appropriateness of potentially removing parliamentary scrutiny and oversight
of the scheme for the numbering of carriage services by providing an avenue for
the scheme to be established other than by disallowable legislative instrument;
- whether judicial review and independent merits review of decisions made under
a numbering scheme managed by the number scheme manager will be available; and
- the appropriateness of amending the bill to include additional guidance about
what would constitute 'effective complaints processes' for the purposes of
proposed paragraph 454C(2)(n).[61]
Broad delegation of administrative
powers
The Scrutiny Committee also highlighted that proposed
section 459A would allow ACMA to delegate any or all of the powers
conferred on it by the numbering plan to a body corporate. It requested the Minister’s
advice as to why this was necessary and ‘the appropriateness of amending the
bill to provide guidance as to how a body corporate is to exercise any powers
that are delegated to it’.[62]
At the time of writing this Digest, the Minister’s
response had been received but not published by the Scrutiny Committee.[63]
Industry and consumer group
responses
Communications Alliance, the peak telecommunications
industry body in Australia, welcomed the proposed legislative amendments for an
industry-managed telephone numbering management framework in 2015. The Chief
Executive Officer, John Stanton stated:
This is a sensible deregulatory reform, toward which industry
has been working with Government for some time ... Similar arrangements have
worked well in other countries, generating more agile, cost-effective and
dynamic systems for managing numbering – to the benefit of consumers and
industry alike.[64]
In May 2017, the Communications Alliance released a
consultation paper which proposed that it should become the numbering scheme
manager under the proposed reforms and outlined a possible governance model for
this arrangement. The Communications Alliance (or CA) consultation paper
stated:
Assuming the Bill is passed by Parliament in the near future
and with little modification from its current form, CA would submit the final
version of its proposal to the Minister for his consideration. The Minister
would then determine, via legislative instrument, that CA would become the numbering
scheme manager. This submission to the Minister would only occur after
appropriate consultation is completed with regulatory and industry stakeholders
and the public. This paper forms part of that consultation process.
A consequence of such a Ministerial determination would be
that an industry ‘Plan for Telecommunications Numbering’ would replace the ACMA
Telecommunications Numbering Plan 2015, and be managed by CA.
CA is expecting the proposal to be beneficial for both
consumers and industry stakeholders because it will rationalise resources and
streamline processes to reduce the costs of services to consumers, and improve
the agility of industry to respond to customer needs. The new arrangements will
also be less prescriptive and provide greater flexibility for adapting to
future number allocation scenarios and the rapid evolution of the
telecommunications market. Industry has self-interest in ensuring that number
management is run in the most practical and cost effective way for the benefit
of consumers and the industry.[65]
Proposed Communication Alliance governance model
Source: Communications Alliance, Industry
managed numbering arrangements: consultation paper, May 2017, p. 18.
The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network
(ACCAN), the peak communications consumer organisation, made a submission in
response to the Communications Alliance’s consultation paper proposal. In term
of the provisions of the Bill, ACCAN noted ‘there is no requirement on the numbering
scheme manager to report to the ACMA on overall management of numbers under the
scheme’. It stated:
ACCAN believes that the Numbering Scheme Manager must be
required to provide the ACMA with at least Annual Reports that can be tabled in
Parliament. Currently, ACMA’s Annual Reports contain information [on] numbering
charges, numbering arrangements and numbering activities and reform. If the
Minister is to be satisfied that the proposed Scheme continues to meet its
principles, there must be annual and publicly available reporting against each
of the principles.[66]
However, ACCAN was prepared to support the development of,
and management of, numbers through the establishment of a numbering scheme manager,
‘under the aegis’ of the Communication Alliance with three conditions:
- government,
regulators and consumers must be members of the proposed Numbering Policy
Committee (NPC)
- the
Communications Alliance Board not be given authority to override policy
decisions by the NPC and
- all
numbering codes that concern consumers’ right to and use of numbers must be
registered under Part 6 of the Telecommunications Act.[67]
Schedule 7–Publication requirements
The amendments in Schedule 7 will amend the BSA to alter
the publication requirements when ACMA changes certain standards. The
Explanatory Memorandum states the amendments will provide ‘ACMA with increased
flexibility to choose a method of publication that is most appropriate to reach
the target audience’.[68]
Items 1–4 amend section 127 of the BSA which
requires that if ACMA ‘determines or varies or revokes a standard’ it must
publish a notice in the Commonwealth Gazette stating the standard has
changed and where copies can be purchased. As amended, section 127 will not
require publication in the Gazette and will change the reference to
copies being ‘purchased’ to being ‘accessed’. It will also insert proposed
subsection 127(2) which will require the notice to be published on ACMA’s
website and ‘in one or more places that are readily accessible by the public’.
An inserted note clarifies that this could mean publication on another website.
Equivalent amendments are also made by items 5–8 to
clause 33 of Schedule 6 (Datacasting services) in the BSA. This clause
also requires the publication of notices by ACMA when ACMA determines, varies
or revokes a standard.
Schedule 8–Installation of optical
fibre lines
The Telecommunications
Legislation Amendment (Fibre Deployment) Act 2011 amended the Telecommunications
Act to insert ‘Part 20A–Deployment of optical fibre etc’. Part 20A requires
that where specified new developments, or developments within an identified
class, are fitted with telecommunications lines or facilities, they should be
fitted with optical-fibre lines or fibre-ready facilities.
However, the obligations to install optical-fibre lines or
fibre-ready facilities in Part 20A are subject to section 372J which allows NBN
Co to issue ‘a written statement to the effect that neither it nor any other
NBN corporation has installed, is installing, or proposes to install, optical
fibre lines in the project area, or any of the project areas, for a specified
real estate development project’. NBN Co can exercise this power at the request
of a person or on its own initiative.
The Explanatory Memorandum states:
The provisions were intended to provide a mechanism by which
developers could seek to be excused from the default obligation to install
fibre-ready facilities, such as pit and pipe, in areas where NBN Co would be
providing services using fixed wireless or satellite technology and where NBN
Co would not be using fixed lines. In such circumstances, it was envisaged that
the installation of pit and pipe would be unnecessary as there would be little
likelihood that they would be used by NBN Co.
However, the ability for NBN Co to make such statements
failed to recognise that other carriers may want to provide fixed line
infrastructure in such areas. In particular, Telstra has obligations as the
universal service provider to provide voice services in parts of Australia that
are outside NBN Co’s fixed line footprint. Telstra may need to install cabling
to fulfil this obligation. Telstra may wish to use pit and pipe to do so.
In addition, other competitive providers could be contracted
to service developments in such areas (e.g. a mining community) with fixed-line
infrastructure and the provider may wish to use pit and pipe to deliver the
infrastructure. While the issue by NBN Co of a statement under section 372J
would not preclude Telstra or a competitive carrier requiring pit and pipe as a
contractual matter, it could lead a developer to believe that it had been
exempted by virtue of NBN Co’s statement, leading to confusion for the developer
and carriers, and potential delays, costs and inconvenience in providing
services where pit and pipe is, in fact, required.
As outlined above, the existing provisions effectively give
NBN Co, as an industry player, power to make decisions of a quasi-regulatory
nature that could affect other providers in the market. NBN Co has seldom
exercised this function. The role also imposes on NBN Co the cost of exercising
this quasi-regulatory function, and maintaining a register. For these reasons,
it is no longer considered appropriate for NBN Co to exercise these functions.[69]
Item 4 will repeal Subdivision C of Division 3 of
Part 20A, which contains section 372J and an associated section which requires
NBN Co to maintain a register of these statements on its website. The register,
contained on NBN Co’s online information concerning government policy for new
developments, indicated only one statement has been registered (for the Eva
Valley Project in the Northern Territory in 2015).[70]
Items 1–3 will make consequential amendments to
Part 20A.
The Minister’s power to exempt developments from the default
obligation to install fibre-ready facilities will remain.[71]
[1]. Explanatory
Memorandum, Communications Legislation Amendment (Deregulation and Other
Measures) Bill 2019, p. 2.
[2]. Parliament
of Australia, ‘Communications
Legislation Amendment (Deregulation and Other Measures) Bill 2015 homepage’,
Australian Parliament website.
[3]. The
amendment was to change the NBN Companies Act to require the NBN Co
Board to prepare a report setting out NBN Co's financial and deployment
forecasts for the period beginning on 1 July 2015 and ending on 30 June 2022. S
Conroy, ‘Communications
Legislation Amendment (Deregulation and Other Measures) Bill 2015,
Telecommunications (Numbering Charges) Amendment Bill 2015’, House of
Representatives, Debates, 22 February 2016, p. 509.
[4]. Australia,
House of Representatives, ‘Communications
Legislation Amendment (Deregulation and Other Measures) Bill 2015’, Votes
and Proceedings, 177, 25 February 2016, p. 1946.
[5]. R
Jolly, Communications
Legislation Amendment (Deregulation and Other Measures) Bill 2015,
Bills digest, 68, 2015–16, Parliamentary Library, Canberra, 21 January 2016.
[6]. The
previous citation of the 2018 Bill was the Communications Legislation Amendment
(Deregulation and Other Measures) Bill 2017.
[7]. Parliament
of Australia, ‘Communications
Legislation Amendment (Deregulation and Other Measures) Bill 2018 homepage’,
Australian Parliament website.
[8]. R
Jolly, Communications
Legislation Amendment (Deregulation and Other Measures) Bill 2017,
Bills digest, 103, 2016–17, Parliamentary Library, Canberra, 29 May 2017.
[9]. T
Abbott (Opposition Leader), The
Coalition’s deregulation agenda, media release, 2 November 2012; T
Abbott (Prime Minister) and J Frydenberg (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime
Minister), Reducing
red tape to build a strong and prosperous economy, joint media release,
19 March 2014; J Frydenberg (Treasurer) and B Morton (Assistant Minister to the
Prime Minister and Cabinet), Delivering
deregulation for Australian business, joint media release, 12 September
2019.
[10]. Convergence
Review Committee, Convergence
review: final report, report prepared for the Department of Broadband,
Communications and the Digital Economy (DBCDE), DBCDE, Canberra, March 2012, p.
1.
[11]. Department
of Communications (DoC), Deregulation in
the communications portfolio, policy background paper, 1, DoC,
Canberra, November 2013, p. 3; DoC, Regulating
harms in the Australian communications sector: observations on current
arrangements, policy background paper, 2, DoC, Canberra, May 2014.
[12]. M
Fifield (Minister for Communications), Regulation
reform agenda continues to benefit the communications sector, media
release, 2 December 2015. See also Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet
(PM&C), Annual
red tape reduction report 2015, PM&C, Canberra, 2016, p. 11.
[13]. Ibid.
[14]. Senate
Select Committee on Red Tape, Policy and
process to limit and reduce red tape: final report, Senate, Canberra,
December 2018.
[15]. Ibid.,
p. 24.
[16]. Ibid.,
p. vii.
[17]. Senate
Standing Committee for Selection of Bills, Report,
1, 2016, The Senate, Canberra, 4 February 2016; Senate Standing Committee for Selection
of Bills, Report,
5, 2017, The Senate, Canberra, 11 May 2017.
[18]. Senate
Standing Committee for Selection of Bills, Report,
8, 2019, The Senate, Canberra, 14 November 2019.
[19]. M
Rowland, ‘Second
reading speech: Communications Legislation Amendment (Deregulation and Other
Measures) Bill 2019’, House of Representatives, Debates, (proof), 25
November 2019, p. 103.
[20]. Australia,
House of Representatives, Votes
and proceedings, (proof), 28, 2019–20, 25 November 2019, pp. 419–420.
[21]. S
Ludlam, ‘Second
reading speech: Communications Legislation Amendment (Deregulation and Other
Measures) Bill 2015, Telecommunications (Numbering Charges) Amendment Bill 2015’,
Senate, Debates, 22 February 2016, p. 586.
[22]. Explanatory
Memorandum, op. cit., p. 4.
[23]. The
Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights can be found at pages 5–8 of the
Explanatory Memorandum to the Bill.
[24]. Parliamentary
Joint Committee on Human Rights (PJCHR), Human rights
scrutiny report, 4, 2017, 9 May 2017, p. 74; PJCHR, Human rights
scrutiny report, 3, 2016, 2 February 2016, p. 1.
[25]. Explanatory
Memorandum, op. cit., p. 11.
[26]. Ibid.,
p. 12.
[27]. Ibid.,
p. 13.
[28]. Parliament
of Australia, ‘Telecommunications
Legislation Amendment (Access Regime and NBN Companies) Bill 2016 homepage’,
Australian Parliament website.
[29]. Competitive
Carriers’ Coalition, Submission
to Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee, Inquiry into
Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Access Regime and NBN Companies) Bill
2015, [submission no. 4], 2015, p. 6.
[30]. Failure
to comply would be a breach of licence conditions, which is a civil penalty
provision—see section 68 and clause 1 of Schedule 1 to the Telecommunications
Act 1997.
[31]. Schedule
3A of the Telecommunications Act.
[32]. Clause
16 of Schedule 3A to the Telecommunications Act. The definition of
‘advisory committee’ means an advisory committee established by section 58 of
the Australian
Communications and Media Authority Act 2005.
[33]. Subclauses
16(2) and (3) of Schedule 3A to the Telecommunications Act.
[34]. Explanatory
Memorandum, op. cit., p. 14.
[35]. P
Fletcher, ‘Second
reading speech: Communications Legislation Amendment (Deregulation and Other
Measures) Bill 2019’, House of Representatives, Debates, 16 October
2019, p. 4245.
[36]. Explanatory
Memorandum, op. cit., p. 19.
[37]. The
‘competition rule’ is contained in section 151AK of the Competition Act
and states that ‘a carrier or carriage service provider must not engage in
anti-competitive conduct’. The circumstances in which a carrier will engage in
anti-competitive conduct are set out at section 151AJ.
[38]. Australian
Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), ‘Division
12 Record Keeping Rule’, ACCC website.
[39]. Explanatory
Memorandum, op. cit., p. 20.
[40]. Ibid.,
p. 21.
[41]. Ibid.,
p. 22.
[42]. Ibid.,
pp. 22–23.
[43]. Senate
Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills, Scrutiny digest,
5, 2017, The Senate, 10 May 2017, p. 9 (emphasis in original).
[44]. Ibid.,
p. 10.
[45]. Senate
Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills, Scrutiny digest,
7, 2017, The Senate, 21 June 2017, pp. 45–46.
[46]. Ibid.,
p. 47.
[47]. Addendum
to the Explanatory Memorandum, Communications Legislation Amendment
(Deregulation and Other Measures) Bill 2017, pp. 3–4; Explanatory Memorandum,
op. cit., p. 23.
[48]. Explanatory
Memorandum, op. cit., p. 26.
[49]. Ibid.,
pp 27–28.
[50]. Senate
Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills, Alert
digest, 1, 2016, The Senate, 3 February 2016, pp. 6–7.
[51]. Senate
Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills, Report,
2, 2016, The Senate, 24 February 2016, pp. 60–61.
[52]. Ibid.
[53]. Addendum
to the Explanatory Memorandum, Communications Legislation Amendment
(Deregulation and Other Measures) Bill 2015, pp. 2–3.
[54]. Senate
Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills, Scrutiny digest,
5, 2017, op. cit., pp. 10–11.
[55]. Senate
Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills, Scrutiny digest,
7, 2017, op. cit., pp. 49.
[56]. Addendum
to the Explanatory Memorandum, Communications Legislation Amendment
(Deregulation and Other Measures) Bill 2017, pp. 4–5; Explanatory Memorandum,
op. cit., pp. 27–28.
[57]. Section
454 of the Telecommunications Act contains a simplified outline of Part
22–Numbering of Carriage Services and Regulation of Electronic Addressing.
[58]. The
current plan is the Telecommunications
Numbering Plan 2015 made under section 455 of the Telecommunications Act.
[59]. Explanatory
Memorandum, op. cit., p. 31.
[60]. Senate
Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills, Scrutiny
digest, 8, 2019, The Senate, 13 November 2019, p. 14.
[61]. Ibid.,
p. 15. As noted above, proposed paragraph 454C(2)(n) is the numbering
scheme principle that states ‘the numbering scheme must make effective complaints
processes available to both the telecommunications industry and users of
carriage services’.
[62]. Ibid.
[63]. Senate
Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills, Ministerial
responses, The Senate, Canberra, as at 26 November 2019.
[64]. Communications
Alliance, Industry
welcomes government move to facilitate an industry-based scheme to manage
telephone numbering, media release, 2 December 2015.
[65]. Communications
Alliance, Industry
managed numbering arrangements: consultation paper, May 2017, p. 9.
[66]. Australian
Communications Consumer Action Network, Submission
to Communication Alliance Industry Managed Numbering Arrangements consultation,
27 June 2017, p. 3.
[67]. Ibid.,
p. 5. Part 6 of the Telecommunications Act deals with industry code and
industry standards including compliance matters.
[68]. Explanatory
Memorandum, op. cit., p. 40.
[69]. Explanatory
Memorandum, op. cit., p. 42.
[70]. NBN
Co, ‘Government
policy for new developments’, NBN Co website.
[71]. Section
372K of the Telecommunications Act.
For copyright reasons some linked items are only available to members of Parliament.
© Commonwealth of Australia
Creative Commons
With the exception of the Commonwealth Coat of Arms, and to the extent that copyright subsists in a third party, this publication, its logo and front page design are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Australia licence.
In essence, you are free to copy and communicate this work in its current form for all non-commercial purposes, as long as you attribute the work to the author and abide by the other licence terms. The work cannot be adapted or modified in any way. Content from this publication should be attributed in the following way: Author(s), Title of publication, Series Name and No, Publisher, Date.
To the extent that copyright subsists in third party quotes it remains with the original owner and permission may be required to reuse the material.
Inquiries regarding the licence and any use of the publication are welcome to webmanager@aph.gov.au.
Disclaimer: Bills Digests are prepared to support the work of the Australian Parliament. They are produced under time and resource constraints and aim to be available in time for debate in the Chambers. The views expressed in Bills Digests do not reflect an official position of the Australian Parliamentary Library, nor do they constitute professional legal opinion. Bills Digests reflect the relevant legislation as introduced and do not canvass subsequent amendments or developments. Other sources should be consulted to determine the official status of the Bill.
Any concerns or complaints should be directed to the Parliamentary Librarian. Parliamentary Library staff are available to discuss the contents of publications with Senators and Members and their staff. To access this service, clients may contact the author or the Library‘s Central Enquiry Point for referral.