 |
Bills Digest No. 10 2003-04
Telstra (Transition to Full Private
Ownership) Bill 2003
WARNING:
This Digest was prepared for debate. It reflects the legislation as introduced
and does not canvass subsequent amendments. This Digest does not have
any official legal status. Other sources should be consulted to determine
the subsequent official status of the Bill.
CONTENTS
Passage History
Purpose
Background
Main Provisions
Concluding Comments
Endnotes
Contact Officer & Copyright Details
Passage History
Telstra
(Transition to Full Private Ownership) Bill 2003
Date Introduced:
26 June 2003
House:
House of Representatives
Portfolio:
Communications, Information Technology and the Arts
Commencement:
The majority of the Act will commence on Royal Assent. Part
2 of Schedule 1 commences on the day on which the Commonwealth's shareholding
falls below majority control. Part 3 of Schedule 1 commences on the day
that 85% of voting shares are held by persons other than the Commonwealth.
The purpose of the Bill is to remove
the restriction in the Telstra Corporation Act 1991 that requires
the Commonwealth to retain 50.1 per cent of equity in Telstra Corporation
Ltd (Telstra), thus enabling its full sale. The Bill includes other provisions
such as a requirement for regular and independent reviews of regional
telecommunications services.
On 1 March 1901,
the State departments of posts, telegraphs and telephones were, by Proclamation,
transferred to the newly federated Commonwealth of Australia, pursuant
to section 69 of the Constitution. Once transferred, the Commonwealth
department was then subject to the exclusive power of the Commonwealth
under section 52 (ii) of the Constitution. Included in the Constitution
was also a specific head of power to enable the Commonwealth to make laws
for the peace, order and good government of the Commonwealth with respect
to:
51(v.) Postal, telegraphic, telephonic, and other like services.(1)
The Commonwealth's power under section 51(v.) is wide
enough to authorise laws on radio and television broadcasts and the power
is regarded as a classic example of how progressive interpretation of
constitutional law responds to changed circumstances.
It is important to distinguish the difference between
the methods the Commonwealth uses to deliver services through its departments
and various business entities and the constitutional power of the Commonwealth
to implement national policies by way of legislation. The full sale of
Telstra does not preclude the Commonwealth from continuing to pass national
laws on telecommunications matters. This is in contrast to some other
federations (such as Canada)
where federal powers extend only to communications between the provinces.
Following federation, the Commonwealth created the Postmaster-General's
Department under the Post and Telegraphs Act of 1901 and placed
the control of post and telecommunications under the department. Control
of the department was vested in a Minister of State for the Commonwealth—the
Postmaster-General. In Bradley v The Commonwealth (1973)(2),
the High Court of Australia recognised that the Postmaster-General had,
in effect, a monopoly in respect of the commercial provision of telegraph
and telephone services.
Postal services and telecommunications functions were
separated in 1975 with the establishment of the Australian Postal Commission
and the Australian Telecommunications Commission (see the then Postal
Services Act 1975 and Telecommunications Act 1975). Telecom
was created in 1975 to be the monopoly telecommunications provider and
it was corporatised in 1989 to become the Australian Telecommunications
Corporation.
Telstra was formed in 1992 following the passage of the
Australian and Overseas Telecommunications Corporation Act 1991 (now
the Telstra Corporation Act 1991). Telstra is a public company
limited by shares, formed from the merger of Telecom Australia
(the then domestic telecommunications carrier) and the Overseas Telecommunication
Commission (the then international telecommunications carrier). Within
Australia,
Telecom changed its name to Telstra in 1995 (and in 1993, overseas).
The Telecommunications Act
1991 allowed the commencement of competition in telecommunications
by establishing a duopoly network between Optus and Telstra and a mobile–only
operator, Vodaphone. The publicly owned AUSSAT domestic satellite system
was sold to Optus in the early 1990s. Up until 1997, regulation of telecommunications
was the province of Austel,
an industry–specific regulator. Regulation of telecommunications competition
now falls under the Trade Practices Act 1974 which is administered
by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission.(3)
Comprehensive competition in telecommunications was introduced in Australia
on 1 July 1997.
After a decade of competition, Telstra still has the
largest market share in fixed line, domestic long distance, international
calls, mobile and internet access. Telstra's competitors in Australia
are all foreign controlled entities.(4)
The Sale of the First Third
of Telstra (T 1)
The Coalition Government's 1996 election policy contained
a commitment to partially privatise Telstra. The proposal involved the
sale of one-third of the Commonwealth's equity by way of a share float
with 65% of the shares reserved for Australian investors. The community
service obligations of telecommunications carriers were maintained. On
2 May 1996, the Government
introduced the Telstra (Dilution of Public Ownership) Bill 1996.(5)
The first Telstra share offer opened on 15 October 1997 at a share issue price of $3.30,
(including the discount for Australian retail investors) paid in two instalments.
The fully paid price per share excluding the discount was $3.40. Telstra
shares were first traded on the Australian Stock Exchange on 17 November 1997. Concurrent listings
of the shares were offered on the New York
and New Zealand Stock Exchanges. The share offer was more than four times
subscribed. The offer to institutional investors was 6.2 times subscribed.
The Telstra public share offer was completed in accordance with the Government's
sale timetable. A performance audit by the Australian National Audit
Office concluded:
This represents a significant achievement, given the unprecedented
scale of the offer.(6)
The same audit report, however, noted that the share
offer was not fully priced (meaning that the costs of fees and commissions
for the sale process might be more competitively priced) and that overall
value for money in any future sale could be improved.(7)
The 1998-99 Australian National Audit Office report also
noted the then estimated gross proceeds of the sale at $14.24 billion
and direct costs of sale at $260 million.(8)
The Telstra 2 sale was outlined in the Coalition Government's
1998 pre-election policy. The Telstra (Further Dilution of Public
Ownership) Act 1999 was passed by Parliament on 21 June 1999. The Act authorised the sale of up
to 49.9% of the Commonwealth's original equity.
The 2000-2001 performance audit by the Australian National
Audit Office (Second Tranche Sale of Telstra Shares) notes that
Telstra 2 was one of the largest public share offers conducted world-wide
in 1999.(9) The audit report estimated that the gross proceeds
amounted to $16.04 billion with direct sale costs of $169 million. The
issue price was set at $7.80 which was a slight discount on the then market
price for Telstra shares. The retail price was discounted to $7.40.
The institutional demand was 1.9 times the allocation. The audit report
concluded that the issue was fully priced and noted:
The success of the offer was underpinned by the strength
of Australian domestic demand, which was reflected in 87 per cent of the
shares being allocated to Australian investors, including two-thirds of
shares allocated to retail investors.(10)
The possibility of also using
hybrid securities in T2 was examined by the Office of Asset Sales and
IT Outsourcing and its advisers but the proposal (i.e. using exchangeable
bonds) was abandoned shortly before the offer was launched.(11)
At the close of the market on Monday, 30 June 2003, Telstra was trading at $4.40 with a
52 week high of $5.08 and a low of $3.92.(12)
Final Sale
of Telstra (T 3)
On the opening of the Fortieth Parliament on 12 February 2002, it was stated that:
The government will not proceed with any further sale of
Telstra until it is satisfied that arrangements are in place to deliver
adequate services to all Australians.(13)
Budget Paper No. 1 for Budget 2003-2004, issued on 13
May 2003, stated that the forward estimates included the effect of the
sale of Telstra but that the Government has committed not to introduce
the necessary legislation until it was satisfied arrangements exist to
deliver adequate services, in particular to rural and regional Australia.
It was revealed in Senate Estimates in the Finance and Public Administration
Legislation Committee on 28 May 2003 that the Budget Papers indicated that
the Government's valuation for the sale of Telstra was based on the price
that it hoped to achieve rather than the then current market price for
the shares, which was lower.(14)
The media speculated that, on the Government's estimate,
the indicative price per share was between $5.25(15) to $5.75,
instead of the then market price of about $4.25.(16) The Minister
for Finance and Administration, Hon Nick Minchin MP, confirmed that the
estimate reflected 'the value of Telstra based on the share price we would
want to receive for our shares' and he also confirmed that it was the
Government's policy to sell Telstra.(17)
On 26 June 2003,
in the introductory Second Reading speech for the Bill the Government
stated:
While the Government is moving to establish the legislation
immediately, it has undertaken not to proceed with any further sale of
Telstra until it is fully satisfied that arrangements are in place to
deliver adequate telecommunications services to all Australians, including
maintaining the improvements to existing services. The independent regional
telecommunications inquiry report, released in 2002, found that the government
had addressed consumer concerns identified by the independent telecommunications
inquiry in 2000.
The bill provides for the timing of the sale to remain open.
The government, however, will be seeking to maximise the returns from
the sale of its remaining holdings.(18)
Since the introduction of the final sale Bill, there
have been divergent views on the application of the proceeds of the sale
of Telstra. The Prime Minister, the Hon John Howard MP, deflected calls
from his Coalition partners to apply the proceeds to rural and regional
Australia—in
his view, the priority was to retire debt.(19)
On 19 March
2000, the Government announced the establishment of a Telecommunications
Service Inquiry to assess service levels to customers in metropolitan,
regional, rural and remote areas. The inquiry assessed Telstra's specified
performance criteria, namely the legislated Customer Service Guarantee.
The inquiry was chaired by Mr Tim Besley AO
and it is referred to as the 'Besley Inquiry'. On 24
May 2001, Senator the Hon Richard Alston,
Minister for Communications, Information and the Arts, issued a media
release that detailed the Government's response to the 17 Besley recommendations.
One of the responses was the announcement of an allocation of a total
of $52.2 million, over four years, to establish a National Communications
Fund to assist significant telecommunications projects in the education
and health services sectors for regional communities.(20)
On 25 June 2003,
the Government released its response to the Regional Telecommunications
Inquiry (the 'Estens' Inquiry). The Estens Inquiry recommended that Telstra,
as the primary universal service provider, be required to maintain an
ongoing local presence in regional, rural and remote Australia
into the future.(21) The Government stated in its response
that it will impose a licence condition on Telstra to give effect to this
recommendation.(22)
In the lead up to the 2001 Election, the Australian Labor
Party issued a Plan for Telstra.(23) The Labor Party's
policy included the retention of majority public ownership and the improvement
of access to the latest broadband technology and an enhancement of services
and pricing for consumers.
Since the final sale Bill was introduced, the Australia
Labor Party has repeated its call for the retention of majority public
ownership of Telstra and pointed to the implications of a private Telstra
that would dominate the telecommunications sector and may use its power
to dominate other sectors like media and information.(24)
The Labor Party spokesman for communications, Mr Lindsay
Tanner MP, said:
Labor sees telecommunications services as essential services,
built around a fixed-line network which is still largely a natural monopoly.
In a huge country with a small and very unevenly distributed population,
government ownership of a dominant telecommunications carrier remains
critical.(25)
The retention of Telstra in majority public ownership
returns a dividend to taxpayers from what is a large enterprise. Labor's
Shadow Minister for Cabinet and Finance, Bob McMullan
MP, estimates that the sale of Telstra, based on conservative
assumptions, would make the budget worse off by around $2.1 billion over
the four year period beginning 2005-06.(26) Mr
McMullan also notes:
The sale of Telstra is one of the most important decisions
facing Australia.
It is critically important that all the facts are presented so that an
informed decision takes place and Australian taxpayers' interests are
protected. (27)
The Australian Democrats do not support the further sale
of Telstra. Their communications spokesperson, Senator
Lyn Allison, has publicly stated:
I would like to start with an unequivocal statement. The
Democrats do not support the further privatisation of Telstra.(28)
On 21 July 2003,
AAP reported that the Australian Democrats confirmed that the party and
its members did not support the further privatisation of Telstra.(29)
Two independent members of Parliament, the Hon Bob Katter
MP and Mr Tony Windsor MP are reported as stating on 29 June 2003 that
they have conducted surveys in their respective rural electorates and
the majority of the responses are against the further sale of Telstra.
The concern expressed was that the likely long-term consequences are not
known so there is no guarantee of an enhancement of rural telecommunications.(30)
Mr Alby Schultz MP, a Government backbencher, is reported
as saying that his constituents in the country electorate of Hume are
dismayed at service standards and he may abstain when the House of Representatives
votes on the final sale Bill.(31)
The Prime Minister, the Hon John Howard MP, has commented
that an assumption should not be made that everybody in rural Australia
is opposed to the sale of Telstra and reported that he was informed by
country people in Queensland
that services have improved quite significantly, particularly over the
past five years.(32)
If the final sale Bill is rejected by the Senate, the
immediate consequence is that Telstra will remain in majority public ownership.
The estimated proceeds from the sale of the remaining 50.1 per cent Commonwealth
ownership are $30 billion plus, depending on the timing of the sale.(33)
It is generally accepted that a failure to pass the Bill
will see it subsequently reintroduced to establish it as one of the Bills
for justifying a double dissolution of Parliament.
In the case of both T1 and T2, the Government considered,
but did not use, the option of hybrid securities in addition to the release
of ordinary shares. In this Bill, the Government is expressly dealing
with that option as part of the final sale scheme.
The Bill introduces a sale scheme arrangement whereby
the Commonwealth may transfer some of its shares to a wholly-owned Commonwealth
company that will issue hybrid securities.
A brief explanation of the share market's terminology
for hybrid securities can be found on the ASX web site where there is
an outline of the broad classification for this group of securities.(34)
Essentially, the more recent type of hybrid securities provide a set dividend
rate for a 5 year period and they can be later converted into shares.
The group also includes redeemable preference shares (see discussion,
below). Traditional hybrid securities usually convert at a set ratio
e.g. one hybrid to one ordinary share. Lately, there has been some attention
to resettable hybrids e.g. the holder can accept new terms, redeem the
face value of the share or convert them under the agreed ratio.
At the time of the Parliament's examination of the legislation
for the sale of the first third of Telstra in 1996, Senator
Brian Harradine raised the suggestion of looking at the
option of a hybrid security sale–scheme approach for Telstra. During
the debate in the Senate on the Telstra (Dilution of Public Ownership)
Bill 1996 he said:
The remaining question that concerns me considerably is obtaining
the $8 billion from a one-third sale of Telstra by the issue of ordinary
shares. I have proposed to the government in my letter that it should
consider the issue of redeemable preference shares in a variety of ways.(35)
As noted above, hybrid securities are a broad group and
they are used to achieve different objectives. Some are more flexible
than others. In hindsight, it is noted that Senator Harradine
showed prescience in 1996 by questioning whether the sale arrangement
for one-third of Telstra at that time, by way of ordinary shares, was
the only option. Senator Harradine's
idea was not taken up at the time but it was referred to the Senate Economic
Legislation Committee for report. The Government's response to the Senate
Committee's report(36) included the following:
While recognising that hybrid securities may provide a useful
form of capital raising in certain circumstances, the government is mindful
of the disadvantages identified in the Committee's report regarding the
exclusive use of various types of hybrid securities for the Telstra offer.
The range of hybrid securities discussed in the majority report is very
broad, encompassing very different features within both redeemable preference
share and converting preference share structures. The majority report
identifies advantages for Telstra and for the government's wider reform
objectives in the use of ordinary equity, in preference to widespread
use of hybrid securities of an equity character. Use of hybrid securities
of debt character, even apart from any tax issues, would lack the advantages
for Telstra and for the government's program that ordinary equity, and
securities of an equity character, would have.(37)
It should be noted that the first Telstra (Dilution of
Public Ownership) Sale Bill 1996 contained what would become section 8AJ
of the Telstra Corporation Act 1991 which governs the Telstra sale–scheme.
Subsection 8AJ (4) authorised the various elements that may comprise the
sale–scheme. These elements included 'the redemption of redeemable preference
shares in Telstra held by the Commonwealth' (paragraph 8AJ(4)(i)). As
noted above, the Government chose to implement the sale–scheme by way
of the more conventional offer of ordinary shares.
Looking back, it is difficult to understand the anxiety
expressed at the time of the first sale about the use of redeemable preference
shares. In particular, the Senate Economics Committee reported that Telstra
had submitted to the Committee that the market for hybrid securities in
Australia
is not well established or understood.(38) More recently,
the securities market is reported to have greeted the announcement that
the final sale (T3) would involve hybrid securities with a 'yawn' but
some analysts noted that this approach could help the markets digest the
proposed $30 billion plus sell-off.(39)
The Government has now decided to maximise the flexibility
available in the sale arrangements for the remaining publicly-owned shares.
Apart from the mixture of the types of shares and hybrid securities on
offer, the Government may also decide to sell by way of a number of tranches
over a period of time.(40)
The Bill provides a definition of its broad group of
hybrid securities applicable under the Telstra sale arrangements in a
proposed new section 8AJA at Item 16 in Schedule 1 of the
Bill.
The Telecommunications Act 1977 regulates entities
such as carriers and service providers. A carrier's licence is subject
to conditions.
Item 1 inserts a new section 66 into the
Telecommunications Act 1977 to empower the Minister or the Australian
Communications Authority to make decisions of an administrative character
in connection with the carrier's licence conditions that ensure that Telstra
retains a local presence in regional, rural and remote parts of Australia.
These administrative decisions could cover such matters as draft local
presence plans.
The Telstra Corporation Act 1991 (the Act) was
formerly the Australian and Overseas Telecommunications Corporation
Act 1991. Telstra is the successor of Telecom and OTC. The Act contains
provisions which place restrictions on the ownership of Telstra, including
a limit on foreign ownership. The Act establishes Telstra's Head Office
and base of operations in Australia.
The Chair of Telstra must be an Australian citizen.
Item 2 inserts a definition of the ACCC (Australian
Competition and Consumer Commission) in the Act (see specific reference
to the ACCC in Item 86).
Item 3 inserts a definition of hybrid–security
issuer company into the Act by reference to amendments to section 8AJ
(see, particularly, Item 14). The hybrid–security issuer company
will be a wholly–owned Commonwealth company.
Item 4 inserts a definition of the Regional Telecommunications
Independent Review Committee (RTIRC) in the Act. The RTIRC will be established
by a new section 74 (see Item 32). The RTIRC will conduct
regular independent reviews of the adequacy of telecommunications services
in regional, rural and remote parts of Australia.
Item 8 and Item 9 are key provisions in
the Bill. The repeal of Division 2 of Part 2 of the Act removes the statutory
obligation on retention by the Commonwealth of majority ownership of the
voting shares in Telstra. In a practical sense, it is interesting to
note how briefly worded the amendments are to achieve such a significant
event.
Items 10 to 15 provide definitions associated
with the marketing of hybrid securities under the sale–scheme. Item
13 is a typographical correction to the Act. Item 15 identifies
that a wholly-owned Commonwealth company will issue the Telstra hybrid
securities.
Item 16 is a key amendment and it inserts a new
section 8AJA Sale–scheme hybrid securities provision in the Act. These
Telstra hybrid securities will be issued in Australia
and overseas and they may be issued in Australian currency or foreign
currency denomination. A discussion of hybrid securities is mentioned
in the Background, above.
Item 17 exempts Telstra's hybrid securities from
State or Territory stamp duty or other taxes.
Item 18 removes any doubt that the issue of Telstra
hybrid securities —to the extent that the issue represents a borrowing
on behalf of the Commonwealth—is authorised by an Act of Parliament.
This provision is inserted to address the broad market description of
a hybrid security as a combination of equity and debt.
Items 19 to 21 authorise access to appropriation
to enable the Commonwealth to meet the costs of engaging in the issue
and management of hybrid securities as part of the Telstra sale–scheme.
Item 27 inserts three new sections 8AYA, 8AYB
and 8AYC into the Act to empower the Minister to regulate Telstra
and any Commonwealth-owned company that issues equity in Telstra to ensure
that activities by those entities in equity markets, unrelated to the
Telstra sale-scheme, do not compromise the Commonwealth's interests in
Telstra. The Minister's power under new section 8AYA becomes redundant
once the Commonwealth's equity falls below 15%. The Bill contains an
automatic repeal of new section 8AYA once that event occurs (see
Item 59).
Item 32 inserts a new Part 10—Independent reviews
of regional telecommunications in the Act (as new sections 72 to
86). A proposed Regional Telecommunications Independent Review Committee
(RTIRC) will review the adequacy of telecommunications services in regional,
rural and remote parts of Australia.
The reports of the RTIRC will be tabled in Parliament. The RTIRC will
comprise a Chair and at least two other members, appointed by the Minister
on a part-time membership basis. The RTIRC may be assisted in the performance
of its functions by the Australian Communications Authority, the Australian
Competition and Consumer Commission and the portfolio Department.
The amendments at Items 33 to 52 commence on the
day designated by the Minister when the Commonwealth's shareholding in
Telstra is less than a simple majority.
Under this Bill, once the Commonwealth's equity in Telstra
falls below 50%, Telstra is then no longer regarded as a 'Commonwealth
authority' for the purposes of a range of other Commonwealth Acts and
Regulations. It is necessary, therefore, to remove references from those
Acts. In addition, it is necessary to provide some transitional provisions
to enable matters that were in train under those Commonwealth laws to
be processed to finalisation. These Commonwealth laws include:
• Archives Regulations
• Freedom of Information Act 1982 (but
note the transitional provision at Item 38)
• Freedom of Information (Miscellaneous Provisions)
Regulations
• Long Service Leave (Commonwealth Employees)
Regulations 1957
• Maternity Leave (Commonwealth Employees)
Regulations
• Occupational Health and Safety (Commonwealth
Employment) Act 1991
• Ombudsman Regulations 1977
• Ombudsman Act 1976 (but note the transitional
provision at Item 44), and
• Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation
Act 1988.
These amendments ensure that the new privatised Telstra
is freed from a range of specific reporting, accountability, employee
and occupational, health and safety obligations relevant to Commonwealth–related
activities and responsibilities.
Item 52 inserts a new Part 3A in the Telstra
Corporation Act 1991 to deal with transitional provisions for matters
that require residual Commonwealth legal effect. These include employees'
long service and maternity leave calculations for service periods that
were previously accrued as Commonwealth employees. The Director of Public
Prosecutions may also act in relation to certain acts, omissions or proceedings
that occurred when Telstra was a Commonwealth authority (see new section
9Q).
In one case, the 'designated day' effect actually triggers
an earlier date through another Commonwealth Act. New section 9H
applies section 128A of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation
Act 1988 (SRC Act). Section 128A of the SRC Act states:
128A
Comcare’s liability to be discharged by prescribed Commonwealth authorities
in some cases
(1) In spite of anything in this Act, an amount
that Comcare is liable to pay under this Act in respect of any injury,
loss or damage suffered before 1 July 1989 (whether or not suffered
before the commencing day) by an employee of a prescribed Commonwealth
authority must be paid by the authority and any such payment operates,
to the extent of the payment, as a discharge of Comcare’s liability.
(2) An action or proceeding does not lie against
Comcare for recovery of an amount mentioned in subsection (1), but
such an action or proceeding may be brought against the prescribed Commonwealth
authority concerned.
(3) Nothing in this Act requires the Commission
to prepare an estimate in relation to a prescribed Commonwealth authority
for any period before the financial year starting on 1 July 1989.
(4) In this section:
…
Under section 128A of the SRC Act Telstra is placed
on the same footing as other Commonwealth-owned business enterprises that
have been sold such as the Commonwealth Bank. Telstra will therefore
continue to be liable to pay an amount in respect of an employee's injury,
loss or damage suffered before 1
July 1989.
Item 53 is an important provision as it enables
the Auditor-General to resign as auditor of Telstra once Telstra ceases
to be a Commonwealth authority.
Telstra Corporation Act 1991
A 15% or more equitable interest in a public company
is considered a significant interest. Telstra is likely to be sold in
a number of tranches and it is necessary for the Commonwealth to ensure
that it receives reports on the progressive sell-down of Telstra, even
when it falls below simple majority control. Once the 85% sale day is
determined, then the Commonwealth's 'significant holding' falls below
15% and it is then no longer appropriate for the Commonwealth to impose
reporting and other special regulatory measures on Telstra.
Items 54 to 59 will remove obligations on Telstra
to report on various matters and to provide information to the Commonwealth—once
the Commonwealth's equity falls below 15%.
The conclusions
and different views put to the Senate Economics Legislation Committee
for its 1997 report Inquiry into Public Equity in Telstra Corporation
Limited (41)are worth revisiting. The current 1.8 million
shareholders of Telstra shares might wonder why they were not offered
the same level of flexibility of hybrid securities before this stage of
the Telstra sale-schemes. It is a fair comment, however, that the size
of the proposed T3 will warrant additional flexibility in its sale-scheme.
The privatisation
of Telstra will see a lessening of the more direct supervision by the
Executive and the Parliament of this large business enterprise. As noted
above, the privatisation will not, however, affect the Parliament's power
to pass laws on legislative policy initiatives directed at regulating
telecommunications matters.
- Commonwealth of Australia
Constitution Act (The Constitution).
- Bradley v The Commonwealth of Australia
and Another (1972-73) 128 CLR 557 at p. 566.
- Drawn from Jock Given, 'Foreign ownership of media
and telecommunications: an Australian story', Media and Arts Law
Review, Vol 7 no. 4, December 2002, pp. 253–272, and Anita Stuhmcke,
'The rise of the Australian Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman, Telecommunications
Policy 26, Pergamon, 2002, pp. 69–85.
- Jock Given, 'Foreign ownership of media and telecommunications:
an Australian story', Media and Arts Law Review, Vol 7 no. 4,
December 2002, p. 260.
- See the background summaries in Bills Digest No. 72,
1995–96, Telstra (Dilution of Public Ownership) Bill 1996 by Dr
Kim Jackson, Brendan Bailey
and Elizabeth Williams and Bills Digest
No. 176, 1997–98, Telstra (Transition to Full Private Ownership) Bill
1998 by Lee Jones, Department of the
Parliamentary Library, Canberra.
After passage through the Parliament the Bill became Act 81 of 1996
and received the Royal Assent on 19 December 1996.
- Australian National Audit Office, Sale
of One-Third of Telstra, Audit Report No. 10 98-99, Canberra,
19 October 1998, p. 12.
- ibid, pp. 12–13.
- ibid, p. 13.
- Australian National Audit Office, Second Tranche
Sale of Telstra Shares, Audit Report No. 20 2000-2001, Canberra,
30 November 2000, p. 10.
- ibid, p. 10.
- ibid, p. 35.
- 'Market Wrap', Australian Financial Review,
1 July 2003, p. 26.
- 'Governor-General's Speech', House of Representatives,
Debates, 12 February 2002, p. 22.
- 'Consideration of Budget Estimates', Senate Finance
and Public Administration Legislation Committee, Senate, Hansard,
28 May 2003, p. 343 (Proof).
- Laura Tingle and
Toni O'Loughlin, 'Telstra sell-off
plan to cut risk', Australian Financial Review, 8 July 2003, p. 1.
- Toni O'Loughlin,
'Value of Telstra shares inflated in budget', Australian Financial
Review, 29 May 2003,
p. 3.
- Natalie Barr, Sunrise,
Channel 7, Thursday, 29 May 2003.
- The Hon Dr Brendan Nelson, Minister for Education,
Science and Training, 'Second Reading Speech', Telstra (Transition to
Full Private Ownership) Bill 2003, House of Representatives, Debates,
26 June 2003, p.
16459.
- Toni O'Loughlin and
Mark Skulley, 'PM: Telstra cash for
debt not the bush', Australian Financial Review, 9 July 2003, p. 3.
- Senator the Hon Richard Alston,
Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, Media
Release, 'Government releases detailed response to 17 Besley recommendations',
24 May 2001.
- The Hon John Anderson MP, Deputy Prime Minister and
Minister for Transport and Regional services and Senator the Hon Richard
Alston, Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the
Arts, 'Government response to Regional Telecommunications Inquiry',
Joint Media Release, 25 June 2003, p. 4, at www.dcita.gov.au.
The Estens Inquiry Report can be found at http://www.telinquiry.gov.au/rti-report.html.
- ibid.
- 'Kim Beazley's Plan
for Telstra', Australian Labor Party, 3 November 2001, and Hon Kim Beazley
MP, 'Labor's Plan for Telstra and telecommunications', Media Statement,
31 October 2001.
- Mr Lindsay Tanner MP,
'Telco's privatisation a bit rich', Australian Financial Review,
8 July 2003, p. 55.
- ibid.
- See letter from Bob McMullan MP,
Shadow Minister for Finance and Cabinet, 'Telstra sale would damage
budget', Australian Financial Review, 10 July 2003.
- ibid.
- Senator Lyn Allison,
'Senator Lyn Allison speaks to the
CTN Forum: Selling Telstra', Australian Democrats Speeches, 10
October 2002.
- 'Democrats wrangle over Telstra', AAP, news.ninemsn.com.au/
Business, 21 July 2003.
- Sunday (television current affairs program),
29 June 2003.
- Mark Davis and Sam
Strutt, 'PM denies Telstra backlash', Australian
Financial Review, 5 July 2003, p. 6.
- ibid.
- Michelle Grattan,
'Dickie talking tough on Telstra proceeds', Sun–Herald, 6
July 2003, p. 25.
- The ASX details are at http://www.asx.com.au/markets/l3/irmhybridsecurities_am3.shtm.
- Senator Brian Harradine,
'Second Reading Speech',
Telstra (Dilution of Public Ownership) Bill 1996, Senate, Debates,
5 December 1996,
p. 6752. See also Brendan Bailey,
'Telstra: Redeemable Preference Shares', Research Note No. 7
1996–97, Department of the Parliamentary Library, Canberra.
- Inquiry into Public Equity in Telstra Corporation
Ltd, Senate Economics Legislation Committee, Senate, March 1997,
see the Summary of Conclusions at http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/committee/economics_ctte/telstra/report/c05.htm
- The Hon Senator Ian Campbell,
Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer, 'Economics Legislation Committee:
Report: Government Response', Senate, Debates, 27
May 1997, p. 3783.
- Inquiry into Public Equity in Telstra Corporation
Ltd, Senate Economics Legislation Committee, Senate, March 1997,
see fourth dot point in the Summary of Conclusions at http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/committee/economics_ctte/telstra/report/c05.htm
- Colin Kruger, 'Talk
of T3 hybrid fails to excite', Sydney Morning Herald, 9 July 2003, p. 20.
- The Hon Dr Brendan Nelson, Minister for Education,
Science and Training, 'Second Reading Speech', Telstra (Transition to
Full Private Ownership) Bill 2003, House of Representatives, Debates,
26 June 2003, p.
16459.
- The Summary of Conclusions of the Senate's 1997 report
Inquiry into Public Equity in Telstra Corporation Limited is
at http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/committee/economics_ctte/telstra/report/c05.htm.
Brendan Bailey
6 August 2003
Bills Digest Service
Information and Research Services
This paper has been prepared for general distribution to Senators and
Members of the Australian Parliament. While great care is taken to ensure
that the paper is accurate and balanced, the paper is written using information
publicly available at the time of production. The views expressed are
those of the author and should not be attributed to the Information and
Research Services (IRS). Advice on legislation or legal policy issues
contained in this paper is provided for use in parliamentary debate and
for related parliamentary purposes. This paper is not professional legal
opinion. Readers are reminded that the paper is not an official parliamentary
or Australian government document.
IRS staff are available to discuss the paper's contents
with Senators and Members and their staff but not with members of the
public.
ISSN 1328-8091
© Commonwealth of Australia 2003
Except to the extent of the uses permitted under the Copyright Act
1968, no part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted
in any form or by any means, including information storage and retrieval
systems, without the prior written consent of the Parliamentary Library,
other than by Members of the Australian Parliament in the course of their
official duties.
Published by the Department of the Parliamentary Library, 2003.
|
 |
