Bills Digest no. 32 2007–08
Communications Legislation Amendment (Information Sharing and Datacasting)
Bill 2007
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
Financial implications
Main provisions
Conclusion
Endnotes
Contact officer & copyright details
Passage history
Communications
Legislation Amendment (Information Sharing and Datacasting) Bill 2007
Date introduced:
20 June 2007
House:
House of Representatives
Portfolio:
Communications, Information Technology and the Arts
Commencement:
On Royal Assent, with Schedule 1, Part 1, Division
1 commencing on the day after Royal Assent and Schedule 1, Part 1, Division
2 on Proclamation or within six months of Royal Assent. Schedule 1
Part 2 commences the day after Royal Assent.
Links:
The relevant
links to the Bill, Explanatory Memorandum and second reading speech
can be accessed via BillsNet, which is at http://www.aph.gov.au/bills/.
When Bills have been passed they can be found at ComLaw, which is at
http://www.comlaw.gov.au/.
To amend the Australian Communications
and Media Authority Act 2005 (the ACMA Act) to provide for sharing
of information between the Australian Communications and Media Authority
(ACMA) and third parties.
To amend the Radiocommunications Act 1992 (the
Radiocommunications Act) to allow the ACMA to vary the spectrum specified
in a datacasting transmitter licence, including a channel A or channel
B datacasting transmitter licence, after such a licence has been issued.
To amend the Datacasting Charge (Imposition) Act
1998 (the Datacasting Charge Act) so that a fee is not payable where
a licensee provides datacasting services on a channel B datacasting
transmitter licence.
The Communications Legislation Amendment (Information
Sharing and Datacasting) Bill 2007 (the Bill) is in two parts.
Part 1 relates to disclosure of information by ACMA officials. Part
2 relates to datacasting issues.
The ACMA is responsible
for the regulation of broadcasting, the Internet, radio communications
and telecommunications. It undertakes functions as required by the
ACMA Act and in accordance with the provisions of a raft of other legislation
including the:
-
Telecommunications Act 1997 (the Telecommunications
Act) and Telecommunications (Consumer Protection and Service Standards)
Act 1999 (Telecommunications Consumer Protection Act)
-
the Radiocommunications Act
-
Datacasting Charge Act and Datacasting Transmitter
Licence Fees Act 2006 (the Datacasting TL Fees Act), and
-
Broadcasting Services Act 1992 (the Broadcasting
Services Act).
As part of its regulatory
function, the ACMA has wide ranging powers, including information gathering,
for example:
The Bill proposes to authorise the ACMA to disclose
certain information gathered in the performance of its regulatory functions
(referred to as ‘authorised disclosure information’) to various government
agencies such as the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission
(ACCC), the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman and to overseas media
and communication regulators. The information which it proposes to
disclose includes information which has been given ‘in confidence’ to
the ACMA.
The Bill also includes provisions relating to the Government’s
decisions concerning channel A and channel B datacasting transmitter
licences. Channel A licences will allow new free to air, in-home digital
television services, while channel B licences can be used for a wider
range of services, including mobile television. [9]
The Bill proposes to authorise the ACMA to vary a condition
of a datacasting transmitter licence that relates to radiofrequency
spectrum after such a licence has been allocated.
Following the enactment of the Broadcasting Services
Amendment (Media Ownership) Act 2006, Mr Graeme Samuel, Chairman
of the ACCC, expressed his support in principle to the sharing of information
about media mergers with the ACMA, stating that any proposed merger
would be assessed by both regulators simultaneously. Mr Samuel suggested
that such sharing could ‘pose a few hurdles’ and may require some media
companies to waive their right to confidentiality’. [10]
In an article published in the Sydney Morning Herald
on 6 March 2007,
it was reported that ACCC Chairman, Graeme Samuel,
had stated that the ACCC and the ACMA had reached agreement to share
information regarding their media merger investigations once the new
laws about cross media ownership were operating. It was stated that
the two regulators would be requesting a waiver from merger parties
allowing confidential information provided to one agency to be shared
with the other. [11]
It appears that the Bill has been introduced, in part,
to facilitate the exchange of information between regulators in relation
to media ownership. The Explanatory Memorandum states that the ACMA
frequently receives information through the performance of its functions
and the exercise of its powers in relation to the regulation of broadcasting,
the Internet, radiocommunications and telecommunications that would
be relevant to other regulatory or administrative bodies or personnel.
[12]
The second reading speech states, by way of example
that:
… in dealing with industry in relation to a proposed
merger, both the ACCC and ACMA are likely to receive evidence relating
to the question of control of commercial broadcasting licences. As
arrangements currently stand, ACMA would be unable to share such information
with the ACCC, even though it is relevant to the performance of the
ACCC’s statutory functions under the Trade Practices Act 1974
in considering and approving proposed media mergers. [13]
The Explanatory Memorandum states that the Bill contains
measures concerning the allocation of datacasting transmitter licences,
including in relation to channel A and channel B datacasting transmitter
licences. [14] The second reading speech states that the proposed
changes would allow the ACMA to address a range of technical issues
as they arise. The types of issues include addressing potential interference
with existing services and optimising spectrum for particular services
such as mobile television. [15]
On 21 June 2007, the Senate referred the Bill to the Standing
Committee on the Environment, Communications, Information Technology
and the Arts for inquiry and report by 30
July 2007.
The Committee received four
written submissions in relation to the Bill. The following is a
brief summary of each.
The Office of the Privacy Commissioner (OPC) acknowledged
that the Bill is primarily targeted at commercial transaction information.
The information which is expected to be disclosed under the provisions
of the Bill is commercially sensitive or confidential information. However,
the OPC considered that it is probable that some personal information
would be disclosed under the information sharing arrangement, such as
the personal information of directors and small business operators.
[16]
The major concerns of the OPC were:
-
the Bill allows for personal information to be disclosed
to agencies and bodies in jurisdictions that do not have privacy regulation
[17]
-
media regulators in overseas jurisdictions are entitled
to receive ‘authorised disclosure information’ but may not have enacted
privacy regulations similar to the Information Privacy Principles
(IPPs) in the Privacy Act 1988 (the Privacy Act), and
-
this means that there may not be any legislation
to prevent any unintended secondary uses of an individual’s personal
information and there may be no way to ensure that the accuracy and
currency of information is maintained.
In addition, the OPC was concerned that the ACMA may
disclose ‘authorised disclosure information’ if it is already ‘publicly
available’. The OPC considered that this was at variance with the IPPs.
This is because the Privacy Act provides that, even if an agency collects
publicly available personal information, for example, from a public
register or from a newspaper, the agency must still comply with the
IPPs. [18]
The OPC made several recommendations for amendment
to the Bill including:
-
that disclosure of ‘personal information’ should
be specifically excluded from any ‘authorised disclosure information’,
or
-
in the alternative, a definition of ‘personal information’
be included and a requirement that compliance with the Privacy Act
was required, and
-
that the regulation making powers in the Bill should
expressly provide that the privacy of individuals is to be a matter
for consideration by the Chair of the ACMA. [19]
Privacy Commissioner Helen Versey
from Privacy Victoria was concerned that the definition of ‘authorised
disclosure information’ is extremely broad and includes information
that the ACMA has collected in confidence and through its coercive powers.
[20]
Like the OPC, Privacy Victoria was concerned that ‘personal
information’ would be disclosed to a state, territory or foreign authority
that may not be subject to privacy regulation that is similar to the
Privacy Act. [21]
In relation to that part of the Bill which allows for
information about the affairs of a person to be disclosed, where the
person has consented to the disclosure, Privacy Victoria was concerned
that the term ‘information that relates to the affairs of a person’
is not defined. Further, whilst the Explanatory Memorandum states that
the Privacy Act is intended to prevail in relation to disclosure of
personal information, the wording of the Bill does not emphasise that
intention. [22]
Privacy Victoria
was also concerned about the section relating to disclosure of ‘publicly
available information’ as that term is not defined in the Bill.
Like the OPC, Privacy Victoria strongly recommended
that, to prevent ambiguity, the Bill should be amended to provide that
the Privacy Act is to apply in matters relating to personal information.
[23]
Free TV Australia Limited (Free TV) is the peak industry
body representing all of Australia’s
commercial free-to-air television licensees. [24]
Free TV considers that the Bill should be amended as
follows:
Free TV submitted that the proposed amendment to section
111 will empower the ACMA to vary the conditions of a licence without
any industry consultation. In their view, issues relating to the availability
and quality of free-to-air television services are far too important
to leave to administrative discretion. [26]
In evidence to the Committee they said they would like
to see a mandatory consultative process to address potential problems
before they actually occur. [27]
The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) submission
related to disclosure of information which had been provided in confidence
to the ACMA.
They acknowledged that the Bill provided for the Chair
of the ACMA to impose conditions on ‘authorised disclosure information’
provided to Royal Commissions, for example, that the recipient of the
information does not further disclose it. Of concern to the ABC was
that the Bill does not have a similar provision in relation to information
disclosed to Ministers or Departmental Secretaries. [28]
The ABC believes that these provisions do not provide adequate protection
for sensitive information disclosed to the ACMA on a confidential basis.
The ABC also made submissions about Part 2 of Schedule
1 of the Bill which proposes to amend the Radiocommunications Act
so that the ACMA is able to vary the licence conditions applying
to a datacasting transmitter licence. This would, in effect, permit
the ACMA to move a datacasting service from one channel to another.
[29]
Like Free TV, the ABC was concerned that there is potential
for interference to free-to-air television broadcasts from mobile television
services that are expected to operate under channel B datacasting transmitter
licences. The ABC submitted that the proposed amendment is an adequate
means of protecting terrestrial television transmissions from interference
from channel B mobile television services and supports the arguments
for a fully-developed planning regime which were advanced by Free TV.
[30]
The Explanatory Memorandum states that the Bill is
expected to have minimal impact on Commonwealth expenditure or revenue.
[31]
Schedule 1 proposes
to amend the ACMA Act by inserting two additional definitions into the
existing section 3. Item 1 inserts ‘ACMA official’ which
means
-
a member of ACMA
-
an associate member of ACMA
-
a member of the ACMA staff or
-
an officer or employee of a Commonwealth authority
whose services have been made available to ACMA.
These are the persons whom it is proposed will have
the authority to disclose information under the ACMA Act.
The second definition, inserted by item 2, is
‘authorised disclosure information’ which defines the nature
of the information which will be releasable under the ACMA Act as follows:
-
information that was given in confidence to the ACMA
in connection with the performance of any of the ACMA’s functions
or the exercise of its powers;
-
information that was obtained by the ACMA as a result
of the exercise of the following of its powers under:
-
the Broadcasting Services Act - Parts
2 (categories of broadcasting services), 5 (control of commercial
broadcasting licences and datacasting transmitter licences), 7
(subscription television broadcasting services) or 13 (information
gathering by the ACMA by way of investigations [32]
and hearings [33])
- the Radiocommunications Act - Chapters 3 (licensing of
radiocommunications), 5 (administration and enforcement) or 6 (miscellaneous
[34])
-
the Telecommunications Act - Parts 3, (carriers)
6, (industry codes and industry standards) 21, (technical regulation)
26 (investigations) or 27 (ACMA’s information gathering powers)
- the Telecommunications Act - Schedule 3A (about a carrier’s powers
and immunities)
-
the Telecommunications Consumer Protection
Act - Part 2 (which relates to the universal service regime) [35]
-
information that was obtained by the ACMA as a result
of the exercise of its powers under a provision that allows the ACMA
or an ACMA official to require a person to give information or to
produce a document [36],
and
-
information that was given in confidence to the ACMA
by a government authority of a foreign country.
The second reading speech explains the reason that it
is intended to provide disclosure to a government authority of a foreign
country. It states that the ACMA has established close relationships
with overseas regulatory agencies in developing co-operative arrangements
for the regulation of the Internet industry. The global nature of the
Internet means that liaison with regulatory and other relevant bodies
overseas is a vital part of addressing offensive Internet material and
working towards securing child-safety online. [37]
The submissions to the Standing Committee on the Environment,
Communications, Information Technology and the Arts in relation to the
Bill each expressed concerns that the definition of ‘authorised disclosure
information’ was extremely broad and would capture ‘personal information’,
in addition to commercially sensitive information.
According to section 6 of the Privacy Act, ‘personal
information’ means information or an opinion (including information
or an opinion forming part of a database), whether true or not, and
whether recorded in a material form or not, about an individual whose
identity is apparent, or can reasonably be ascertained, from the information
or opinion. Given the range and extent of the information which the
ACMA is empowered to gather in carrying out its functions, those concerns
are well founded.
None of the sections of the proposed Bill make express
reference to the intention expressed in the Explanatory Memorandum that
the Privacy Act will apply to ‘personal information’. [38]
Item 3 of Schedule 1 of the Bill proposes to
insert a new Part 7A into the existing Act. Proposed sections
59A to 59H in Part 7A set out various circumstances in which an
ACMA official may disclose ‘authorised disclosure information’ to a
third party.
Proposed subsection 59A(1) allows an ACMA official
to disclose any of the information which is defined as ‘authorised disclosure
information’ to the Minister for Communications, Information Technology
and the Arts. In addition, an ACMA official may disclose ‘authorised
disclosure information’ to the Secretary of the Department, or an APS
employee in the Department who has written authorisation from the Secretary
under proposed subsection 59B(1) as long as the purpose of disclosing
the information is to advise the Minister.
Proposed subsection 59A(2) allows an ACMA official
to disclose to any other Minister ‘authorised disclosure information’
that relates to a matter arising under a provision of an Act that is
administered by that Minister. In addition, an ACMA official may disclose
‘authorised disclosure information’ to the Secretary of a Department,
or an APS employee of that Department who has written authorisation
from the relevant Secretary under proposed subsection 59B(2),
as long as the purpose for disclosing the information is to advise the
relevant Minister in accordance with proposed subsection 59A(2).
Proposed section 59C relates to disclosure to
Royal Commissions. Under proposed subsection 59C(1) an ACMA
official may disclose ‘authorised disclosure information’ to a Royal
Commission. The Chair of the ACMA may impose written conditions to
be complied with in relation to the information which is disclosed:
proposed subsection 59C(2).
The ABC was critical that the proposed section 59C
allowed for the Chair of the ACMA to impose conditions upon the information
which could be disclosed to a Royal Commission but that proposed
sections 59A and 59B did not allow for any limitations on the disclosure
of information to a Minister or the Secretary of a Department.
The Explanatory Memorandum states that it is intended
that information would be disclosed by the ACMA to a Royal Commission
when the information is relevant to the Commission’s terms of reference.
[39] A similar limitation
is imposed on the relevant Minister under the proposed subsections
59A(2) and 59B(2). Under those subsections ‘authorised disclosure
information’ may be disclosed if it relates to a matter arising under
a provision of an Act that is administered by the Minister.
Under proposed section 59D the Chair of the
ACMA may authorise an ACMA official in writing to disclose ‘authorised
disclosure material’ to a number of authorities which are specifically
listed. Under proposed subsection 59D(1) the Chair of the ACMA
must be satisfied that the information will enable or assist the authority
to perform or exercise any of its functions or powers. The Explanatory
Memorandum states that this is an important safeguard which is intended
to ensure that information will only be disclosed to authorities which
have a genuine interest in receiving it. [40]
The major criticism of this section is that a number
of the authorities which are defined in the proposed section have not
enacted legislation which is equivalent to the Privacy Act. [41]
In addition, there are not sufficient protections of sensitive information
disclosed to the ACMA on a confidential basis. [42]
However, according to proposed subsection 59D(2)
the Chair of the ACMA may impose written conditions on the disclosure
of ‘authorised disclosure material’ to the listed authorities. The
Explanatory Memorandum states by way of example that a condition could
be imposed that the information must not be further disclosed by the
authority that receives it. [43]
The ABC supports such a condition being imposed. [44]
However, in the current Bill there is no compulsion for the Chair
of the ACMA to impose that or any other specific condition. Privacy
Victoria suggested that
a provision be inserted to ensure that the Chair of ACMA gives consideration
to transborder data flows in accordance with Schedule 2 of the Privacy
Act. [45]
Proposed section 59E authorises an ACMA official
to disclose ‘authorised disclosure information’ about the affairs of
a person where the person consents to the disclosure and the disclosure
is in accordance with the consent that has been given.
Privacy Victoria
was concerned that the term ‘information about the affairs of a person’
is not defined and that the proposed section does not contain a specific
provision to give effect to the intention enunciated in the Bill, i.e.,
that the Privacy Act will apply to matters of personal information.
[46]
Neither the Bill nor the Explanatory Memorandum give
an indication of how this consent might be requested or the circumstances
in which it might be requested.
Proposed section 59F deals with disclosure of
‘authorised disclosure information’ which is already publicly available.
The term ‘already publicly available’ is not defined.
Privacy Victoria
expressed concern about the breadth of the proposed section on the grounds
that ‘it potentially extends from any authorised disclosure information,
including personal information, that is printed in a popular newspaper,
to information that a person may be able to find from a complex ‘google’
search’. [47] Free TV
was equally concerned about how the phrase might be construed. [48]
Proposed section 59H refers to disclosure of
‘authorised disclosure information’ in ‘specified circumstances’. The
Explanatory Memorandum states that the proposed section provides for
regulations to authorise an ACMA official to disclose ‘authorised disclosure
information’ in specified circumstances, and to provide that the Chair
of ACMA may impose written conditions to be complied with in relation
to the disclosure. [49]
There is no indication in the Bill or Explanatory Memorandum
as to what those ‘specified circumstances’ might be.
The OPC submits that this clause should expressly provide
for the privacy of individuals to be a matter of consideration for the
Chair of the ACMA and suggests that the power to make regulations under
this clause could include a process of consultation with the Privacy
Commissioner. [50]
Despite the provisions of the proposed sections
59A to 59H which set out the circumstances in which ‘authorised
disclosure information’ can be disclosed and the conditions which may
be imposed on that disclosure, the effect of proposed section 59J
is that disclosure may also take place in other circumstances which
have not been specified. Privacy Victoria
submitted that the ‘specified circumstances’ envisaged by this section
should be clearly expressed in the Act, because in its current form,
there is no limit on what information may be disclosed or in what circumstances.
Of particular concern to Privacy Victoria
was that the disclosure of ‘authorised disclosure information’ that
is also ‘personal information’ should be specifically excluded from
this provision. [51]
Item 4 of Schedule 1 of the Bill provides that
disclosure of information under the proposed Part 7A relates to information
which was given to, or obtained by ACMA before, on or after the commencement
of that Part. Essentially, with the enactment of the Bill, the ACMA
will be authorised to disclose information which is already in its possession,
despite the fact that the material may have been provided to the ACMA
on the understanding that it was confidential and would not be disclosed
to a third party, and without any knowledge of the proposed Bill.
Existing Part 3.3 of the Radiocommunications Act relates
to apparatus licences.
Division 1 of Part 3.3 of the Radiocommunications Act
relates to the types of apparatus licences. Section 97 of the Radiocommunications
Act provides that the ACMA may issue either transmitter licences or
receiver licences. Sections 98A and 98B provide that the ACMA may declare
that a specified datacasting licence will be issued as a channel A datacasting
transmitter licence or a channel B datacasting transmitter licence respectively.
Division 2 of Part 3.3 of the Radiocommunications Act
relates to the manner in which the ACMA issues different types of apparatus
licence.
Division 3 of Part 3.3 of the Radiocommunications Act
relates to the conditions which can be placed upon apparatus licences.
In particular, sections 107(1)(g), 108A(1)(f), 109(1)(f) and 109A(1)(k)
provide that the ACMA can apply ‘such other conditions as are specified
in the licence’.
Items 6 and 7 of the Bill propose to amend subsection
111(1)(d) of the Radiocommunications Act which is located in Division
3 of Part 3.3.
The existing subsection 111 currently provides for
the ACMA to make certain changes to licence conditions applicable to
apparatus licences, including a datacasting transmitter licence, for
example:
-
impose one or more further conditions to which the
licence is subject
-
revoke or vary one of those further conditions
-
revoke or vary one of the conditions that has been
applied to the licence under sections 107(1)(g), 108A(1)(f), 109(1)(f)
and 109A(1)(k), and
-
if the licence is a transmitter licence, but not
a datacasting transmitter licence, vary a condition already specified
in the licence under sections 108(2)(a), [52]
(b), [53] or (c) [54]
Item 6 proposes to delete the phrase ‘or a datacasting
transmitter licence’ from subsection 111(1)(d) so that the ACMA can
vary a condition specified in the licence under subsections 108(2)(a)
– (c).
Item 7 proposes to insert the phrase ‘or 109A(1)(d)’
to subsection 111(1)(d) so that, in addition to being able to rely on
the terms of 108(2)(a) – (c), the ACMA will also be able to vary the
terms of a licence under section 109A(1)(d). [55]
These proposed amendments will achieve their stated
intention, that is, to enable the ACMA to vary the spectrum specified
in a datacasting transmitter licence, including a channel A or channel
B datacasting transmitter licence, after such a licence has been issued.
[56]
Item 8 of the Bill proposes to amend the Datacasting
Charge Act.
Section 6 of the current Datacasting Charge Act provides
that if a transmitter licence authorises the holder to transmit datacasting
services in digital mode, then a charge is imposed on the transmitter
licence in respect of the financial year. The proposed amendment to
subsection 6(a) will exempt channel B datacasting transmitter licences
from this section.
According to the Explanatory Memorandum, the Government
has decided that channel B datacasting licences should not be subject
to an annual licence fee. [57]
In respect of Part
1, the Senate inquiry process raised significant concerns about tightening
the definitions of key terms in order to reflect privacy concerns.
These concerns are referred to in the Main Provisions section of this
Digest.
In respect of Part 2, despite the apparently minor
changes that are proposed to the Radiocommunications Act, the effect
is significant. The submissions by the ABC and Free TV reflect their
concerns about the need for further consultation before channel A or
channel B datacasting transmitter licences are issued so as to avoid
any interference with existing free-to-air broadcasts.
Endnotes
[1]. Section 520 Telecommunications Act 1997.
[2]. Section 255 Radiocommunications Act 1992.
[3]. Section 7 Datacasting Charge (Imposition)
Act 1998.
[4]. Section 6 Datacasting Charge (Imposition)
Act 1998.
[5]. Section 65 Broadcasting Services Act 1992.
[6]. Subdivision 5B Broadcasting Services Act
1992.
[7]. A ‘trigger event’ will occur if a commercial
radio licence is transferred to a third party or a new media group is
created or there is a change in the control of a media group of which
the radio licence is a part.
[8]. Section 43B Broadcasting Services Act 1992.
[9]. Senator the Hon Helen Coonan, Minister for
Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, Address to ABN
AMRO Communications Conference 2007 entitled ‘2007 – reaping the benefits
of the media reforms’, Sydney, 17 April 2007, p. 5.
[10]. M. Ricketson, ‘Samuel wants close co-operation
between regulators as mergers loom’, The Age, 25 November 2006, p. 3.
[11]. L. Murray,
‘One step closer to media melee’, Sydney Morning Herald, 6
March 2007, p. 25.
[12]. Explanatory Memorandum, p. 2.
[13]. The Hon. Bruce Billson MP,
Minister for Veterans’ Affairs and Minister Assisting the Minister for
Defence, ‘Second reading speech: Communications Legislation Amendment
(Information Sharing and Datacasting) Bill 2007’, House of Representatives,
Debates, 20 June 2007, p. 13.
[14]. Explanatory Memorandum, p. 3.
[15]. The Hon. Bruce Billson,
op.cit.
[16]. Office of the Privacy Commissioner, Submission
No. 2, July 2007, p. 3.
[17]. For example: Queensland,
South Australia and Western
Australia do not have privacy legislation.
[18]. Office of the Privacy Commissioner, op. cit.,
p. 4.
[19]. Office of the Privacy Commissioner, op. cit.,
p. 5.
[20]. H. Versey on behalf of Privacy Victoria, ‘Submission
No. 1, 13 July 2007,
p. 1.
[24]. Free TV Australia Limited, ‘Submission
No. 4, 17 July 2007,
p. 1.
[25]. ibid., Introduction, p. 1.
[26]. ibid., Section 2, p. 2.
[27]. Evidence of R. Bunch, Public Hearing before
Senate Standing Committee on Environment, Communications, Information
Technology and the Arts, 7
August 2007, p. 6. Free TV Australia Limited considers that
the Radiocommunications Act should include an additional amendment in
similar terms to Part 3 of the Broadcasting Services Act which would
entrench a formal consultation.
[28]. G. Dawson for and on behalf of Australian
Broadcasting Corporation, ‘Submissions to the Senate Environment,
Communications, Information Technology and the Arts Committee, 17 July
2007, p. 1.
[29]. Australian Broadcasting Corporation, op. cit.,
p. 2.
[31]. Explanatory Memorandum, p. 3.
[32]. Part 13, Division 2 of the Broadcasting Services
Act.
[33]. Part 13 Division 3 of the Broadcasting Services
Act.
[34]. Including international agreements at section
299 of the Telecommunications Act 1997
[35]. According to section 8 of the Telecommunications
(Consumer Protection and Service Standards) Act 1999, the main object
of the universal service regime is to ensure that all people in Australia
should have reasonable access to standard telephone services, payphones,
prescribed carriage services and digital data services.
[36]. For example section 45 of the Broadcasting
Services Act which requires licensees to provide information for
the Register of Controlled Media Groups.
[37]. Second reading speech.
[38]. Explanatory Memorandum, p. 7.
[39]. Explanatory Memorandum, p. 12
[40]. Explanatory Memorandum, p. 13.
[41]. Privacy Victoria,
op. cit., p. 2.
[42]. Australian Broadcasting Corporation, op. cit.,
p. 1.
[43]. Explanatory Memorandum, p. 13.
[44]. Australian Broadcasting Corporation, op. cit.,
p. 2.
[45]. Privacy Victoria,
op. cit., p. 2.
[48]. Free TV Australia Limited, op. cit., Introduction,
p. 1.
[49]. Explanatory Memorandum, p. 16.
[50]. Office of the Privacy Commissioner, op. cit.,
p. 4.
[51]. Privacy Victoria,
op. cit., p. 3.
[52]. Provides that a licensee must not operate
a transmitter for a purpose that is inconsistent with a purpose of the
kind specified in the appropriate frequency band plan.
[53]. Provides that a licensee must not operate
a transmitter except in accordance with the licence conditions that
relate to containment of interference to radiocommunications or transmission
of an identification signal.
[54]. Provides that a licensee must not operate
the transmitter except on the frequency specified in the licence.
[55]. Provides that a datacasting transmitter licence
is subject to a condition that the licensee must not operate the transmitter
except on a frequency or a frequency channel and at a constancy that
is specified in the licence.
[56]. Explanatory Memorandum, p. 18.
Paula Pyburne
Law and Bills Digest Section
17 August 2007
Parliamentary Library
© Commonwealth of Australia
This work is copyright. Except to the extent of uses permitted by the
Copyright Act 1968, no person may reproduce or transmit any part of this
work by any process without the prior written consent of the Parliamentary
Librarian. This requirement does not apply to members of the Parliament
of Australia acting in the course of their official duties.
This work has been prepared to support the work of the Australian Parliament
using information available at the time of production. The views expressed
do not reflect an official position of the Parliamentary Library, nor
do they constitute professional legal opinion.
Feedback is welcome and may be provided to: web.library@aph.gov.au.
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 Entry Point for
referral.
|
