Senator Brian Harradine has scuttled the government’s proposed Media Legislation by proposing further amendments to the new Bill.

The Bill will now go back to the House of Representatives, where Communications Minister Alston expects it to be passed back to the Senate without the amendments being accepted, creating an impasse unless further negotiations can solve the deadlock.

It is one of several Bills which could trigger a double dissolution, although Senator Alston does not believe that will happen.

He told the ABC’s AM program:

“I think we had reasonable warning of what was likely to happen, but I think everyone needs to understand that that final amendment is really a dagger through the heart of cross-media reform.

The US and the UK are going down the same path for the same reason, and clearly you want to flex the market up.

It’s not a Packer/Murdoch issue, the people who have been belting loudest on my doors are all the other players in the industry who actually see opportunities.

CATHERINE MCGRATH: … The legislation was in the Senate last night, you’re trying to push it through the way you’ve designed it, but Senator Harradine forced through this amendment which says that you can’t own two forms of media in the major capital cities. Why is that such a major problem?

RICHARD ALSTON: Well, the cross-media rules are already out of date. They say that if you can’t own more than more than one of radio, television or print.

We’ve proposed a rule that says you can’t own more than two out of three and there are a number of other safeguards in the legislation, minimum number of voices for example, so that people get the full spread of diversity of opinion. That’s what it’s about.

It’s not about how many pieces of monopoly do you own, it’s about whether people have access to a range of views…

In the UK, which has a population three-times as large as ours, they don’t have those protections. They’ve only got about one and a quarter commercial television stations.

CATHERINE McGRATH: Well where does it go from here? Does it go back to the House of Reps to be rejected again and become a possible double dissolution trigger, or do you negotiate?

RICHARD ALSTON: Well, we’ll send it back to the Reps. I’m sure they’ll make some changes including the removal of Senator Harradine’s amendment. And we’ll see where we go from there.

But you know, if it ends up being twice rejected then it clearly is able to be considered further at a later time.

But I mean this isn’t going to be the trigger for an early election, I can absolutely assure you of that. There are already four or five bills that have been twice rejected, and as the Prime Minister’s indicated, we’re in no hurry to go to the next election.

Explaining his amendments during the Senate Debate Senator Harradine said:

I move these amendments to protect against media proprietors having undue influence in the metropolitan media markets. My amendments are quite straightforward. They would ensure that a media proprietor could not own both a television licence and a newspaper in the same mainland capital city or, as the legislation describes it, a `metropolitan licence area’.

The definition of metropolitan licence area used in the legislation does not include all Australian capital cities. It does not include Darwin, Canberra and, most importantly, Hobart. I was initially concerned about the omission of Hobart from the definition, but I am satisfied that the minimum voices rule detailed in the most recently passed amendments will protect Hobart and also Launceston from media concentration.

The amendments protect against media proprietors having undue influence, particularly in a city, by owning both a television licence and a newspaper in that city. I have also been concerned that some of the larger media groups in television and newspapers might have undue national influence if they were allowed to merge. I made the arguments before in my speech on the second reading debate …

My amendments are specific to newspapers and television. We have just heard Senator Cherry outline to the Senate the type of influence that these media each have–I think Senator Cherry said 50 per cent for TV, 28 per cent for newspaper and 22 per cent for radio–and half of that was the ABC.

The reason that my amendments are specific to television and newspaper is that these are the types of media that have been found to be influential sources of news for the general public and, most importantly, they count for fewer voices than other media like radio.

There is already some concentration in the TV and newspaper markets… No new television licences are permitted until 2006. In contrast, there are a number of commercial radio stations in each of the mainland capitals and plans for new FM radio licences in Adelaide, Brisbane, Melbourne and Sydney.

Without my amendments… I put it to you that this is the scenario. A media owner of one particular Australian television network which has the potential audience reach of over 70 per cent of the population could look to purchase or merge with a newspaper group. If a merger were agreed with one of the major newspaper groups which has almost 70 per cent of the capital city and national newspaper market that would create a situation which would be totally unacceptable to the public interest…

This issue is far too important to let go and not to address in this particular measure…

I hope that the government will not ditch the bill if my amendments are adopted by the Senate. They go to the heart of diversity and, indeed, of democracy. The minister would readily acknowledge the substantial improvements made to the bill by his own amendments and those of other senators. A lot of time and work has been put into them, and I acknowledge that.

On the issue of the growth of the industry, my amendments would still allow room for media proprietors, particularly the smaller proprietors, to move and grow. They will, for instance, still allow newspapers to merge with radio and allow television to merge with radio in the metropolitan area. They also allow a media proprietor to own a newspaper in one city and a television licence in another city. Regional areas will not be directly affected by these amendments… I ask the Senate to support my amendments.