Page 2808 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 14 August 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
something for which most people, firstly, do not have the computer equipment; secondly, do not have the money; and, thirdly, do not have the ability to pay the postage, as the Government does. Just before the election they are liable to say that certain members have an enormous allowance increase to send out letters to constituents. That is, of course, political content, political campaigning. Other organisations cannot take public money and do that; but the Labor Party can, and has.
Also, it is well known that the Government can use public information ads. It is important that the government of the day have the right and the opportunity to let the community know of various important matters that come before it. But the problem, as we well know, is that they are well tuned towards abusing that right. It is not a matter of letting the public know so much as trying to persuade them of something. It is more propaganda than public information.
Nevertheless, the government of the day and the major parties - the major other party perhaps - have the opportunity to take those sorts of advantages. The major parties have a number of opportunities on talkback radio and television chat shows to get across a political content. They may say, "We were just having a friendly interview with someone out at the football", but it is all a matter of getting across a viewpoint to do with political advertising. They would maintain the right to do that, yet prevent other people having the same opportunity.
A short while ago Mr Collaery mentioned the concern about the media ownership in Australia. I think most of us feel that the opportunity to present a message to people is being controlled by fewer and fewer people in this nation. We well understand who has mates in the major media. Once again, this could benefit the major parties, to the detriment of smaller political parties and other community groups, be they welfare organisations, charities and so on.
I think we should fight against the ban, and that is the reason for the matter of public importance today. I have brought it up in the past, and I will bring it up in the future, because the Government has not yet done a total backdown and we need to keep on them, for the benefit of the people in Canberra to make sure that they back down. However, the Government or political parties with the money will be able to buy up more media stations. This has already happened; there is certainly one radio station in Sydney that is owned by a political party. With that media ownership would come more and more control of what goes out on those outlets, be they radio or television.
If the ban came through there is no doubt, as I mentioned, that there would be more direct mail going out. Also, there would be a great increase in newspaper advertising. But the basic principle that we talk about is whether or not the Government has the right to remove the right of
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .