Senator LUDLAM-I have a couple of questions. With respect to the funding for digital broadcasting, I understand that funding of about $14.5 million was recently announced for infrastructure for this switchover. Can you tell us how far that will go, and give us a breakdown between TV and radio?
Mr Scott-It is not actually funding for the digital switchover. That is additional capital money for the ABC as we move from being an analog broadcaster into a digital broadcaster. We had a review done some years ago now, and our submission back to government reflected the need for approximately $15 million additional in capital for a five-year period, and then it would need to double on top of that. Digital technology is expensive; it needs to be replaced more quickly. It is harder to repair. The whole of the organisation is moving into a digital environment. Even the matters that Senator Macdonald was talking about earlier in the kind of equipment that our crews need in regional areas is an example of the challenge of the transition to digital technology. This is additional capital money for the ABC as we move from being an analog broadcaster to a digital broadcaster. We will be making further submissions to government on the back of expert advice that we have received, that we will need continuing increases in capital funding in order to provide the kind of services that we need to provide in this digital era.
Senator LUDLAM-Is that just funding in perpetuity?
Mr Scott-No, it was one-year additional capital funding, for which we were grateful to the government and the minister for his support with that submission.
Senator LUDLAM-Do you have any idea of how far the $14.5 million will go as a proportion of your total spending on new digital equipment? Can you give us some idea within an order of magnitude of how much more you might need?
Mr Pendelton-We model our infrastructure replacement and capital requirements over a 10-year period. Those sorts of investments require that length of thinking in terms of the current capability of the organisation. Our modelling, which we refreshed leading into the last triennial funding submission, had a number in the order of an additional $32 million that, on average over the next 10 years, the corporation requires to maintain its current capability.
Senator LUDLAM-Okay, so the $14.5 million is slightly less than half your funding needed to make the transition within that 10-year span?
Mr Scott-The feeling was that we needed around $15 million for the first five years of that decade, so this is the last instalment of that first five years. We received $15 million in the prior year from the government in the triennial funding and we received $15 million from the previous government for the three years prior to that. So, we are five years in now. We are grateful for this money but we can model increased capital demands as we go forward.
Senator LUDLAM-That five-year span will take us probably right through the digital TV rollover, so you will not be broadcasting in analog anymore?
Mr Scott-No, not quite. This will take us through to the end of this next financial year, 2010-11, so there are still two plus years of the analog switch-off to take place. The money that we are receiving around analog switch-off and the transmission required to move to digital is separate funding to this capital funding.
Senator LUDLAM-Is it possible to estimate the total cost of the switchover to digital or is that too difficult? Because, as a result of these questions and answers, I still do not have a clear idea of how much that $14.5 million is relative to the total cost of the switchover.
Mr Pendelton-They are different numbers. The cost of conversion to digital was funded from about 2000-01 onwards in two programs, digital conversion parts one and two. Digital conversion part one was about $110 million, this was for the television; and digital conversion part two was $84 million at the time. Those programs to do the initial conversion have been completed in the last year or so for the residual equipment. There is further capital funding to pick up the last bits of the analog conversion plus the maintenance of this equipment. A lot of this equipment installed in early 2000 is already at the end of its life and requires replenishment. Whereas a whole lot of the analog gear such as cameras were maintained and managed for 10, 15, 20 years, the new digital gear is all black-box, solid state equipment, software based, that actually expires at the five to seven-year window. What we are seeing is the replenishment requirement for all of that digital conversion now starting to hit us.
Senator LUDLAM-We are moving to a bit more of a disposable regime of equipment. Is it possible to model or estimate how much faster your turnover is and how much more it is going to cost to run in the digital environment?
Mr Pendelton-Yes. We have modelled that.
Senator LUDLAM-Could you provide us with that on notice?
Mr Pendelton-Yes.
Senator LUDLAM-Moving now to ABC Radio National, you broadcast almost exclusively in AM, but I am aware that in some regional areas Radio National does broadcast in FM. Given today's mobile audio technology with phone handsets and MP3 players and so on, which receive more I think exclusively on the FM band, are there any proposals to broadcast Radio National in FM across the country?
Mr Scott-Not at this moment. AM still remains a very powerful way of broadcasting and reaching significant portions of our audience. The final availability of FM transmission is more a question of ACMA than it is for us, but we are taking advantage of new technology to get Radio National out there to audiences in new ways. We are currently broadcasting Radio National on digital radio, for example. The ABC application on the iPhone, which I understand is being downloaded by a quarter of iPhone users in the country, including
Senator Conroy-
Senator LUDLAM-So just let the Hansard record show the minister waves an iPhone at this point.
Mr Scott-That application does stream Radio National. If you want to listen to Radio National through your phone, you can, and we are looking to make that available not just on the iPhone but on a range of smart phones as well. Of course, we are streaming Radio National online. So we are looking to take advantage of the technology that we can to reach audiences where we can, taking advantage of the tools that are available. We think AM radio will be with us for a long period of time. I appreciate that not all radio sets that are now available have AM. We are conscious of that. But that is where I think we are using digital radio, smart phones, and other online delivery services to try to meet that need.
Senator LUDLAM-So getting Radio National out of FM is partly a spectrum question, which you refer to ACMA, but would there be a substantial cost involved in broadcasting Radio National on FM frequency?
Mr Pendelton-It would have a different characteristic in the market, so whether it would actually get the coverage depending on whether the frequency was available within the market. The cost of FM transmission I think is more expensive, off the top of my head, than the AM.
Mr Scott-Also, as Mr Pendleton suggested, AM is pretty good where it works and where it operates. I appreciate there might be some limits around the audience, but the AM signal booms out a long way, and often you need a number of different FM frequencies to reach the same footprint to which AM delivers. It is complicated. I must say that we are aware of the limits of AM as far as some of our audience members are concerned, but we do not have as a key part of our strategy the migration of all our AM platforms to FM.
Senator LUDLAM-I guess I was not proposing that you knock it off AM; I do not want to be misinterpreted in that way. It sounds like you have evaluated it briefly and decided that that is not a way forward?
Mr Scott-I think we are just taking advantage of the new opportunities as they emerge. ACMA is far more equipped to speak on this than I am, but the FM platform is pretty loaded in many markets and the prospect that all of a sudden a lot more spectrum would be available for us to be able to broadcast Radio National on both AM and FM in some markets, I just do not think that we have thought that that is likely.
Senator LUDLAM-With respect to an Asia Pacific Television Service, which is actually in the DFAT budget portfolio statements, but can you tell us what that contract is worth to the ABC?
Mr Scott-It is about $19 million a year. There is a review process as it sets into place on the performance of the ABC in delivering that contract. That contract expires in August 2011.
Senator LUDLAM-What is the timeframe of the review process?
Mr Scott-It is taking place at the moment, but it is being run by DFAT, not the ABC.
Senator LUDLAM-Do you know when that wraps up?
Mr Scott-It is a process that is under way at the moment. It is about a 12-week review, I think. They have to report by August. We have to be informed by DFAT in August what their intentions are with the contract.
Senator LUDLAM-I can put some of those questions to them later in the week. I have a couple more, if that is okay, and then I will get out of your way. With respect to the audio description trial which I think was canvassed briefly in the last round, the Access to electronic media for the hearing and vision impaired: approaches for consideration, discussion report, 2009 said the government was considering conducting a technical trial of audio description on the ABC before switch-over. Can you tell us the status of that trial? When did it commence, and has it concluded?
Mr Millett-The government is still talking to us about what its plans are regarding a future trial.
Senator LUDLAM-Could I put that one to the minister? Do you have anything you can update us with on that?
Senator Conroy-We have been ongoing discussions about trying to achieve that, but I do not know that we have reached a final resolution at this stage.
Senator LUDLAM-That was pretty much the answer that we got last time I asked. Is it possible to get any more information about where these discussions are at?
Senator Conroy-I am happy to take it on notice and get you some more detail.
Senator LUDLAM-Just a sense of when those discussions might be concluded, because obviously the digital switch-over is about to get under way in a serious way. I would be interested to know whether any funding has been allocated specifically. I expect there would need to be some appropriation for it.
Mr Millett-There certainly has not been any funding allocated for it.
Senator LUDLAM-Is that there if it is needed, if the government decides to go ahead with it, or are we getting into hypothetical territory?
Mr Scott-Let me take it on notice and I will come back to you as soon as we can on that.
Senator LUDLAM-Okay. Since we are taking it on notice, finally, would there be some sort of consultation process? Would you be rolling that out a bit further to advocates for blind and vision impaired people across Australia?
Mr Scott-We will take that on notice.
Senator LUDLAM-Thank you. My last question relates to a documentary called Hope in a Slingshot which was accepted by the ABC for broadcast some time ago now. Then a couple of months later, a decision was taken not to put it to air. What is the process for reviewing ABC content against your editorial policies? What happened in the instance of this particular documentary?
Mr Scott-I am not aware of the specifics of that, Senator. Let me take that on notice. The last documentary that was raised at these hearings, with a suggestion that we were not going to show it, did in fact go to air last month.
Senator LUDLAM-Okay. I remember some discussion about that. Hope in a Slingshot, just so you know, is a documentary that was prepared taking testimony from Israelis and Palestinians, essentially with their hopes and aspirations for peace in the region. The reason that the producers were given that the ABC would not broadcast it was that they needed to provide content of a similar type and weight. The producers and I are wondering whether that means you would need to screen a pro-war documentary before you would be able to
screen something that was advocating for peace because that is the message that seems to have been sent.
Mr Scott-Let me take that on notice and let me find out more details on that.
Senator LUDLAM-You are not aware at all of the background to this?
Mr Scott-I have no details on it. I am not really across the details of it at all. The only thing I would say is that we talk with a lot of people about making and purchasing television programs and I would draw a distinction between when we are having preliminary discussions and when a decision has been made to purchase that documentary and to put it to air. I am not aware in that circumstance whether in fact a documentary had been purchased and then we decided subsequently, taking your advice on it, not to air it, or whether in fact when we had reviewed the documentary there was simply a feeling that we would not go ahead with the acquisition of it. I just draw that distinction, which I think is an important distinction.
Senator LUDLAM-That may be the case in this instance, but you have told the producers-I have got a letter here signed by Kim Dalton, your director of television-that because it expressed a certain point of view you needed to seek an alternate point of view. To me that sets an uncomfortable precedent: that you will not be able to screen a piece that was not taking one particular side in that conflict apart from people's-
Mr Scott-Have you seen the documentary, Senator?
Senator LUDLAM-No, I have not; you have not broadcast it yet.
Mr Scott-Our platforms talk about over time covering principal relevant viewpoints. Without having seen the documentary, I would not want to narrowly judge what viewpoints the ABC felt that it may have been expressing. You have depicted it as being pro-peace and so therefore the alternative side is war. In my experience around covering issues on the Middle East, it is often more complex than that, and the perspectives that people draw from it are sometimes distinct from that. We will find out more details on that specific one.
Senator LUDLAM-I would appreciate that. I have no other questions.
