Content Window

Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee

24/02/2014

Estimates

ATTORNEY-GENERAL PORTFOLIO

Screen Australia

Screen Australia

[09:40]

Senator SINGH: Mr Mason, I think last time we were at estimates you had only just commenced in your role. Has Screen Australia received any kind of ministerial direction since the change of government, and what would that direction be?

Mr Mason : I am sorry Senator—could you clarify that for me?

Senator SINGH: Last time I asked whether the government had directed Screen Australia to look at any particular future policy direction, and it was too new for you being in the role and so forth after the election. So I am asking that question now that it has been some six months.

Mr Mason : It has been three months. But, thank you, I feel like I have been there for six. No, we have had no directive from the minister.

Senator SINGH: Are there any vacancies on the Screen Australia Board?

Senator Brandis: I will add to Mr Mason's answer. As you know, Senator Singh, there is a capacity for the minister to give directions, but ordinarily that would not be done, particularly when the minister has confidence in the way in which the agency is going about its work. I have a lot of confidence in Screen Australia, and I have a lot of confidence in Mr Mason, so I have not felt it necessary to give a ministerial direction.

Senator SINGH: Chair, I have a lot of questions. This is wasting time.

Senator Brandis: However, of course Mr Mason and I, and others, have had conversations about what might broadly be called the future direction of screen policy, and Mr Mason is in frequent contact with my office. I would not want anyone to be misled by the fact that because ministerial directions, in the strict sense, have not been given—because ordinarily they would not be—that there has been any neglect of the agency. I am sure Mr Mason does not think that we have neglected him.

Senator SINGH: That is fine. I have Mr Mason's answer to the question on the public record. Are there any vacancies on the Screen Australia board, Mr Mason?

CHAIR: Minister, I would have said the direction should be more films on Menzies and less on the Dismissal.

Senator Brandis: As a matter of fact, it is interesting you say that, Mr Chairman, because I understand there is a series about Sir Robert Menzies being produced this year. Whether it attracts Screen Australia funding remains to be seen.

Senator SINGH: We are stretched for time, and if we do not get all our questions asked we will have to look at spillover day.

CHAIR: Go with the questions and have a spillover day. Can I just tell you now, Senator Singh, do not keep using the threat of a spillover day. It does not make two iotas of difference to me.

Senator SINGH: It is not a threat, Chair, and it is the first time I have raised it this morning. It is just that we are running out of time because of the dialogue going on across the table between you and the minister.

Senator Brandis: If you would just ask questions, we would get to places faster. Senator Milne does this a lot better than you do, Senator Singh, if I may say so.

Senator SINGH: I think you should say that to yourself, minister. You are the one interrupting.

CHAIR: I did interrupt, Senator Singh. You have the question, Mr Mason; apologies to Senator Singh.

Mr Mason : Senator, the term of one of the board members expired on the 31 December. That is all.

Senator SINGH: In relation to the NBN rollout, I understand, obviously, the now broken promise of the NBN rollout. In a state such as Tasmania, which was a state that was to give vital first mover advantage with NBN, what impact could that backflip have on building a digital screen industry in Tasmania? I understand you were in Tasmania recently, so I am sure you were aware of our growing digital screen industry in the state.

Senator Brandis: Mr Chairman, can I object to that question?

Senator SINGH: Excuse me. The question is to Mr Mason.

Senator Brandis: I am objecting to the question. Mr Chairman, as you know, the rules for these hearings are like the rules of the Senate chamber, which under Senate standing orders prohibit argumentative matter in a question. Acknowledging as I do that it is a reasonably freewheeling forum, it nevertheless seems to me that there are a number of false assertions made in that question, and I am not sure that it does not trespass beyond the rule against argumentative material. And in any event—

Senator SINGH: Oh, what rubbish!

Senator Brandis: In any event, Mr Chairman, I wonder how it is that anyone imagines that Mr Mason can be expected to offer commentary about the Tasmanian economy.

Senator SINGH: I can rephrase the question.

CHAIR: Okay, rephrase the question. But ministerial appointments, I think, was part of the question as the minister of course—

Senator SINGH: No, that was not part of the question.

CHAIR: Anyhow, go ahead—rephrase it.

Senator SINGH: Mr Mason, with the NBN rollout stopping now under the new government—

Senator Brandis: That is false, Senator Singh, and you know it to be false.

Senator SINGH: other than those areas where contracts have already been laid—

CHAIR: What is the question to Mr Mason?

Senator SINGH: will that have an impact on the fledging digital screen industry in Tasmania?

Mr Mason : We remain very committed to all the states and regions throughout the country. As I think you are aware, Senator, we have supported various multimedia start-up creative people and we continue to work with them in the best way possible to roll out their work.

Senator SINGH: In your visit to Tasmania, what were your impressions of the screen industry in the state?

Mr Mason : We are very excited that we are being able to support, as I think you know, various new projects in Tasmania—a big television series, multimedia people. We launched our new 'shorts' program in Hobart and Launceston. It is a state that we think has a lot of creative offerings to the sector.

Senator MILNE: Minister, I just want to ask whether it is true that you asked Barry Cassidy to consider his position as chairman of the advisory council of the Australian democracy museum?

CHAIR: I think we dealt with this at last estimates, did we not?

Senator Brandis: We did. I am happy to respond. Does anyone need any Screen Australia anymore or can they be excused?

CHAIR: Thank you very much for your attendance. I apologise that it was so brief.

Senator Brandis: Senator Milne, as the chairman has rightly said, we dealt with this very exhaustively at the last estimates round and I am not at all reluctant to deal with it again. But can I just give you the caution that my recollection of a conversation with Mr Cassidy when I was asked about these matters in November, when the conversation had only happened a couple of weeks earlier, was obviously a lot fresher than my recollection some three and a half months later. That having been said, can I direct you to the evidence that I gave on the last occasion when I was asked these questions.

Senator MILNE: I will go back to that, but I am also interested with the appointment of Heather Henderson, David Kemp and David Smith.

Senator Brandis: Sir David Smith.

Senator SINGH: Sir David Smith. What is your intention in relation to the direction that the democracy museum is taking, given the appointment of people who are clearly—in the case of David Kemp—political and clearly extremely conservative?

CHAIR: I would say it would apply to Mr Cassidy.

Senator Brandis: I do not know whether you know Sir David Smith or Heather Henderson or David Kemp, but I suspect that Sir David Smith would describe himself as a conservative. I know all three of them. I have had the pleasure of coming to know Heather Henderson quite well in recent years. She would not describe herself as a conservative like her late, great father, Sir Robert Menzies; she would describe herself as a liberal. And Dr David Kemp, who I have known for years and whose scholarly works I have read and appreciated, quite consciously—I have discussed this matter with him many times—very, very consciously describes himself not as a conservative but as a liberal. So I think you mischaracterise at least two of those three people. But, Senator Milne, that having been said, I do not at all cavil at the description of them as 'political' people—although Mrs Henderson's only political dimension, I suppose, is the fact that she is a respected author of books, of political memoirs. It has been the custom of governments of both political persuasions to appoint to the council people who do have a political dimension in their background. As I said at the last estimates hearing, I think the particular nature of that council means that people from both non-Labor and Labor backgrounds bring a lot to it. The only two qualifications I would make is that I think it best that political people be appointed to the board at a time when their political careers are behind them—and in the case of Dr Kemp it is certainly true that his political career is behind him—and that there be balance. When I came into the portfolio it seemed to me that there was very little balance; I think there was one person from the non-Labor side of politics on the board—former senator Paul Calvert—and there were a very large number of former Labor politicians on the board. My objective is to have a balanced board in which there is a reasonable weighting of people from all political points of view on that board.

Senator MILNE: Subsequent to those appointments have you met with the board and given any indication of what you expect from them?

Senator Brandis: No. I am to see the board shortly. They have invited me to a meeting. So I have not had a formal meeting in that sense, but I can tell you I had a very long and, as you would expect, very intellectually stimulating telephone conversation with Dr David Kemp one morning not long ago about the direction of the institution. You should remember—I might remind you—that not only was Dr David Kemp a cabinet minister and a member of the House of Representatives for nearly 20 years—

Senator MILNE: Fourteen years.

Senator Brandis: but he has been in my view one of the most illustrious political science academics that this country has ever produced. His scholarly work Society and Electoral Behaviour in Australia: a Study of Three Decadeswas the pathbreaking work in electoral studies in this country. So we are not talking about a person who is a one-dimensional political party person; we are talking about one of Australia's most illustrious scholars.

Senator MILNE: In your view.

CHAIR: This is a very pertinent conversation, but we have to finish there. We are going to the National Archives.