Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee, , 3:15:51 to 3:27:52
Data collection for the Australian Digital Inclusion Index and a detailed breakdown of projected funding for regional connectivity packages.
Topics: First Nations, Government spending, Infrastructure
Speakers: Senator The Hon Sarah Henderson, Mr Sam Grunhard, Senator Nita Green, Senator Varun Ghosh, Mr Jim Betts, Mr David Mackay, Senator The Hon Carol Brown
My last question goes to the Australian Digital Inclusion Index. And I there was an announcement of six million dollars that's been provided by the government uh to help improve data collection. How is that been invested?
Thank you, Senator. So um the funding for the delivery of that measure was awarded to RMIT universities. Oh, yeah. And the grant agreement was uh executed in late 2024. Um this has already really had some tremendous results which have been published on our website and on their website. Um you give me an overview? Certainly. So what that funding enabled was the RMIT to conduct two rounds of data collection through 24, 25 and 2526, with a total of up to 5,600 online and face-to-face surveys. What that's resulted in is initially in November 2025 they released their first report counting on connectivity measuring digital inclusion for First Nations Australians. That included a First Nations Digital Inclusion Dashboard, which is full of really important insights which will inform not only our programme work but also that target 17 refresh you just mentioned. Uh it's it's a fascinating dashboard with some really sobering numbers in it. Um just recently in May they've released a supplementary report which contains detailed findings of 729 surveys of digital inclusion and communications and media use undertaken by First Nations Australians in 10 specific regional towns. So what they've done is they've gone out and conduct surveys and profile 10 regional towns and exactly what the digital inclusion experience is.
Do you know the locations of those?
I'm sorry, Senator, I don't have the list of the ten locations, but it is all um published uh on the internet. Um but we're happy to provide you some more information on notice if that would be helpful. Yes, and on uh the RMIT as well. So they are they are conducting uh a second round of survey work of up to 2,000 surveys in urban, regional and remote locations uh and they'll be they'll be using all of that new data that they're collecting as we speak uh to feed into the national inclusion index in the first half of 2027. So that work is underway, they're continuing to gather data and to refine the metrics they're reporting against.
So that last round?
Yes.
Uh that's expected to be completed by the middle of next year.
That's right, Senator.
Okay. Thanks.
That's when the updated reporting would be available. So the field work would be earlier than that.
Okay. Thank you.
Um can I just follow up on one of those questions from Senator Brown? You mentioned um Wi-Fi to WA remote communities, Fegel Bay, among others, Fitch Rock Crossing and a few others. Um can I just ask about how you measure the impact of provision of Wi-Fi in terms of improved social outcomes? Uh the absence of Wi-Fi in some of those communities has been linked to a range of different um negative social outcomes or social problems. Is there a way you're able to measure the flow-through benefit of the provision of Wi-Fi?
So, Senator, we as part of the grant agreements, we will be looking at that. Grantees will be required to give us updated reporting as to the level of connectivity and some of the outcomes being achieved. Many of these sites have effectively just gone live, as you've heard. So we will be getting regular reports from grantees to inform us, and we will therefore be able to give more information as all these sites go live and as they enter that five year operational period about some of the benefits that will be achieved. We do hear anecdotally, of course, already that um the communities are absolutely noticing the difference, but we'll gather more data on that as the programs carry on.
Thank you very much.
Thank you, Ms. Just on that program. What programme are you funding the Wi Fi WA under?
Um so this was we were talking about the First Nations Community Wi Fi program, which was part of The which is a 20 million dollar component of the broader 68 million dollar First Nations Digital Inclusion Package that the government announced in uh a couple of years ago.
Right, okay. So there's 17 million allocated for 2627 under the First Nations Digital Inclusion Package. I I just want to refer and strongly um reject the Minister's characterisation of the regional connectivity funding that the government has committed. In the departmental question number SQ260582, we've just it's just landed this morning. Regrettably it took over 100 days to get this answer, but the First Nations digital inclusion package is going from 17 million in 2627 to zero. Zero in 2728, 2829, 2930. For the mobile black spots programme that is being whittled down to 780,000 in 2930. The mobile network hardening program. 2829, zero, 2930, zero. There's other programs I won't go through in detail. The on-farm connectivity program, only 10 million and 2627. Zero in 2728, 2829 and 2930. Savage, savage cuts. The regional connectivity programme. In 2829, after 11.4 million in 2728, for the following two years, there is zero funding. The Regional Roads Australia Mobile Program. That is that goes from 11.9 this financial year, 12 million next financial year, six, and then nothing in 2930. The regional tech hub savagely cut a service that's doing an incredible job for regional Australians. The telecommunications disaster resilience and innovation program. 10 million and 2526, 3.6 million in 2627, and zero in the following three years over the Ford estimates. So from 114 million dollars allocated in 2526, 116 million in 2627, that is dramatically whittled down to $780,000 in 2930, less than one million dollars for regional connectivity across this country, which I say is an absolute disgrace. And based on the information that we've just received this morning. Do you know what contributions, what is the investment pipeline of the three mobile network operators?
So before the department answers any of the detail on that, I would point out that it is routine for governments to establish programs which are time limited in terms of their funding and then as budget processes roll round to have that funding replenished. So implicit in everything you've just said, there are opportunities for government to extend funding programs or to support.
Well, Mr. Beer, are you aware that of I mean this this is the Ford estimates?
This is a dis is the decision for the funding in the forward estimates is periodically revisited as budget as measures expire and are extended. So these are we can anticipate future budgets in which some of the programs that you've described are capable of being requisition or extended, but those are decisions for future budgets.
This is these are decisions made by this government in the May budget which have shown that a number of these programs have been savagely cut, as I say, from 116 million and 2627 to $780,000 only. And so are you aware of any other funding that's flowing, um, Mr. Betts?
I'm just going to respond to the political statement in your question, so if you would let me respond and then No, you've just cut off the Secretary.
He made a comment.
I was in the I'm seeking to respond to your question. I think I think Mr. Betts is fine. Um the funding in the budget over the Ford Estimates represents the delivery of an enormous amount of programs. And um there are always going to be considerations of future programs in future budgets. Um it sounds like the proposition you're making is for new projects on top of the um thousands that we are delivering to be um considered. And we will do that in future budget rounds. But we are not cutting funding, we're actually delivering it.
Well, that's not what your delivery looks like. That's not what your money that's been allocated.
Can I go to the end of the day?
But if you have a question for the minister time, is the department aware of the investment pipeline by in interregional connectivity, terrestrial networks over the next five years by the three MNOs?
So, Senator, we do speak regularly with the MOs about their um their view of what they will be investing in. Um obviously they're considering a range of things at the moment, including you were just discussing UOMO. I think the the strongest evidence will come out of the ACCC uh investigation, inquiry that's underway right now, which certainly will be looking at the investment appetite of the three mobile net national mobile network operators. Um it will be inquiring into that. It's it's part of the discussion paper they've put out. So we we will certainly get more detailed evidence out of that, but we do speak regularly to them and uh they of course are continuing to invest in their networks.
So um Mr. I was just asking specifically, are you aware of the investment pipeline by the three M and O's interregional connectivity, so terrestrial networks specifically over the next five years? Do you have that information or have you sought that information?
As I say, Senator, we speak to them regularly. Of course, their plans change all the time depending on investment conditions, depending on their profitability in the market. Uh but we speak to them regularly.
I'm not asking whether you speak to them regularly. I'm asking whether you hold that information or whether you have sought that information.
If you if you mean a specific dollar figures as to exactly how much they're planning to invest in different areas, no, I do not hold that information, Senator.
Okay, thank you. Um that is the department or anyone in the department intending to seek that information?
As I say, Senator, we expect that a lot of that information will be adduced through the ACCC inquiry.
Did um did the ACC at any point make a recommendation to the Minister in relation to holding an inquiry? That inquiry?
To Minister Wells?
Yes. I understand they sit in another portfolio.
I can't imagine they would have done it.
Was there a recommendation to government in relation to that inquiry? Because the ACLC have commenced that inquiry on their own volition. But was there an earlier recommendation to government that that inquiry should be held? It may not have been within your department. That's right. Yeah. Yeah. I'm very um conscious of time.