The Morrison Government has locked in funding of $4.2 billion for the ABC and SBS over the period from 1 July 2022 to 30 June 2025.
Minister for Communications, Paul Fletcher, says the funding will allow the ABC and SBS to continue to provide innovative, comprehensive and high quality television, radio and digital media services to all Australians.
He says, “The ABC and SBS are essential components of Australia’s diverse media landscape.
“We’ve delivered an increase in funding for both national broadcasters compared to both the 2016-19 and 2019-22 funding period. This funding commitment is designed to provide certainty for both broadcasters and is being announced well in advance of the next funding period to assist the ABC and SBS to develop their forward plans.”
The ABC will receive $3,284.9 million over the next three years. This includes $45.8 million under the Enhanced News Gathering program to strengthen local public interest journalism in regional communities.
This is an increase of $87.2 million over the current triennium.
The ABC will see a return of indexation on base operational funding as outlined in the May 2021 Budget papers.
ABC Managing Director David Anderson, says, “On behalf of the ABC, I welcome the funding certainty this announcement brings to the national broadcaster for the next three years.
“The $3.3 billion over the next triennium, announced by the Minister Paul Fletcher, sees the resumption of indexation, the continuation of the Enhanced Newsgathering (ENG) program that provides vital services across the country, and ongoing support for audio description services for blind or visually impaired audiences.
“ENG funding has delivered more tailored news to local communities and has seen the ABC invest more in specialist resources that provide vital context and analysis about issues that matter to all Australians.
“Importantly, this announcement also guarantees the ability of the ABC to continue to reinvest funds from the recently concluded Google and Facebook deals into rural and regional services.
“As the ABC’s Managing Director, I have consistently made the case for the resumption of indexation on the ABC’s base funding and the continued support for ENG program.
“The triennial funding announcement is an important recognition that the ABC is needed now more than ever, and this funding is required so it can continue to fulfil its vital role in our democratic society.
“I would like to thank the Minister, Paul Fletcher, and the Government for recognising the enduring value of the ABC as we mark 90 years of serving Australians.”
SBS will receive $953.7 million, including an additional $37.5 million in ongoing funding to support its long-term sustainability.
This is an increase of $56.7 million over the current triennium. A table setting out the funding commitment is attached.
* Note: this is a three-year funding commitment, expiring on 30 June 2024, for additional news services in Arabic and Mandarin. A decision on whether to extend this funding will be taken as part of the 2024/25 Budget, based upon an assessment of the performance of these additional services.
The ABC and SBS will also receive additional funding to support the continuation and expansion of audio description services to blind and vision impaired Australians.
Minister Fletcher has today written to the ABC and SBS outlining their three-year funding packages, and issued Statements of Expectations regarding the reporting by the two organisations in relation to a number of their key activities, including a new National Broadcasters Reporting Framework for Australian Content, and, in the case of the ABC, its rural and regional activities.
The Government says the reporting framework is to increase public transparency around how much the national broadcasters are investing in Australian content.
The ABC and SBS will be asked to report to the ACMA on their provision of, and expenditure on, Australian content in line with the reporting obligations currently in place for commercial television broadcasting licensees.
The will form part of the broader reporting arrangements for Australian content, overseen and administered by the ACMA, who will be provided with an additional $3.3 million over four years to develop and implement a single, harmonised reporting framework for all content providers, including streaming services, national, commercial and subscription broadcasters.
ABC Chair Ita Buttrose, says, “I am delighted with the Government’s decision to commit $3.3 billion over the next three years to the ABC.
“It will allow the national broadcaster to continue doing what it does best – provide information and entertainment to Australians wherever they live.”
Labor’s Shadow Communications Minister Michelle Rowland said the government’s announcement is too little, too late, saying the Coalition s only acting now to avoid ABC funding becoming a key election issue. “On the eve of an election, the Liberals want you to forget they’ve spent eight years cutting and attacking the ABC,” she Tweeted.
It is obvious that futher savings could be made by combining the ABC and SBS into one entity. That may involve consolidating behind-the-scenes staff.
It has been done before. In 2011, the ABC and WIN consolidated their master control and continuity at a distribution point in Ingleburn. What was once the sacrasanct ABC master control where there were no cuts to overtime compared to other departments within the ABC. It has vanished now.
Here's the irony about the ABC's staff cuts. Why are ABC cutting staff, yet in the last year we're seeing new faces presenting on ABC24? New faces on the ABC are not staff cuts. Alternatively are ABC using staff cuts as a pretext to really discriminate against older workers? It seems so. The new faces at on ABC24 don't look like mature-aged workers seeking a career change.
Furthermore the other irony is that their news always talk about climate change and lowering carbon dioxide emissions, yet they don't look at their own house by having the biggest carbon footprint, specifically 50kW-100kW ABC transmitter versus a 5kW commercial station transmitter.
Just because the ABC is permitted to transmit high power doesn't mean they can do with less power.
I am a fan of the ABC and SBS, but when they talk about staff cuts and reducing carbon emissions, there is a loss of credibility. Similarly many of the programs on SBS are English-language and have nothing to do with multiculturalism. and could easily be accommodated on the ABC. I have said this before on this site.
Thank you,
Anthony of I don't believe the rhetoric of staff cuts at the ABC when they're employing new staff, Belfield in the land of the Wangal and Darug Peoples of the Eora Nation.
Correction:
Where I wrote:
"Just because the ABC is permitted to transmit high power doesn't mean they can do with less power"
Correct to
"Just because the ABC is permitted to transmit high power doesn't mean that they cannot achieve using less power"
Thank you,
Anthony of it's my mistake Belfield in the land of the Wangal and Darug Peoples of the Eora Nation
Hi Anthony,
Just a difference of opinion here. Some of the ABC's AM radio services operate at a maximum transmitter power of 50kW. That's a bit different from EIRP radiated from the antenna. I haven't ever seen FM radio transmitters in Australia greater than 20kW but because of the more limited coverage footprint of FM services, FM transmission power consumption costs are probably slightly higher than AM for a similar coverage footprint. Commercial AM radio services in Australia are typically either 2kW or 5kW. 50kW may sound like a lot of power but the coverage of a 50kW AM service is extensive. Very high powered AM transmitters are preferred where extensive coverage is desired because the AM band doesn't have the capacity to accommodate many lower powered transmitters without interference. Analog radio is extraordinarily power efficient. Considering the power consumption of every listener's receiver, analog radio is much more power efficient than DAB+ and Internet streaming.
Here's an additional thought Anthony. The mode of transmission for many of the ABC's regional FM Local Radio, Radio National and News Radio services is mono. FM transmission in mono requires 10 times less transmission power than stereo FM transmission to achieve the same signal to noise ratio. There's a point above which increasing FM transmission power no longer extends coverage because the line of sight between the transmission tower and the receiver becomes obstructed by the curvature of the Earth. FM is typically suitable for coverage extending 100km to 150km or sometimes more from the transmission site, depending upon the height of the transmission antenna above sea level and the nature of the surrounding terrain. FM generally can't provide coverage beyond the horizon.
Dear David,
Thanks for responding. You made the valid point about high-powered AM transmitters having greater coverage. I would understand that in the context of rural broadcasting, high-powered AM transmitters cover a greater area than the licenced area of a rural commericial AM transmitter.
Then is a 50kW transmitter for metropolitan necessary for the metropolitan areas given that the commercial stations' transmitters are 5kw for the same licence area?
When it comes to AM transmissions, the greatest waste of power is in the carrier frequency which remains constant regardless of loudness of the information.
Generally radio manufacturers have from "day one" utilitised diode detectors to demodulate AM signals. Had a synchronous detector been employed in AM receivers, then it would not be necessary for the AM station to transmit the carrier.
Despite that, the use of high-powered AM radio transmitters is a far greater emitter of carbon dioxide compared to a low-power transmitter.
Nevertheless, I cannot see why the ABC is using high-powered 50kW transmitters for metropolitan and RN in the metropolitan areas when the commercial stations can achieve the same coverage area with a 5kW transmitter.
Further to that, another contributor, Mr St. John would argue of the benefits of DRM+ being implemented in rural areas. DRM+ can be implemented in a number of frequency bands including MW, HF and VHF. An MW DRM+ transmission can carry more channels, transmit in stereo, provide a wake up on emergency event and transmit text.
The energy required to transmit DRM+ is much less than an AM transmitter.
Here is a demonstration of a DRM+ signal form NZ received in Victoria, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36h2-lsy1Vg&ab_channel=VictorianDXer , The signal is very clear and audio quality is better than a standard AM SW receiver.
However from previous postings about DRM+, there does not seem to be a motivation to broadcast in DRM+ especially in rural areas. The policy tends to be for converting AM stations to FM.
Yet the DRM+ system requires less energy than either an AM and/or FM service and the receivers can be implemented by software defined radio (SDR) rather than employing electronic components.
Don't know why the ABC aren't pushing for lower costs of transmitting their services either by lowering their power output and/or using DRM+ which uses less power.
Doing that, the ABC can definitely be wearing its reduction of carbon dioxide emissions "on its sleeve" and not be two-faced about the issue.
Thank you,
Anthony of critical Belfield in the land of the Wangal and Darug Peoples of the Eora Nation
Here's another thought Anthony. I don't like coming up with thoughts that don't get said. There's a point above 50kW where increasing AM transmission power doesn't yield much meaningful increase in the coverage footprint. The RF propagation mechanisms get too complex more than about three or so hundred kilometres from the transmitter site to be able to deliver reliable, consistent reception quality.