Scrap the NBN, says Abbott, and build some roads

188

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has described Labor’s plan to invest billions of dollars of equity funding in its flagship National Broadband Network project as “reckless”, noting in his Federal Budget reply speech tonight that the capital could be re-allocated to fund a number of major transport infrastructure and hospital projects.

In the budget papers released on Tuesday night, the Government provided further detail about how it would inject equity funding into the NBN project, allocating $18.2 billion in equity injections to NBN co over the proceeding years up until the 2014-15 financial year. The payments are instalments towards the Government’s total equity contribution to the NBN, which is expected to be $27.5 billion — and about $13 billion will also be spend on the Government’s deal with Telstra.

However, in his Budget reply speech tonight, Abbot said although the Coalition supported better broadband services, it wasn’t “reckless enough to spend upwards of $50 billion on a National Broadband Network without a cost/benefit analysis.”

“That $50 billion could fully fund the construction of the Brisbane rail loop, for instance, the duplication of the Pacific Highway, the Melbourne to Brisbane inland rail link, the extension of the M4 to Strathfield, and 20 major new teaching hospitals as well as the $6 billion that the Coalition has proposed to spend on better broadband,” the Opposition Leader stated, referring the unpopular broadband plan his side of politics floated during last year’s Federal Election.

As Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull has previously highlighted, Abbott pointed out that broadband speeds of up to 100Mbps were already potentially available to “almost every major business and hospital”, as well as most schools, and, referring to the HFC cable networks offered by Telstra and Optus, through high-speed cable “already running past nearly a third of Australian households”.

The HFC cable networks of Telstra and Optus do run past a large number of premises in major cities like Sydney and Melbourne; however many residents and businesses are unable to get the service connected in practice, due to specific requirements around multi-tenant dwellings such as apartment and office blocks.

“The smart way to improve broadband is not to junk the existing network but to make the most of it,” said Abbott. “It’s to let a competitive market deliver the speeds that people need at an affordable price with government improving infrastructure in the areas where market competition won’t deliver it.”

Abbott also took aim at the Government’s $308.8 million funding reinforcement for a program which is seeing digital set-top boxes installed for pensioners and the disabled as part of the Government’s ongoing efforts to switch Australia over to digital television. A number of electronics retailers, such as Harvey Norman and Kogan Technologies, have stated they believe the amount being spent per household to be above the market rate.

“Government will spend $350 on each pensioner’s set-top box when Gerry Harvey can supply and install them for just $168,” said Abbott. “Perhaps this programme should be called ‘Building the Entertainment Revolution’. Pensioners and self-funded retirees deserve better than this.”

Image credit: Delimiter

188 COMMENTS

  1. The opposition, who obviously have the nations best interests at heart, oppose the government on something.

    Facepalm. Really? I would never have guessed. Also cue justifications for the NBN followed by a blow by blow debate of why it is an expensive waste.

    • By the way, the “best interests at heart” part was sarcasm. I didn’t think I would need to point that out, but you know, after this long following Delimiter.

      Also, I am not implying that I think Labor have the best interests of the nation at heart either. I didn’t think I would need to point that out either, but… well yeah.

  2. build more roads? ever heard of peak oil? government shouldn’t spend another cent on new roads, or airports for that matter.

      • tis funny,. but the *contrails* from the jets have more impacts than the fuel used/burned itself. yes i know, counterintuitive but there you go.

        less counterintuitive is the cost of simple road resurfacing from asphalt product year by year. and if oil keeps going up, that does too. im kicking myself for not bookmarking the link at the time but the cost per KM is a wake up call in itself…. for the expected total build cost of the NBN you dont really get a whole lot of real road done over its lifetime, for the money. even assuming oil price stays where it does, and the fibre has a shite lifetime of circa 30Y.

        i actually agree with HC just below tho – a HSR link across the eastern seaboard from brissy to melbs would cost less in materials, upkeep or even the fuel cost per capita. the only catch is the engineering folk are taken up atm with flood rebuilding and NBN already, or so we are told.

        (i do disagree with teh ‘only 2 million’ part tho – last i saw Brisbane will overtake Melbourne as second by population stakes given time; but agree that it really is a state issue – not something for Tony or Julia, unless they are going to chip in to help? :) im sure Can Do can help convince Tony if he gets elected anyways /snark).

        but thats neither here nor there – we talking NBN here – but just wanted to say that i disagree with Tonys ‘lets build some roads’ with that money idea – it isnt necessarily the best way of spending those funds.

    • Every 8 years local government spends $40 billion just in maintenance of suburban roads, while the federal and state governments spend the same on highways and major roads. Why doesn’t Abbot take the local government costs and spend that instead? After all, we only need dirt roads to our local homes, and dirt-road equivalents for our networks.

  3. Finally Mr Rabbitt has some winning ideas, no I’m actually serious, specifically the “Melbourne to Brisbane inland rail link” and the “duplication of the Pacific Highway” which begs the question why wasn’t anything done about these when the coalition was in power? Anyway onto the rest…

    “The Coalition supports better broadband”

    False, the coalition does not “support better broadband” what you support is what you think is just good enough.

    “That $50 billion could fully fund the construction of the Brisbane rail loop”

    Let’s just ignore the fact that this is a state issue for now, are we supposed to spend “$50 billion” on a project that will only benefit a city with a population of about 2 million instead of a project that will benefit the whole population?

    “Speeds of up to 100 megabits are already potentially available to almost every major business and hospital, to most schools, and through high speed cable already running past nearly a third of Australian households.”

    This old chestnut again lol. So what about the other two thirds Tony? What about upload speeds Tony? What about speeds beyond 100mbps Tony?

    “The smart way to improve broadband is not to junk the existing network but to make the most of it.”

    Actually Tony that is exactly what you do. When something becomes redundant or broken you dump it and replace it with something new that performs even better, it’s called progress. We do this with governments too btw, they seem to get rusty after about 11 years…

    “government improving infrastructure in the areas where market competition won’t deliver it.”

    Which begs the question again why wasn’t anything done about this when the coalition was in power?

    • HC this would be the perfect thread for our mate (you know who) to again submit those immortal words (much like his overlord TA) as he did at ZD

      And I quote… “Before roads, there were no roads”…LOL!

        • ‘Before roads there were no roads’ of course refers to the ridiculous comparison repeated over and over by the pro NBN parrots of the NBN to road building.

          Before NBN FTTH there was fixed line internet adequately serving the major percentage of the population with ADSL, ADSL2+ and HFC.

          But of course you know all of that and you also know the comparison to a road build is ludicrous, but mindless repetition is the backbone of the majority of mindless pro-NBN argument.

          • No need to get all defensive, I didn’t mention any names…LOL

            Also, regardless of your rhetoric, if you are unable to see the humour in such an obvious (obviously ridiculous that is) comment, well!

            But to reflect, that comment was in reply to another comment (from HC) relating to the comparison of copper to fibre and dirt to bitumen.

            So apart from you stating the bleedin’ obvious (like before internet there was no internet… wow) before bitumen there was indeed dirt.

            Analogy is sound, please keep up the misguided and desperate FUD…!

            Ooh and I note, you hand pick which of my comments you reply to or refuse to reply to (as you are unable to reply) even though you said you would never ever reply to me what-so-ever, again…hmmm!

          • “But of course you know all of that and you also know the comparison to a road build is ludicrous”

            Defeat has made you crazy dude. Comparisons to roads/highways/etc are all completely valid. You just have to learn to process the information you are attempting to read in your brain a bit better.

            “but mindless repetition”

            Seems to work for Mr Rabbitt and his zoo crew chums.

          • Since when do you rip up already working roads so you can lay your own road purely because you want everyone to use YOUR road?

          • No, you rip up old superseded roads and replace them with newer, superior ones… it’s not rocket science…

            Now tell us again… “before roads, there were no roads”…LOL!

          • Are you suggesting we lay dirt & asphalt roads side by side so people have a choice which one they want to drive on?

          • Every time you replace a dirt road with a bitumen one.
            Every time you build a new bridge acroos a river nd close the old one.

            In fact, I cant think of any sane instance where you would continue to maintain a decrepit expensive worn out road between point A and point B after you built a new super highway between point A and point B.

            Do we still spend money maintaining the old dirt tracks beside the new highways?

    • Infrastructure development is state issues, and if the Federal government wants to build infrastructure it has to do it through the states

      When the coalition was in power, all the states were Labor, and Howard gave them the GST which was the biggest boost to funding that they got to deal with growth

      In some states (such as WA) they had plenty of infrastructure development, in others like N.S.W. it was totally hopeless

      • So to answer you in your own speak, deteego…

        Howard “wasted my tax dollars” on “white elephants, with no “ROI”, that we “don’t need because everyone already has adequate access to” and that we “cannot afford”… which “private enterprise would have built”…

        Commie b^st^rd!

      • “Infrastructure development is state issues blah blah blah”

        You are stating the obvious for what reason? I mean do you have a point at all with this comment or are you just trying to emulate a thousand monkeys working at a thousand typewriters?

    • i pretty sure the $50 billion would cover the cost of all those projects he mentioned if not most of them. I think many people didnt understand the point abbot was making. Theres no way in the world the rail loop costs 50 billion dollars if you know anything about the project hes talking about. Federal governments regularly fund state responsibilities anyway and gst is a federal tax divided to states as well. Abbot should have clarified the point that the $50 billion would cover all those projects plus still cover the $6 billion improvement to internet. (btw i voted labour so stfu)

  4. “…with government improving infrastructure in the areas where market competition won’t deliver it…”

    This is where he just fails. Fails full of facepalm. Market competition has not delivered improvement in general communications infrastructure up until now – what has changed to alter this?

    Nothing.

    • Except wireless infrastructure of course where supply cannot keep up with demand oh and except ADSL2+ exchange upgrades where the likes of Telstra , iiNet, TPG and Internode are still rolling out exchange gear and signing up thousands of ADSL2+, Naked DSL and VoIP customers every day.

        • I just rang up Telstra and sent a email to Verizon in the USA and Apple about the next IPhone wireless capability, MW says you are backing a loser technology with LTE, they all should be laying FTTH.

          • Better email Dell and Lenovo while your at it and tell them their desktop and laptop business is dead as well. No one wants full size screens and keyboards anymore, it’s a loser technology.

            How many times to people have to say this before some people understand, both technologies are complementary.

            There is a lot you will never be able to do on an iphone.

            People still want and need a real computer in their house with a reliable, fast, high volume fixed line Internet connection.

          • Nowhere do I say wireless is not necessary/useful. A rubbish, pointless statement like that is just part of the usual shit you and your various alter-deteegos try and infer.

          • Oh dear I must have hit a nerve, it’s dropped into personal attacks already, that was quick it usually takes three or four posts into a discussion.

            There is one overriding thing the pro NBN pundits hate with a passion and their God given right to be correct on any utterance is anyone disagreeing with them.

          • The anti-NBN bible…

            Page 1… (of course) –

            Q. How does one escape from a sticky debating situation, when one’s antiNBN FUD is seemingly inescapable…!

            A. If (should actually say when) you are debated into a corner, where there is no escape… “simply claim personal attack and run”… this is a sure fire winner…

            (FINE PRINT – after declaring “personal attack”, feel free to also go MIA for a while, until the topic boils over… then return as if nothing ever happened, and ensure you completely ignore any or all references to your previous sticky situation)…

            Oh look it’s being used AGAIN…!

          • Haha…whatever you think “mate”…

            …at least I discuss the actual issues instead of throwing hand grenades into discussions with the express intention of directing the discussion away from the issues…

            However, if you really want to discuss “personal attacks”, perhaps we should compile a list of all the personal attacks you’ve launched against people on this (and other) sites?

            People in glass houses should not throw stones.

          • “…at least I discuss the actual issues”

            You do in your first opening post , but if someone disagrees with you the discussion rapidly deteriorates into gems like this : ‘ A rubbish, pointless statement like that is just part of the usual shit you and your various alter-deteegos try and infer.”

            Wow a in depth response of that quality must take your hours of thought, love your work.

          • I may disagree with other people, but heck, isn’t that the point of a debate – to discuss opposing points of view?

            But lets get back on topic instead of having a meta-discussion.

          • @ alain, why would you ring Telstra?

            You are there at Telstra (unless you chucked a sicky).

            Err, you are aware though, in-between commenting feverishly here (all anti-NBN of course), you are actually meant to be doing “at least some work” for Telstra/your shareholders!

            Or are these comments part of your job, there at Telstra?

          • Here is again with the desperate diversion, try and make it personal with unfounded and incorrect off topic rubbish as usual.

          • alain, please! If you are going to insist on coming here generally, to “make claims” (as opposed to forwarding simple opinion – big difference) and to “correct us [sic] LOL”, please ensure that you at least, have minimal factual basis/reasoning for doing so!

            “Umm, because” – just doesn’t cut the mustard, out side of the schoolyard.

            Being so, when you’re incorrect, wallet/politically driven claims are highlighted for all to see, please then do not simply, desperately, call personal attack and run? Man-up to your claims and debate them. If they are found wanting (as they inevitable are) again man-up and accept accountability!

            It’s what rational adults, living in an intelligently evolved society, do! So, please feel free to join us…!

            As for you accusing me of personally attacking you, because I simply ask of you? “NO, NO, NO, got it”?

            Look, just for you, here’s an example only (purely for demonstration purposes) of a “personal attack! “alain, you are the moron by which all morons are measured”. You see how that is personal? But I am NOT doing this am I? Regardless of how much I “may” truly believe such a statement”!

            You have made claims and when quizzed, consequently hidden behind accusations of personal attack directed at me. Again, no, no, no, I am simply asking for you to expand upon and explain how you came to such conclusions, particularly as your conclusions are “oddly”, completely contradictory?

            I am not even being nasty, I am simply requesting clarification! Which if you aren’t (as you obviously aren’t) able to provide, “leaves your commenting credibility, past, present and future in total tatters”!

            Granted, after many in vain attempts to gain simple explanation from you, I may give the impression of attack, to those who want to scream attack and run. But seriously, when a simple question is ignored over and over, other facetiously playful measures are required, to attempt to entice clarification (or to of course, simply, further highlight for everyone else’s perusal, the “runners” bias and ineptness…LOL)!

            Herein lies (pun intended), the problem? YOU are unable to explain how you, in just one week could make two totally opposite claims which contradict each other and instead of manning-up, you weasel, hide and worse, accuse me of wrong-doing because I simply ask…!

            All just to desperately try to reflect your own faux pas/embarrassment?

            So once again I “respectfully request” clarification from you, for these/your previous claims, please?

            You said (under your alter ego advocate, at ZD Net) –

            1. “You betcha the NBN will be a success that’s how monopolies work”! DIDN’T YOU?

            Then just one week later you said –

            2. “The NBN will fail, like HFC before it”! DIDN’T YOU?

            All I ask is for you to please explain your reasoning, as to how both these outcomes can possibly occur?

            I look forward to you finally doing so, thank you…

      • which is it , alain? wireless infrastructure or wired (DSL2 exchange upgrades?) you sound confused, as if its wired upgrades you meant wouldnt that mean Tonys argument that wireless is the panacea for all is being rejected by -gasp!- the free market?

        as M.Wyres has pointed out http://www.smh.com.au/business/mobile-broadband-traffic-to-soar-20110503-1e6nd.html you have a little trouble with wireless spectrum. would you care to explain otherwise why Internode et al arent investing in wireless rollouts instead of wired ones? as by your lights it MUST be the way to go? LTE speed and al lthat….(/apologies to Rick Moranis)

        or is your original comment that “ADSL2+ exchange upgrades where the likes of Telstra , iiNet, TPG and Internode are still rolling out exchange gear and signing up thousands of ADSL2+, Naked DSL and VoIP customers every day” correct and wired nets are still profitable and in fact equally as desired by end users as wireless ones? to the point they are 1growth1 areas said isps will invest in?

        this inquiring mind would like to know.

    • Market competition has not delivered improvement in general communications infrastructure up until now

      How can anyone believe this rubbish? You keep coming up with this statement and nothing to back it up. You can buy fiber connections right now, running at any speed you care to pay for. If you don’t mind the build costs you can get that out in the middle of outback Australia. You can also buy internet access very cheaply if you want, but it (obviously) won’t be as fast, and cheap internet is primarily available to city people.

      Plot a chart of the internet speed available per year in Australia for the last 20 years since Internet has existed. Go and do some genuine research, and then come back and say there has been no improvement. Plot a chart of total download volumes, tell me it’s not going up.

      The only thing that the private competitive market has not done, is go out to some country towns with a few hundred residents (where none of those residents have a lot of spare money to spend) and then built them a deluxe service equivalent to what you can get in the middle of a major city. No the private market has not done that, and there’s a reason, because putting huge investment into a small bunch of people who can’t actually pay you is not going to turn a profit. It won’t turn a profit for any private operator, and it won’t turn a profit for NBN Co either.

      You might notice that all the fancy restaurants are in the middle of major cities as well, and the bars and the clubs also. Why do you suppose that might be? Oh wait, that’s where the customers are.

      • Ah Tel…

        You have just inadvertently highlighted info to refute your very own (by that I mean the anti-NBN) argument…

        That is, what we have now is good enough.

        WTF you say… Well, take what you have just said about improvements over the last 20 years and now project that into the future…?

        • This is the statement I was responding to:

          Market competition has not delivered improvement in general communications infrastructure up until now

          Read it carefully and try to understand what the words mean.

          Can you see the words “good enough” in there anywhere? What is “good enough” anyhow?

          • Tel, no need to get all narky because your very own claims of technology improvement are contradictory AND I’LL SHOUT IT THIS TIME… “to refute your very own (BY THAT I MEAN THE ANTI-NBN ARGUMENT)”.

            I was speaking generally (and thought I made it clear- but obviously not, my bad) of those of your ilk, who claim what we have is good enough…and we won’t need better…!

            Scroll up and see brisguy telling us his 20Mbps is fine and alain saying we don’t need it…

          • So I’ll take that as agreement then that market competition has in fact delivered steady and significant improvement in general communications infrastructure. If you wanted to agree you could have just said “me too” or something. I guess that issue can be closed now.

            Now, as for what is “good enough”, that is quite a different topic, but probably a topic that does deserve some consideration. You still have not defined “good enough” for the purpose of discussion though. I don”t see how you are going to make an argument around terms that you can’t even come up with a definition for.

            Scroll up and see brisguy telling us his 20Mbps is fine and alain saying we don’t need it…

            Naturally enough brisguy has defined what is “good enough” from his point of view, I have an even slower link than what he quotes and I’m perfectly happy with my copper as well, it serves all my needs. Maybe tomorrow I’ll have different needs, but at the moment what I have is just fine. It really pisses me off when other people tell me that I have a duty to want something else, I’ll tell you what I want, you won’t tell me what I want.

            As for what you might want (or think you need), that’s your business, by all means spend your own money and buy the things you want. One of the reasons I don’t like Socialism is that I don’t like the idea that everyone should be the same as everyone else.

            If you actually bothered to look at what alain has been saying, he is pointing out that many Australians have had options to buy HFC services far superior than what they are currently using. These Australians have chosen of their own free will not to buy the service, so uptake of HFC has been poor. The market just isn’t there for this kind of service. Yes they were offered movies and the latest whiz-bang doodads, they said “no”. That was their choice and choices such as these are what makes a free society operate.

          • Gee Tel, I almost missed this, that would have been just not “good enough”…

            So why is it you wish to be pedantic over two words (good enough), which I simply repeat from your brother naysayers?

            Regardless of any measurement pertaining to good enough may be to you or I, the anti-NBN crowd (I won’t say you and have you personally, get all huffy again) have said many times “we don’t need an NBN/fibre, because what ‘WE’ have (copper) is good enough”! Totally ignoring those who do not have anything that can be described as good, let alone good enough…

            ***Lol…right on cue just an hour and a half ago, in the below article, to prove the fact (scroll up one comment to WTW) those exact, magic words –

            http://delimiter.com.au/2011/05/17/in-defence-of-an-honourable-man/#comment-62820

            A snippet – …”What people simply choose to ignore is that the copper is more than GOOD ENOUGH”…

            Again, since you conveniently hid your previous claims behind a couple of words, because – oops, you inadvertently were suggesting an NBN is needed after all… I redirect you back to YOUR (yes you personally this time) claim that technology has gone ahead markedly. So if/when the trends continue (as they have traditionally done – as YOU claim) we will indeed need to keep abreast, won’t we?

            Anyway, back to the magic words. If you haven’t previously seen the term “good enough” from a selfish bunch, who don’t care about others and you don’t find their selfishness repugnant (regardless of your NBN leanings) well I’m afraid you miss the entire point of the exercise…

            So go over to ZDNet and watch the speed tests come in and when you see the likes of Melbourne 269kbps, Sydney 41kbps, Perth 1200kbps or whatever, that’s when those two magic words from the “anti-NBN crowd will ring home… and you will then see that that what we have (regardless of the artificial tag/measurement you place on it) IS NOT, good enough, not good enough what-so-ever…!

          • So now you deem to tell me who my brothers are, as well as what my needs are, do you? I find that contemptible.

            If you are replying to me, then it would seem normal and courteous to reply to what I wrote rather than attempting to finish some conversation you were having far away with someone else entirely. I find it difficult to piece together your stream of consciousness when it involves implicit knowledge of things I might supposedly be reading on zdnet or whatever.

            With regards to the issue of what is “good enough”, and to the extent that I can puzzle out the argument you are attempting to deliver; you are saying that if I (or one of my brothers) is satisfied with a service, and someone else in the world who might be receiving an approximately similar service is dissatisfied for whatever reason, then that makes me “selfish” because I am unwilling to demand an upgrade to my present service. Is that something similar to your argument?

            So if I eat an apple and enjoy it, but the guy next door eats an orange and finds that orange too sour, then I would be “selfish” unless I spit out what remains of my apple and march right back to the fruit shop demanding a banana. That would be much the same argument.

            With regards to improving technology and growth in the industry you say:

            Again, since you conveniently hid your previous claims behind a couple of words, because – oops, you inadvertently were suggesting an NBN is needed after all… I redirect you back to YOUR (yes you personally this time) claim that technology has gone ahead markedly. So if/when the trends continue (as they have traditionally done – as YOU claim) we will indeed need to keep abreast, won’t we?

            You appear to be saying that because a given organisational methodology has delivered improvements in the past, then we can conclude that in order to achieve improvement in the future we should adopt a completely different methodology. You fail to present any evidence why the engine that delivered innovation in the past, would not continue with much the same progress.

            I dare say that if the Internet had grown very little in Australia and no new technologies had been introduced you would still use that as an argument for the NBN, so what you are really saying is you just like the idea of the NBN and facts are irrelevant.

      • The money you pay for fiber buildouts and speeds is extortionist and has nothing to do with the cost of an actual buildout. No small business can pay for those costs anyways.

        And your supposed speed increases have basically stopped now that copper has reached its limit. Furthermore the majority of people live outside of ADSL2+ range, so that’s not an option for them either.

        You won’t get any speed or quality increases until you go all out fiber. Your comparison to shops in the city is rather inane. The point of telecommunications is to make it possible for everyone to communicate. Would you have preferred not to build out copper to the regional areas?

        For the love of god please say no to that.

        • *And your supposed speed increases have basically stopped now that copper has reached its limit. Furthermore the majority of people live outside of ADSL2+ range, so that’s not an option for them either.
          You won’t get any speed or quality increases until you go all out fiber.*

          RUBBISH. you can invest in FTTN.

        • And your supposed speed increases have basically stopped now that copper has reached its limit.

          So that is why iiNet is rolling out VHDSL, and Bir Air are rolling out services up to 100 Mbps and mobile wireless has been getting faster every year (and available in more areas, and still more towers rolling out), and HFC has had several generations of DOCSYS upgrades (recently reaching DOCSIS 3.0). You show me what has stopped, in concrete terms, not your “Merlin makes stuff up” effort but real examples.

          Do you understand anything about the limits of copper? Why not explain to us what you know so you can look really silly?

  5. The Liberal* stance on the NBN was a deciding factor in Abbott not becoming PM last election. Hasn’t he learnt?

    *Note I intentionally didn’t say “Coalition” because I refuse to believe the Nationals don’t support the NBN – they are just toeing the Liberal policy in this regard.

    • “The Liberal* stance on the NBN was a deciding factor in Abbott not becoming PM last election. Hasn’t he learnt?”

      Is that what your personal exit polling across all booths told you from the last election?

      • No alain, that’s what the (traditionally conservative) independents, with previous ties to the Libs/Nats, who sided with Labor to form government… and even quoted the NBN as a big part of their reasoning for doing so, clearly indicates… OMG…

        So what did your exit polls tell you? Since you ignore reality!

        • Really?

          http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/coalition-wont-sway-andrew-wilkie-over-nbn/story-fn59niix-1225923723338

          “But NSW MP Mr Oakeshott told The Australian Online that the National Broadband Network was only one of a whole “bucketload of issues” that led to him helping Labor form a minority government.

          “There was a reason I took 16 minutes and 50 seconds,” he said, referring to his explanation of his decision to support confidence in the Gillard Labor government. “Ten seconds of that was broadband.”

          If you look at the other reasons Independents backed Labor the Independent Tasmanian Wilkie got gambling reforms and funding for Royal Hobart Hospital, the NBN was in fact a minority small player reason taken across ALL the Independents two of which backed the Coalition and the Green that backed Labor into Government..

          Never mind RS it sounded good.

          • Err alain, who swore he would never, ever correspond with me ever again, when he was cornered…, but here he is now, when he thinks he’s finally on a winner, corresponding with me, LOL!

            Which part of my statement here, regarding the Independents, do you NOT understand…

            “and even quoted the NBN as a big (((PART))) of their reasoning for doing so, clearly indicates…”!

            You just said Oakeshott considered the NBN and what about Tony Windsor –

            http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/359685/nbn_becomes_lynchpin_labor_win/

            BTW thanks for your URL too, to guess where…NWAT..oops no, the UNAustralian, how lovely!

            Interestingly however, you inadvertently highlight that traditional conservative Independents such as Oakeshott, have many concerns over the oppositions policies not just broadband, which was why they supported Labor. Concerns which obviously have wider implications for all Australian’s…

            Perhaps this is why former PM Fraser quit the Libs, as he believes they have become too extreme…! So thanks for giving us all, many more reasons rather than just the NBN, to NOT vote for Abbott…!

            You are really an NBN/Labor supporter aren’t you…! You must be with all the evidence you supply which inevitably supports both!

            Never mind alain, you at least tried! Back to not corresponding with me again, before I ask you to answer your silly contradictions, which still remain unanswered since Nov 2010 (because you will never, ever, etc…LOL)!

          • Across ALL the Independents and their reasons for backing Labor the NBN was a reason among many reasons or not of consideration at all, it may have been a major reason for ONE Independent Windsor but just to give you a update – he is not the ONLY Independent in Parliament.

            Did you like this statement oh wise one? best let this go through to the keeper eh?

            “There was a reason I took 16 minutes and 50 seconds,” he said, referring to his explanation of his decision to support confidence in the Gillard Labor government. “Ten seconds of that was broadband.”

            The rest of your post is the usual off topic repetitive rhetoric stocking filler.

          • OMFG… “the NBN as a big (((PART))) of their reasoning for doing so”… Hellooooo!!!! Why do I bother I’d get more sense out of the neighbours dog…!

            I note too, you simply gloss over the rest which is outside your obvious mantra (oh he who will never ever…can you ever be truthful?).

            Anyway, since you are again corresponding with me (LOL) let’s clear this up once and for all, by turning the clock back to Nov 2010.

            You said (under your alter ego advocate, at ZD Net) –

            1. “You betcha the NBN will be a success that’s how monopolies work”… DIDN’T YOU?

            Then one week later you said –

            2. “The NBN will fail, like HFC before it”… DIDN’T YOU?

            Please explain you reasoning, as to how both these outcomes can possibly occur…?

          • Yes the usual tactic when you are backed into a corner RS, which is quite often, the frenetic desperate attempts to make it personal and divert to a different topic that has blatantly nothing to do with the current discussion.

            Smoke & mirrors and no substance RS, the backbone of your post content.

          • Backed into a corner…LOL. Didn’t you say you’d never ever correspond with me again? Oh that was to get out of that corner you speak of…LOL

            So speaking of YOUR corner…LOL… ONE independent… really? Can you count?

            http://www.theaustralian.com.au/australian-it/national-broadband-network-top-priority-for-independent-wilkie/story-e6frgakx-1225912082058

            (note it’s even from the Australian so you can’t argue…LOL)

            Again – http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/359685/nbn_becomes_lynchpin_labor_win/

            And Oakeshott factored it too…you said (yes for 10 seconds… which is 10 seconds more than you factor anything, before you post your contradictory FUD).

            So Wilkie, Windsor and Oakeshott (not to mention, although he supported the Coalition) Katter, has been arguably, the most outspoken NBN supporter of any of them!

            LOL, it’s clear ONE OF US, is backed into a corner and it ISN’T ME…

            Now, instead of excuses, hiding, dodging, sobbing and hypocritically pointing the finger at others.. JUST ANSWER THE QUESTION OF YOUR RIDICULOUS CONTRADICTIONS…!

            Well…!!!!

          • Your unwillingness to answer to your own contradictions is rather pathetic alain. Do you ever look at yourself in the mirror in the morning and feel ashamed at what you’ve become?

  6. When you consider we are a mineral resources and primary produce based economy I guess it kind of makes sense to give priority to investment in transportation & logistics infrastructure. Don’t disagree with the need for NBN serving required facilities/ clusters where demand and industry dictates need. But to each and every consumer door, I think not.

    • “I don’t need no new fangled copper wires running to my house. What am I going to use that for? I don’t have one of those new fangled telephones, and no one else I know does either. Waste of money, the govmint should be spending money on decent stuff.”

      I’m sure people said that 100 years ago when someone had the guts to have some foresight and courage to build the copper network, and it’s done us proud for that time, performing way above what was originally intentioned.

      While I sigh with disappointment at a lot of what Labor are doing in power, I’m glad they’re spending some money putting something in place that I, my not-yet-existant children, and my grandchildren will all benefit from. The fact that I have to pay for it now – big deal. I drove down a road this morning that was paid for by someone who is long dead.

      • Jim, I agree that mentality can be frustrating but I struggle to quantify the spend on universal role out of fiber to the home when with my current residential ADSL2 arrangement, my wife and I can reliably and regularly run concurrent desktop videoconferencing sessions (MSFT & Avaya enterprise tools) while CNBC is steaming to a TV in the background. While this only occurs twice a week surely that would have to put us in some sort of top percentile bracket for residential users & all over existing infrastructure. We never expected nor planned to use our residential service to this extent but hey ….. it delivers and we are reaping the benefits it provides.

        I still cant help but feel the NBN in its committed form was driven by Kevin Rudd’s egotistical desire for a legacy than a diligent and strategic sovereign investment.

        Once again I am not opposed to NBN in its entirety, just its extent and intent.

        • That’s very nice for you !!! – Just so happens that the rest of us don’t happen
          to share parameters quite like that ……………

      • To be fair on Labor, they inherited an unbalanced economy on the verge of collapse after a full decade of random vote buying and wild speculation.

        No one will ever attribute the coming recession to the Liberals of course. They’ll blame Labor, but the clearest theory I’ve seen on economic instability is Minsky’s. He states that the natural instability is UPWARD with the downward part being the correction.
        Anyhow, they’ve got a tough job unwinding all the middle class welfare that was entrenched.
        Most people don’t see the big picture, which is that regardless of the tax rate, it will never feel any different thanks to the RBA. They complain about higher taxes, and they complain about interest rates, but they never put 1 and 1 together to realise that interest rate policy is in large part a response to taxation policy.

        Lower taxes quite quickly become higher interest rates.
        Take a look at the early 90’s. When Superannuation was introduced (which, lets face it, is very similar to a tax), interest rates nosedived from the high teens to the low single digits.
        Conversely, when Howard started throwing money around with tax breaks, personal grants, various welfare benefits (for workers!) and ‘one off payments’, interest rates steadily rose.

        The problem with interest rates now, is they’re affecting recent and younger buyers the hardest while virtually having no effect on long term owners. Thanks for the housing bubble, Howard!

        But I digress.

        Anyhow, on topic.
        Abbott is once again proving how small his vision is. Not only does he completely lack any understanding of the importance of telecommunications in our society, but he’s so stuck in the past that he’s actually advocating more roads. For what? For commuting?

        Look, it doesn’t take a professor to take a look around the cities we work in and see that the vast majority of the businesses there don’t NEED to be there. They could happily live elsewhere but for lack of infrastructure. Obviously a good transport network is ideal, and it’s difficult to put trains, trams and buses from everywhere to everywhere. The CBD’s will always have the best public transport, this much is obvious.
        Freeways have not exactly reduced our problem much. It’s plain to everyone that the states have gone on an orgy of freeway building, but congestion is steadily failing to improve. Parking for cars is also an expensive proposition. Sydney is among the most expensive places to park in the entire world.
        Building more roads will do nothing to improve this situation.

        So what could entice a large corporate to move elsewhere?
        Well personally, my experience with large corporates is that they tend to consist of multitudes of relatively autonomous teams. They interact, but for the most part, they would barely notice if they were in another city. Indeed, often they are already.
        I personally think that one of the deciding factors is their network requirements. It’s simply easier to get high speed links in the CBD, which more or less limits the potential of technology like (the excellent) Cisco Telepresense to intercapital meetings. I think that if they could, many of them would split their CBD offices into several satellite offices. This would slice a lot of commutes, reduce the flavour of the month carbon emissions and result in a return of work/life balance to many.

        Even without telecommuting, today’s accepted corporate business models would benefit from the NBN.

        This is the thing Abbott fails to understand.
        Never mind the fact that there is already well over 200bn allocated to roads over the next 10 years. NSW and Vic alone make up 100bn of that and I don’t see anyone complaining about the road network being a waste of money.

        It’s funny really, the NBN will last a lot longer than most road surfaces and cover the entire nation for the same cost as a single state’s road budget.

        So allocating more funding to roads, when we already have masses of them to cure the problems of congestion is like saying a fat person feels weak and tired because they don’t eat and sleep enough.

        The roads are the PROBLEM not the solution.
        I know that’s an odd perspective to take, but think about it. Roads are congested because people have little choice but to use them. Offer the nation some form of alternative that can reduce travel requirements, and you just watch as the brains of the nation figure out how to exploit that.

        Abbott, please don’t ever be prime minister.
        Your last government did virtually nothing for this nation except cause long term structural issues. The one major point in your favour is the gun buy back. But as health minister, you were largely responsible for the Americanising of the healthcare system. I’m so glad that Australians didn’t flock to private cover. It might look nice in the short term, but oh boy, in the long term it’s a ticking time-bomb of clauses and slow agonising deaths for people who could have been saved.
        RU486 was another classic example. Whether people believe in it or not, it is not the health ministers job to bring religion into a health debate.

        Gillard might be an inept visionary with bad timing, but Abbott is the sort of person who, 20,000 years ago would have been sitting at the cave mouth denouncing the building of the first hut as a waste of time and effort.

        • *Lower taxes quite quickly become higher interest rates.*

          RUBBISH.

          lower taxes along with lower government spending would be interest rate neutral.

          *Take a look at the early 90′s. When Superannuation was introduced (which, lets face it, is very similar to a tax), interest rates nosedived from the high teens to the low single digits.*

          RUBBISH.

          superannuation is nothing like a tax. employer super contributions are a form of employee compensation. as a matter of fact, salary received in the form of super contributions is taxed at concession rates relative to ordinary wages credited to bank accounts.

          *Thanks for the housing bubble, Howard!*

          RUBBISH.

          the housing bubble is driven by credit expansion – and monetary policy is set by the RBA in Martin Pl, not in Canberra.

          *Look, it doesn’t take a professor to take a look around the cities we work in and see that the vast majority of the businesses there don’t NEED to be there.*

          RUBBISH. businesses need to be close to their clients. WTF do you think is going to get the auditing, marketing, PR, banking, HR, etc, appointment/contracts? a service-provider conveniently located in the inner-city…. or some firm 3 hours drive out in the bloody sticks?

          *They could happily live elsewhere but for lack of infrastructure.*

          viable infrastructure is only built where there is sufficient demand to amortize the large fixed cost base. this is why we have industrial clustering – to realise the economic benefits from shared infrastructure.

          *Freeways have not exactly reduced our problem much. It’s plain to everyone that the states have gone on an orgy of freeway building, but congestion is steadily failing to improve.*

          right. hospitals are full of sick people. the more hospitals we build, the more they get filled up with sick people. therefore, we should stop building hospitals. how dumb can you get with that kind of illogic.

          *I think that if they could, many of them would split their CBD offices into several satellite offices… Even without telecommuting, today’s accepted corporate business models would benefit from the NBN.*

          there’s already shitloads of unused dark fibre capacity in the capital cities. HTF is pushing fibre to every fookin’ household going to make fibre access more affordable for businesses?

          the NBN will f***-up the whole fibre platform as a viable means for fast broadband for those who REALLY need it.

          *It’s funny really, the NBN will last a lot longer than most road surfaces and cover the entire nation for the same cost as a single state’s road budget.*

          who gives a flying f*** how long the white elephant will “last”? the pertinent question is what value it will generate relative to other means for deploying the capital.

          *The roads are the PROBLEM not the solution.*

          REALLY? so, pushing fibre to Whoop-Whoop today… abolishing all roads tomorrow!

          *I know that’s an odd perspective to take*

          no odd-er than all the CRAZY, crackpot socialist schemes already dreamt up and implemented (with a BIG FAIL) by communist governments all over the world.

          *.. except cause long term structural issues.*

          you just described Labor’s NBN.

          *I’m so glad that Australians didn’t flock to private cover. It might look nice in the short term, but oh boy, in the long term it’s a ticking time-bomb of clauses and slow agonising deaths for people who could have been saved.*

          really? so you prefer to be stuck on 5 year public hospital waiting lists?

          *Gillard might be an inept visionary with bad timing*

          Gillard, Conroy, Rudd, Swannie are talentless commie dipshits who should be ejected from Government ASAP for the sake of our national welfare.

          • And you tried to tell us you are apolitical…LOL…

            That was the most trumped up politically biased… to coin the phrase… RUBBISH I think I have ever had the displeasure of reading…

            Seriously…!

          • No kidding. I don’t even know where to start dismantling his bias.
            Unfortunately, it’s clear that his reality and the one most of us live in are two very different things.

          • I started a reply debunking it, but I realised there’s no point arguing with an illiterate, uneducated partisan hysteric.

          • Yes indeed myne…

            Like I said to him… when he suggested I am pro-Labor because of my loyal support for the NBN…

            No… I am a swinging voter, BUT… I am Pro-NBN (which by default, inadvertently makes me pro-Labor “FOR NOW” as the Libs have said they will can the NBN…so!) whereas you are simply pro-Lib – period!

            NOW/SINCE, PROVEN BEYOND ANY DOUBT…!

            I do not outwardly refer to the opposition as “hare-brained” or “retarded dipsh!ts” (because they have an opposing view to me) as he does the government… My vote is earned not a given…

            I even said to him, if the NBN was Coalition policy I would still be here vehemently supporting it and suggested he’d be here back-slapping me and agreeing with me, not arguing…! Such is the difference in our agendas…

            Pitiful really, when one’s political bias, kills off common sense and will not allow one to rationally analyse the entire situation!

          • I’m from America, and let me tell you the last thing you want is private health insurance. In fact the only people who really want private health insurance (and aren’t being fooled by lying politicians and media) are sociopaths who couldn’t care less if the bottom 50% went bankrupt and died from lack of coverage. Are you one of those types?

          • *I’m from America, and let me tell you the last thing you want is private health insurance.*

            everybody knows that the emerging, huge structural element in the US federal budget deficit relates to Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. eventually, when foreigners stop buying US Treasuries in Ponzi finance fashion, the ruling Administration, be it Gingrich / Palin / Jindal, etc, will be forced to cut Medicare/Medicaid spending and there goes your public health safety net.

            *In fact the only people who really want private health insurance…are sociopaths who couldn’t care less if the bottom 50% went bankrupt and died from lack of coverage. Are you one of those types?*

            that’s what Medicaid is for – a public health safety net for the poor and destitute. Medicaid should definitely be retained. however, given that the US Government is facing fiscal insolvency, Medicare will have to be reformed.

            it just doesn’t make sense for the Government to provide retirement healthcare to middle and upper class rich who can afford to provision for their own old-age healthcare needs. either way, healthcare isn’t free. either you pay for it through taxes (i.e. effectively a form of public health insurance premium) or you subscribe to private health insurance directly and purchase cover tailored to your own individual needs.

            clearly, the latter option is far superior as it evades government waste and inefficiency. after all, it’s meaningless to have “public health cover” when the US Government’s Medicare/Medicaid programs have projected future unfunded liabilities running into TRILLIONS of dollars – that’s the American equivalent to our own FAI (Fook-All-Insurance).

            if necessary, expand the Medicaid safety net… but eliminate public health insurance for the “rich”.

  7. I like the idea of investing in road infrastructure. It means we will be able to transport datapackets stored on inexpensive USB sticks via trucks and trains for delivery to other places in Australia. We can have linkages between the road and rail network to shipping ports where the data can travel via submarine to other countries. That is the future.

    This whole “broadband” thing was crazy talk anyway.

    • ROFL. Love your thinking.

      We can probably buckle up some 2TB hard drives in Qantas economy class, and support our airlines in the process. “In the event of an emergency, a usb cable will drop down, to save the data. Please attend to your hard drive before you attend to yourself”.

    • The money is taken out as a *loan*. Scrapping the NBN would not magically produce any more money to build roads, as the NBN is expected to PAY FOR ITSELF. How hard is it for people to understand this basic concept? Why do people have to be so stupid?

      • *The money is taken out as a *loan*. Scrapping the NBN would not magically produce any more money to build roads, as the NBN is expected to PAY FOR ITSELF. How hard is it for people to understand this basic concept? Why do people have to be so stupid?*

        yea? and trenching all over Australia to lay fibre is not going to compete for labour resources with other projects (incl. road building), thereby, driving up the costs of carrying out other more worthwhile projects (which earn a higher return than a measly 7%)?

        indeed, why do people have to be so STUPID? look in the mirror and ask yourself that question.

      • *The money is taken out as a *loan*. Scrapping the NBN would not magically produce any more money to build roads, as the NBN is expected to PAY FOR ITSELF. How hard is it for people to understand this basic concept? Why do people have to be so stupid?*

        yea? and trenching all over Australia to lay fibre is not going to compete for labour resources with other projects (incl. road building), thereby, driving up the costs of carrying out other more worthwhile projects (which earn a higher return than a measly 7%)?

        indeed, why do people have to be so STUPID? look in the mirror and ask yourself that question.

  8. Putting aside the benefit or otherwise of investing in fibre, if you were taking Abbott seriously, then to keep the alternative capital expenditure out of the budget as per the NBN you at least need to make a return on paper (if not reality) somewhere down the track. That rules out teaching hospitals, and means all roads would have to be toll roads.

    But this is a farcical opposition because any infrastructure project like a toll road that has the potential to offer a return can be funded outside of the budget on its own merits independently from any other project, there is no sacrificing one for another.

    Taxpayers will end up footing the bill in the budget under 2 scenarios.

    The first is where the business plan does not meet expectations and needs ongoing budget funding to be sustainable or competitive. This seems to be built on the ‘magical wireless’ scenario.

    The second scenario is if the coalition wins and decides to sell off the assets in a fire sale after the government has already invested about 20 billion in equity. The sale price will be dependent on the take-up rates up to that point and any revised projections. You’d have to reckon that taxpayers are going to foot a multi-billion dollar bill in this scenario.

    The most likely third scenario however in the event of a coalition win is that further investment and rollouts are frozen beyond any committed to prior to the election, so probably up to June 2014. A cost benefit analysis will be conducted over 2014 which will tell them whatever they want it to tell them, most likely that it will proceed but in a more limited form with private cherry picking (competition) allowed. Assuming the NBN has focused on the regions, selling off the NBN is not going to sit well in those regional electorates who are still sore about Telstra – so it ain’t going to happen.

    A fragmented NBN will give Telstra the power to pick off high value exchanges by shifting them off ULL to fibre and outside of existing regulatory frameworks. Telstra’s South Brisbane migration gives a snapshot of what will happen in other major metro areas. In the low value areas where the NBN is, Telstra will be happy to be paid to transfer their customers onto the NBN. Either way, copper is dead.

    Labor or Liberal, thus far my modest number of Telstra shares are looking pretty good, I just think the existing NBN plan is better for the country as a whole, and I don’t think it’s great for the country that we end up with this silly regulatory scenario where the accc has to divine what a fair wholesale price should be, and competitors have to wait years for the courts to arbitrate a fair deal.

    • *The first is where the business plan does not meet expectations and needs ongoing budget funding to be sustainable or competitive. This seems to be built on the ‘magical wireless’ scenario.*

      no, that’s built on the… “no thanks, i’m not going to spend $40/mth on wholesale CVC charges” scenario. NBN Co. is not going to survive on the revenue from “basic access” subscriptions. the only possible rationale to rolling out fibre to every Tom, Dick, Harry, dog, goldfish is that everyone is going to spend up to their eyeballs on premium services.

      Foxtel chalked up operating losses for years on end… and still has relatively shitty market penetration relative to actual platform reach. no fook’n wonder no private telco will lay fibre to Whoop-Whoop. there’s simply no economic justification.

      *The second scenario is if the coalition wins and decides to sell off the assets in a fire sale after the government has already invested about 20 billion in equity.*

      if NBN Co. continues rolling out fibre in one-horse towns with 15% take-up rates… that $20bln of supposed “equity” will have a fair market value of $5bln. it’ll HAVE to be a “fire-sale”.

      *You’d have to reckon that taxpayers are going to foot a multi-billion dollar bill in this scenario.*

      f***, yea! thanks to Labor’s crazy, hare-brained, socialist schemes (viz. every school needs a brand new sports hall! every house needs a fibre conneciton!)

      *A cost benefit analysis will be conducted over 2014 which will tell them whatever they want it to tell them, most likely that it will proceed but in a more limited form with private cherry picking (competition) allowed.*

      “cherry-picking” is probably the most abused and over-used term in the whole NBN debate. WTF is it wrong to only build infrastructure where there’s actual demand for it and it can be viably sustained?

      Telstra stopped rolling out HFC because there is no generalised demand for superfast broadband beyond the existing footprint. only retarded dipshits like Conroy would consider wasting taxpayers’ money rolling out fibre to small towns with 15% take-up rates.

      *Assuming the NBN has focused on the regions, selling off the NBN is not going to sit well in those regional electorates who are still sore about Telstra – so it ain’t going to happen.*

      assuming “the NBN is focused on the regions”, the NBN will largely be a stinking pile of Labor horsepoo… there’ll be NO BUYERS at 100c on the dollar.

      *I just think the existing NBN plan is better for the country as a whole*

      the NBN will f***-up the cost-competitiveness of our nation’s fixed-line infrastructure.

      • Oh Tom, Dick and Harry. You’re my favourite fictional members of Australian society. They were John Howard’s favourites as well. What a coincidence that you used them too!

        • Seems I’m not the only one who (again, without me knowing for sure – as you won’t tell us) can see the distinct “probability” of a political agenda, forming the basis of each and every one of your posts tosh?

  9. Turnbull…it’s Mr RABBIT season!!!
    Get back in there, say yes to NBN and you’ll be the next PM.

  10. Yeah, that’s great! Unless all the new roads Abbott proposes to build are tolled, the taxpayer isn’t going to get any returns on their investment.

    The NBN isn’t included in the budget for very good reasons because it is a commercial investment that is expected to return the capital invested. To suggest we stop building the NB to build roads is only going to but a bit dent in the budget.

    • Well, that depends on how you look at it.

      Any government pending $500M on a new piece of non-tolled freeway will never see a “return on investment” in dollar terms – that is, that government will never recoup that $500M back into their coffers.

      However, spending that $500M on that freeway may well see benefit to the economy of $500M or more over the life of that freeway.

      It would most likely make freight transit more efficient, and get people from A to B more quickly than before – (inferring potential productivity gains). These are benefits to the economy that counter the cost to deploy that infrastructure, and are *likely* to be higher than the cost.

      That is, simply by existing, that $500M-to-build freeway may provide $2B worth of benefit to the economy over say, 20 years. That’s a good investment, even if the initial outlay doesn’t return to the government in dollars and cents.

      But those benefits are very difficult – (if not almost impossible) – to quantify at the time of that initial outlay.

      Heaven forbid that I “get” something that TAbbott is trying to say, but that *SEEMS* be what he’s talking about – the benefit of the existence of infrastructure.

      Speaking of the NBN, it is much the same. Nobody doubts that $35B is a lot of money – absolutely it is.

      But the benefits to the economy of its mere existence over the 50+ year life of the network are equally as difficult to measure right now, as would be measuring the benefits of the $500M freeway at its commencement, in the above example.

      A freeway is infrastructure. A desalination plant is infrastructure. You use freeways for nothing. You use water from desalination plants for nothing. But governments pay for them to happen, to provide their benefits to the people.

      An NBN is a freeway too – but it’s a freeway with tolls on it. It provides a financial return as people use it.

      However long it ends up taking to return that initial outlay – (whether it is the time frame they are planning for or not) – it’ll reach that mark long before any $500M freeway ever does.

    • thats just it. Tony Abbott might be a monkey but he’s not stupid enough to actually believe what he is telling people. He is just sprouting populist ideas and preying on joe public who doesnt know what is involved.

      • “He is just sprouting populist ideas”

        He is? what populist ideas is that then?

        and preying on joe public who doesnt know what is involved.

        Joe Public is slowing waking up to what is involved with the $43 billion taxpayer funded Rolls Royce rollout as well, of course the s***t has not hit the fan yet, we are in the ‘freebie’ honeymoon pilot phase, wait until the HFC and copper is switched off and people see what they have to pay for a basic ‘like it or lump it’ monopoly NBN Plan.

        Joe Public also watches and learns from the insulation debacle and the Rolls Royce $350 set top box, roll on 2013, this Labor Government clinging to the slimmest margins of Government courtesy of a few Independents is going to get rolled big time.

        • Gee there’s lots of Rolls Royces being umm, rolled out!

          And you have the audacity to accuse others of silly road analogies…LOL!

        • where do you get the $350 set top box bs from? these days thats not a stb, thats a fully fledged hard drive PVR for that money. a basic SD olin receiver runs you about 40 bucks at Big W – which is what i expected to govt to be offering, not premium PVRs.

        • “$350 set top box, roll on 2013”

          LOL gotta love that anti-NBN logic where everything almost magically doubles in price. $26 billion suddenly becomes $50 billion and $179 becomes $350. Just LOL.

          “this Labor Government clinging to the slimmest margins of Government courtesy of a few Independents is going to get rolled big time.”

          Don’t be surprised to see more independents and greens win seats at the next election. People really seem to like these minority governments, I know I do, so many bitter tears it’s very entertaining and the best part is we seem to make more progress with them.

          • The cost of the set top box is $350 HC, there is no doubling up.

            http://itechreport.com.au/2011/05/13/2011-budget-government-explains-350-set-top-box-allowance/

            The point remains about this Government being a prolific waster of taxpayer money, the insulation and set top box farce is just one of many that voters will remember in 2013, especially when we get all the cost blowout BS about the NBN before then and punters work how how much they have to pay for a FTTH Plan that is not massively taxpayer subsidised under the guise of we are still in the ‘pilot phase’.

            It’s funny how the pilot phase’ is taking so long on a product that has been rolled out by others in Australia years ago, but it’s a nice way of keeping pricing artificially low to attract uptake, how does ‘free’ sound punters?

            The free plan strategy of course is to get people to sign up for FTTH while HFC, and ADSL2+ is still available, obviously giving people a choice on a level playing field is not what the NBN FTTH is all about and it loses out.

          • “The cost of the set top box is $350 HC, there is no doubling up.”

            You said “Rolls Royce $350 set top box” that statement is incorrect and erroneous. A final price of $350 might include installation fees which the link confirms… wait let me guess, you expect people installing these things to work for free? right? Funny how there are always these companies that pop up after the fact that say they can do things cheaper and/or better… btw I know a guy who had to spend 4 hours on a job because the user was too stupid to work the thing, I’m guessing this one was the type that is against the NBN. So really people like you are to blame for this.

            “set top box farce is just one of many that voters will remember in 2013 + yet more ill-informed blah blah blah”

            LOL sure it will.

          • @HC

            So let’s digest all that verbal fluff surrounding your response, so that’s a YES then, the set top box will be $350, glad we got that out of the way.

          • “So let’s digest all that verbal fluff surrounding your response”

            The only fluff here is in your posts…

            “so that’s a YES then, the set top box will be $350”

            No. The cost of a set top box will not be $350. Total installation cost possibly but you never made that distinction in your initial statement, so either you were trying to mislead people or you don’t know what you are talking about, which is it?

          • Ahh relying on the trivial semantic detail to try and get yourself out of the corner HC, who cares what the break up is, the fact is it is costing the sucker taxpayer $350 for each box, nice try, no goal I’m afraid.

            Perhaps the NBN Co could install them when each pensioner residence takes a cough-cough ‘free’ NBN connection , we could save money by designing a NBN box that incorporates a digital TV tuner.

            (…shh I’m giving Conroy ideas)

          • “Ahh relying on the trivial semantic detail to try and get yourself out of the corner HC”

            No. Since the error was on your part not mine you are the one still stuck in a corner. We just don’t know if you were deliberately trying to mislead people or you don’t know what you are talking about. That part is still up for debate. I will not assume anything until you clarify.

            “who cares what the break up is, the fact is it is costing the sucker taxpayer $350 for each box”

            So I was right you do expect people installing these things to work for free?

            “no goal I’m afraid.”

            Indeed you are not doing too well today. I’m sure next week will be no different unfortunately.

          • FFS… speaking of semantics… absolutely everything has to be spelled out doesn’t it?

            Not that I really care, because I am here exclusively because of my support for the NBN (no other reason)! But when I see such biased lunacy, always spewing forth from the same source, it amazes me…!

            alain, trot down to Harvey Norman and ask about STB’s.

            Yes you may get one for $60…

            Then ask them to deliver, install, set up etc…

            I bet it costs more than $60… wanna bet?

            Seriously, at least try to show minimal common sense in your political/wallet driven crusade!

          • LOL…back pedal… I won the bet it was more than $60…

            See you buy the unit and then it costs more for the extra’s…good boy you have learned…!

            Thanks you for that…!

          • @RS

            But were not talking about $60, we were discussing the $350 box/installation figure as outlined in the Budget as you well know.

            Rabbit and headlights comes to mind reading your panic responses RS.

          • alain (sigh) READ WHAT I WROTE…and then at least TRY to comprehend, amidst all that FUD and bias –

            My quote – ((( “Yes you may get one for $60…

            Then ask them to deliver, install, set up etc…

            I bet it costs more than $60… wanna bet?” {END} )))

            And does it cost more than $60…well alain??? Yes or No… Gee Ye, as I said!

            Don’t make up MORE BS, that’s what was said…

            Anyway speaking of BS, you didn’t mention the availability for the installation (which incidentally IS more than $60… as I said).

            Go on tell us where it’s avaialble?

            Capital and a few major cities… now find out how much installation will cost in Broome, Gladstone, Broken Hill…etc (again I bet it’s more than $60…LOL)…

            FFS your endless FUD is amazing…and it’s not just anti NBN FUD, it ‘s anti-Labor, pro-Lib, PRO-TELSTRA FUD!

            Ah your selfish motives become clearer and clearer tiger!

          • Oh you have decided to move the goal posts eh? it’s now installation and supply in Broome, Gladstone and Broken Hill, so what do want a break up by post code of all of Australia in a desperate attempt to try and get out of that hole you have dug for yourself?

            Pathetic.

  11. Indeed, imo Tony is treating the people with contempt (as idiots) and the people (well those who are silly enough to swallow his contemptuousness, as witnessed by a few usual suspects here) are not only accepting his contemptuousness as gospel (pun intended) but even repeating him parrot fashion…!

  12. >> Get back in there, say yes to NBN and you’ll be the next PM.

    you know, that’s the truth. i’m not generally a labor supporter, but i will be voting for them, for as long as the libs keep harping on about how we don’t need an NBN. frankly it’s tiring. everyone in the industry knows we do, and it will be a brilliant thing once completed.

  13. Just how many roads could you even build with the NBN budget anyway? I’m still driving on the same roads when I was born even with the MASSIVE amount of funds allocated to infrastructure and I’m in my 20’s, imagine the amount of people you will take off the road by enabling them to work from home, or simply the benefits to our economy from ubiquitous access?

    As someone in Perth, I, and most of the country should be insulted Abbot considers building ONE ROAD in ONE CITY, that a tiny, tiny, tiny portion of the population would utilize on a daily basis is a better option than wiring the ENTIRE country up with some of the fastest broadband in the world, broadband and various other communication equipment that everyone would have access to, and a massive majority of the population would use on a daily basis.

    I agree our roads are in poor condition, but why scrap the only policy that actually has a chance of taking cars off the roads?!? It’s debatable the effect it would have, but surely promoting decentralization and working from home would have a positive effect on road congestion.

    • absolutely. im a bit older and ive always been pissed off that theres the fuel tax and the roads subsidy in fed and state taxes that pretty much never gets ploughed back into roads. there wouldnt NEED to be money sunk into a brissy road loop (if that even was 50bn, Abbott figures) if the tax reciepts had actually spent on the items the tax was purposed for in the first place. let alone all the other road items he might dredge up as examples the NBN ‘could pay for’. and both sides of politics have been guilty of this BTW, Howard and Rudd/Gillard. but Howard had 11 years to his name, much of it sitting on his hands in this respect. pardon me if i dont believe Tony will be any different.

  14. I just remembered something; a few months ago Abbott wanted to scrap the NBN to pay for the Queensland flood disaster now he wants to scrap the NBN to pay for roads. So much for that idea lol.

  15. The libs say do this do that with the money??? WTF did they do when they where in?

    Made a surplus but at the cost of everything falling apart…… It seams when there in the spend fk all cash to get there surplus to make them “look good” but let everythign fall apart then labour gets in and spends that money on the nation but go into debt which to some fools makes them look bad?

    Seems that liberals screw Aus but most of the ppl here are too stupid to see that there screwing us over… It realy does nothing for us to be in surplus with the country falling apart fkn spend the money…. We are not US there complete capatalist we are spose to be better for the ppl now and in the future screw looking after buisness all the time

    • I think it needs to be a balance; I like the cyclical Labor ‘spend big’ Coalition ‘rein things in’ dichotomy; it ensures over the long period that enough will get done

      • It’s the natural political cycle that’s been in operation for 110 years…

        Further, a budget surplus is where a government collects a certain amount in revenues – (ie: tax dollars) – and spends less than that total, and keeps the rest.

        A budget deficit is where a government collects a certain amount in revenues and spends more than that total.

        If you’ve had a sequence of budget surpluses – (which we have) – a sequence of budget deficits may only be spending the reserves stored up during the surpluses.

  16. Mr Abbott was part of a governemnt that was in power for over a decade, at one point controlling both houses of parliament.

    Why didn’t they build the roads so sorely needed then?

  17. “That $50 billion could fully fund the construction of the Brisbane rail loop, for instance, the duplication of the Pacific Highway, the Melbourne to Brisbane inland rail link, the extension of the M4 to Strathfield, and 20 major new teaching hospitals as well as the $6 billion that the Coalition has proposed to spend on better broadband,”

    And exactly how does Tony propose to REPAY that $50 billion given that none of these things will return a single dollar in income to the federal government?
    Remembering of course also that only $26 billion of that is governemnt funds and the other half will be paid for out of the income stream generated by the NBN.

    So, in a nutshell Tony is proposing $26 billion of unfunded infrastructure spend plus an additional $24 billion of unfunded borrowings for additional infrastructure spend that he has no idea how he will repay?

    Seems Tony’s “magic pudding” just keeps getting bigger.

    • The implication would be that, instead of allowing you to INVEST your $billion on the NBN and get a return from it, he will TAX the $billion to spend it on hospitals and road and you’ll never any of your money back.

      Of course, as small-govt low-tax advocate, he’s not really going to tax you or build those things.

      It’s all just hot air.

  18. alain:
    “‘Before roads there were no roads’ of course refers to the ridiculous comparison repeated over and over by the pro NBN parrots of the NBN to road building.

    Before NBN FTTH there was fixed line internet adequately serving the major percentage of the population with ADSL, ADSL2+ and HFC.”

    Before roads their were dirt tracks and before them trails and they adequately served the major percentage of the population also.

    The point is, unlike Tony Abbott, the world has not remained in the early 19th century and what was adequate technology in the 19th century, dirt roads and copper cable pairs will NOT adequately serve the major percentage of the population in the 21st century.

    • “Before roads their were dirt tracks and before them trails and they adequately served the major percentage of the population also.”

      Dirt roads eh? So dirt tracks are like copper and fibre is like a nice asphalt road? That analogy is just brilliant! I like it :-)

  19. deteego:
    “When the coalition was in power, all the states were Labor, and Howard gave them the GST which was the biggest boost to funding that they got to deal with growth”

    Great comment except that it’s basic premis is completely and utterly untrue.

    Howard “gave” them the GST but the money raised by the GST was in fact well short of the money the states previously received under the general grants scheme and had to be topped up througout his time in governement.
    So, in fact during the Howard years, the states did not receive even one cent in additional funding beyond what they would have received anyway.
    The FEDERAL governemnt on the other hand had increased it’s take of the tax by by 2% by introducing the GST but it only had to make up the difference between the GST revenue and the general grants formula out of consolidated revenue.

  20. “That $50 billion could fully fund the construction of the Brisbane rail loop, for instance, the duplication of the Pacific Highway, the Melbourne to Brisbane inland rail link, the extension of the M4 to Strathfield, and 20 major new teaching hospitals as well as the $6 billion that the Coalition has proposed to spend on better broadband,”

    Hmmm, maybe Tony should have READ the budget rather than using his budget reply speech to plea for a stab at power through an early election.
    Funding for Infrastructure Australia, which is chaired by transport guru Rod Eddington, will increase by almost 40 percent to $36 million over four years.
    That already is represents a $10 billion increase in spending on roads.

    Rather than ignoring infrasructure spending for roads, schools and hospitals as Tony Abbott’s government did for a decade, this government is building an NBN AND building roads, schools and hospitals.

  21. i love how the government is pushing how good its ideas are to encourage private sector development in the infrastructure sector but then at the same time is buying assests from a private company to be able to build a state owned asset. kinda seems contradictory? (before retards post comment about state owned im referring to context of state owned assest, as in the state of australia. Country owned asset is not a term property of the state also means countries so stfu).

    • “i love how the government is pushing how good its ideas are to encourage private sector development in the infrastructure sector”

      What? You must be mistaken, if you are talking about the NBN it is the opposition (you know Mr Abbott and his zoo crew chums) that wants to leave it to the private sector not the government.

      “at the same time is buying assests from a private company to be able to build a state owned asset. kinda seems contradictory? ”

      So you’d rather the government just roll over the top of the existing infrastructure, duplicate it and waste monies rather than use what is already there?

      “(before retards post comment about state owned im referring to context of state owned assest, as in the state of australia. Country owned asset is not a term property of the state also means countries so stfu).”

      Before you call people retards perhaps you should learn how to spell and structure sentences properly.

      • *So you’d rather the government just roll over the top of the existing infrastructure, duplicate it and waste monies rather than use what is already there?*

        that’s EXACTLY what the retarded Labor pollies are doing!

        • “that’s EXACTLY what the retarded Labor pollies are doing!”

          Really? NBNco will be building new ducts rather than use the ones they are paying Telstra for? This certainly is a new development, please provide a source for your claim.

          • *Really? NBNco will be building new ducts rather than use the ones they are paying Telstra for? This certainly is a new development, please provide a source for your claim.*

            Really? 1 + 1 = 3 ? This certainly is a new development, please provide a source for your claim.

            c? anyone can play your stupid game of putting words into other ppl’s mouths and then pretending to rebutt it.

            so Whirlpool-ish.

          • “please provide a source for your claim.”

            You made the claim not me.

            “c? anyone can play your stupid game of putting words into other ppl’s mouths and then pretending to rebutt it.”

            That’s exactly what you did. You know perfectly well I was referring to ducts in my post… so do you want to provide a source for your claim or clarify what “Labor pollies are doing!” What are they doing tosh?

            “so Whirlpool-ish.”

            Sure is and you’d know http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/user/356121 You post there? LOL Why am I not surprised. This is a low grade riff-raff forum.

          • *You know perfectly well I was referring to ducts in my post…*

            no, i didn’t – i guess you can never overestimate other people’s stupidity. my bad – apologies.

            *so do you want to provide a source for your claim or clarify what “Labor pollies are doing!” What are they doing tosh?

            indiscriminately ripping out copper and laying fibre, and shutting down HFC

            = “rolling on top of existing infrastructure”

            = “unnecessary infrastructure duplication”

            = “wasting money”

            selectively building new exchanges, nodes and upgrading backhaul, etc

            = “use what is already there”

            *Sure is and you’d know http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/user/356121 You post there? LOL Why am I not surprised.*

            mate, WP NBN forum is just a propaganda mouthpiece for NBN Co. everybody knows that. they have as much tolerance for criticism of government policy as the Chinese Communist Party does.

            pretty sad, really… considering that the internet is universally celebrated as the “new” means for promoting freedom of expression, free-flow exchange of ideas, etc. the more things change, the more they stay the same.

            *This is a low grade riff-raff forum.*

            really? because the Publisher (who happens to be staunchly “pro-NBN”) is enlightened enough to facilitate and allow healthy, intelligent debate (as opposed to WP’s unspoken policy of censoring discussion)?

            as for “low grade, riff-raff” comments…. how about “superannuation is a tax”? roflmfao!

          • “no, i didn’t – i guess you can never overestimate other people’s stupidity. my bad – apologies.”

            Apology accepted.

            “indiscriminately ripping out copper and laying fibre, and shutting down HFC blah blah blah”

            Boo hoo? Oh noes the poor rotted out copper! What ever will we do without the slow speeds!?!?

            “mate, WP NBN forum is just a propaganda mouthpiece for NBN Co. everybody knows that.”

            yes of course it is…

            “pretty sad, really… considering that the internet is universally celebrated as the “new” means for promoting freedom of expression, free-flow exchange of ideas, etc. the more things change, the more they stay the same.”

            yeah I’m not sure who you are trying to convince I agree with this assessment and thus I don’t post there if you are stupid enough to post there then you really shouldn’t be complaining you are part of the problem and a hypocrite.

            “really? because the Publisher (who happens to be staunchly “pro-NBN”) is enlightened enough to facilitate and allow healthy, intelligent debate (as opposed to WP’s unspoken policy of censoring discussion)?”

            Dude I don’t care if you or anyone else is pro or anti NBN, if you post on Whirlpoop then you wont get any sympathy from me. btw I’ve discussed this many times on ZDNet and iTnews so my policy regarding this forum is on record and well established.

            “as for “low grade, riff-raff” comments…. how about “superannuation is a tax”? roflmfao!”

            What are you talking about? Do you expect me to magically know what discussions you have had there? newsflash: I don’t and I don’t care.

          • HC… I found this comment coming from your mate [sic] … one who outwardly opposes the NBN and in essence, further internet progress (especially for Australia and Australians) disgustingly, hypocritical!…

            “pretty sad, really… considering that the internet is universally celebrated as the “new” means for promoting freedom of expression, free-flow exchange of ideas, etc… (cont)

            Don’t you…?

          • Well you really would have to take into consideration their idea of “new” and “free-flow” is… to your average anti-NBN crusader new is dial-up and free-flow of ideas is what ever is printed in The Australian :-)

          • @alain…

            Each and every one of your repetitively ridiculous comments can be answered simply with 3 letters…

            No, not WTF, SFA or FOS (although acceptable answers)… F, U, D…!

          • yea, copper is so worthless.. that’s why NBN Co. is paying Telstra BILLIONS of dollars to shutdown the “old network” and not compete with them. and just imagine how much more NBN Co. would have to cough up if the ACCC hadn’t artificially-depressed returns on the copper network via regulatory fiat (thereby depriving Telstra any economic incentive to make further investments in the network).

            no, it’s so much easier to engage in mindless Telstra bashing and egging on the return of a government monopoly with a ridiculous, unsustainable cost structure, that is destined to be one of the biggest (govt) corporate bankruptcies in history (if fibre gets rolled out to every one-horse town in our vast country).

            since you guys have so much trouble wrapping your little heads around simple, elementary concepts such as “value” and “cost”, why don’t you make yourselves useful and go “planking” instead (of filling up NBN discussion threads with mindless bullshit).

          • Speaking of filling up threads with mindless B$… here’s to$h…

            Umm the payment to Telstra isn’t for copper… it’s for customer migration, pits, ducts etc, get with it. The copper is simply the superseded medium (again… just like dirt roads) which is being upgraded. How hard is it to understand, seriously?

            It really isn’t hard to understand “IF” one wants to understand.

            But with each comment (inadvertent admission) my friend [sic] it becomes clearer, that as the the daily double… both subservient Lib and Telstra minion… you simply aren’t allowed or wanting to understand (think fingers in ears yelling no, no, no)…

            Planking eh? I think you are doing enough “planking [sic]”… for everybody… so enjoy “your self”!

          • You know what tosh if it was up to me I would have handled Telstra thing a bit differently to what NBNco is doing, it would have saved us a few billion the only “problem” with my plan would be that it would have completely destroyed Telstra and then you would have had a bunch of Telstra shareholders whinging about it all day long. Thankfully for you (assuming you have Telstra shares) NBNco is a little more diplomatic compared to me.

          • *I would have handled Telstra thing a bit differently to what NBNco is doing, it would have saved us a few billion the only “problem” with my plan would be that it would have completely destroyed Telstra*

            sorry mate, there’s Constitutional protections against government cumpulsory acquisition of Telstra’s fixed assets without payment of compensation or restitution. dream on.

          • There is a hell of a lot of dreaming in pro-NBN argument, they live in a fog of fantasy of their own making.

      • i was referring to infrastructure in general, look it up, as a part of the budget there were measures to encourage private sector development in infrastructure. Im just saying alot more could be done to encourage private sector development in telecommunications.

        Ps why are you so attacking, i really couldnt care about making spelling errors or sentance structure on a stupid forum like this and the fact that you care so much about it is quite sad.

        • People get aggressive brisguy, because other people selfishly come here and say, well, I have 20Mbps and I’m happy… so we YOU need an NBN. Obviously not caring at all, about anyone else (I’m also on 20Mbps, but I care about others).

          FYI – the first N in NBN = National, like, for everybody, not just you!

          • The fact that the ‘everyone else’ don’t actually need it is irrelevant eh RS? -like Brunswick for example that has plenty of high speed BB alternatives.

            ‘Everyone else’ will only need it when the alternatives are switched off after Conroy pays Telstra and Optus to do so.

            That’s NBN FTTH survival on its technical merits.

          • If you look at the median broadband speeds in Australia it’s pretty obvious the FTTH network is necessary. Everyone will have access to the same speeds, just like everyone had access to phone lines.

          • What are the median speeds of BB in Australia, and why do all residences in Australia NEED FTTH speeds?

          • Oh look, what a coincidence! We were just talking about selfish people who say I’m ok, **** you, we don’t need an NBN…alain

            Now what was that, about before roads there were no roads… Priceless…!

        • Also brisguy… to again answer your “PS. why are you so attacking” (which you asked another)…

          Perhaps you should ask yourself the same thing…

          I note in your previous comments you referred to retards and twice said STFU… so WTF do you expect in return?

  22. “I guess you can never overestimate other people’s stupidity…” says tosh…

    No tosh you can’t… and hypocritically, YOU are the obvious reason why…!

  23. toshp300:
    “yea, copper is so worthless.. that’s why NBN Co. is paying Telstra BILLIONS of dollars to shutdown the “old network” and not compete with them.”

    Actually they are paying BILLIONS of dollars for the lease of the cable conduits and exchange buildings to house the interconnect points in order to save tens of billions of dollars to plow in their own cables and erect their own buildings.

    • *Actually they are paying BILLIONS of dollars for the lease of the cable conduits and exchange buildings to house the interconnect points in order to save tens of billions of dollars to plow in their own cables and erect their own buildings.*

      read the NBN Co. business case. conduit/duct savings only amount to ~$2bln odd. the vast majority of the Telstra payments relate to compensating Telstra for loss of future revenue from shutting down the copper network (spun as “customer migration incentives” by NBN Co.).

      • also nbn co is basically buying telstras customers from the copper so they can put them on the fibre so they can scrape some money in. This forces everyone who wants wired internet to sign up to an nbn co product.

        I know people will jump at me for saying this but im quite happy with 20mbps what percentage of the population will use any higher than this. 15 % take up rates seem prety low.

        • You are spot on there brisguy, the NBN without the Telstra and Optus customer base on board is dressed up like a large expensive Christmas turkey with no one at the table.

          The NBN needs the Telstra and Optus fixed line networks to be compulsorily shut down so that their customers who make up the overwhelming majority of the retail BB base in Australia have no option but to use FTTH if they want fixed line communications.

          If the NBN had to compete alongside ADSL and HFC it would lose out bad as most punters are happy with what they have, the tech geeks in blogs like this whine about their upload speeds for example, but as a percentage of the population they would not even register on a postage stamp, but of course they don’t mind the sucker taxpayer paying for their upload speed increase though.

          There is always the constant brag about the wonderful ‘technical merits’ of FTTH, it’s funny how all alternative fixed line infrastructure has to be shut down so that users are forced to appreciate its ‘technical merits’.

          That’s how consumer choice works in a ‘cough-cough’ open market Conroy style.

  24. Abbott how many roads can you seriously expect to build for $36Bn

    what’s your cost benefit analysis and business case?

    with 8 states and major highway roads projects costing $3bn each (hume, pacific and eastlink) that equates to 1 major road per state. plus

    How can that benefit regional Australia?
    How can that raise any return on capital? (Will they be tolled?)
    What is the ongoing expense of these assets?
    Will they provide employment opportunities beyond their construction?
    How will they bolster our national productivity and increase skills and products exports?

    • News Flash for Goresh:

      It’s not 2009 and Howard is no longer a MP and Leader of the Coalition.

  25. News flash for Alain

    It’s 2011 and Tony Abbott, ex-Howard era minister and protege wants to take us back there.

  26. brisguy:
    “This forces everyone who wants wired internet to sign up to an nbn co product. ”

    As against the current situation where everyone who wants wired must sign up with Telstra.

    • “As against the current situation where everyone who wants wired must sign up with Telstra.”

      Incorrect unless the Optus HFC , TransACT cable and the Greenfield estates that have non Telstra FTTH from the likes of Opticomm and others have all suddenly disappeared.

  27. “The Government will pay $9 billion to access Telstra infrastructure – including pits and ducts – to avoid duplication.
    A further $2 billion will go towards dealing with structural separation issues.”

      • *Decommissioning payments payable to Telstra at the time of disconnection of subscribers as an incentive for the take up to subscribers to NBN infrastructure. Decommissioning payments on occur under the Deal scenario.*

        look at this RUBBISH SPIN by NBN Co. and resultant mangled grammar:

        “incentive for the take up to subscribers”

        WTF does that mean? those Telstra payments are clearly not “incentives TO SUBSCRIBERS” (i.e. Telstra is not passing on the billions of dollars in “customer migration incentives” to customers in the form of discounted access to the NBN fibre platform.)

        rather, the decommissioning payments are clearly “bribes TO TELSTRA” to induce them to collude in NBN Co.’s scandalous attempt to shutdown all competing networks and corner the entire fixed-line market and impose extortionary access charges on consumers.

        after all, major ISPs have already made it clear that internet plan prices will rise as high as 50% under the new fibre regime.

        keep on spinning…

      • $13B’s what Renai said in the article… and he may be privy to updated info…

        But the two parties involved both officially announced approximately (please add typically stupid comment …..now) $11B.

  28. Mr Abbott, Ted Stevens has sent you a message…

    “ Ten movies streaming across that, that Internet, and what happens to your own personal Internet? I just the other day got… an Internet was sent by my staff at 10 o’clock in the morning on Friday. I got it yesterday [Tuesday]. Why? Because it got tangled up with all these things going on the Internet commercially.

    […] They want to deliver vast amounts of information over the Internet. And again, the Internet is not something that you just dump something on. It’s not a big truck. It’s a series of tubes. And if you don’t understand, those tubes can be filled and if they are filled, when you put your message in, it gets in line and it’s going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of material, enormous amounts of material.”

    Now, Mr abbott, the key point here is that the internet is NOT a big truck, building roads wont improve data delivery.

  29. alain:
    “Incorrect unless the Optus HFC , TransACT cable and the Greenfield estates that have non Telstra FTTH from the likes of Opticomm and others have all suddenly disappeared.”

    To-date the only company at an advanced stage in talks with NBNco to migrate their customer base is Telstra.
    Their is NO requirement for any of these companies you mention to migrate to the NBN network. They WILL be required to offer access on the same terms as NBNco however which is likely to mean that they will choose to migrate rather than maintain their own networks with the asociated overheads.
    Optus is currently negotiating with NBNco but has not come to a decision yet whether they will migrate or not.

    http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/381169/reassurances_gained_optus_nbn_talks_continue/

    • Good point Goresh…we keep hearing about no network competition!

      But as you just demonstrated, these companies which have these networks, unlike Telstra (who can see the benefits of offloading the copper before a major fix is required and receive a wad of cash for migration, to boot) may decide, since “government owned is so bad” and “free market private enterprise is so great” (according to the NBN detractors) that they don’t want to be part of the NBN.

      Running with your comment too, I’m guessing conversely that say Optus for example, could theoretically keep their HFC network going if they wanted and also be an NBN RSP in other areas?

      Granted and as you said, it is probably not practical for them to do so… but it is an option! It’s up to private enterprise to deliver if they want to…!

      Anyway, speaking of NBN competition (at network level) the claim I like best is from the nay sayers who keep having an each way bet, by stating wireless will be be so competitive in the near future that it will put the NBN out of business! But in the very next breath, they claim the NBN to be a big bad monopoly with no competitors?

      Anyway thanks for the insightful comment, I thoroughly enjoy reading your posts!

  30. toshP300:
    “after all, major ISPs have already made it clear that internet plan prices will rise as high as 50% under the new fibre regime.”

    Which major ISP’s?
    Certainly not Telstra, Optus, IINet, iPrimus, Internode etc.
    Which MAJOR ISP’s are you talking about?

  31. alain:
    “That’s a one off, I am sure if asked for a discount on 20,000 boxes and 20,000 installations it would be a hell of lot lower.”

    As Conroy said to Mr Harvey, if he wants to tender at that price to the government to do the job then he is more than welcome to do so.
    The government would be more than happy to poche difference between the budgeted price and the lowest tender.
    No contracts have been signed and the tender process is open.As a taxpayer I look forward to Mr Harvey’s putting his money where his mouth is and submitting a tender.

    • Yes indeed and alain likes to highlight the $199 installation fee in the URL he Googled 24/7 to find, but ignores the limited areas of availability for this installation, also outlined within his own URL…!

      And when I asked him (ok that’s how much it will be in Sydney, Melbourne etc, but) how much in Broome, etc? I’m accused of moving the goalposts…que?

      Obviously anyone with any common sense (who actually wants the facts) would analyse all factors, including the median price for STB installed, throughout Australia (urban and rural)… and of course as he said when doing bulk supply and/or installs too…

  32. toshP300,
    The only ISP I have heard of in that reference is Internode.
    I would note that the cheapest naked dsl plan on their site is currently $59/month.
    Their cheapest NBN plan is currently $29.95/month. Add to that an additional $24/month NBN access charge and you get $54/month.
    Of course, the data quota is much lower.

    • *The only ISP I have heard of in that reference is Internode.*

      that’s an ISP that falls under your “major ISP” classification.

      *Their cheapest NBN plan is currently $29.95/month.*

      those are NBN trial site prices and do not reflect full pricing under the new fibre regime.

  33. Yes but you said major ISP’s (plural)… yet there was only one.

    Were you fudging and fluffing…?

    No wonder you and that forked tongue, have such a “low aura”…!

  34. toshP300:
    “those are NBN trial site prices and do not reflect full pricing under the new fibre regime”

    Which is why I added the NBNco wholesale price to that to get $54/month.

  35. toshP300:
    “so you know better than Internode what prices they’re going to charge?”
    No, I do know however what price they are CURRENTLY charging and I know what price NBNco is intending to charge them.
    It is reasonable to assume that Internode’s current price including NBNco access fees of $0 should go up by the amount NBNco has said they will charge them for this class of service.
    In both cases the final figure I used was derived from teh same formula Internode charges plus NBNco charges.

    • *It is reasonable to assume that Internode’s current price including NBNco access fees of $0 should go up by the amount NBNco has said they will charge them for this class of service.*

      but you’ve just added on AVC charges. what about CVC, NNI, extra backhaul to 121 POIs, etc?

      *In both cases the final figure I used was derived from teh same formula Internode charges plus NBNco charges.*

      what formula? you’ve just read off a table of trial site access charges which bear no resemblance to final prices because at that point NBNco hadn’t even released their corporate plan! Internode have said naked adsl equivalent prices will go up $20 – why are you 2nd guessing them?

      • To do what you guys, I’ll borrow and put your FUD hat on for a minute…

        Not saying Internode would do this (they seem most reputable)… but…

        Wouldn’t be like private enterprise to take advantage of a situation and inflate prices (to help that precious bottom line) and blame someone else for them doing so, now… would it?

  36. It should also be noted that Internode’s numbers are based on extreme download volume in the 100’s of gigabyte range, which would be very very few users and that the volume charges NBNco has quoted are still being negotiated, whic is why Internode is making such a big deal about it, in order to bring the public behind their side of the argument as much as possible.
    Since the total to be raised from volume charges will remain the same, the argument comes down to whether we should shift the balance of the cost burden towards the majority of low volume users as Internode’s proposal does or towards the the minority of users shifting extreme amounts of data.

    Should mum and dad users subsidise the fileswappers or should teh fileswappers subsidise the mums and dads?

    • *the volume charges NBNco has quoted are still being negotiated*

      are they? if you followed the discussion between NBNco spokesman vs SH and BS in WP, it seemed like they weren’t budging at all. their only meaningful response was to subsequently release an “online wholesale pricing calculator” which didn’t suggest any change in prices.

      however, you’re right to the extent that the proposed prices have yet to be approved by the ACCC.

      *Since the total to be raised from volume charges will remain the same*

      no, the total to be raised from port fees and data charges will have to be the same.

      *the argument comes down to whether we should shift the balance of the cost burden towards the majority of low volume users as Internode’s proposal does or towards the the minority of users shifting extreme amounts of data.*

      that’s not what the proposal does. by shifting the variable data charges into the fixed port fees component across all speed tiers, you’re essentially reducing NBNco’s flexibility in terms of offering different contention ratios and throughput allowances to wholesale customers in the higher speed tiers.

  37. toshP300:
    “but you’ve just added on AVC charges. what about CVC, NNI, extra backhaul to 121 POIs, etc?”

    All of these were in fact incuded in the figure I provided as quoted by NBNco as typical of this level of service, it was NOT just the AVC.

    • to quote you:

      “Their cheapest NBN plan is currently $29.95/month. Add to that an additional $24/month NBN access charge and you get $54/month.”

      the $24 you added is just AVC. where’s the CVC, NNI, backhaul, etc?

      • I like the assumption that both of you seem to be making here:

        That the prices here are reflectively only expenses and profit margins that, in this case, Internode want to make, and that the wholesale cost of the NBN should be added in full to the pricing.

        I’m pretty sure you’ll find this isn’t the case. You stand to lose a lot of customers if you raise your prices suddenly the amounts you guys are talking about. Better to wear a greater profit margin now.

  38. Build some roads. Oh my G*d!! They are all pollies after all. They don’t lead they follow. they don’t really do anything unless a focus group tells them it’s Ok. Ever heard of PEAK OIL!!! We won’t need roads or really anything that works with oil. As for electrcity. How do you mine coal without oil? With a solar powered 50 ton CAT truck? LOL What we do need is leadership. Unfortunately we all have a one way ticket to hell with both sides of poltics. I generally can’t stand the Greens. But they are the only party trying to address the Peak Oil issue. They got my vote because Peak Oil is the only issue.

    Oh and yeah. Forget about the NBN, your car in fact pretty much everything you understand about modern society and lifestyle. It will all be gone soon. It’s so funny reading this stuff. How insignificant all these issues will be soon. NBN today and tomorrow it will be, should I eat my neighbours dog!

Comments are closed.