news Communications Minister Conroy this morning heavily criticised his shadow, Malcolm Turnbull, stating that the Liberal MP’s continued criticism of the management of the National Broadband Network Company constituted “witch hunts” and “personal attacks” which needed to stop.

Turnbull yesterday morning gave a lengthy speech adding to his already heavy criticism of the NBN project as well as his personal criticism of NBN Co chief executive Mike Quigley, who Turnbull does not believe is qualified to lead the NBN effort and who he has criticised repeatedly in the past. Turnbull also heavily criticised a number of media commentators, who he accused of promulgating a pro-NBN “partisan ideology” and being “apologists” for what he said were the NBN’s failings.

“Two weeks ago I was accused of, and I quote, “slandering” Michael Quigley by expressing the opinion that, fine executive though he may be, he was not the right choice for NBN Co because he hadn’t previously managed either the deployment or day-to-day operation of a telecommunications network,” said Turnbull.

“Mr Quigley’s career was spent at a vendor of networking equipment, where he was extremely successful. The fortunes of a networking vendor depend on designing, bringing to market and supporting excellent products that meet the needs of customers, and persuading carriers to buy them. Mr Quigley has not worked for a telecommunications carrier. He hasn’t ever been responsible for a network rollout, or an operating telecommunications business. Nor as it happens have any of the current Directors of NBN Co – there, we have five former bankers, two former McKinsey consultants, two former equipment vendors, but no former telecom executives.”

“In my view,” Turnbull added, “this has contributed to NBN Co setting for itself milestone after unrealistic milestone that it has abjectly failed to achieve. It has contributed to NBN Co’s culture of gold-plating and excessive spending, because if capital is no constraint and those supervising the enterprise are not directly familiar with its task, the safest option is to choose the most costly option, and the easiest way to deal with mounting pressure and slipping schedules is to throw money at them.”

In a statement this morning, Conroy said Turnbull should “stop short-changing the Australian people and immediately release the Coalition’s broadband policy”. “In the first three quarters of this year Malcolm Turnbull has delivered 16 speeches, issued 34 media releases, made 1,268 tweets, and launched a survey, but he has not released a broadband policy,” Conroy said.

“In a recent 7.30 Report interview, Mr Turnbull refused to answer how much the Coalition’s broadband plans would cost. In the same interview, Mr Turnbull committed to providing downloads at 25 Mbps with only a lucky few achieving 80 Mbps. At yesterday’s Comms Day summit, Mr Turnbull again squibbed the chance of releasing a policy.”

“He instead launched another outrageous attack on the professional expertise of NBN Co, saying that he’d conduct a thorough inquiry into the management and governance of the company. The Australian people want a broadband policy from the Coalition, not personal attacks or witch hunts.”

Conroy said Turnbull’s recent launch of an online survey – which has reportedly received some 13,000 responses – into broadband around Australia was an attempt to cover up for what Conroy said was a lack of policy and the Liberal MP’s “inability to answer simple questions about the Coalition’s plans”.

“Mr Turnbull shouldn’t need a survey to know that no one in Australia can get a download speed of 100 Mbps using copper,” said Conroy. “Mr Turnbull also shouldn’t need a survey to know that no one in Australia would get a download speed of 100 Mbps using Telstra’s ageing copper network under his FTTN plan.”

“The contrast between the Gillard Government’s National Broadband Network and Mr Turnbull’s inadequate approach could not be clearer. Under Labor, 93% of all Australian premises can receive broadband services of 1 Gbps using NBN Co’s fibre to the home. Only Labor’s NBN will deliver Australians with the broadband that serves their needs into the future.”

opinion/analysis
I think it’s a little disingenuous of Conroy to say that Turnbull hasn’t released the Coalition’s broadband plan. Turnbull has detailed the Coalition’s plan in pretty substantial detail. While we don’t know the actual costs just yet, we do know that Turnbull would immediately call in the Productivity Commission to conduct a cost/benefit analysis into the situation, and would likely focus on moulding NBN Co’s fibre deployment into a fibre to the node-style deployment, likely retaining some of the satellite and wireless components of the deployment as well. In addition, fibre to the node-style rollouts are pretty well understood at this point globally, and also in Australia, where, as Turnbull pointed out yesterday, half a dozen plans have been advanced along these lines over the past half-decade or so.

Of course, Conroy is correct that Turnbull has not yet released a formal policy document regarding the Coalition’s rival NBN plan, and there are also mutterings out there that Turnbull’s quasi-policy statements in this portfolio may not have the full approval of the Shadow Cabinet under Opposition Leader Tony Abbott.

In a broader sense, however, some of these issues are becoming overshadowed by Turnbull’s incessant and, on the basis of the evidence offered, groundless, attacks on NBN Co’s management. Under very difficult (some would say impossible) circumstances, with a constantly shifting political and regulatory landscape, there is a great deal of evidence that Quigley and his team at NBN Co are doing a very competent job in enacting Labor’s NBN vision. Despite this, however, Turnbull continues to attack Quigley personally, and has done so a number of times over the past several years.

There is a long convention in western democracies such as Australia’s that the Opposition of the day largely concentrate their criticism of the Government of the day on the political figures who lead the Government and abstaining from direct criticism of the public servants who enact their political masters’ will. The reasoning behind this convention is sound: After all, most Oppositions eventually win Government and need to work with many of those same public servants. Certainly, if Turnbuill ever became Communications Minister, he would need to work directly with the management of NBN Co.

Turnbull’s abandonment of this convention and his ongoing direct attacks on Quigley breaches are disturbing in this sense. They indicate a willingness of the Liberal MP to abandon this principle and take the fight to players who should not be directly involved in the political debates which Turnbull and Conroy have as their daily bread and butter. The management of NBN Co has no way to directly respond to Turnbull’s criticism; Conroy is really the only one who can do that.

I agree with Conroy that Turnbull’s attacks on NBN Co’s management have become something of a “witch hunt”. I, for one, would like to see debate in this area focused squarely on matters of policy and the delivery of policy, leaving personal attacks out of the arena – especially when they are directed at public servants who cannot fight back. To attack such figures personally is unseemly.

Image credit: Kim Davies, Creative Commons

Tweet

1. GongGav
   Posted 10/10/2012 at 12:06 pm | Permalink | Reply

   If Mr Quigley HAD “managed either the deployment or day-to-day operation of a telecommunications network” as per MT’s selection criteria, he’d find something else to state was a key requirement. Truth is, there simply isnt anybody available that has everything required, so for me, having someone like Mike Quigley in charge, who has credentials with a very high volume IT company, is better than pretty much every other option.

   Its donut politics at work, nothing else. The “complaints” about Quigley serve no other purpose than to distract from the real issues that MT never addresses.

   • Renai LeMay
     Posted 10/10/2012 at 12:11 pm | Permalink | Reply

     ‘Donut politics’ is a good name for this. Along with the “atomic banana”, it’s one of the better terms I’ve heard applied to the Coalition’s NBN approach right now ;)

     • Tinman_au
       Posted 11/10/2012 at 12:08 pm | Permalink | Reply

       Another term you can add is that is “Aggressive Attack” (AA). It seems to be the hallmark of this generation of Liberals, and it’s applied to pretty well everything/anything to do with the ALP (like the deregulation of the wheat industry….something that the Liberals actually want, just not under Labors watch).

       AA is whats really putting me off the Libs at the moment, I don’t get the vibe from them that they are “builders” and they don’t offer anything but sketchy plans that Tony probably wont stick with unless they are written in blood or something.

       “Policy” in Australia is a very sad state of affairs currently, as there is only one party that actually seems to be putting anything serious/actual forward :(

       As I said yesterday, I’d love to see Malcolms actual plan, including how he will deal with the higher speeds we’ll require in a few (10?) years time. I’d also like to see how anything he’ll involve Telstra in be cheaper (for the end user), my experience with Telstra (over many, many years and CEO’s) is premium prices for average/mediocre services (to the end user).

       Note to MT if you read: Give me an actual reason to vote for you Malcolm and I’ll give it serious consideration, but currently Labor have the better (speeds and access) and cheaper (for the country and the end user) solution.

2. Paul Thompson
   Posted 10/10/2012 at 12:08 pm | Permalink | Reply

   Hi Renai,

   you seem to have genuine respect for Quigley. After reading up a bit about him, I have to say that I do too – giving his first years salary to charity and refusing a bonus? That is pretty good stuff.

   Have you thought about nominating him for Australian of the year? Seriously, the example he has set for business leaders in giving back to the community is… exemplary. And after he has been subject to Malcolm’s misdirected harassment and abuse, with no recourse, it might be nice to have some kind of recognition.

   • Renai LeMay
     Posted 10/10/2012 at 12:10 pm | Permalink | Reply

     I don’t think he has quite earned Australian of the Year yet, but I would argue he would be a contender in 3-5 years, if the NBN rollout goes well.

     • Tinman_au
       Posted 11/10/2012 at 12:10 pm | Permalink | Reply

       +1

       If there were more like him in Wall St would we have had a GFC? :)

3. Hubert Cumberdale
   Posted 10/10/2012 at 12:51 pm | Permalink | Reply

   It is to be expected that Turnbull will criticise everything and anything NBNco do or say without any rhyme or reason, consider his leader is Tony Abbott, however the criticisms of Quigley is a completely different matter. It’s becoming increasingly clear that Turnbull (and his apologists) are scared of the NBN succeeding. They know Quigley can make it a success thus the criticism are inevitable… The article yesterday said Turnbull was “fearless” that is bullshit. He fears Quigley.

   • Master T
     Posted 10/10/2012 at 2:16 pm | Permalink | Reply

     According to Turnbull’s own Wiki and Blog, hes had no formal experience in IT at all.

     Yet he was on the board of directors at OZEmail. Just because he has some ‘experience’ doesnt mean that he is automatically the dictator of who’s qualified or not.

     If anything, I would’ve headed to a company like Cisco for a director hunt – or even some smaller start-ups here.

     Hell – even the great Simon Hackett might’ve been a good choice – He actually has some IT qualifications.

     But … such is life.

   • NBNAlex
     Posted 10/10/2012 at 3:26 pm | Permalink | Reply

     It’s interesting Hubert.

     As we have noted over at ZD, the incessant anti-NBN try hards, are the first to cry personal attack/ad hominem, when one simply points out their ridiculous logic regarding the NBN.

     But where are they now, to point the personal attack/ad hominem finger at Malcolm?

     • Hubert Cumberdale
       Posted 10/10/2012 at 4:20 pm | Permalink | Reply

       I wouldn’t call what malcom said a personal attack or anything that has been said by you on Zdnet either. unfortunately It’s all too easy to cry personal attack/troll etc when you know you are loosing a debate in the online world. The anti-NBN zealots (hint: not a personal attack) take this to a new level. Perhaps they simply are not self aware enough to even notice they are being hypocritical, perhaps it is a symptom of a larger “conservative” problem in the “logic” centres of their brains: http://delimiter.com.au/2012/10/04/nbn-could-cost-100bn-claims-hockey/#comment-501046

       :-)

4. NPSF3000
   Posted 10/10/2012 at 7:07 pm | Permalink | Reply

   “I think it’s a little disingenuous of Conroy to say that Turnbull hasn’t released the Coalition’s broadband plan. Turnbull has detailed the Coalition’s plan in pretty substantial detail. ”

   Since when?

   He hasn’t gone to any sort of detail and the few broad objectives he has set appear to be contradictory [faster, cheaper, better, PC study, FTTN].

   The only way that Turnbull could possible be accused of releasing the plan ‘in detail’ is if the plan is nothing more than what has been released – i.e. no real plan.

   • MikeK
     Posted 10/10/2012 at 7:36 pm | Permalink | Reply

     ( Turnbull has detailed the Coalition’s plan in pretty substantial detail )

     I was thinking the same thing as NPSF3000, has Turnball released a paper detailing his plan Renai ? I’d be interested in reading it. I know he has said a lot of things on the trot but you cant take that seriously until I see a detailed paper from the Coalition, this is very seriously money we are talking about our money.

     • MikeK
       Posted 10/10/2012 at 7:52 pm | Permalink | Reply

       And I thought Turnball was going to do a CBA to determine what was the best plan to follow, has he already got a plan with out the CBA. And if the CBA says that the current ( Labour ) plan is the right plan, then his plan is pointless so why take him seriously in the first place.

     • Renai LeMay
       Posted 10/10/2012 at 8:34 pm | Permalink | Reply

       Turnbull has not released a paper.

   • Renai LeMay
     Posted 10/10/2012 at 8:34 pm | Permalink | Reply

     He has detailed the Coalition’s approach quite substantially — and certainly a thousand times more so than the scant detail (about one paragraph) which Labor took to the 2007 election.

     • NPSF3000
       Posted 10/10/2012 at 9:01 pm | Permalink | Reply

       Okay, what is the outlined approach? Try not to say anything that would contradict things he’s said in the last 3 months.

       Then, once you’ve done that… How much of it coalition position? What little Malcolm has said hasn’t exactly been supported by the coalition – senior figures want even less!

     • Zok
       Posted 10/10/2012 at 9:55 pm | Permalink | Reply

       Coalition’s “greatly detailed” approach examples: “fast internet is only good for downloading porn”, “fibre is obsolete, wireless is the future”, “no-one can envisage any need for more than 12Mbps”, “we should look at NZ” (when they were implementing FTTN; not a beep about our Kiwi mates since they decided to switch to FTTH), “FTTN with 80Mbps for most is the way to go” (at costs for which other countries manage to provide only around 20Mbps)… etc. etc.

     • MikeK
       Posted 10/10/2012 at 10:09 pm | Permalink | Reply

       Renai, the question still remains, first CBA to determine its viability, the CBA might determine that a FTTN system maybe non-viability. So until you have the results of the CBA you can not formulate a viable plan. So logic dictates that the only plan Turnball has regarding comms is a CBA.

       • Samuel
         Posted 11/10/2012 at 2:44 pm | Permalink | Reply

         Alternatively…
         >>> a/the CBA wont be done.
         or
         >>> a/the CBA will be ignored and reasons will be invented why it had to be ignored

     • PeterA
       Posted 11/10/2012 at 9:03 am | Permalink | Reply

       He has not detailed a policy. He has made detailed commentary. VERY different things, especially when said by a politician. A politician stands by his policy, or releases new policy that replaces old policy. Everything said before, between and after an actual paper (or PDF) bound policy document is susceptible to change, being labelled as “misinterpreted” or classed as “out of context”.

       What we have, is an indication of the potential shape and possible scale of liberal communications policy if things don’t change before the release of the policy in writing.

       I challenge you to remove even a single qualifying weasel-out word from that sentence. If you can, I can almost guarantee you that you will have changed the meaning to be a false statement.

     • Tinman_au
       Posted 11/10/2012 at 12:19 pm | Permalink | Reply

       Renai Said: “He has detailed the Coalition’s approach quite substantially — and certainly a thousand times more so than the scant detail (about one paragraph) which Labor took to the 2007 election.”

       I’d agree that he’s “outlined” their approach quite a lot, but “detailed”?? No way, and definitely not at a level we could compare the two plans.

       I’m not asking him to release a full blown business plan/roll-out schedule, but I’m sure the “respected engineers” that advised them the NBNCo plan will cost $100b could do a ball park “You’d need 80,000-90,000 cabinets” and take it from there.

   • Harimau
     Posted 10/10/2012 at 11:04 pm | Permalink | Reply

     Actually, when I first read those sentences, I thought Renai was being sarcastic. And then I read further and realised he wasn’t. And then I was confused. Where was the substantial detail? I’m pretty sure you can stick everything that Malcolm’s revealed about the Coalition “policy” on two powerpoint slides.

5. CMOTDibbler
   Posted 10/10/2012 at 8:33 pm | Permalink | Reply

   Will Conroy accept a cost estimate from Turnbull that is as accurate as the one Conroy provided before the ALP was elected in 2007? That would be the up to $4.7bn that became up to $43bn after the election.

   Why doesn’t Conroy ignore Turnbull and put this energy into something useful like selling the benefits of his NBN?

6. PeterA
   Posted 11/10/2012 at 9:10 am | Permalink | Reply

   
   Turnbull has detailed the Coalition’s plan in pretty substantial detail. While we don’t know the actual costs just yet, we do know that Turnbull would immediately call in the Productivity Commission to conduct a cost/benefit analysis into the situation, and would likely focus on moulding NBN Co’s fibre deployment into a fibre to the node-style deployment, likely retaining some of the satellite and wireless components of the deployment as well.

   From your statement above you have argued against your claim that he has a detailed plan.
   You said: We don’t know the cost.He will run a CBAIt will probably transition to FTTNIt will probably retain the wireless/satellite components

   Can I just point out, that in almost every one of Turnbulls speeches on the matter, he never said it will be FTTN exclusively. He said technology agnostic.

   I would like to now claim, that Turnbull hasn’t specified anything about his policy at all.. His “NBN” policy is entirely flexible. Except perhaps the running of a CBA. The only thing I think most people are satisfied will actually occur. Except I am not even certain he has released a policy document saying he will do even this! (and when he inevitably gets moved away from communications policy if the liberals win the next election his successor can comfortably say “That was the previous communications ministers policy, not Liberal Government policy”).

   • PeterA
     Posted 11/10/2012 at 9:10 am | Permalink | Reply

     ordered list not allowed :(

   • PeterA
     Posted 11/10/2012 at 9:14 am | Permalink | Reply

     I would like to add, that the Labor party policy of 2007 was more detailed than coalition policy is now.

     It had a price tag. (even if it was wrong.)

     (PS. from memory it didn’t explicitly state FTTN, but the price tag meant that FTTN was the only obvious technological method to reach the stated goals of 12 megabits for everyone at the stated government funding commitment)

     • Zok
       Posted 11/10/2012 at 11:16 am | Permalink | Reply

       Actually, the ALP policy from 2007 was quite specific on that front — FTTN was supposed to be rolled out to 98% of Australian population.

       http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/library/partypol/E2KM6/upload_binary/e2km65.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf#search=%22library/partypol/E2KM6%22

       • MikeK
         Posted 11/10/2012 at 6:39 pm | Permalink | Reply

         Renai,
         if you look at the paper that Zok kindly linked you can see that the Labour paper was released 9 months ( March 2007 ) before their party took office on the 3 Dec 2007 detailing their proposal for the NBN.
         Coalition No paper no cigar just a load of ranting and raving.

7. Drew
   Posted 11/10/2012 at 9:19 am | Permalink | Reply

   “there are also mutterings out there that Turnbull’s quasi-policy statements in this portfolio may not have the full approval of the Shadow Cabinet under Opposition Leader Tony Abbott”

   oh, do tell more…!

8. Brendan
   Posted 11/10/2012 at 10:59 am | Permalink | Reply

   Turnbull is walking the line between making statements as to what L/NP will offer as an alternative, and delivering on message, which is “destroy the NBN”.

   This means, he will continue to play the man, not the ball, confuse topics to draw the public off track and indeed attempt to call into question the entire NBN process.

   Turnbull has made announcements regarding the Coalition “plan” — which I now see is referred to as the “Coalition NBN Plan” (hint, if you’re using the other guy’s nomenclature, you’ve already lost) — however I do not believe an official policy has been put forth.

   At least, I cannot find any reference on Turnbull’s web mouthpiece. Or references to it elsewhere. Lots of talk around plans, though.

   I could plan to put a tea-cosy on my head and say “Malcolm is my Master..” but that doesn’t mean I will actually action it. If my policy was to trott about with a tea-cosy on my head, well, people might hold me to that.

   And that’s why there is no policy. Turnbull is intelligent enough to know “policy” tends to be something the voting public holds governments to. And reacts rather negatively to if they change. Or are reversed.

   I am forever amused that the general media continues to confuse plan, for policy. This of course suits Malcom, because it adds far more credence to his views, than perhaps should be. :-)

9. Zok
   Posted 11/10/2012 at 11:05 am | Permalink | Reply

   Liberal Party still showcases the “Broadband and Telecommunications Policy” from their last election campaign on their website:

   http://www.liberal.org.au/sites/default/files/ccd/Broadband%20and%20Telecommunications%20Policy.pdf

   Until this changes, anything Malcolm Turnbull says is just his own commentary, irrespective of how eloquent is sounds or how much some people would like to see it in a positive light (even when most of his speeches and points raised are contradictory of each other or so vague to be meaningless.)

10. Tailgator
    Posted 11/10/2012 at 11:10 am | Permalink | Reply

    “Turnbull has detailed the Coalition’s plan in pretty substantial detail.”

    Hi Renai. I must have missed the exposition of Turnbull’s NBN plans in some detail. Would you mind setting out those details. Point form will do.

    Cheers.

11. Marc
    Posted 11/10/2012 at 3:01 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Can’t you just go speak to the ‘Engineers’ that are in Turnbulls ear telling them that the NBN is going to cost up to $100billion to see how much a FTTN network is going to cost?

    I mean, these people obviously know more than NBNCo.

• • Topic
  • Voices
  • Posts
  • Freshness
• • 77TB a month on fibre

    Started by:  Karl in: General telecommunications

  • 1
  • 1
  • 6 hours, 1 minute ago

     Karl

  • Malcolm Turnbull, Time Traveller

    Started by:  quink in: Everything else

  • 2
  • 4
  • 1 week ago

     Karl

  • Article on 'Ultraviolet'

    Started by:  ray73864 in: Everything else

  • 2
  • 2
  • 1 week, 3 days ago

     Karl

  • Surface sells out … of its tiny amount of stock?

    Started by:  Renai LeMay in: Gadgets

  • 4
  • 4
  • 1 week, 4 days ago

     douglasrose

  • Coalition fraudband plan summary…

    Started by:  Hubert Cumberdale in: National Broadband Network

  • 4
  • 5
  • 2 weeks, 2 days ago

     JamesH1

  • NBN Is A Question Of Reliability

    Started by:  JamesH1 in: National Broadband Network

  • 1
  • 1
  • 2 weeks, 2 days ago

     JamesH1

  • Renai asked:

    Started by:  Tinman_au in: National Broadband Network

  • 1
  • 1
  • 2 weeks, 2 days ago

     Tinman_au

  • What Happened to Whirlpool posts

    Started by:  MikeK101 in: Everything else

  • 2
  • 2
  • 1 month ago

     Bob.H

  • Conroy/Turnbull NBN Debate Next Week

    Started by:  zephram in: National Broadband Network

  • 1
  • 1
  • 1 month ago

     zephram

  • Blocked from posting? Let me know

    Started by:  Renai LeMay in: Everything else

  • 2
  • 2
  • 1 month ago

     Abel Adamski

  • Falsehoods of the day

    Started by:  Karl in: National Broadband Network

  • 4
  • 5
  • 1 month, 2 weeks ago

     Anonymous

  • Is IBM selling its Network Services Division to Telstra?

    Started by:  Renai LeMay in: Everything else

  • 1
  • 1
  • 1 month, 2 weeks ago

     Renai LeMay

  • 10 Terabit NBN plan? Yes please :)

    Started by:  daniel996 in: National Broadband Network

  • 2
  • 2
  • 1 month, 3 weeks ago

     Karl

  • Renai (or anyone else?): List of working tags?

    Started by:  Tinman_au in: Everything else

  • 3
  • 6
  • 2 months ago

     midspace

  • Receiving spam from "OEMSoftware Newsletter"?

    Started by:  Renai LeMay in: Everything else

  • 4
  • 4
  • 2 months ago

     midspace

•