news An extensive survey of residents in the early stage National Broadband Network rollout zone in the Melbourne suburb of Brunswick has shown that 89 percent backed the NBN as a “good idea”, even if they hadn’t immediately signed up to use the project’s fibre infrastructure.
The survey was contained in a report, High-speed Broadband and Household Media Ecologies: A Report on the Household Take-up and Adoption of the National Broadband Network in a First Release Site, which was put together last year by the University of Melbourne and the Swinburne University of Technology using funding from an independent grants scheme operated by the Australian Communications Consumer Action Network. It is available online in full now. The study initially surveyed some 282 households in late 2011 and in mid-2012 followed up with a survey to 102 households from the initial set. All 2,600 households in the Brunswick early stage area were initially approached with door to door canvassing.
One aspect of the survey sought to examine views on the NBN project as a whole, with 82 percent of surveyed households agreeing or strongly agreeing that the NBN was a “good idea”. The percentages were higher amongst those who had already signed up to use the NBN’s infrastructure, but even the vast majority of those currently using ADSL and wireless broadband solutions in Brunswick believed the NBN was a good idea.
“When asked why they thought the NBN was or was not a good idea, the most common reason people thought the NBN was a good idea related to the Internet service it would provide, with 24% saying because it would be faster and 18% saying it would be better quality Internet,” the report stated.
“The second largest set of reasons for support of the NBN related more to national benefits across a range of factors, including building an infrastructure for all Australians (14%), which would be beneficial for the future (11%), would improve national productivity (8%), and would help us maintain global competitiveness (6%). Other reasons noted were the importance for connecting and including rural Australia (5%) and keeping up to date with developments in technology and innovation (5%).”
“In contrast to this raft of positive reasons for supporting the NBN, a small percentage of respondents had negative views, with 6% thinking it was either too costly or a misdirected use of government funding, while 2% thought the project itself was too complex and suffering delays (see Figure 36).”
The survey adds to a number of other recent surveys and studies which have demonstrated enduring support for the NBN project amongst Australians in general. A similar study published in October 2012 (also by Swinburne) asked the question: ‘Do you think the development of the National Broadband Network is a good idea?’ According to the report, 35 percent strongly agreed with the proposition, and 32 percent agreed. Some 13 percent sat in the middle with an answer of ‘neither’, while 13 percent disagreed, and 7 percent strongly disagreed.
A similar survey taken in 2009, when the NBN policy was in its infancy, found that a higher percentage – 43 percent – strongly agreed, while 32 percent agreed, 17 percent sat in the middle, and 5 percent and 4 percent disagreed and strongly disagreed respectively. This may indicate that the Coalition’s ongoing criticism of the NBN has had some impact on the project’s popularity, with the amount of Australians strongly agreeing with the project slipping, although the project as a whole remains popular with the majority of Australians.
Another poll taken in February 2012 showed similar strong results for the NBN. The poll was taken by Australian social and market research company Your Source. The organisation sends out between 7,000 and 8,000 invitations to respond to each poll it conducts, from which it usually receives about 1,000 responses.
In February 2012 the company polled its audience with the following question: “From what you’ve heard, do you favour or oppose the planned National Broadband Network (NBN)”? The response displayed an enduring level of support for the NBN, with 56 percent of total respondents supporting the NBN in total, compared with 25 percent opposed and 19 percent stating that they didn’t know.
Just 10 percent of those polled strongly opposed the NBN, while 20 percent strongly favoured the project. Amongst Labor and Greens voters who responded to the poll, support was the strongest, with 80 percent and 77 percent supporting the initiative, 42 percent of Coalition voters supported it.
Over the preceding 14 months before the poll was taken, Your Source has asked respondents the same question on three other occasions, with respondents displaying a very similar support rate for the project — ranging from 48 to 56 percent. Those opposing the project have ranged from 19 percent of respondents to 27 percent.
The polling echoes internal Coalition research. A landmark internal report handed down in mid-2011 into the Coalition’s loss in the 2010 Federal Election highlighted a failure to adequately respond to Labor’s flagship National Broadband Network plan as a key reason for losing valuable votes, especially in the sensitive Tasmanian electorate, which is receiving the network before the rest of the nation.
The majority of the report did not mention the NBN, but one section quoted extensively from a similar report produced last year by Sydney academic Julian Leeser into the Tasmanian leg of the election, which has been reported in brief.
“The failure to properly explain the Liberal Party’s broadband policy and the Labor Party’s effective scare campaign was a major cause of the party’s failure to win seats in Tasmania,” the report states. “This was the nearly universal review of people making submissions to the review and is borne out by research undertaken by the Liberal Party. In the view of many, the party’s policy amounted to a threat to come into people’s homes and rip the Internet out of the wall.”
The survey also demonstrated a number of other trends amongst residents of the Brunswick early stage NBN rollout area. For starters, the research results showed that there is a relationship between NBN uptake and household composition, ownership, and income. First adopters of the NBN are much more likely to be households with children than those without children, are more likely to have higher incomes than those with ADSL, and are much more likely to be households who own their home rather than rent.
Secondly, although there were early issues regarding NBN take-up in the area (primarily due to issues such as dealing with unfamiliar technology, the in-development nature of NBN Co’s installation process, confusion about the nature of NBN Co as a wholesale provider and the fact that landlords (not residents) needed to provide approval for installation), many of these early issues have now been resolved in the area.
NBN households in the area appeared to primarily be motivated by speed to take up the infrastructure, with those not opting for the network citing the perceived costs of doing so or satisfaction with their current telecommunications plans. However, once households did take up the NBN, they were more likely to make greater use of the Internet and more likely to engage in more sophisticated online activities. NBN-connected households were also twice as likely to be used as placed of work than other households.
“Our research suggests that the personal value proposition of the NBN is its speed and its data capacity, which is perceived to be associated with increased participation in the digital economy for both work and leisure,” the report found. “NBN households also believe the NBN is of national value and can help to play an important role in building the productivity and competitiveness of the national economy, and in providing for universal digital inclusion.”
opinion/analysis
We’ve now seen quite a few detailed reports showing that Labor’s NBN project is overwhelmingly popular in the electorate, and the evidence from early stage rollout zones such as Brunswick also shows that the more Australians know about the NBN, the more likely they are to support it. In May I wrote:
“An overwhelming body of evidence is gradually being accumulated that Australia’s population as a whole is staunchly in support of the NBN. Views on this matter are not divided; research has consistently shown that the policy is very popular and that most Australians in all areas agree the project should go ahead.
Now, I’m not going to say that the Coalition has to do everything the population says, should it win government. Clearly, sometimes a Government needs to enact an unpopular policy because it’s the right thing to do. But such overwhelming support does mean that the Coalition needs to produce a higher burden of proof for why the NBN policy as a whole should be substantially modified.”
These comments have been true for quite a while and continue to be true.
Image credit: Taken from the report mentioned in the article.
Surprise surprise. Where is Tony Flabbot? he was saying Internet prices would triple with the NBN. More proof that its all FUD. lso wonder where Malcolm is hiding and what excuse he is working on.
They will just fall back on their bogus ARPU argument.
“strongly afreed”
Cheers, fixed.
“mi-2012”? New acronym?
Cheers, fixed.
Be afreed…be very afreed…
Freed. Uncertainty. Doubt.
Except the LNP will continue to wave the word “mandate” around like it was Harry Potter’s magic wand, claiming that they are in their right to substantially modify the NBN.
Nice Survey. And good Summary Renai.
However, those opposed to the NBN will brush it off as “not statistically significant.”
Evidence piles up, but it means little to those who refuse to accept any positive evidence at all.
“However, those opposed to the NBN will brush it off as “not statistically significant.””
Of course and unless it was 100% in favor they’ll latch onto that small percentage and say “see no one wants the NBN!!!”
“Evidence piles up, but it means little to those who refuse to accept any positive evidence at all.”
One positive is for all News Ltd’s blustering and whining it has had little effect on what people actually think of the NBN. Must be hard for them to come to terms with the fact that they’ve become even less relevant now.
It’ll go the way of statistics on Global warming. I’m sure the two are interchangeable when talking with people.
“Here’s Why People Don’t Buy
Global Warmingthe NBN – CBS News”Part of that will be directly related to:
Electoral Division of Wills, which is where the initial test site of Brunswick resides, is ALP held since 1996.
Electoral Division of Melbourne, which is where most of the remaining Bruswick NBN rollout is occurings, is GREEN held since 2010.
Gee I can’t wait for Turnbulls retort to this.
@chunk
http://delimiter.com.au/2013/03/04/82-of-early-stage-residents-back-nbn/#comment-583487
All the evidence in the world of the public’s positive opinion of the current NBN won’t change the Coalition’s narrative on it.
One of the regular posters on Whirlpool (shout out to Ungulate) asked whoever was listening to Google the term “post truth politics”. It is this strategy that the Colaition appears to subscribe to, effectively sticking their fingers in their ears against any evidence against their narrative and continuing it as if the evidence didn’t exist.
How to change the narrative to closer to what Australians want though? The statistics aren’t fibbing here. Is there a survey on the Coalition’s narrative? Do we know how many actually support their “cheaper, faster” alternative over and above the current NBN? Is that the way to go?
So many questions, so very little definitive answers. Having confidence in the Australian people to choose the NBN (a single policy) over other tarred policies (whether they’re justified in the tarring or not) is not at it’s highest levels.
It’s wonderful to see people support this progressive initiative. The problem appears to be that they don’t understand just how important it will be in the decades to come, and they’re really not interested in those of us (i.e. Renai and many others here) that actually do see the possibilities of the platform.
IMO, one of the biggest mistakes that the Goverment made in the early days of this project, was to call it the “National Broadband Network”.
All this did in the minds of many non-tech folks, was provide them with images of young teenagers sitting in darkened bedrooms for hours, sucking on Red Bull and endlessly playing mind-numbing video games. (and visiting God knows what other seedy websites) Or young women spending hour upon hour on facebook, or uselessly twittering their lives away.
In retrospect, I think the project should have more properly been called the NCN… the “National Communications Network”, because that’s what it really is.
Now that the mistake has been made, the Goverment needs to be informing the public of all the future benefits to our lives and society that this project will bring… “other” than faster web browsing.
Malcolm Turnbull uses this general public misperception every time he sarcasticly refers to the fact that most people have fast enough broadband speeds already, and that only a minor improvement (such as that which would be provided by a FTTN solution) is really needed to keep everyone happy.
If the focus was very publicly shifted by the Goverment or other interests “away” from fast internet for home users, and rather towards upgrading our “communications network” so it could provide the other benefits, like better and more functional video comferencing for business, and which in turn would allow the ability for remote medical consultations and even remote operations, the delivery of next generation television services, and all of the other “non”-residential services and abilities that a fast broadband infrastructure can provide… then I think the general public might finally start to understand the possibilities that the rest of us already see, and the future of this project might be a little more positive.
And the likes of Malcolm Turnbull et al would be unable to come-out and say that his FTTN alternative will provide the same abilities, because FTTN and the other older existing technologies that he’s relying on, are simply not up to any task other than providing a slight boost in speed for a small number of the luckiest home internet users.
The NBN (or should I say, the NCN), represents a lot more than faster browsing for privileged home users. (the Rolls Royce when only a mini is needed???)
It represents the future, and the future competitiveness of our nation.
Emmet, how much I agree with you! I have said many, many times – in print and in conversation – that one of the biggest PR mistakes was calling it the ‘National Broadband Network’. To most people, the term ‘broadband’ means absolutely nothing. It implies, as you so rightly suggest, all that is is bad about modern “Internet access”. I also believe that this constant implication by the Labor Federal Government that it is all about ‘high speed Internet access’ is a huge mistake. It isn’t! It is about replacing a 19th century communications network that is on its last legs with a ubiquitous 21st century communications network that is in its infancy, and has the potential to grow for the next 100 years!
Yes, as a part of that network replacement, there are speed issues that are obviously attractive. But – just like a 1 year old Usian Bolt didn’t run the 100 metres in 9.6s but had to grow up to achieve it, cutting his legs off when he was a child ( cf the Liberal approach) would have somewhat stymied his ability in the future! It is the lack of foresight, and the general inability to recognise the nature of what we are attempting to achieve that concerns me most – and, like you, I believe this is not helped by the moniker ‘National BROADBAND Network’.
“IMO, one of the biggest mistakes that the Goverment made in the early days of this project, was to call it the “National Broadband Network”.”
I agree and have thought so for some time without saying anything, and also have thought that the National Communications Network would be a more correct and understandable moniker. The NBN title is misleading to the uninformed, and the fibre/sat/tower system is about a lot more than just broadband. It’s about ubiquity, about being out from under the control of Telstra, and having an equitable communications made available to as many parts of Australia as possible. 100/40 speeds are just the icing on the cake.
I wonder if it is too late to change the Name with a fanfare of explaining what the NCN is and why
@Emmett B
And yet the respondents say exactly what you claim the perception is..
“When asked why they thought the NBN was or was not a good idea, the most common reason people thought the NBN was a good idea related to the Internet service it would provide, with 24% saying because it would be faster and 18% saying it would be better quality Internet,” the report stated.
“The second largest set of reasons for support of the NBN related more to national benefits across a range of factors, including building an infrastructure for all Australians (14%), which would be beneficial for the future (11%), would improve national productivity (8%), and would help us maintain global competitiveness (6%). Other reasons noted were the importance for connecting and including rural Australia (5%) and keeping up to date with developments in technology and innovation (5%).”
The nationbuilding, support for regional/rural, productivity gains etc all run behind speed and quality of service.
And those teens sitting around with their red bull, games, facebook and porn (oh, and feedback threads for news sites, a real bandwidth hog wot)? Guess what mate, they’re not teens, they’re all ages… People see it that way because that’s the way it is.
And for earlier posters, the sample size has nothing to do with it (it’s adequate for an impression). Even being subjective is irrelevant (it’s an opinion poll after all). But it’s kinda hard to argue (well, at least if you some sort of integrity when putting forth an argument) the project is good just because it’s popular… Flip it around, the “recession we had to have” was unpopular, but it was good policy. Rudd was a populist and we saw how he ended up, and it looks like Gillard and co. are heading that way as well.
The politicians say the only poll that counts is the one on election day.
Its the same with the NBN. The only poll that counts is how many people sign up.
Everything else is PR. And if the poll that counted wasn’t going as badly as it is they wouldn’t be doing this sort of PR. They wouldn’t have to.
Ask people if the US alliance is a “good idea”. And they’ll say yes, enthusiastically in high numbers. Now ask them whether they support the wars that alliance has dragged us into and they say no in just as high a numbers. Ask them if they think a female PM would be a good idea. Now look at how Julia Gillard’s going in the poll for “best PM”. It is quite possible and quite normal for people to think something is a good idea in principle but done poorly in practice.
Even Turnbull and the Liberals aren’t opposed to a national broadband network. They just want it to be implemented with a different set of priorities about what’s important.
So the ALP and NBNCo and the FTTH fanboys like Delimiter just ought to get on with getting it done well. Not waste their time on PR.
Gordon … I understood your point right up until you mentioned the word “fanboys”..
That word invalidated your previous argument by implication that anyone that is for FTTH must be a fanboy (at least you didn’t use the juvenile “fanboi” tag I guess).
I cannot take your arguments seriously if you attack people, not the argument.
*sigh* This is also the problem with the Coalition’s narrative. They attempt to change the argument by attacking the people, not the policy. I wish they’d get over it.
You may be right, Gordon, when you say that “The only poll that counts is how many people sign up.”
In those first release areas which have now had about 12 months to sign up to an NBN service, about half have done so.
Most were on new 24 month contracts when fibre became available (thanks to a Telstra marketing blitz), so this seems to validate the NBN by your measure!
“Even Turnbull and the Liberals aren’t opposed to a national broadband network. They just want it to be implemented with a different set of priorities about what’s important.”
The one they want to “build” is basically “business as usual”. For all Malcolms posturing that his NBN is “like for like, but faster and cheaper” they really are chalk and cheese, most folks under his NBN will be on marginally better speeds than what they can get now, while a luck few near the node/cabinets may get faster than current..
And it won’t help with the water ingress problem which is affecting folk like me now.
tinman
Note the coalition plan as we know it will be FTTH to all new developments, Business and industrial areas and parks (most of who’m already have fibre available at very high prices ).
Impact – Maintain high returns for the owners and developers as they will be the in demand locations due to upload and reliability stability requirements.
Handicap home business and SOHO by forcing them into a high rental environment limiting their growth options by soaking up their cash flow
@Gordon Drennan
And if the poll that counted wasn’t going as badly as it is they wouldn’t be doing this sort of PR. They wouldn’t have to.
Ummmm:
which was put together last year by the University of Melbourne and the Swinburne University of Technology.
It’s from ACCAN, done by a University. It had nothing to do with NBNCo. Your premise is false. You’re assumption that this is “PR” for and from either the government or NBNCo. is incorrect. This was a study done by ACCAN to show whether or not the NBN was having the effect on CONSUMERS (The first C in ACCAN) that it was supposed to.
As for the rest of your argument, see above for what Murdoch has put very succinctly.
Your comments and posturing show that by your own standards, you must be a coalition fanboy. Nice to hear from you anyway. It is always a reminder how political bias can affect one’s judgment.
The politicians say the only poll that counts is the one on election day.
Of course, they only say that when they’re not actually leading in the polls.
“The failure to properly explain the Liberal Party’s broadband policy and the Labor Party’s effective scare campaign was a major cause of the party’s failure to win seats in Tasmania,” the report states. “This was the nearly universal review of people making submissions to the review and is borne out by research undertaken by the Liberal Party. In the view of many, the party’s policy amounted to a threat to come into people’s homes and rip the Internet out of the wall.”
I can certainly vouch for this attitude at the previous election. The Tasmanian public seems better educated about the benefits of the NBN, largely because it was well explained by previous tech-guru premier David Bartlett (one of the best IT educated politicians I have known). Not to mention Tasmania has some of the worst blackspots for broadband coverage, with many smaller towns missing out on ADSL. It’s also no secret our economy needs help and most Tasmanians I speak to recognise the huge economic benefits from having fast ubiquitous broadband that connects us to the mainland. Some people (myself included) also hope it will help elevate the “brain drain” (lots of Tas Uni graduates move straight to the mainland as they have difficulty finding well paid employment in their field of expertise). With ubiquitous broadband, it will be realistic for more people to work from home via HD video conferencing and telepresence.
So in the above sense I’m proud of the fact that many Tasmanians aren’t buying into Turnbull’s bullshit, as more of the public recognises down here that if we lose the NBN, we lose a significant chance to “bring us closer to the mainland”.
it’s a shame it wont actually matter to them, they care not what the public wants, they’ll look after their big business mates…they are the barbarians at the gates of free market…
How very true!
Nice stats here as well
http://www.nbnpetition.com.au/Stats.aspx
Have a vote here folks:
http://www.technologyspectator.com.au/picking-nbn-australia-wants
Maybe we can force a plebiscite on the Coalition to do what the AUSTRALIAN PEOPLE actually want.
Good suggestion in principle – the problem is even the author of that article doesn’t understand the NBN well enough to phrase the question correctly. Comparing the current NBN as directly comparable $60bn vs $30bn coalition cost is disingenuous. The cost of the NBN is immaterial to the public as taxpayers, but any cost for the coalition approach is a greater cost to the Govt and taxpayers than the Labor NBN. Without making this clear in their articles journalists are simply adding to the confusion and fear promulgated by the LNP, even those who are strongly supportive of the NBN.
A referendum phrased like this would have precisely the opposite effect of what is desired – a lot of people who are currently supportive of the NBN would be thrown by a question like this and vote for the one that they perceive will cost them less.
On the subject of the election in general, most voters are even more shortsighted than politicians – they vote for the party that will provide them with the most immediate benefits. Old people like the LNP who throw $100 in extra seniors payments their way. Single parents are currently very unhappy with the Gillard Govt who just cut SPP in half – that’s a lot of struggling single parents who have $300 less per week to cover their rent and feed their kids, who I guarantee couldn’t give a flying fish about the NBN.
Most people also aren’t aware that their decisions for a single election can have lasting consequences for the future of the country. WA voters didn’t realise voting for a particular party in the late 90s could result in the state Govt selling off land that had been set aside for a major highway link for over 30 years. Voting the LNP into power now will not only derail the NBN and all the social and economic benefits it would have brought, but will make the future establishment of state – owned wholesale infrastructure of comparable quality at comparable cost impossible to achieve. Any future NBN post LNP dismantling of the current project will be a misshapen inadequate facsimile of what is being built today, with the additional insult that it will be privately controlled so whatever we end up with will cost more for substantially less.
I’m done – time to go throw up in disgust.
+100
In all, the noise and ruckus against the upgrade of Communications for the Nation is all coming from the Big Business end of Media Enterprises. They know that the NBN may spell the end of their current business models and the advantages they enjoy because of the lack of ubiquitous communications across our massive land and isolation geographically to the rest of the world. Media are funding the easiest to buy Political representation to represent their interests and those that do, get the Media to give them advantageous media coverage. It represent an absolute Gold Mine to the average Polly. They get compliant media to help them and Media use Goebbel’s methodology of propaganda to full effect to roll the Australian public to theirs and the LNP’s desires, all in one concerted game plan.
Trouble is, they tried that game in the USA and the American’s saw through it in their elections and they didn’t get what they wanted. It was hilarious watching those results coming in on Fox Screws *cough* Fox News *cough*
This isn’t surprising. I’ve commented before to the effect that as the project gains speed and traction, as the connections start rolling in, the overall vision of the NBN will increase.
For all of The Australian’s (not that they are alone here) bile and vitriolic hate spewed against the NBN, it’s seen almost zero inducement to change peoples views.
Instead, there’s a general trend being established the the NBN is the preferred choice.
And this is, again, a lesson the LNP will learn; they are assuming a victory next election based on polling, so much so that they’ll once again forget to bother with Policy.
NBN was simply one of many policy areas that are all but non-existant. We have internal reports that clearly state the risks identified.
The footprint of the network is going to be considerably bigger come election; it’s going to be a more well known topic.
What everyone needs to understand is that when the pols show that the coalition is going to wipe the floor with the ALP, the coalition coudnt give a toss what the electorate thinks about their NBN or lack there of policy.
mR.abbott does not care what you think of his boradband policy as it is not going to affect him getting the top job.
It it were a closer race, he would take a much closer look at it.
“What everyone needs to understand is that when the pols show that the coalition is going to wipe the floor with the ALP, the coalition coudnt give a toss what the electorate thinks about their NBN or lack there of policy.”
and there’s a reason Tony Abbott/LNP are doing so well in the polls and why the MSM is so heavily biased towards the LNP, it’s come out in the last week that Tony Abbott, as suspected, is 100% in bed with Murdoch’s Press and Is secretly meeting with News Ltd Management once a week to discuss anti-ALP strategy!
http://www.reddit.com/r/australia/comments/19ln66/tony_abbott_has_lunch_at_news_ltd_hq_every_week/
Completely agree that Abbott doesn’t really give a toss about broadband. He does just want to live in the Lodge. All other considerations are secondary.
The thing is, of course, that once they actually have the big offices and staff at their beck and call, they will actually have to DO something. You know, make decisions ‘n’ stuff.
And at that point… well who knows what will thought bubbles will appear above Abbott’s head? I suspect, though, that he will be happy to let Malcolm Turnbull do pretty much whatever he wants in the area of broadband – provided that it doesn’t cost money or make any intellectual demands on the Leader.
And Malcolm is such a two-faced smarmer that you absolutely can’t predict what he will do. In the end, the path of least resistence will be the most likely guide. Here’s a draft press release, embargoed until November 2013:
“Something something fast broadband something Labor waste something something.
Something something FTTN something something fibre something extravagance something BT something Productivity Commission.
Something market based something something BT something best practice something something quicker and cheaper.”
IMO
Much of the anti NBN opposition is driven by
A) Threatened monolithic vested interests and business models
B) Threatened Free Market ideology, potential to expose the inability of the Free Market to actually provide a high standard of National infrastructure through competition. The concept of the appropriate approach for the circumstance/requirement is abhorrent to the one size fits all ideology.
http://www.afr.com/p/technology/american_experts_query_fibre_to_815VYwhw6vko8nvWpJ9CAL
The Free Market Operators from their Cost/dividend perspective.
A more objective and dispassionate view,
http://www.buddeblog.com.au/frompaulsdesk/broadband-the-american-way/
A telling observation among several
“Regulatory or legislative incentives are needed to create a utilities-based infrastructure and the incumbents are lobbying hard to avoid any changes – if anything they want more regulation to further bolster their monopolies. They are waging an all-out legal campaign against any municipality that wants to build its own broadband network. They have been very successful in this – after 15 years of municipal broadband initiatives less than 1% of Americans are connected to such networks.”
http://www.technologyspectator.com.au/why-nbn-shouldnt-follow-atts-lead
http://www.buddeblog.com.au/frompaulsdesk/how-far-will-us-regulators-bend-to-att-and-verizon/
http://www.buddeblog.com.au/frompaulsdesk/impressive-lte-deployments-masking-fixed-line-broadband-crisis-in-usa/
Powerfull ideological and Vested interest forces arrayed against the NBN
Yes there are powerful interests arrayed against governments doing anything to help their people. Regardless of the Chicago School having been totally discredited, politicians are still running the “small government is good” line – especially in the US but also here.
The only people to benefit from small government are the rich, who don’t need government to support them and don’t like progressive taxation. The average person still needs police on the streets, public schools and other things that governments provide to all citizens.
Government isn’t (or shouldn’t) be a threat to people – it is there to ensure safety, security and (hopefully) prosperity for all. The Gina Reinharts of this world don’t like the prospect of having to be equal.
Maybe one day there will be few enough “small-government” people that we can drown them in a bathtub.
The only way to keep the NBN is to keep Labor.
Comments are closed.