news The independent MP who chaired the Federal Parliament’s committee investigating the NBN has lambasted the Coalition for its claim that the real cost of Labor’s National Broadband Network project was likely to be up to $90 billion, pointing out that the treasury and finance departments disagreed with the Coalition’s estimate.
The Coalition has not yet published any document to verify its claim, but this morning the Daily Telegraph reported that using modelling from key telcos and finance industry analysis of the NBN Co’s 2012 corporate plan, the Coalition had estimated the project would take four years longer to finish and potentially cost an extra $45 billion to complete. The newspaper claims to have seen sections of the Coalition’s policy analysis in the area.
However, Rob Oakeshott, the outspoken independent MP whose backing for the NBN helped put the Gillard Government in power back in 2010 and who chaired the Federal Parliament’s committee investigating the project and holding it to account, has a different view. “If today’s Daily Telegraph was true on NBN costing $90 billion, the INDEPENDENT Treasury/Finance boffins would have it on-budget,” Oakeshott said on Twitter this morning. “They don’t.”
Oakeshott further added in comments to some of his followers: ” I am being kind. Let’s see what they produce this week. This is a very big test for Tony Abbott to get his NBN policy right … rate of return, rate of return, rate of return. It is everything in business, and infrastructure – public and private.” And then, referring to the Department of the Treasury: “I’d trust their judgement over politicans/media any day of the week. Apolitical,qualified,and focussed. If not them, then who?”
The Coalition’s $90 billion claim this morning is not the first time it has claimed that the NBN would cost dramatically more than the Federal Government’s estimates. Over the past few months, senior Coalition politicians such as Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull have repeatedly publicly claimed that the NBN could could cost as much as $100 billion to build, despite the company’s own estimates showing that it will require around $37 billion of capital injection from the Government and eventually make a return.
Similarly, in October last year, in another example, Shadow Treasurer Joe Hockey used the exact same $100 billion figure in an interview with ABC Radio’s AM program at the time.
“… we can’t trust the numbers that the Government is putting in the budget papers,” Hockey said. “Last year they said there was going to be a $22 billion deficit, it turned out to be a $44 billion deficit. There is not one contractor in Australia that believes the Government is going to roll out its National Broadband Network for $32 billion. Expectations are as high as $60 billion, $70 billion or even $100 billion for the National Broadband Network.”
Based on current evidence, it currently appears as if the Coalition is incorrect in its claims that the NBN project could end up costing between $90 billion and $100 billion in total.
NBN Co’s current corporate plan (PDF) states that NBN Co will require some $37.4 billion in capital expenditure over the next decade to construct its network infrastructure. It will also spend some $23.1 billion in operating expenditure over that period, although that figure is expected to be made up mainly from $26.4 billion in revenues over that period. Ultimately, over the long term (30 years or so), NBN Co is projecting that it will make a return of 7.1 percent on the Government’s investment in the infrastructure — meaning that it is currently projected that the construction of the NBN will actually make the Government money on its investment.
Additionally, not all of its funding is expected to come from the Government. NBN Co is currently projecting that it will require about $30 billion worth of government investment over its life, with another $14 billion to be funded through debt arrangements.
NBN Co has already locked in construction contracts for much of the next half-decade in states and territories around Australia, as well as network equipment and other related contracts, giving it significant forward visibility in terms of its costs. In addition, the company has finalised its $11 billion agreement with Telstra and its $900 million deal with Optus, and it is also seeing more Australians take up higher-value NBN plans than it had been estimating, meaning that its revenue estimates may be conservative.
In comparison, the Coalition has consistently declined to provide detailed financial information relating to its own policy, which is currently based on fibre to the node technology, as opposed to the NBN’s fibre to the home rollout. Turnbull initially stated in mid-August that the Coalition had a fully-costed policy “ready” to be released, but later rescinded the statement, telling the ABC that the Coalition was not in a position to be able to fully cost its policy before the next Federal Election.
Oakeshott has for some time been frustrated by the fraught level of political debate around the NBN. In the parliamentary NBN committee’s recent fourth report into the project, the independent MP bitterly complained about the sharp divide between the various sides of politics on the issue.
“The tradition of committee membership in Australian political culture is that adversarial politics is left at the door,” Oakeshott wrote at the time. “It is a concern to many that this culture is showing signs of changing on this Committee, where sensitivities of our oversight work as compared to political party election platforms has made the work of the committee much more difficult than it need be. In my view, this is an early warning sign that the topic of higher speed broadband technology is likely to feature strongly in political debate throughout 2013, an election year.”
opinion/analysis
I’ve only got one thing to say to the Coalition on this issue. To misquote Samuel L. Jackson’s character in the seminal 1994 classic Pulp Fiction (and apologies for the strong language here, but I feel as though it’s warranted):
“Evidence, motherfucker. Do you have some?”
It should be obvious to anyone who prefers to think rationally rather than just to make stuff up and believe things without evidence that as a senior Australian politician, you can’t just make statements like the NBN will cost double what the Government says it will without some kind of supporting evidence to back your claims. But then, Australian politics isn’t incredibly focused on rational thinking these days supported by evidence, so who knows what the Coalition can get away with at this point.
Image credit: Alex Sims, Creative Commons
What is this “evidence” you speak of?
I can’t help but think it is time to call The Wolf and get this mess cleaned up once and for all.
+1
Yeah only one problem, the Wolf (Rupert Murdoch) has a deal with the Boy (Tony Abbott) to leave him alone regardless of how many lies he tells!
And why the hell not? The ABC and Labor (with your mate Leigh Sales, the wonderfully balanced Barry Cassidy, the ridiculously middle-grounded Tony Jones to name a few of many) have been polishing turds together ever since their inception. About time Tony Abbot, the Prime Minister in waiting whether you like it or not, gets a bit of a go amongst all the Labor trolls, goonies and loonies out there.
The writing’s on the wall everyone! Read it and WEEP! Salvation day 14th Sept.
“About time Tony Abbot….gets a bit of a go”
I guess your not old enough to remember, but Tonys had “a bit of a go” before, and he stank then too as Health minister.
that comment made my Monday Renai, thanks haha.
No worries, it’s been stewing around in my mind for a while :)
I think you actually went a bit easy on them, but then I do understand it’s a public news site, so I guess you have to :)
As Carl Sagan said: “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”
No extraordinary evidence will be presented by the coalition, and the most substantial “evidence” will be the usual anonymous contractors who do not wish to be named for fear of losing their contracts and maybe two or three analysts. And it will be at best barely mentioning the per premise cost with some abortive attempts at an international comparison – to New Zealand for instance.
That’s the most we’ll hear about the reasons behind that $90 billion figure and they’ll pass it on as fact from this week onwards.
What we won’t be hearing is why the figure $90 billion instead of let’s say $85 billion – there certainly won’t be a breakdown of more detailed cost overruns or anything like that.
I wonder what would actually happen if the Coalition won, implemented their ‘cheaper’ NBN, how much would that cost I wonder, oh we don’t know because the Coalition has not revlead any of their policy and costings. We all know that the FttN network will be upgraded to FttP in the future, how much extra will it cost to replace FttN with FttP? I would damn well say it will be plain cheaper, easier and more beneficial to the country as a whole to implement FttP (wireless and sat) now.
“how much will it cost to upgrade from FTTN >> FTTP?”
Ask New Zealand for comparative pricing, because that is what they had to do BEFORE the FTTN was completely roll out there.
Really, is this the sort of performance we can expect from a Coalition government?… then how are they any improvement on what we have now?
Hey Renai, go find someone in the IT industry thats sai the LNP FttN plan will cost a squillion dollars and quote that for the next 6 months.
Current estimates are $30b if everything goes right, but like the Labor plan things wont go 100% right. The Turnbull has claimed Labor’s FttP will cost $90b, but their own will cost 1/3rd to 1/4 the cost.
What factors have driven the FttP cost to $90b, and how can The Turnbull guarantee the same factors wont impact on his own plans?
So if the current estimates are for $30b, and the same factors apply over both projects, doesnt that suggest the $30b estimate for FttN will end up being $60b?
There’s a simple logical argument to throw around as FUD, to counter some of the FUD that’s been carelessly used over the past 3 years.
Let’s do some maths:
ALP – $37b for FTTP/Wireless/Satellite
LNP:
— $15b for FTTN (MT claim)
— $1.1b for Wireless (already committed under current plan)
— $1.1b for Satellite (already committed under current plan)
— $0.6b (at least) per year extra network maintenance costs.
— $21b (estimated) for subsequent upgrade to FTTP
— $12b to Telstra/Optus
— plus whatever is already spent
TOTAL: $51b – (in today’s money) to get to FTTP – (at unknown point in the future, and which even MT agrees will come one day)
FTTP in 2021 for $37b?
FTTP in (god knows when) for at least $51b?
You choose.
“FTTP in 2021 for $37b?
FTTP in (god knows when) for at least $51b?”
I think the way the Libs are going they’ll just buy everyone in Australia a Bigpond Mobile Broadband dongle so it’ll only be $1.1B for them (and $1.25 a Mb for the rest of us)…
Please, old wise one…
why does this cost component:
” – $12b to Telstra/Optus ”
(consistently in all your posts) only appear on the LNP side of the ledger, but not on the ALP side of the cost ledger?
Under ALP policy, is Senator Conroy paying the “$12b to Telstra/Optus” out of his own personal bank account?
Please explain.
The $12b he quotes is for the payment to Telstra/Optus for their pipes. Its part of the $37b figure, and is contracted to be paid out. There are significant residual costs that are contracted, and hence will also be part of the Liberal plan.
With no plan to recoup those costs.
But to answer your question, its on both sides of the ledger, he’s isolated it as The Turnbull has never considered it part of his miracle cost of $15b.
If anything, Michaels being generous with that $50b figure. He hasnt factored in any renegotiation that will have to happen with Telstra to get the copper that is in those pipes. That could add another $10b in costs.
The $12b he quotes is for the payment to Telstra/Optus for their pipes. Its part of the $37b figure
The $37b capex estimate includes $12b Telstra deal?
Oh please……..
Take some chill pills GT. I could be wrong, I was just stating things as I understood them. If they ARENT part of Labor’s CAPEX costs, then the number is still a valid inclusion. It could just as easily be the estimated value for the copper lines that the Liberals are going to have to gain access to for their FttN project.
There are two bits of Telstras infrastructure at play. The pipes, and the copper in those pipes. Labor negotiated an agreement to get access to the pipes, so they didnt have to dig up every street to lay the fibre. The Liberals are going to have to go one step further, and get permission to actually use the copper that is in those pipes.
Its either that, or roll their own copper out for that last mile from the node. If they DO use whats already there, then independent evaluations have placed the value of those lines at $12-15b.
So when you look at the Liberal costs, the value of that infrastructure is going to be a key cost. Telstra isnt going to give it to them for free, and if they try it for some reason, the shareholders will be voting no on the deal anyway.
One other thing. If the Liberals roll out their plan as we know it, and get private industry to build the network, then pretty much every cost is either OPEX, or goes on budget. And that includes the pre-commited costs Labor has contracted, which would normally stay as a CAPEX cost. So yes, costs CAN be CAPEX for Labor and OPEX for Liberals.
Its one of the biggest negatives of the Liberal plan to bribe the incumbents to do the work. I’ve asked several times how they can justify such an approach when their mantra for the past 6 years has been that Govt spending needs to be cut back, and cut back hard.
Easy GT just add the $12B then, and…
(drum roll)… now its $49B vs $51B.
$49B for the Rolls Royce NBN you guys all keep telling us about vs. $51B for the old rusty commodore, but with a Mal’s Smash Repairs paint job and nice new tyres.
:/
Because that is already included in the Opex I believe someone correct me if I am wrong
oic…. so this:
“– $12b to Telstra/Optus”
when it appears in Labor policy, it’s an “OPEX” and disappears completely from view…
but when the exact same payment appears in LNP policy, it’s CAPEX and becomes a BIG SCARY NUMBER…
interesting logic…
Because it is for something different the NBN are leasing the ducts the coalition will need to purchase the copper up front so $17 billion is what the copper value was estimated at a few years ago so the coalition will need to pay for it over the next 5 years of rollout.
In Labor’s plan $11 Billion is paid over 30 years if you can not see the difference well I can’t help you.
You’ve missed the boat on this one.
The $11 Billion was for access to the Telstra ducts AND disconnection of copper landline services. So the copper network is worthless to Telstra because the NBN fibre was going to replace it.
Presumably then the cost of buying the copper landlines and disbanding the copper landlines are very similar.
I do believe Telstra have indeed said the figure will remain the same…
But of course closing the old, denigrated and obsolete copper last mile and replacing it with superior, up to date fibre will save (iirc) somewhere in the vicinity of $800m per year in copper maintenance costs.
…and if i were Telstra and the government “needed” my copper, I wouldn’t be paying it…
An offhand comment by David Thodey is not necessarily set in stone.
In any case, it is not realistic to simplistically equate leasing the ducts, and buying/leasing the copper (including modifying the copper to insert FTTN). ie I am not sure that Telstra would consider leasing the copper if the network would be chopped up to insert FTTN.
A more realistic analysis would have to include the scrap cost of the copper. How many billions would that be worth? Enough to dominate the $12billion, I am sure.
Presumably then the cost of buying the copper landlines and disbanding the copper landlines are very similar.
Correct demundo.
The revenue loss to Telstra under both ALP and LNP policy scenarios is exactly the same, i.e. Telstra has to completely exit fixed-line wholesale business… so the amount of compensation required (to offset the same magnitude of revenue loss) is identical.
Of course, NBN’ers will NEVER EVER EVER concede that FTTN is cheaper to implement than FTTP.
Actually we always concede that. We question however if the savings the FTTN present in the short term counter the extra spending required in the medium and long term. We also point out that the time required to renegoicate the contract with Telstra, which may or may not involve an increase in the monetary amount.
However, I I think it will increase in amount because Turnbull will want to ask Telstra to turn back the HFC network and the copper drops in metro areas might still be considered worth something despite being considered redudant under the NBN. Through we’re probably only taking a few hundred million to a couple of billion at most here.
So tell me, do you believe that we’ll eventually, that is within the next two decades, need to upgrade the FTTN portions of Turnbull’s plan to FTTH, if so, what is the opportunity cost associated with delaying a full FTTH rollout? Will we come up with a net saving or net loss in the long term, if so, by how much, and if it is a loss, which I strongly believe it will be, can we justify that loss?
If you’re going to criticise our position, at least understand what our position is.
We question however if the savings the FTTN present in the short term counter the extra spending required in the medium and long term…. So tell me, do you believe that we’ll eventually, that is within the next two decades, need to upgrade the FTTN portions of Turnbull’s plan to FTTH
Please bear in mind: “future FTTP spending required in long term” has to be discounted back to arrive at present day value when comparing to current day “FTTN option” savings. Please refer:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Present_value
Current industry wisdom among global telco CEOs/CTOs is slow gradual 25-30 year migration period:
https://twitter.com/tonybrownITM/status/303749115232284672
On this basis, no need to pull out Excel spreadsheet…. implementing FTTN now and pocketing the three-to-fivefold savings in capex is a slamdunk. Just imagine the interest cost accumulated on a compounded basis over 25-30 year period!!!
However, I I think it will increase in amount because Turnbull will want to ask Telstra to turn back the HFC network
Wrong. If Telstra is allowed to operate HFC and retain their wholesale customers on HFC only, that means less compo required because less wholesale revenue given up by Telstra.
if so, what is the opportunity cost associated with delaying a full FTTH rollout?
The global evidence is little difference in ARPU for FTTN and FTTP networks, hence minimal “loss of benefit” from delay. (In Japan, NTT actually has to LOWER FTTP prices to ADSL levels to attract subscribers!!!)
Sure – the Coalition wants the NBN on the budget…so this changes the column this is in…
You can do some further math from the other direction. Where are the blowout opportunities in labors policy?
The pois – many existing facilities – I suspect are fairly static. I’m also presuming direct Nbnco staffing is also going to be static. The cost of the fibre itself at a nominated number of km is a known figure. I don’t know the breakdown of costs off the top of my head, but the one major cost that wouldn’t necessarily be static is the contractor costs. Which my lousy memory seems to be telling me is something in the order of 12 bn? of the 37.4 costs?
On the assumption – and I’m happy to be corrected on it – that is the major area where costs are fluid and not static, and there is no other share of the 37.4bn with the possibility/ability to expand to the degree required to satisfy the Liberals statements – it would have to be spectacularly wrong to inflate by something in the order of 5 or more times to hit a figure anywhere near that 90bn claim. And that after build costs checked in the 5 test areas, and current first release sites – real world experience as it were, which should give a strong indication of how much labour=money it costs per fibre area module? Its a laughable claim on the face of it but the msm have their ‘very serious’ faces on and treating it as credible?!
Just by the bye, I’ve also seen very little querying of what happens to the 18k tax free area after Tony axes the carbon tax, as promised. And another article I’ve seen this morning raises other queries too: Isn’t one of Tony’s policy statements that have been put about basically ‘the nbn must be canned and we tip that money into roads health etc’? Yet you see – from the Newman govt no less! Tony has no proven intent to follow through on roads? http://www.news.com.au/national-news/queensland/queensland-rails-against-tony-abbotts-tunnel-vision/story-fndo4ckr-1226613612728
Yet he’s viewed as a credible, if not must be, next PM? I so wish – faults and foibles asides, it were MT taking the libs in. I find it impossible to believe he could be this incoherent, and a vote for the libs would be a respectable choice rather than trading clowns in the hot seat. Serious questions need to be asked and I very much fear they won’t be until after we are stuck with him. Fie on the media for enabling this.
Pick me! Pick me!
I, as a worker in the IT industry, hereby proclaim that a FTTN rollout will cost over $100bn due to unknown future costs regarding higher maintenance and opex costs and eventual replacement of the copper with fibre.
Feel free to quote that anytime, as long as evidence for my claims is not provided in any way, shape, or form.
Sorry… replace $100bn with $100sqn
Unfortunately, as frustrating as their unsubstantiated fear-mongering and ultimately foolish telecommunications policy are, I have resigned myself to the fact that this is the Liberal Party’s election to lose. Having experienced first-hand how the Barnett Government strolled back into power after wasting money their whole term here in WA, I cannot foresee a future where Tony Abbott is not the next PM, and the NBN is not completely botched by the Libs.
Sad but true. :(
Evidence ? Facts? Details? What are they?
Look, just pick a Huge Number and go with it.. Make an outlandish statement and flow with it..
Say cheaper , faster, sooner with mouth full of .. uhmm and well , thats all needed really.
Sorry Renai but the Liberal Party doesn’t have any evidence.
We have been asking for evidence to support their assertions for over two years and all we ever get is promises and then new apparently baseless assertions.
Why would they suddenly change?
On one side we have a corporate plan that on current performance is not holding up. On the other side we have numbers plucked from goodness knows where. How does the general public choose who to believe?
Yep, let’s have some evidence, from both sides. Oakeshott, as an independent and as chair of the NBN oversight committee, is ideally placed to get some. It’s up to you in the media, Renai, to get the rest. Just cold, hard analysis.
+1
we have numbers plucked from goodness knows where
according to this:
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/business/the-ninety-billion-nightmare-the-real-cost-of-the-nbn-rollout/story-fn7ki14e-1226614471419
source is research reports by $’000,000-renumerated investment banking analysts at Macquarie Bank and Deutsche Bank.
I think they’d have a better clue about these things than the stodgy Canberra public servants at Treasury and Finance. Oakeshott is just embarrassed for backing one of Labor’s worst policies.
No what he did is said my plan will cost $22.5 billion times it by 4 and $90 billion.
I would bet anything that the price he puts on FttN tomorrow is between $20-$30 Billion dollars.
That is where the number came from.
AJ is a prophet, wait and see
Winner
$20.4 Billion Capex
$29.4 Billion in total
http://www.afr.com/p/technology/scaled_down_abbott_nbn_to_cost_bn_D8btFuIKqOtvPxlR1nSZfL
So, lotto numbers?
LOL I wish
What you keep saying is Source = Macquarie or whatever but.
Where is the source.
Oh you “just trust” him to interpret the source? show us the source or it is an outright lie.
I want evidence; I don’t want: “Oh just trust me Macquarie said it; and Turnbull read it and read out the number of import from the source!!11”. We don’t believe YOU GT we only believe Macquarie and even then; only when we have seen what they actually say.
If you can’t show us the evidence; everything you say is bullshit.
For some reason that reminded me of MKR.
The connection between Macquarie Bank and the Liberal party is a bit like the ALP and brothels. It is not removed from politics in the slightest
“It should be obvious to anyone who prefers to think rationally rather than just to make stuff up and believe things without evidence that as a senior Australian politician, you can’t just make statements like the NBN will cost double what the Government says it will without some kind of supporting evidence to back your claims. But then, Australian politics isn’t incredibly focused on rational thinking these days supported by evidence, so who knows what the Coalition can get away with at this point.”
unfortunately this applies to pretty much everything from the Noalition atm, they make shit up about the state of the economy, the size of the countries debt, the carbon tax, the real reason power bills have sky-rocketed in cost and so forth!
They really are the most dishonest bunch of politicians ever to blight our nation and yet most of the MSM are giving the LNP and Tony in particular a free ride … I for one am disgusted! If that willingness to turn a blind eye doesn’t = a deal with the devil (Murdoch), I dont know what does!
Lately I’ve taken to posting various anti-LNP things on my FB page and have had otherwise intelligent family members and friends start repeating the LNP FUD at me – and then they act all shocked when I tear their argument a new back passage with real facts from authoritative sources!
Not happy LNP!!!!!!
Agreed. The Liberals are doing more to hurt this country with their constant scaremongering than the GFC did.
rob oakeshott is a very special honest up front person….more liberals should take a page out of his book and get on with running the country instead of running their bullshit…..good on you ROB you have our support!!!!!!! like your style…….
I tend to believe Turnbull will fail to provide policy, because of some reason or other that has “..prevented true cost being calculable” or some such, and main stream media will not so much as notice.
Turnbull has repeatedly claimed there is policy. The ridiculous situation is people are so wound up over Gillard that they’re blind to the realisation they’re likely to vote in a party that has virtually no policy or plan for the next 3-4 years.
Which is really more 6-8 years, given the nature of voting tending to allow a party to hold government for two terms. The same thing happened in QLD. Angry voters swinging blindly.
I’m amazed the current political climate has reduced to the the outcome of a party to take office without policy. The thing people typically use to hold a party accountable and to vote for. Remarkable.
Im not surprised by this at all because the LNP and Murdoch press are clearly working together to create the Fear Uncertainty and Doubt in the minds of the electorate about the current ALP gov, economy, NBN etc.
Yes we must keep Uncle Rupert happy…..
The Coalition’s selective leaking of their unsubstantiated propaganda has already had the intended effect, with headlines such as ‘Ninety Billion Nightmare’, followed by the usual weasel words that NBN ‘could’ cost ‘up to’ $90 billion.
Having planted that image in the headlines for public consumption, we can now expect the Coalition to be very silent when asked how they managed to arrive at that figure.
Oh well, at least it’s an improvement on Turnbull’s previous statement that it ‘could’ cost ‘up to’ $100 billion. If he keeps this up, he’ll get down to the right amount in only two or three years time.
Oh well, at least it’s an improvement on Turnbull’s previous statement that it ‘could’ cost ‘up to’ $100 billion. If he keeps this up, he’ll get down to the right amount in only two or three years time.
I thought he was boosting the cost of the NBN up to $90B to make it easy to show how the MT plan will only be 30% of the NBN.
Isn’t that it?
I think this is an exercise in manufacturing consent to demolish the FTTH and substitute FTTN.
Remember the LNP are about to launch their turkey this week, well at least according to them they will. So to make your turkey look good for the punters you have to give the electorate a good stroking first with some FUD….otherwise the punters might ask nasty questions like how come it cost 2/3 the NBN and delivers 1/10 the speed etc…..
It amazes me the LNP has to resort to out right lies to win an argument, you’d think in the position they are in they wouldn’t have to resort to these kind of lies……really not a good sign imho.
I’m still waiting for Turnbull to explain how much it would cost to deploy FTTN — without using Telstra. The company that has flatly stated it would not renegotiate the NBNco agreement.
Until he does, shrill claims of ninety-billion-dollarstm ring a bit hollow when he cannot even substantiate his own alternative.
“The company that has flatly stated it would not renegotiate the NBNco agreement.”
Not so.
Telstra have said they will not renegotiate the value of the deal, but could be negotiated on technology mix.
Basically, Telstra say “we’ll do what we have to, but we get $11b”.
True. I was referring to the existing deal, though. :)
Telstra would be open to an (effectively) new agreement, but the existing isn’t. It obviously goes without saying that if Uncle Malcolm asked Telstra to price a FTTN deployment, they’d happily come up with a different solution and terms. And price.
The thing is, Turnbull hasn’t indicated (thus far) that that is actually likely to happen. Statements have been directed almost exclusively to re-engineering through NBNco.
We shall see tomorrow, perhaps?
I’m sure you’ve heard it many times but Directors of a company are obligated to generate the most value for their company that they can, if they don’t they are being negligent in their duties. They have even been quoted saying as such in response to questions about the NBN-lite that might be.
I think it’s fairly clear that the current deal is for leasing ducts and use of the copper is a separate matter that they will have to get maximum value for. I suppose there could be some too-ing and fro-ing as to what that number might be given that there is only one buyer but they will have to compare the number against their own earnings by retaining it. Clearly the number is not zero.
Worth Noting the major reason for delays, which leads to innefficienies and difficulties in obtaining and retaining skilled subbies and workers. The shortage of skilled workers is not what it is being presented as.
Besides with the Polls for the lst year and the virulent anti Labor MSM, why would any contractor spend resources traing and skilling fibre splicers when there will be limited work for them under a FTTN plan.
Telstra has been the major delaying factor in several ways. They will be the big winner, the Nation and our economy the loser.
Give them credit they have played a very smart hard ball game and now their Alan Bonds will deliver for them
Jesus came to Tony Abbott I a dream and told him the future of communications in Australia under a coalition led governement will be FAX. Therefore any ‘evidence’ led discussion around the economic impact of having fibre running to every business and residential premises in Australia should be immediately dismissed.
The Liberals game plan:
Spread as much FUD as possible about anything Labor and provide nothing concrete that could be used to do the same back.
They (Libs and Murdochs boys) have managed to get “the public” to such a fervour that they don’t care what alternative to Labor they have, they’d probably vote a dog in over Labor.
it’s a shame that Australians seem to be too stupid to see through it and demand real policies from the Libs…
Someone saying $90b a few days before they reveal their bnb/cost?
If their NNN (National Node Network) was accurately costed at $15b then there’s no need to spread rubbish about $90b.
Prediction: Libs policy will cost around $25-$30b – NOT the $15b that’s been thrown around for the last year – $25b will look favourable compared to “$90b” but not so favourable compared to $37b.
Rupert, Gena and Packer for PM because we know that’s who will really be running the country.
Packer for PM because we know that’s who will really be running the country
gee, that’s funny….. isn’t it two high-powered Labor powerbrokers/numbersmen on Packer’s retainer lobbying the Liberal State Govt to allow Packer to build his high-rollers luxury casino in Sydney?
I guess from this episode we know who’s really running the country like you say
The real problem the LNP has with the NBN is not how much it will cost, but who owns it and hence profits from it.
From that point of view their nonsensical policy makes perfect sense.
Does anyone else get the feeling the coalition is getting their info from that 1 guy the monks trained wrong on purpose so they would have something to keep them entertained?
This new figure is just a laugh and I am awaiting the policy or lack there of, pretty sure 90% of whirlpool already has their pitch forks and torches at the ready.
Let’s not forget that ANY change to the current deals that are in place will require a renegotiation with Telstra. At the moment the NBN will ultimately render the copper network useless and no longer used. i.e Worthless.
Under the Coalition plan, this copper now has ALL of its value back – plus more. As the Libs CANNOT roll-out FTTN without it. Telstra will, of course, be getting the best value for their shareholders. So what do YOU think it is Telstra is going to require ( or what trade-off will they want) in order to move forward with FTTN?
Either way… it will be the taxpayers who will be “dropping trou” and taking it. And the Libs just don’t care.
The important issue about the Coaltion’s broadband policy is Rupert Murdoch’s agenda that is being hidden from the public. This information won’t be found in the main stream media.
http://cafewhispers.wordpress.com/2013/04/08/on-the-eve-of-a-coalition-policy-announcement/
Also, why is it that Malcom Turnbull condems Labor’s NBN policy, yet invests in the same technology in France?
http://www.zdnet.com/au/turnbulls-nbn-french-kiss-is-right-but-so-wrong-7000002969/
Hang on – how does 37bn + 45bn = 90bn? Since when was the NBN going to cost 45bn in he first place? Just fudge the numbers a bit and hope no one notices…?
stolen rom a meme on facebook / twitter
“Voting for Tony Abbott because you hate Julia Gillard , is like eating shit because you hate spinach”
Brilliant!!!
But relevant to the article, how?
+1
+lol
Evidence doesnt matter because I am news.com.au
Ha ha ha I own the news in Australia!
Is there any truth in the rumor that the Murdoch press is so against the NBN because it could quite possibly compete against Foxtel and their pay TV satellite and cable technology?
As soon as you provide fibre links to each home in Australia, you could in theory buy Pay TV from whoever, allowing other companies to enter the market cheaply without spending billions on infrastructure.
FTTN will not be able to provide pay TV, therefore it’s good for the LNP.
“Is there any truth in the rumor that the Murdoch press is so against the NBN because it could quite possibly compete against Foxtel and their pay TV satellite and cable technology?”
I don’t personally believe so. I think it’s more about News Ltd not liking Labor in general.
This is common in QLD. Basically there was a heavy swing in type of stories which favored Campbell newman Farly positive and Labor a quite mouse everyone was tired of
It would been enough to swing the election with that influence
All you would need is a few people whom read the paper and news to influence the change in other peoples gossip and beliefs
Good example was how Campbell Newman was meant to be sacking everyone. Which got a minor mention once or twice for some strange reason
It’s a shame they can’t produce unbiased comment/articles. I mean News.com.au is such a professional news outlet. I love the colourful ads.
Guess I’m just lucky, I should get the NBN around Sept/Oct. Well… Maybe….
It does make some sense though Renai, with Rupert about to float off the papers with Foxtel attached, they will need every cent Foxtel makes to stay alive, their own dwindling revenues wont do it.
“you can’t just make statements like the NBN will cost double what the Government says it will without some kind of supporting evidence to back your claims”
Why not if you can claim that you already have a fully costed alternative and then later claim that you cannot produce a fully costed alternative until in government?
If you can make two statements of “fact” that are mutually exclusive of each other, you can say anything.
Orwellian doublethink seems to be the basic foundation of the coalition and it’s supporters.
Hows that Labor budget surplus coming along?
What about that Labor $2 Billion dollar mining tax?
Or how about the Senator Conjob ironclad 340,000 premises passed by July promise?
Yeah… I really believe the governments numbers are right on this one. Fool me once… shame on you, Fool me twice, shame on me.
We are here to discuss the NBN :/
The problem is credibility
Conjob says we should believe his numbers and that it’s weally weally gonna be $37 Billion, promise!
He also said that there would be 340,000 premises passed by July… Pwomise!
His government also said they were going to get a budget surplus this year… Pwomise!
This government has no credibility.. no body believes them and nobody believes their numbers. Well except maybe the NBN’ers.
As I’ve stated I support the NBN but the BS has got to stop and heads need to roll in NBN management.
Indeed credibility…
So $37B isn’t credible,even though costed and detailed but $90B (as pointed out in the article) plucked from thin air is?
Costed by the same guys who gave us the roll-out numbers.. come on you can’t be this gullible.
They aren’t even paying their contractors enough to be able to hire the workforce needed to roll-out the network any faster than it currently is(1500 new premises passed a MONTH) how do they expect that they will get 6200 Premises passed per day? Are 10,000 oompa loompa’s going to appear out of oompa loompa land and work for NBN peanuts?
NBN need many more workers and the only possible way they can do this is pay more money. That means the cost of the network will balloon
Again I ask…
$37B isn’t credible, even though costed and detailed but $90B (as pointed out in the article) plucked from thin air is?
So, how many broadband plans did the Howard government get off the ground?
Oooooo, Oooooo, I know this one: Exactly 1: 1.5mbps DSL1.
Actually a few that were absolute vote winners: 512kbps with its little brother 256kbps.
Sorry, but privatization of Telstra hasn’t served us well.
You know if your going to bring that up..
So hows that several billion dollar black hole that on their pre-election budget? You know the same one that got several high ranking accountants booted out for gross misconduct/negligence?
Hows that “We will never put in a GST in my term?” statement?
Hows that “It’s not a core promise!” statement?
Yes old news is old news… and they’ve changed for the better right? right?
I’m sorry but both political divides are just as guilty as each other. You cannot call out one side and turn a blind side on the other. Here’s the difference at the moment though… one side has something on paper costed and screened by independant accountants/finances (oh and guess what no black hole was found either. It’s completely complient). The other is just saying numbers in the airs from estimates and ‘experts’. All we’ve been asking since this began is show us something *on paper*. Costings, maths, estimates, plans! ANYTHING! Sound bites from pundits/experts are never enough unless you have something to back it physically.
You say that like Tony “Non-core, blood oath promise” Abbott has some…
“Fool me once… shame on you, Fool me twice, shame on me.”
Indeed. We’ll see just how many times tomorrow after Turnbull releases his “broadband” “plan”…
“The best way to put a price on carbon, is through a simple tax”
– Tony Abbott.
“The problem is credibility”
– TheTruthHurts
$100B? More pure FUD from the Murdoch Media and the Opposition. Nothing more than hot air and spin.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/libs-to-promise-nbn-cheaper-and-earlier/story-fndo317g-1226615267835
THE Coalition has vowed to deliver the NBN at half the cost, up to six years earlier and with same speed internet and much cheaper.
And just when you thought the lies couldn’t get any bigger?
I found one of Thatchers quotes quite apt here:
They have the socialist disease, they have run out of everyone else’s money.
Well they haven’t run out of money yet, but the nbn work rate seems rather appalling. (20% !!!)
Could it be that their initial estimates were wrong ?
If that is the case, wouldn’t it follow logically that their final estimates would also be wrong ?
Lets see what MT has to offer.
What the? So I walk into Camera World and some flash, well-fed salesman called Malcolm comes up to me and…I buy a 12 megapixel camera over a 20 mgp camera do I? In Dick Smith I buy Windows 98 rather than an Apple mega vision thingie. A cathode tube TV rather than a 3D plasma. Why? Because its cheaper? Because the salesman is a con artist? Something is disconnected in the Illiberal mind from the cybernetic world of continual progress that – like or love it – we accept as the constant upgrade cultural norm. Or as Lyotard said: “The true goal of the system, the reason it programs itself like a computer, is the optimisation of the global relationship between input and output, in other words, performativity.” What Bull and Bott offer is lack of performance! Totally in contradiction to what and how people choose techno stuff everyday: the latest and best, not last decade’s rejects. Our whole freaking economy is based on people repeatedly storming Harvey Norman for the latest gee-whiz junk. And people will vote for them being sold a second-rate system! Do the words “laughing stock” not mean anything?
+ 1
The coalition’s !00 Billion+ predictions seem quite accurate.
Looking at the fine print I can quite believe that the NBN will blow out to that amount & beyond…once Tony & Co get hold of it & attempt to convert it to FTTN.
Lets see;
First a CBA
Then11Billion to Telstra
Now buy back the copper we sold at Telstra’s price & terms then try to maintain it at an extra 1billion PA.
Power & maintenance costs for 60,000+ kerbside fridges.
Lack of income due to competition from the Telstra & Opus rival & faster networks in all the profitable metro areas.
Subsidies required to provide service to the remainder.
Replacing all the 100 year old failing copper with more copper?? (mustn’t use FTTP/H)
Hmmm…
Bugger it, i didn’t write it in blood. We’ll just scrap this white elephant & go back to one of our original napkin plans & replace/switch all those nodes with wireless towers on every corner until my mate AJ’s magic German laser beams eventuate. (apparently they don’t require fibre for transmission)
You OK with that Murdoch, old pal?
Comments are closed.