Conroy’s time as Comms Minister is coming to an end

By
Renai LeMay
-
110

opinion There are very good reasons to suspect that Stephen Conroy’s reign of fire and blood as Australia’s Communications Minister is gradually coming to an end; with the nation to receive new talent in this crucial portfolio either at the next Federal Election — or even substantially before it.

Does the above statement shock you? Well it might. After all, Australians have had a long time to get used to Stephen Conroy’s face as our national Communications Minister on television screens, in newspapers and in online media. The Labor Senator has been nothing if not high-profile, and the at times over the past four years has seemed one of the only constants in a rapidly changing telco sector.

However, there are a number of indications that Conroy may shortly be on his way out of the portfolio.

The first and most obvious case for Conroy’s departure from the communications scene is the likely victory of the Coalition at the next Federal Election, whenever that may be. With the Gillard Government continuing to suffer woeful polling results, there seems little doubt that Tony Abbott’s team will easily be able to capitalise on Labor’s many mistakes — from the knifing of Kevin07 to the carbon tax to the bungled refugee situation — to win Government at the next poll. While the most likely scenario is that this next election will occur on schedule in 2013, the Government still holds power by only the slimmest of margins — two seats — and has always been only a couple of by-elections or independent defections away from losing its grip.

However, there are other reasons to take a harder look at Conroy’s position at the moment.

For starters, over the past six months we’ve witnessed a marked decrease in Conroy’s visibility in the portfolio. The Minister has barely held any press conferences, has given only a couple of notable speeches and has made just a handful of controversial off-the cuff comments. What press releases he has issued in general have largely been run of the mill announcements in areas such as digital television, and mostly prepared in mass-produced style by his department.

I could ask you to trust me on this (as I follow the Minister obsessively), but you can always also take a gander at his media centre for yourself. Read his speeches, check out his statements and ask yourself: What has Conroy been doing for the past six months in his portfolio? The answer: Not much.

Conroy’s role in the major events in his portfolio over that period — the media enquiry, for example, or the various NBN-related launches — has turned out repeatedly to be relatively minor, with the Minister’s involvement quickly dropping out of the public radar as players such as Telstra, NBN Co and various others have taken over the stage.

Likewise, the Minister’s parliamentary appearances have also been lacklustre. In Senate Estimates mid-way through October, he appeared bored with the proceedings, answering few questions but merely directing half-hearted jabs at old enemies such as Barnaby Joyce and Simon Birmingham. The fiery Senate debates in the chamber which we have come to be appalled by over the years have been few and far between.

“I have been doing estimates for 15 years,” Conroy told neophyte Greens senator Larissa Waters at one point.

Now, some of this is because most of Conroy’s policy aims for the communications portfolio have been achieved over the past term and a half since Kevin Rudd swept Labor to power in November 2007. Over that period, Conroy has, after all, successfully set up an entire National Broadband Network superstructure, implemented radical structural reform and new consumer safeguards in the telecommunications sector, planted a massive wedgeload of new legislation, orchestrated Australia’s digital television switchover and even made some headway with Labor’s unpopular Internet filtering scheme (a watered down version has already gone live at Telstra and Optus) … all while fighting a series of ferocious political, regulatory and industry-related battles and catching up on the odd bit of football.

Four years of that is definitely enough to leave anyone exhausted — and Conroy’s no longer a young man. At the age of 48 and with a feisty five-year-old daughter to take care of … we sometimes wonder how Conroy has managed the gargantuan task he’s had since 2007. But manage it, he has.

But now most of that is over.

Almost all of the battles Conroy has fought over the past half-decade are now in other people’s hands. NBN Co, Telstra and the ACCC are involved in a complex dance for the future of Australian broadband, his legislation is no longer controversial, his department’s programs are largely on track and the Internet filter, although still officially government policy, has been put out to pasture through a classification review. And Conroy’s daughter is even likely in school at this point.

If I was Stephen Conroy, right now, I’d be wondering what I would do with my time. A certain calm has descended on the good senator’s life … and there is likely no real storm to come. Conroy is able, for the next year, to look forward to a fairly relaxed period watching the NBN slowly grow and idly wondering what will become of the project following the next election.

This much is apparent.

However, even the most naive Canberra watcher knows that politics doesn’t work like that. Politics is nothing if not ferocious, especially in the Federal arena. If you’re not active, then you’re inactive and ripe to become a target.

If you trace Conroy’s career from his appointment to the Senate in 1996, what you’ll find is that the Minister has been continually active throughout that period. He quickly took a leading role two years after his ascension, in 1998 becoming deputy leader of the Opposition in the Senate, and holding Shadow Ministry roles from that point on.

Conroy — like a younger version of Steve Jobs, complete with spectacles and closely cropped greying hair — thrives on controversy, new projects, energetic endeavours and vitriolic, tense exchanges. I’ve never seen the Minister back down from a challenge, and he seldom approaches things diplomatically or patiently. His is a full-on personality. A restless energy animates his frame and leads him into furious political exchanges, punctuated by his iron wit.

He has moments of vagueness too — remember the “spams and scams coming through the portal”? And a lack of deep technical understanding has plagued him over his career. But he is not ready to retire — and that means he will right now be wondering: What next?

What’s next for Conroy, as we satirically suggested before the 2010 Federal Election, is a shift into a different portfolio.

Conroy has been Australia’s first Communications Minister to truly master the portfolio, bending the entire telecommunications sector to his will and reshaping it with a steadfast scalpel. But now he must find another area to reshape anew.

With no cabinet reshuffle having taken place since the 2010 election, it’s high time Prime Minister Gillard looked at shifting the chairs around, and it’s a good time to do so — giving a fresh set of ministers a crack at governing and Labor its last chance to convince the Australian public that it’s worth a third term before the 2013 election rolls around.

It would be appropriate in such a reshuffle for Gillard to reward Conroy — one of her only truly successful ministers — with a portfolio seen as more prestigious — finance and deregulation.

Finance is currently held by Penny Wong, who won it after the retirement of Lindsay Tanner in September 2010. But Wong’s performance in the portfolio has been nothing short of anaemic. With a background in arts, law and the union movement, Wong probably didn’t understand much of the portfolio to start with, and has probably by now become what Sir Humphrey Appleby would refer to as “house-trained”.

Conroy, on the other hand, with his economics degree and history in the financial services and corporate governance shadow ministry, as well as his extensively regulatory experience dealing with the telco sector, is a natural fit for finance, and would likely bring its bureaucrats to heel as he has the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy.

Gillard would then be able to parachute a relatively young Minister into the now-mature communications portfolio, giving them the chance to hold the wheel for a year or so and gain some experience in a safe manner before Labor faces electoral defeat in 2013.

Of course, Labor is nothing if not a fairly obstinate political party, stuck in its ways, and Gillard may believe that Conroy has already been rewarded enough through his minor promotion to “Minister Assisting the Prime Minister on Digital Productivity” following the 2010 election. The PM may retain Conroy’s services in Communications, merely to ensure the portfolio remains on track.

But we hope not.

New blood for Communications, and fresh fodder for Conroy’s mental grinder, is the prescription which we’d give Gillard for the next year. The alternative is to leave an increasingly stale but capable Minister in a portfolio which he has mastered and is obviously growing bored with.

Attack dogs like Conroy can’t be kept in a kennel for too long. Otherwise, they start champing at the bit.

Image credit: Kim Davies, Creative Commons

Related posts:

  1. End of an era:
    Stephen Conroy quits as Comms Minister
  2. Abbott confirms Coalition FTTN policy;
    Hints Turnbull will be Comms Minister
  3. Goddamnit, just make Malcolm Turnbull Comms Minister already
  4. Jason Clare appointed Shadow Comms Minister;
    Michelle Rowland to assist
  5. Abbott confirms Turnbull as future Comms Minister

110 COMMENTS

  1. I love and hate this guy in equal measure.
    Would be sad to see him go.

    Still……I’ve got some mates in the finance game, who’s days I’m about to ruin with this rumor…..

    muwhahahahahhahaha!!!!!!

    • I don’t think that was avoidable, given the mess the portfolio has *always* been in. However, I think overall he has dramatically improved the potential for future telecommunications in Australia.

      • all that “NBN legislation” will amount to naught when Tony Abbott pulls the plug on taxpayer funding.

        in terms of the “loaded gun” held at Telstra’s head to “separate” (whether structural or functional), my understanding is the “Competition & Consumer Safeguards Act” vests certain discretionary powers in the Minister… but it doesn’t compel the Minister to take any action… Malcolm can simply choose to ignore the Act without having to repeal it…

        so much for “Conroy’s reforms”….. limited shelf-life…. unless Kevin can resurrect Labor’s electoral fortunes, they are sitting on deathrow along with NBNco.

        • You seem so sure of a coaltion win yet you are here almost everyday whining about the NBN and your cold war era communist conspiracy theories… seems to me like wasted effort for nothing when you know “Mr Rabbitt will save us all from teh big bad NBN wolf”???

          • *You seem so sure of a coaltion win*

            err…. did your eyes glaze over the bit where i say, “unless Kevin can revive Labor’s electoral fortunes….”? (in the same way they glaze over all the devastating and valid critiques of Labor’s NBN”.)

            *and your cold war era communist conspiracy theories*

            communists are everywhere. (think #occupy.) political ideologies wax and wane but they never die. they just wait for the right moment to resurface and reassert their influence.

            time for me to go wabbit huntin’ ;)

          • communists are everywhere. (think #occupy.) political ideologies wax and wane but they never die. they just wait for the right moment to resurface and reassert their influence

            You must admit, that does sound a little paranoid…

          • Not really, its true

            If you studied history/philosophy or political studies you will realize that political ideologies don’t die, they just change their clothes

          • Sure, there’ll always a be a fringe. But if you think the #occupy movement, or Labor’s NBN are the result of a communist resurgence, then you’re being more than a little paranoid. It’s downright nutty.

          • Well I never said that, neither did Tosh, he was just stating that the NBN is “communist” in design (well socialist would be more accurate, since communism is a form of government)

          • mate do you even know what communism is? your remarks here seem to indicate that you don’t.

            let me copy and paste the dictionary definition for you:
            “advocacy of a classless society in which private ownership has been abolished and the means of production and subsistence belong to the community”

            Now lets look at the NBN; its run buy a private company, all its construction is done by private companies, it is a for profit company and the government already indicated it will sell it off later in the stage…

            So can you and everybody else that says this is a communist thing to give us all a break and move on to another argument that is more useful!

            And you call yourself a study of history! wow… I hope you start reading more….

          • Labor’s NBN is “communist” because you have:

            i/ Labor central planners (a career foreign office bureaucrat & an ex-union official) dictating a technological platform to the industry;

            ii/ justifying this huge strategic decision mostly on “technical considerations”, while completely disregarding market factors such as consumer value, preference, affordability and the opportunity cost of taxpayer capital;

            iii/ shutting down all other existing market (fixed-line) alternatives via taxpayer-funded bribes;

            iv/ passing legislation (or doing private deals with Telstra) to inhibit or discourage the deployment of competing fixed-line networks with more favourable cost characteristics.

            the deprivation of market choice and abolition of the role of market signals in co-ordinating resource allocation are central to how the former USSR economies were run.

            NBNco is a “private company”? gimme a break…

          • If the choice is between pure capitalism which never works and socialist always go with the latter. Why you might ask? because market mechanisms by themselves don’t work, want some evidence check the current state of the economy the world over for a an example.

            Now as for us in Australia, we live in a sparsely populated huge content were market and profit indicators alone would mean everybody would live just in the big cities since no one in the business community in their right mind would invest anywhere else, since it makes little to no economical sense.

            This is where governments come in to bridge the gap. any project such as the NBN must be centrally planned, how else would anyone plan such a large project!

            The government is passing all sorts of legislation with the NBN to:
            1- make sure that the tax paper pays the least amount of money for the project (it needs to be profitable and all money returned to government within a certain amount of years).
            2- Make sure that the NBN does not become another Telstra, i.e the company that owns the infrastructure can not sell it directly to the consumer too.
            3- Deals with Telstra because previous governments stuffed up the sale of telstra and made all sorts of mistakes that caused the need for the current governments to deal with them to insure the success of the NBN.
            Nation building projects are rarely done by private enterprise, they are too expensive and their main objective are not usually maximum profit return on investment, but actually national building and advancement of the nation as a whole.

            Is the NBN plan perfect, far from it, are Labor perfect? way far from it. Is the NBN needed for our future in Australia, believe me, as an IT professional who works in networking, we really really do need it.

          • Geo, I think if you looked at the pure “socialist” countries, you will see that they have failed much much harder (cuba, north korea, china, etc etc) then any of the heavy market driven countries (America, Australia, Japan etc etc)

            I would rather be in the latter then in the former to be honest

          • deteego, that is the thing though, socialist countries are not really the ones you mentioned, those are communist countries, socialist ones are like Sweden or Norway.

            Either way, pure anything is not good, you need to be balanced for things to work for the best of everybody. a good balance between social responsibilities and capitalism, it is not an either or situation here, but a combination of the best of both worlds that we should strive to achieve.

            For example Norway is very business driven, however, their social ideas and responsibilities are very high up on their agenda too. everybody wins. The environment, public health, public transport, private business and the population as a whole. If only their weather is not so bad, one would contemplate moving there :-)

          • In the sense that Tosh is trying to describe, the countries I mentioned are “purely” socialist, in regards to how their economies are run. For an example with North Korea (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_North_Korea)

            It is one of the few countries in the world that has a centrally planned, socialist economy with little to no private enterprise

          • technically, “communism” is the end state of “socialist” transformation of an economy…. where, amongst other things, private property is completely abolished, etc.

            the communist revolutionaries were smart enough to figure out that you can’t jump from semi-feudal societies to “pure communism” in one leap. instead, to get there, you need to undergo a staged process of “socialist transformation”.

            hence, in popular lexicon, the terms “socialist” and “communist” are often used interchangeably to refer to the same phenomena. note that the third letter in “USSR” stands for “socialist”, but the Soviet Union is widely regarded as “communist”.

            so is North Korea. but, even in North Korea, neither “private property” nor “private business” have been completely abolished. the abject failure of “communism” in countries such as USSR and China lies precisely in the fact that, in both cases, the process of “socialist transformation” of the respective economies were abandoned and reversed before the final endgame of “pure communism” was achieved.

            given that “socialism” is a “transformation process”, socialist policies like Labor’s NBN, which attempt to foist a politically-dictated outcome on one sector of the economy to the exclusion of “market determinants”, are clearly “communist” in nature.

          • So roads, rail etc, built by governments of both persuasion are also socialist evils?

            Seems some ideologically ignore that RSP’s will compete via the NBN infrastructure… for example, just like trucking companies/couriers etc do on our government built roads!

          • “they just wait for the right moment to resurface and reassert their influence”

            You believe the NBN is proof of that? There is a word for people like you, I’m not going to say it because anyone reading your post will be thinking it anyway.

          • look…. Malcolm was the first to compare Labor’s NBN to communist North Korea, etc.

            he was ridiculed by one vocal commentator who works in the industry as a reg chief (whom i shall not name). i’ve just been trying to explain how accurate Malcolm’s analogy or characterisation is. “economic planning” in the Soviet Union is run by engineers with a strong focus on “technology” as opposed to factors such as “demand” and “cost”. it’s hard to gauge “demand” and “cost” when you abolish market prices.

            the parallels to Labor’s approach to the NBN are striking. kudos to Malcolm for pointing them out.

          • I see. So Turnbull comes up with a spurious argument comparing the NBN to North Korea etc and you believe he is not only credible but decide to adopt the very same arguments yourself. I think that’s all I need to know.

          • Well it’s as good as you making spurious arguments that overseas countries are keeping HFC for ‘nostalgic reasons’ !

          • I never said that. (Post URL proof or it didn’t happen) The only thing I’ve ever said is some people here in Australia are emotionally attached to the copper and want to keep it for nostalgic reasons. You seem to be one of them.

          • That link confirms exactly what I said in my last comment: “the ones against the NBN for political and/or emotional reasons like you.” You were the one talking about “overseas countries” Not me. Wow, you really enjoy embarrassing yourself… Apology accepted for the attempt to put words in my mouth… or the more likely “bu bub bu buu” with the additional backpedaling.

          • What semantics? You seem to be projecting here. It’s all there in black and white dummy. Your attempt to attribute your own words as mine has fail. Take it like a man.

          • I stated at that link:

            “The ‘hapless ones’ include all overseas countries that have a mix of infrastructure types and even if they are in the process of rolling out FTTH they do not require the existing working BB infrastructure to be switched off and billions given to their owners to do so.”

            You responded to that comment with:

            “We are saying keeping old redundant connection types for nostalgic and emotional reasons is pointless.”

            See that key word YOU used, it says ‘nostalgic’ , I repeat it says ‘nostalgic’, where YOU are referring to overseas countries keeping a mix of infrastructure types, which includes HFC.

            My comment about you stands:

            “Well it’s as good as you making spurious arguments that overseas countries are keeping HFC for ‘nostalgic reasons’.

          • I said NOTHING about overseas countries. That was you. I said: “That’s right they “do not require” No one ever said it was a requirement. We are saying keeping old redundant connection types for nostalgic and emotional reasons is pointless.” (I like how you omitted the first sentence btw) Now are you saying keeping old redundant connection types for nostalgic and emotional reasons is a good idea? I’m not, I’m saying it is a bad idea and if we or any other country do it for those reasons then that would be stupid right? So now that we’ve established that keeping old redundant connection types is pointless here in AUSTRALIA we can conclude the ones wanting to keep the copper running when fibre makes it redundant want to do so for emotional and/or nostalgic reasons. btw if you don’t believe it is emotional for others (Clearly it is for you though) perhaps you should take it up with Mr Thodey:

            http://www.businessday.com.au/business/ignore-party-lines-telstra-ceo-tells-investors-20110912-1k5zh.html

            “Mr Thodey conceded that turning off its copper wires was ”emotional” for some investors”

            Great, glad we got that sorted. Now please STFU. Everyone is sick of your pedantic bile.

          • wow the “bu bub bu buu” was even more spectacular than I expected nice.

        • toshP300 and alain, we all know that you two are Liberal stooges, what does Tony Abbott have in his budgee huggers, why its little tosh and alain but in stead of producing some useful like sperm all you two produce is miss information and deceit. You do more harm to the Liberal movement than good so stop trying to impregnate us with your non-sense.

          • interesting debating tactic to employ “reproductive analogy”…..

            anyhow…..

            *what does Tony Abbott have in his budgee huggers*

            more ball’z than the entire Labor frontbench combined possess…

          • “what does tony Abbott have in his budgee huggers
            more ball’z than the entire Labor frontbench combines possess…”

            Tell me tosh, did that comment or observation come from personnel experience, it most be part of the Liberal initiation process, sizing up you leaders balls and then kissing them, well that would explain the smirk on Tony Abbots face, I believe the Labor Party has a simular initiation but there you have to kiss c**t.

          • wow Mike, more worn out tired cliches than a NBN launch (and that includes the orange button), thanks for the laugh.

          • Have you ever noticed that when ever tosh posts a comment, alain follows closely behind, maybe there the same person or it could be an alpha, beta relationship, alain if tosh is behind you, don’t bend over but I think its too late, bad tosh.

          • Hey Mike you have the same posting style as the multiple banned one Pepe/Rizz/RS etc.Must be just an a amazing coincidence eh?

            lol

          • Again, I am still here laughing at you clutching at straws, too, boy…!

            What were you saying?

            We don’t need fast speed NBN… but now that Telstra’s fast speed HFC is cheaper, sign me up… priceless idiocy!

          • Keep clutching at straws and believing the earth is flat, NBN no good and everyone who can clearly see you for what you are, must be RS, boy…LOL!

          • “or it could be an alpha, beta relationship”

            It’s more like a tweedledee and tweedledum relationship Mike.

          • @Mike

            Well you did start your post Tosh and Alain, who else did you expect to answer? – then decided to try and point score because we did, brilliant, love your work.

          • Actually, I was referring to other comments you two have made on previous subjects,
            But I see that it changes from post to post so I guess it depends who was on top the night before.

          • Reading through it, you’re likely right. I can’t be bothered right now (it being late Friday afternoon), but I’ll take a more detailed look later on.

          • Nice try Tosh… you don’t like what others say, so you ask for deletion…! Well in this instance perhaps, because the above, in places, certainly does cross that line…

            But what the Ubermind should do imo, is use his own policy “equally across the spectrum all of the time”…

            http://delimiter.com.au/comments-policy/

            Not just apply/post it to those who criticise him such as – http://delimiter.com.au/2011/11/04/when-mainstream-media-covers-cloud-startups/#comment-194625 And not just against outspoken pro NBN posters.

            Use it “also”, against a small group of persistent anti NBN posters (two particularly) who frequently break the comments policy (and do so seemingly, with open arms) as the Ubermind obviously doesn’t want this site to be perceived as a “geek fest, NBN admiration society”, so these two are obviously given a bit (a lot actually) more “unfair” leeway!

            So it’s no holds barred for some and a link to the policy/banishment for others, even when making like/like comments…

            Shame really, this site and the Uberminds open mindedness elsewhere (writing equally pro/anti NBN opinions”) is quite refreshing.

  3. Conroy may not be perfect but he’s probably the best communications minister we’ve had in a very long time.

    All the Howard government ones were absolutely woeful. Mostly dinosaurs who didn’t know the first thing about communications in the modern world.

  4. You’ve got to give him credit for getting the NBN off the ground, but the filter and similar ideas, egad what was he thinking.

    Still can’t see him going before the next election though.

    • As much as he is as likeable or as useful as a pair of fettered dingo kidneys, I too would be flabbergasted if he moves out of this role before the election.

  5. “Of course, Labor is nothing if not a fairly obstinate political party, stuck in its ways, and Gillard may believe that Conroy has already been rewarded enough..”

    I could respond “LOL” as tosh would, when they have no valid argument to make.

    If Abbott isn’t an example of Abacus toting “stuck in their ways” politician, I’m my own great Aunt.

    Or I could point at the Liberals, then back at Labor. And ask you “what the heck are you smoking?” — and can I have some, please. ;)

  6. Conroy has done something no other communications minister has done for the portfolio in the last ten years.

    The job.

    I may not be impressed with the scope-creep (heh) filter, but in the space of a few short years he has shaken the crap out of the industry and managed to bring a modern concept (NBN) into at least the beginnings of fruition.

    That’s a pretty impressive accomplishment; compare that to a half-arsed pre-election bungle of “OPEL” after 10+ years of SFA. Or Turnbull’s notion of 1990’s internet.

  7. I’d like to see Kate Lundy take his place. She’s been keen on digital culture for quite some time and would fit the job quite well.

  9. I, like most others here, have a very strong love/hate relationship with the guy. I hate him passionately, yet recognise that he’s been the best communications minister we’ve had in a long time. Better than Beazley at least!

    But if there is a cabinet reshuffle in the works, I hope Kate Lundy gets the nod for this job. She’s the only one on that side of politics who actually understands the field.

  10. “Spams and Scams coming through the portal?” The guy is a real piece of work and I for one, are glad he’s going!

  13. If the election is 2013

    the coaliton will not win under abbott , they will not be able to rescind any of labor’s legislation or the nbn

    studying the Austrliaan eleciton system and the way parliament works , after aug/sept 2012 , the full senate has to served his term.

    which runs out in 2015 , so therefore the coalition can not call a double dissolution election until 2015, if there is no election next year, reason why abbott is throwing everything even the kitchen sink for an early election.

    if he doesnt get it, there is no point of him leading the opposition

    • That’s very interesting Joe, so your saying for example, that if the Coalition gains power in a 2013 election, they will be a lame duck government until a half senate election which will be in 2014 but the senates won’t take their seats in parliament until July 2015 and there is no guarantee that the coalition will even then have a majority in the senate. So if there was an election in July 2013, the first 2 years of a 3 year term, the government cant dismiss the NBN and if they don’t win a majority in the 2014 half senate election they cant dismiss the NBN until 2019 and by that time Labour will be back in government.

      LOL don’t just love politics, what a cruel game, all that struggle to gain power and in the end you don’t have any.

      • @Mike

        “LOL don’t just love politics, what a cruel game, all that struggle to gain power and in the end you don’t have any.”

        That’s what the Gillard Labor Government must think every time they need the Independents and the Greens to pass any legislation.

        • Well they have to don’t they to break the deadlock. If it was just the Liberals they would have the clear majority. After all the Liberals had to join with the Nationals under to even get close to parity.

          • The government do have to grovel to the greens and independents. But no matter how unsavoury that may seem to some people, it is a position the opposition would gladly swap places with, to be in government.

    • @Joe H

      I think you need to study the Australian Parliamentary and electoral system much deeper, your post is full of factual errors.

      Suffice to say a Double dissolution can be called at anytime (if it meets the conditions of the Act) and your Senate election timings are just plain wrong.

      Here read all about it.

      http://www.aec.gov.au/FAQs/Elections.htm#next_election

      • Alain

        Yes alain if the conditions were me for example say the coalition win in 2013 to get a doulble dissolution

        , the conditions means they would have to get the opposition vote in house of reps and senate, which is unlikely there is no way labor would make it easy for the coaliton

      • The terms of the four Territory Senators are tied to the term of the House, so any early House election would also include the four Territory Senators. The state Senators cannot face election before 3 August 2013 unless there is a double dissolution, and the current State Senators would retain their seats until 30 June 2014. If the current Labor government stays in office until 2013, any new Coalition government could not begin the process of developing a double dissolution trigger until after 1 July 2014, making it nearly impossible to have a double dissolution election until 2015.)

        • Once again you are misinterpreting the rules on double dissolution, it has nothing to do with timing 2015 or otherwise, it can happen at anytime, not likely given neither of the parties have the majority in the Senate, with the Greens holding the balance of power there.

  14. 50/50 yay for him for getting the NBN to lift off and boo to him for his stupid internet filter which is mainly used for government control via the NBN in the first place.

  15. Renai,

    I think you need better evidence that Conroy is shifting portfolios other than the lack of activity at the Conroy’s media centre and comments to a debutant Greens senator. Have you heard rumours from Labor insiders or anything of that nature?

  16. You could be onto something here Renai.. its unlike this Minster to be dropping back into low-profile status.. His contribution to the local communications scene has been massive with the NBN vision/implementation and the structural separation of Telstra – both incredibly complex and demanding pieces of work. Easy for some commentators to deride some parts of this work but frankly who else in Government is howing this kind of visionary leadership? While the Internet filter concept was a bit of a low point, it really shouldn’t have been a necessary conversation for the Minister to be involved in if industry had got their act into gear and acted collaboratively as they have in the UK and elsewhere. Like you, I would expect there to be cabinet reshuffle before the next election and I think it would be kind of interesting to see Rudd get the comms portfolio! Apparently much of the original NBN vision goes back to him and the debates with Turnbull would be interesting to say the least..

    • heh I seriously doubt Rudd would be shifted into Comms … if there has ever been someone who loves their portfolio to death, it’s Rudd with Foreign Affairs ;)

      Turnbull’s presence in the portfolio does complicate things a little. You can’t exactly slow in too junior a Minister to oppose him — otherwise Turnbull would eat them alive ;)

    • “Easy for some commentators to deride some parts of this work but frankly who else in Government is howing this kind of visionary leadership”

      Except blowing $43 billion on a FTTH rollout which requires all existing fixed line BB working infrastructure to be shut down to help make it viable, with a perpetual extending completion date now set for 2022 and the structural separation of Telstra yet to be approved by the ACCC (and not looking good) and does not have to be completed until 2018 post two elections away is in no way visionary.

      I would call it blind optimism.

      • “Except blowing $43 billion on a FTTH rollout which requires all existing fixed line BB working infrastructure to be shut down to help make it viable, with a perpetual extending completion date now set for 2022 and the structural separation of Telstra yet to be approved by the ACCC (and not looking good) and does not have to be completed until 2018 post two elections away is in no way visionary.”

        What will the Liberals “blow” to migrate the FTTN to FTTH? Sorry? Is that the sound of crickets?

        I can never, ever get a straight answer. Because you have no clue. Neither does the Liberal Party. They don’t think ahead.

        And that vacuous, complete lack of policy framework will come back to haunt them.

        • “And that vacuous, complete lack of policy framework will come back to haunt them.”

          You are totally right Brendan, I’ve said this before clearly the coalition are not looking ahead. It’s not just about the next election but the one after that and the one after that. People who cannot vote now will be voting in the future and they will be wondering why our communication infrastructure wont be up to the job, expect labour and the greens to take advantage of this. The coalitions decisions could cost them votes in future elections.

        • @Brendan

          “What will the Liberals “blow” to migrate the FTTN to FTTH? Sorry? Is that the sound of crickets?”

          Well even giving you the dubious point that the FTTN needs to be migrated to the FTTH anyway anytime soon after rollout, why are you asking the Coalition for costing when the NBN Business plan came out after the last election?

          Based on that precedent I assume you are comfortable with a Coalition Business plan after the 2013 election (if they win)?

          chirp-chirp indeed.

          • “Well even giving you the dubious point that the FTTN needs to be migrated to the FTTH anyway anytime soon after rollout”

            Sorry, are you stating that there’s no need to upgrade FTTN? That, despite it being considered, worldwide as a bridging solution, we’re just going to let it sit. For years. With no change.

            Thank you for eloquently proving my point. No. Vision. None. No. Future. None.

            “why are you asking the Coalition for costing when the NBN Business plan came out after the last election?”

            I’m asking you, how much to migrate from FTTN to FTTP/ FTTH?

            It’s a very simple question. Here, I’ll break it down into a very simple structure — How. Much. Will. Cost?

            You don’t know, do you. Has a study been commissioned by the Coalition? Do we have that CBA? Hello?

            Beuller?

            “Based on that precedent I assume you are comfortable with a Coalition Business plan after the 2013 election (if they win)?”

            Why would I be comfortable with a solution that doesn’t address regulation (Telstra will fight a split) that doesn’t address any FTTN future, doesn’t address the enormous hidden costs (yet another black hole?) of replacing FTTN with FTTH/ FTTP.

            So, either we have a massive cost, which will come directly out of taxes, rather than split; low cost due to the Coalition sitting on their hands for another decade — or?

            No, really. WTF?

          • “Sorry, are you stating that there’s no need to upgrade FTTN?”

            No I didn’t say that, FTTN is cheaper and faster to deploy because it uses existing infrastructure, the inference that infers as soon as you roll out it out you need to consider upgrading it to FTTH is spurious, because it assumes there is adriving need for FTTH because FTTN cannot handle what?

            ” That, despite it being considered, worldwide as a bridging solution, we’re just going to let it sit. For years. With no change.”

            Where is it considered world wide as a bridging solution?

            “I’m asking you, how much to migrate from FTTN to FTTP/ FTTH?”

            Why does this need to happen, you have not proved this requirement yet?

            “You don’t know, do you. Has a study been commissioned by the Coalition? Do we have that CBA? Hello?”

            Hello? we don’t have a CBA for the NBN either, but you are ok with that?

            “Why would I be comfortable with a solution that doesn’t address regulation (Telstra will fight a split) that doesn’t address any FTTN future, doesn’t address the enormous hidden costs (yet another black hole?) of replacing FTTN with FTTH/ FTTP.”

            How do you know they are ‘enormous’ if they are ‘hidden’, make up your mind!

            “So, either we have a massive cost,”

            What massive cost, you just putting the word massive in front of cost doesn’t mean it is so, I could equally say ‘low cost ‘on that basis.

            See that was easy.

          • Just to add, knowing the cost of something, isn’t the same as having a CBA for it.

            Numbers were flying around pre-election. Numbers are flying around for Liberal’s FTTN; just no numbers for the eventual replacement. Because either there is no plan, or there is no intent to upgrade.

            And since Turnbull has been so stringent in the past demanding an NBN CBA, where is the FTTN one? I mean, it’s all well and good saying “after the election” but that’s what he held the other guy accountable for. It’s only fair we ask the same.

            Do we really need another decade of inaction, broken regulation and a monopoly bent on reclaiming all customers? How is that a win?

            “Yay, we spent crap all money and you now have crap all infrastructure, aren’t we awesome!”

          • “Just to add, knowing the cost of something, isn’t the same as having a CBA for it.”

            Yes I know, that’s why the NBN Businesses Plan is not a CBA.

            ” Numbers are flying around for Liberal’s FTTN;”

            What numbers?

            “just no numbers for the eventual replacement.”

            Here we go again, why does it need replacement, what is driving that ‘replacement’ that you infer is so urgently needed post FTTN rollout?

            ” Because either there is no plan, or there is no intent to upgrade.”

            How do you know there is no intent to upgrade?

            “And since Turnbull has been so stringent in the past demanding an NBN CBA, where is the FTTN one? I mean, it’s all well and good saying “after the election” but that’s what he held the other guy accountable for. It’s only fair we ask the same.”

            Well that’s like a dog chasing its tail, we are still waiting on the NBN CBA and it is being rolled out anyway, I assume the Coalition has the right to follow Labor precedent.

            “Do we really need another decade of inaction, broken regulation and a monopoly bent on reclaiming all customers? How is that a win?”

            Are you referring to the NBN or something else?

        • And that vacuous, complete lack of policy framework will come back to haunt them.

          It is haunting them now and us, think Howard + telstra separation. All the Howard govt could see was the $$$$ and they left us with the tab.

          • The tab you keep going on about, dont you remember, your 43 zillion dollar white elephant North Korean communist plot,
            alain if the liberals shat in your mouth you would swarrow it.

  17. The filter and his haphazard way of attacking problems are what stick out for me.

    -Canceling Opel (when NBN Mk II will use similar technology to deliver service and unambitiously aims for the same max speeds)
    -The complete misread of the situation re: FTTN NBN Mk I resulting in that complete farce when Telstra up and got itself disqualified
    -The refusal to promote separation of Telstra until Sept 09, 6 months after the announcement of NBN Mk II
    -All but accusing Sen. Ludlum and any Australian who didn’t support his filter of ‘supporting pedophilia’

    But hey, let’s all forget that cos the guy managed to luck out and get one thing on the boil… I wouldn’t be terribly surprised if Labor win the next election by staging some sort of big hand out 6 months prior to the next election. Based on the sample presented here, it appears that memories are ludicrously short for failures and voters are easily bribed by pollies dangling shiny things in front of their faces…

    • “-Canceling Opel (when NBN Mk II will use similar technology to deliver service and unambitiously aims for the same max speeds)”

      No, it doesn’t. Opel offered 12mbits. NBN offered 100Mbit, now up to 1Gbit. Wireless technology wasn’t formalised to begin with, so at best “simliar”.

      I’d like to see you push 1gbit down a copper tail over ~1km, based on currently ratified standards in Australia. ;)

      “The complete misread of the situation re: FTTN NBN Mk I resulting in that complete farce when Telstra up and got itself disqualified”

      Telstra disqualified itself. Sol tried to play the man, not the game. And lost. Then he left. Surprise. Don’t pin Telstra’s monumental screw-up on anyone but the company.

      The new guy is a bit more focused on building Telstra, not systematically destroying their business lines.

      “All but accusing Sen. Ludlum and any Australian who didn’t support his filter of ‘supporting pedophilia’”

      I think we can all agree that is the closest thing to a genuine Godwin, without using the inflammatory ‘nazi’ phrase there is. Apart from calling opponents fascist nazi pedophiles. There’s still time, though.

  19. My opinion…..if you’re going to post stuff like this you need to back it up,otherwise all I see is another click seeker. Haveagoodweekendeverybody.

Comments are closed.