news Communications Minister Stephen Conroy has demanded that the Coalition publish its policy platform for the next election in the area of broadband and telecommunications, pointing out that this is the third time, in as many months, that he has made this inquiry of the Coalition; asking it to disclose its broadband policy, the technology it proposes to use, and the cost to Australians.
Last week the Gillard Government announced its three year National Broadband Network rollout plan detailing the deployment of fibre and wireless broadband infrastructure to 3.5 million premises in 1500 communities in every state and territory in Australia by 2015. The Labor Federal Government’s NBN plan will eventually see high-speed broadband made available to every one of the 11 million homes in Australia by 2021.
In comparison, Conroy said, besides giving a speech last August, and campaigning negatively against the NBN, Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull had not tendered an actual broadband policy. He added that the Coalition currently had no broadband policy document, no funding commitment and no information on the ‘Turnbull plan’ from anyone in the Coalition.
In fact, Conroy said: “In the first three months of 2012, Mr Turnbull has made 479 tweets, issued 9 press releases and delivered 4 public speeches. In that time he has only provided one piece of policy detail – to buy back Telstra’s copper, at an unspecified cost.” Conroy also added that while Turnbull’s Coalition partners continued to call for fibre to the home in regional Australia, their leader kept saying that investment in 21st century broadband was a waste.
Turnbull had claimed, mid-February, that there was enough capacity on private satellites already in orbit or scheduled for launch, for the NBN to deliver broadband to the 200,000 or so premises in remote Australia without building its own. He had also said that outsourcing or leasing capacity would be more appropriate. However, it remains unclear whether leasing capacity would be able to deliver the speed or capacity of satellite broadband which NBN Co plans to deliver using it.
Conroy’s list of questions that the Minister wants Turnbull to answer are as follows, relating to the areas of costs, technology and policy:
- How much will his network cost?
- How will he achieve the structural separation of Telstra?
- Who supports his contention that Telstra will not require additional payment for nationalising the copper?
- How does he cost a network with a capital cost of $35B at $50B?
- How many FTTN nodes does he plan to build?
- What percentage of households will be served by which technology – FTTN, HFC, wireless?
- What does he really think the future requirements for bandwidth are in Australia?
- When does he expect his network will need to be replaced by FTTH (he calls it a migration path)?
- What satellites does he plan to use to deliver broadband beyond the reach of wireless?
- How will he ensure comprehensive broadband availability through his hit and miss approach?
- Does he support his leader’s belief that everyone is happy with wireless?
- Does he support the National Party view that fibre to the home is the right solution? Does he support their target of 50% fibre to the home for regional Australia?
- What he will actually do for the year it will take the Productivity Commission to subject his plan to a Cost Benefit Analysis?
- How much will his ‘voucher’ system for regional Australia cost? How much dearer are ‘comparable’ regional prices to metropolitan prices?
- When will his plan be submitted to shadow cabinet for funding approval?
The office of Malcolm Turnbull declined to comment on Conroy’s statement.
opinion/analysis
I’m not saying the Coalition’s own telecommunications policy is without merit — in fact, as I’ve previously written, it does have a great deal of merit. However, broadly I agree with Conroy. Turnbull has simply not outlined the policy in enough detail yet for the electorate to be secure in the knowledge that it is good policy — in fact, Turnbull has not outlined it officially at all, in any kind of document.
To be fair to the Coalition, the NBN policy which Labor took to the 2007 election was also similarly threadbare, so Conroy is calling the kettle black a bit here. However, that doesn’t mean that it’s OK for the Coalition to do the same. It wasn’t OK that Labor hadn’t fully fleshed out its telecommunications policy before the 2007 election, and it’s not OK that the Coalition hasn’t fleshed out its alternative now. Conroy’s questions here are legitimate.
Opinion/analysis by Renai LeMay
All the Coalition seem to do is denigrate the Government policy without suggesting viable alternatives.
I am starting to think that the Liberal Party policy on telecommunications is to have no policy.
The sooner this NBN madness stops the better. The alternative to NBN is FTTN which is a fraction of the cost and can be rolled out quickly. A change of Government is needed ASAP.
“The sooner this NBN madness stops the better”
I agree, there are far too many ill-informed comments on the matter…
“The alternative to NBN is FTTN which is a fraction of the cost and can be rolled out quickly.”
I’m sure what you actually meant to say is FTTN is a joke and will be an unmitigated disaster. Such a network will need to be upgraded as soon as it has been finished rolling out. With a start date most likely no sooner that 2016 plus a five year build time that puts the completion date of this patchwork plan at 2021 (Just like the NBN). So yes it is an alternative just not a very good or well thought out one.
“A change of Government is needed ASAP.”
Or what? Can’t you wait for the 2013 election? What’s the rush? You got a train to catch?
I still don’t get why people who have a beef with the government always demand a reelection.
Deal with it until 2013, then you get your chance. Not sooner.
“The alternative to NBN is FTTN which is a fraction of the cost and can be rolled out quickly. A change of Government is needed ASAP.”
A fraction of the cost of what?
There has been no stated cost. It’s like saying “Lets go shopping for this product at Coles rather than Woolworths because it’s cheaper”. – Even though at that point in time the product at Coles has not got a pricetag on it.
As long as there are no cold hard facts released by Turnbull, that argument is invalid.
Work with solidified facts, not with dreams of cheaper-but-we-actually-haven’t-seen-the-price-but-should-be-cheaper “facts”
I’m really out of touch. I missed the newsflash that Turnbull now suddenly wants to buy back Telstra’s copper. So not only is the Coalition’s policy completely lacking in details, it appears to be completely hare-brained too. I’m trying to see the good in this – I’m interpreting this proposed buy-back as the Coalition indirectly admitting that they completely mishandled the privatisation of Telstra. That doesn’t change the fact that they’re trying to fix an old mistake by making a new, even bigger mistake, i.e. “Oh, bugger, I seem to have shot myself in the foot. I guess I need to amputate my whole leg now.”
The coalition does have a plan. Do it cheaper by using a mix of appropriate Technologies.
How much will his network cost? Did you not read the plan.
It’s going to be less (cheaper!)
How will he achieve the structural separation of Telstra?
In an appropriate way!
Who supports his contention that Telstra will not require additional payment for nationalising the copper?
If Telstra want significant $ for its copper then our plan may not be cheaper. Therefore it follows that they will not ask, as the plan is cheaper.
How does he cost a network with a capital cost of $35B at $50B?
Labour party programs always blow out by 15 billion dollars.
How many FTTN nodes does he plan to build?
An appropriate amount.
What percentage of households will be served by which technology – FTTN, HFC, wireless?
An appropriate %, with our fiscally responsible plan.
What does he really think the future requirements for bandwidth are in Australia?
Cheaper dammit. Didn’t you read the plan?
When does he expect his network will need to be replaced by FTTH (he calls it a migration path)?
Our plan is so good it will never need an upgrade to inferior fiber.
What satellites does he plan to use to deliver broadband beyond the reach of wireless?
The appropriate satellites will be chosen, so as not to waste money like the Labour recklessness.
How will he ensure comprehensive broadband availability through his hit and miss approach?
The Government will engage Private industry in a constructive (and appropriate!) way to ensure all Australians receive the best broadband possible (where appropriate).
Does he support his leader’s belief that everyone is happy with wireless?
Everyone is happy with wireless (BTW, glass fiber is wireless…)
Does he support the National Party view that fibre to the home is the right solution? Does he support their target of 50% fibre to the home for regional Australia?
Certainly, where appropriate.
What he will actually do for the year it will take the Productivity Commission to subject his plan to a Cost Benefit Analysis?
Engage with industry in a non destructive or wasteful fashion.
How much will his ‘voucher’ system for regional Australia cost? How much dearer are ‘comparable’ regional prices to metropolitan prices?
It will be cheaper (see the plan above) in both cases.
When will his plan be submitted to shadow cabinet for funding approval?
At the appropriate time.
Oh great addition to the debate there Paul.
“When appropriate” isn’t a valid answer to any of those questions.
Have no fear NBN fanboy. We will give our plan more detail at the “appropriate” time.
Trust us, we are the Liberal Party…
But seriously, giving more detail might switch the debate from the $50 billion NBN to our lack of ideas. We don’t need to win the election, just not lose it by providing anything people might find controversial. Every Labour policy has been painted by the press as a failure, so we just need to ride that train into office.
The best part is that your comment is actually something we could plausibly hear from MT.
Well played, sir. Well played.
I think that’s the joke that James missed.
James was joking (he posted it on WP too), the funny thing is that these are exactly the sort of answers we hear from the NOalition FanBois and the NOalition itself!
Doh, I meant Paul. :-p
But I meant James…
Call me successfully trolled :) (Saw the guy post it on Whirlpool :P)
No fear; the best satire is that which cuts closest to the real bone.
The problem is, if you start reading and get too disgusted to continue it reads just like a lot of MT fanboi arguments. It was only if you continue on you go, no he has be be joking, no one is that big a douche. (members of the Liberal party excluded as they don’t belive what they say anyway)
hmmm, where is the link to flag the post as inappropriate!
The vital factor is for Senator Conroy to expedite the roll-out of the NBN and to pull-out all stops to achieve the best result by the next election. In fact the NBN delivery could be the best chance the Gillard Government has to sway Australians to favour it when casting their vote.
The issue that Conroy has is that the latest rollout has over promised and will almost certainly under deliver.
Rather than a 3 year plan, it will be 4.5 years until some suburbs have active services (Westen, ACT
Hoopers Crossing, VIC), because design isn’t scheduled to start until September 2015, meaning services will won’t be available until September 2016.
If we assume that the rollout is at full speed in July 2015, then 6000 premises a day with 250 work days in a year, that means 1.5 million premises in a year. So the headline 3.5 million premises becomes 2 million. NBNCo have assumed a 70% take-up rate, so the number of active services drops to 1.7 million.
Will “almost certainly” under deliver? Them’s weasel words right there!
You’re either sure of yourself that it will under deliver… or you just kind of sort of think so.
Which is it? Do tell.
So give us the Detailed alternative plan then Matty..ooops, there isnt one.. Roll-on NBN
Be fair, Paul, anyone can see that while poor old Mathew may be sure of his allegiances, he’s not too clear on the details.
As when he says: ‘design isn’t scheduled to start until September 2015, meaning services will won’t be available until September 2016.’
See, it’s as clear as mud – services will or won’t be available. Which by an amazing coincidence seems to exactly parallel the coalition’s NBN-replacement ‘policy’.
How can the Libs possibly have a genuine National Broadband Network policy when they cant even afford their so called “articles of faith” policies (70 Billion dollar black hole and counting). Plus we all know that Mr “im no Bill Gates” doesn’t think we even need an NBN so the chances of getting anything substantive from the Libs are basically ZERO!
The plan is to destroy the NBN, dismantle all contracts, pay out those invested companies and do nothing for a few years. So yeah i guess it wouldn’t look good to show a plan like that to the public now would it. Politics for the party, that’s all your seeing here.
It would be called a market-based mechanism for Broadband and internet services
So the same market mechanism that’s been trapped in a Telstra controlled PSTN hell for the last 12+ years?
just like what we had from 1997-2007, go Malcolm, you are our only hope to ‘back to stoneage’
oh goody, can we reimport Sol and the amigos too?
We’ve got one already, and it stinks.
The Coalition wants the private sector to build the NBN so they’re going to buy Telstra’s copper and give it to the NBNCo to roll out FTTN? That’s completely inconsistent. The NBNCo is still government owned.
Why on gods’ green earth would the government buy the copper. Surely they’re better off trying to bribe Telstra into separation in order to create the ‘Network Co’, possibly by merging in the NBNCo’s assets and some money. Then at least they have a private sector company that can do the job.
Having said that, in his Press Club speech mid last year Turnbull allowed for Telstra to build the network without structural separation. I think this is a much more likely outcome. No wonder they don’t want anyone to know.
Buy back the copper? Why indeed.
Remember what Kerry Packer said, when he sold Channel 9 to Alan Bond and bought it back a few years later for a song? “You only get one Alan Bond in your lifetime.”
This time it will be Telstra saying “You only get one Malcolm Turnbull in your lifetime.”
Check the ALP polling, at this stage Labor is set to crash so badly in the next election that Turnbull will be under no pressure whatsoever to deliver on promises.
I follow the polls very closely, and they don’t tell a simple story at all. Labor’s losses will be worst in Queensland and WA (especially the latter), but will be relatively minor in NSW, SA and Victoria. Yes, they will lose in 2013 – but to think that any government can afford to be complacent just because they can is unlikely to be a successful political strategy. The wheel may turn one way, but it can turn back the other as well. Voters react quicker to failures and punish governments far more readily than in the past.
I tend to agree Tel and herein lies the problem.
Regardless of who is in power, each major player has an ideology which may need to be kept in check from time to time.
If one side is swept into power, there is no one to keep the bastards honest (in this case, once the Senate changes over) and they will be able to do whatever they want, unbridled and regardless of who or what it may negatively impact upon.
Whilst a hung parliament is not healthy either, I think a landslide is just as bad.
The valuable thing is not the copper, it’s the right of way to have access to pits, ducts, etc.
It is entirely possible that this right-of-way was never owned by Telstra anyhow and remains state government property. If local councils had half a brain (hint: they don’t) they would fit general purpose trenches under the footpath and rent out the space to all-comers.
By the way, I’ve seen two fiber roll outs recently in Sydney, neither was NBN. One was Optus (putting in their own Optus tagged pits right along the roadside) and the other was AARNET (dropping into an existing tunnel). I think there are some interesting developments lurking under the radar.
It’s true that the copper is of no long-term value to anyone – except to Malcolm Turnbull, since his FTTN proposal depends absolutely on it. Thereby guaranteeing that Telstra will hold out as long as possible for as high a price as possible. Think they won’t? Then you haven’t been paying attention over the past few years.
I’ve seen Optus install fibre recently too, to a building where I used to work. And a right mess they made of it, too. Great big ugly concrete and bitumen scars all over the place. Really quite a terrible job.
Australia is a lucky country with third rate politicians who at the best of times are not too sure what they are doing. they are a bunch of wastrels
Turnbull believes in the free market remember that? Competitive industry, where consumers have more than one choice. I’m not talking about fake choices here where you can “choose” which brand to have printed on your bill but everything else is government controlled (e.g. the NSW electricity industry), I’m talking about genuine choice.
The moment we had Optus offering competition in Australia, and every single year thereafter, we had significant improvement in communications. Higher bandwidth, cheaper services. Why on Earth would you fix something that demonstrably ain’t broken?
If its not broken, then why the hell doesnt my local area have anything more than 15% of premises with ADSL1 ?
Imo, in fixed line comms we previously had little actual competition, it was all Telstra favoured no matter which way you looked at it – a DSLAM or two in Telstra’s exchange (if they allowed it) then accessing Telstra’s network. Either that or simply being totally, a Telstra reseller, whilst all competing against Telstra.
Not good.
Prices were high, technology was old (copper) and stalled (remember no ADSL2+ until we say) and fibre not seriously on the radar, as everyone from incumbent with multi-billion dollar network profits, to accessors with minimally priced ULL/LLS, although huffing and puffing on the outside, were actually all warm and comfy, with high retail prices and little investment outlay, thank you. Plus there was regulatory litigation regularly.
Seriously, Telstra didn’t even consider becoming competitively priced and no one at all was seriously interested in anything but the status quo, until the threat of the NBN forced them to all sit up and take notice.
But of course, according to Malcolm and those similarly ideological relentless NBN critics, it was all coincidence that the pricing decreases all feverishly started around the time of the initial NBN plan(s).
Surely if your the libs the best idea would be to say – well the government has already gone down this path and now its too expensive to backtrack….so we’ll just continue on with the NBN.
Libs get in power & we get our precious broadband – win win
Comments are closed.