news Communications Minister Stephen Conroy has issued an angry statement rejecting Coalition criticism of Labor’s plans to deploy fibre to the home infrastructure in rural areas throughout Australia, demanding the Coalition “come clean” with its own plans for rural Australia.
This week several Coalition parliamentarians issued statements criticising the National Broadband Network Company for what they saw as a change in the company’s approach to deploying NBN infrastructure in rural Australia. In a statement, Shadow Regional Communications Minister Luke Hartsuyker claimed NBN Co had originally planned to deploy fibre to the home in towns with 1,000 people, but had recently changed its policy and would now only roll out fibre to towns with 1,000 residences.
“Page 12 of the 2010 NBN Corporate Plan reflects what Kevin Rudd announced in April 2009 – that fibre would be extended ‘to towns with a population of around 1,000 or more people’,” said Hartsuyker. “This is another example of the NBN Co scrambling to conceal the fact that the business case for the NBN does not stack up.”
“To change these guidelines from ‘people’ to ‘premises’ and then blame it on a ‘typo’ just shows the depths they will go to try and gloss over the cost blowouts and rollout delays. They are very good with the spin but they are always caught out by the facts. NBN Co’s comments again highlight the lack of transparency and complete contempt this government owned company has for the Australian people. One wonders how many other parts of the Corporate Plan have changed because of typos.”
Liberal MP Joanna Gash also issued her own media release. “Just like the promise of ‘no Carbon Tax’, Labor has now backtracked on its NBN election pledge, hanging many rural and regional voters out to dry,” Gash said. “It’s becoming more and more clear that Labor is now just pandering to its metropolitan constituency at the expense of anyone living in a rural or regional area.
Gash urged residents of smaller villages to write to the Prime Minister to express their outrage over the sudden exclusion of their homes from an NBN fibre optic broadband connection. “It’s time to let the Prime Minister well and truly know that Australians won’t stand for another election lie,” Gash said.
However, in a retaliatory statement, Communications Minister Stephen Conroy attacked the Coalition over what he said was “misleading” behavior.
“Since the Government’s press release of April 2009, an Implementation Study by McKinsey and KPMG recommended that it was cost effective to increase the coverage of NBN fibre from 90 per cent to 93 per cent of Australia,” Conroy said. “This means that under the Gillard Government, NBN fibre will reach 70 per cent of homes and businesses in regional Australia.
“This includes towns with less than 1000 premises where they are on the NBN transit network, such as Inglewood in Queensland, Brookton in Western Australia, and Trentham in Victoria. The Government announced that it would adopt this target on 20 December 2010 and released a list of towns that would receive fibre.” In the intervening eighteen months, Conroy said, the Coalition had sat on its hands and developed no broadband plan.
“The one thing we do know is that a Coalition Government won’t connect any homes or businesses in regional Australia to fibre – not to towns with 1000 people and not to towns with 1000 premises,” said Conroy. “The Coalition should explain how they plan to provide broadband to the towns that will get fibre through the NBN. The Gillard Government’s plans for the NBN are clear. It is time the Coalition came clean with theirs.”
opinion/analysis
To be honest, I’m not quite sure who is objectively right here, although I will note Kevin Rudd’s original statement regarding the issue appeared to be an approximation rather than a firm commitment for the NBN to reach towns of 1,000 people. In this context, the Coalition appears to be clutching at straws here.
However, what I do know is that it doesn’t matterly overly much, as far as the political situation is concerned. Unlike Labor, the Coalition hasn’t yet released a plan to reach these rural areas with broadband, and what we know of Coalition telecommunications policy suggests that residents in most rural areas will be far worse off long-term under the Coalition’s approach than under Labor’s. Because of this, I find it hard to accept the Coalition criticism on this issue. As far as I can see, the residents in these areas have a lot more certainty under Labor’s policy than they do under the Coalition’s.
Image credit: NBN Co
The Coalition strategy at present regarding their own policies is to avoid or delay any close examination prior to the election. The reason, I believe, is to keep their message simple and keep the focus on Labor. They don’t need to be better, they don’t need to be factual, they just need to keep people dissatisfied with Labor long enough that they’ll vote for something else.
They have the luxury of not needing to actually produce anything before the election so maintaining ambiguity in their policy allows them to give unhappy voters an impression that they will fix everything without the risk of being called liars later when they deliver less than was expected – since they haven’t made any specific promises. A case in point is MT’s language around broadband policy. The only thing changing are the words, no firm commitment to any specific course of action has been made since the original FTTN. “Complete the vision of the NBN”, “Fast broadband”, these are subjective terms and don’t mean anything specific, our minds fill those blanks in so we have only ourselves to blame later when it turns out we filled in wrong.
Labor currently can’t do that because they are in the position of being in power and as such must “do” as opposed to simply heckle. “Doing” is difficult because you don’t get any do overs if you don’t get it absolutely right first time. We also live in a finite world with finite resources so not everyone can be a winner and losers complain loudly.
Heckling is easy because nobody ever gets everything absolutely right first time and in the real word that’s often an impossible target anyway. Hecklers don’t need to produce a result, they just fling mud from a distance. In some places those people might be called Trolls. It makes me wonder if Mr Abbott has ever spent any time lurking under local bridges.
After the next election the LNP will likely call a double dissolution. At that point they’ll gain control of both houses and hold absolute power. Last time that occured we got work choices, which seems a distant spectre now but was very real and horrific for those who had no power to fight it.
“After the next election the LNP will likely call a double dissolution.”
There are a range of parliamentary considerations, constitutional issues and also factors involving the High Court when talking about calling a double dissolution.
Should the Coalition win the next election, short of securing a Senate majority at the polls with the half-Senate election, they will realistically be unable to call a double dissolution before early 2015.
I find it hard to believe that any political party would risk its hold on power halfway through its term in office.
And remember that with a double dissolution the senate quota number is much lower meaning that minor parties and the Greens will have a much better chance of gaining senate seats for 4 or 8 years. I can’t see the coalition risking a senate with many more minor parties holding the balance of power.
If only MT would get behind the NBN as it stands currently (and challenge Abbott for the Lib’s leadership). Then i’d have no problems voting for them.
As a swinging voter/pro NBNer (so currently Labor by default), after the out and out lies the current Coalition have made and the negative campaign they have run with their media mates, regarding the NBN, I don’t think they ever could support the NBN as it stands.
And personally because of this, even if they did, I certainly wouldn’t be gifting them my vote so easily … as frankly, they don’t deserve it!
+1 although frankly the Libs dont deserve my vote for the last 18months of barefaced dishonesty they have been peddling!
typo: matterly
I know he’s not popular but it is times like this that I think Conroy was a perfect choice to head the building of the NBN project. He’s
a) Relentlessly driven to make the project succeed
b) A ruthless headkicker of opposition to the project
c) Maybe not as technical as you’d like (not many other Labor people are except for Lundy) but has shown a real willingness to get across the issues
If it wasn’t for his support of mandatory filtering he would be trumpeted by the IT community as our best comms minister ever, IMO.
Conroy is being his usual charming self, but he does have a point. All of the towns scheduled to get fibre under the NBN will not be getting fibre under the Coalition’s plan. So to complain that some will be missing out seems disingenuous when nobody is getting fibre at all under the Coalition.
And with no specific details about the Coalition’s plan, it’s impossible to say whether the Coalition will actually be able to deliver improvements to regional Australia before the NBN.
“And with no specific details about the Coalition’s plan, it’s impossible to say whether the Coalition will actually be able to deliver improvements to regional Australia before the NBN.”
Very unlikely.
It’s not always commercially viable to simply walk into Mordor. I mean, deploy in some areas. So unless there’s an offset, investment or some other kicker to help drive regional deployment, Turnbull is making claims about the NBN, his policies don’t even account for.
.. and the local-state L/NP party members continue to call for a broader NBN for regional areas. It’s all a bit Shakespearian (Much ado about nothing).
Best comment today.
“It’s not always commercially viable to simply walk into Mordor. I mean, deploy in some areas.”
In Soviet Russia, you go to the NBN, Mordor comes to you and Abbott has a clue.
Yes it’s strange for anyone to criticise another for doing more than they them self plan to (even for their own bread and butter Coalition partners constituents), do so with a straight face and then actually expect to be taken seriously.
However, many rural people (those I actually want the NBN for) have commented here and at other forums, saying things such as, “my current comms is crap and has been for years, but still no NBN for me for at least 3 years, thanks a lot NBNCo”…
Thus ignoring their plight for the last decade or more was caused by private enterprise, due to unprofitability, ignoring them (as will again be the case sans NBN). While NBNCo will fix their problem, but just not tomorrow.
So, these same people now have another hollow and ridiculous claim to support :/
“Thus ignoring their plight for the last decade or more was caused by private enterprise, due to unprofitability, ignoring them (as will again be the case sans NBN).”
Irony of the L/NP not really engaging with Private Enterprise to build out into the bush (apart from the occasional handout, most of which went to Telstra) for at least two terms, when now, suddenly it’s all very important?
Priceless.
History does not show the L/NP are capable of handling broadband sensibly; why people persist in believing, (praying?) that Turnbull will become the messiah (the spice must flow..) and lead us all into a brighter future, is beyond me.
Turnbull may keep the NBN. He may also be ‘forced’ by party policies to roll back the deployment, fracturing it’s footprint and shortchanging the bush in the process.
If there were bipartisan support for FTTP, I would support focusing on rural areas first, however, If it were my business, I would focus on where I can make some money back for now.
“To be honest, I’m not quite sure who is objectively right here”
2010:
Implementation study – aims for 93%
Statement of expectations = 90% min, 93% target.
NBNco Corporate plan – 93% target.
NBNco Corporate plan page 65 – Detailed explanation of planning rules, including 1000 premises rule.
2012:
Coaltion: OMG it’s premises not people, the NBN has changed goals behind peoples backs, they are fudging numbers to improve business case!!!
And you’re still confused as to who is in the right?
*Page 63
Kinda of amazing to see how far someone can distort the truth so they can toe the party line.
If the goal is to hit 93% of premises, wouldnt that be in the ballpark of 93% of the population anyway?
They were talking about the 1,000 premises limit on towns. Apparently NBNCo or the government or somebody released something which incorrectly said towns with population above 1,000 would get fibre but it’s actually towns with premises above 1,000 which will be getting it.
The thing is, it’s always been 1,000 premises, that hasn’t actually changed. And of course, nobody in regional Australia is getting fibre under the Coalition’s plan so their complaints seem quite disingenuous.
Depends on how far the population is skewed either way, quite possibly though.
“The proposed FTTP footprint is shown in Exhibit 5.3. It should be noted that this footprint actually
extends to 92.3% of premises as of June 2010 but covers 93% of premises at the end of the roll-out.
The FTTP footprint has been determined as follows:
i. All communities with greater than 1,000 premises (determined by G-NAF data) were
mapped, and then remote communities (i.e. those requiring extensive transit backhaul)
were backed out, to provide the minimum FTTP coverage of 90%
ii. Transit backhaul routes required to service this FTTP footprint and 8 satellite earth stations
were then plotted, and any communities with greater than 1,000 premises excluded under i.
along these routes were added back in, resulting in 90.8% FTTP coverage;
iii. All additional communities with over 1,000 premises were then added back in, together with
the additional transit backhaul needed to serve these communities, resulting in 91.4% FTTP
coverage; and
iv. All communities with greater than 500 premises that are passed by the transit backhaul
routes resulting from i-iii were added in, resulting in 92.3% FTTP coverage.”
Page 63 the NBN Co. Corporate plan 2010.
There does seem an inconsistency with the first government expectations:
“2. The technologies utilised should be Fibre to 93% of premises (including Greenfields
developments) (defined in this Plan as the Fibre Network), Fixed Wireless to 4% of premises
(delivering at least 12Mbps) (defined in this Plan as the Fixed Wireless Network or Wireless
Network), and Satellite to 3% of premises (defined in this Plan as the Satellite Network);”
“Connect homes, schools and workplaces with optical fibre (fibre to the premises or ‘FTTP’),
providing broadband services to Australians in urban and regional towns with speeds of 100
megabits per second – 100 times faster than those currently used by most people extending to
towns with a population of around 1,000 or more people;”
These two criteria could very well be in collision, if you did do all 1000 population towns this could go over 93% fibre coverage with corresponding cost increases.
At the end of the day the opposition is late to the party here
“These two criteria could very well be in collision, if you did do all 1000 population towns this could go over 93% fibre coverage with corresponding cost increases.”
Actually, it’s the opposite. Because that 93% is premises coverage, not population coverage as well. There’s always going to be an average of more than 1 person per premises, to account for couples/families/housemates etc.
It’d likely end up somewhere around the same number of premises, but just to more population and a different distribution of population.
It’d be interesting to do the maths actually…. if I could be bothered….
“There’s always going to be an average of more than 1 person per premises, to account for couples/families/housemates etc.”
While you’re probably right… Premises != Home
What is truly remarkable, by repeatedly mentioning “transparent subsidies”, “infrastructure competition”, etc, the Coalition is clearly signalling they will dismantle all of Conroy’s policies, e.g. state monopoly, metro regional pricing cross-subsidy, etc.
Massive regime change from fast-closing Labor era, yet not a single telco industry participant has come out attacking or criticising Malcolm over the proposed Liberal policies.
Instead we’ve had one guy called “Jason”(?) doing pricing work for an lSP actually trying to defend Abbott’s assertions about broadband getting more expensive in that “Abbott consciously lying” article. Now, just yesterday we have Carl Jackson from Transact defending Malcolm on FTTN /FTTH relative cost.
Curious isn’t it? Sharp contrast to tech blogs like ZDNet and ABC games and tech attacking Malcolm Turnbull.
“Massive regime change from fast-closing Labor era, yet not a single telco industry participant has come out attacking or criticising Malcolm over the proposed Liberal policies.”
By Jove you’re right! I mean, there’s been no criticism since at least Monday!
“MyNetFone’s CEO has rebuked Malcolm Turnbull’s claims the Coalition could deliver a cheaper model for the National Broadband Network (NBN), stating the cost of maintaining the copper network will add to a fibre-to-the-node (FTTN) deployment.”
http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/431389/coalition_nbn_cheaper_no_says_mynetfone_ceo/?fp=4&fpid=78268965
and before Monday?
Read http://www.MalcomTurnbull.com.au.
Its a real cracker. The guy’s getting trolled on his own website. Not that pro-nbn people are trolls, I’m certainly not on most days. However hes being completely annihilated on his own site, by people that seem to be more in contact.
The LNP have alot to fear, they’re disconnected with the population as much as Labor.
There’s this wonderful device called google.
@Stuart
“Massive regime change from fast-closing Labor era, yet not a single telco industry participant has come out attacking or criticising Malcolm over the proposed Liberal policies.”
That’s because the Coalition policy has no details to attack. Can you not see this?
“Instead we’ve had one guy called “Jason”(?) doing pricing work for an lSP actually trying to defend Abbott’s assertions about broadband getting more expensive in that “Abbott consciously lying” article. Now, just yesterday we have Carl Jackson from Transact defending Malcolm on FTTN /FTTH relative cost.”
You seem to enjoy selective reading. For a start, this is 2 instances, where there are HUNDREDS of instances positive for the NBN and negative on the Coalition plan.
Second, that “one guy” fails to undertand that it is a law of diminishing returns that says it is impossible for services to always get cheaper. Do you see our electricity getting cheaper (BEFORE the carbon tax, don’t get petty)? What about Gas? Water? Sewerage? Groceries? No, none of these get cheaper over time. They get more expensive, because of inflation AND because of rising costs to provide them better and more reliably….EXACTLY like broadband. The artificial lowering of prices we have seen is because Telstra had the monopoly until ULL was forced on them in the early 2000’s, breaking through the artificially high pricing that Telstra had held. We are now bottoming out on that pricing- we only have one way to go from here- up.
Third- Did you read my reply to Carl’s comment? Or are you maintaining your selective reading again? FTTN is cheaper to rollout IN ISOLATION. It is NOT cheaper in such a spread out country as ours, nor is it cheaper once you factor in buying the copper- the thing that ALLOWS it to be cheaper in the first place by using existing infrastructure.
Saying “there is no criticism of the Coalition plan in industry is interesting and perhaps indicates it’s not as bad as it’s made out by “fanatics” on Tech websites” is ridiculous. There IS no plan to criticise. AND the industry is gearing towards the NBN; they have no IDEA what they’ll be required to do if the Coalition get in and halt it. The Coalition aren’t talking to them, because they don’t HAVE any details.
So Joanna Gash yet another Liberal party member in favor of a 93%(+?) FttH network for Australia. Can someone please compile a list of all coalition members in favour the NBN and more specifically in favor of FttH for more residences? I think it would be very entertaining.
Why is it that Julia Gillard is criticised for not standing for anything? Meanwhile Coalition people can lobby for fibre in their areas and turn up for opening of school halls in their electorates while criticising the plan to build them?
Because whatever she’s stood for, she’s changed as soon as few weeks later? We all expect lies, backpedaling etc. from our illustrious politicians, but she’s set new records for being two faced.
I’ll never even HOPE that they may do what they say from now on.
Someone could make a killing in politics by stating their promises on a Statuatory Declaration, with consequent risk of jail terms for failing to fulfill the declared promise.
I would love the NBN to come to my area, the town it meets requirements re:#premises, but I don’t expect it to happen, not only due to likely change of government. it would require conduit bored under 400m of trees. Some moron 30years ago decided to put 10pair copper cable direct in ground to service a deadend 2km street with 15 properties.
I see similar cessation of fibre at immediate borders of suburban rollout in Tasmania. Even my 1km wireless link to working internet is to a shed thats unlikely to receive an upgraded line.
Leaving Labor/Gillard promises aside, can I ask SBD if you get power via lines?
If you do and you are within town boundaries of a town with 1000 premises, then there’s no reason that wouldn’t get fibre to you aerially. You could even HAVE a new trench dug- they aren’t doing much civil works, but they have said they’ll do some.
Is your town on the NBN fibre lists for your state? And how far out from town do you live?
Yes about 1km of SWER power line. No doubt it “could” be done, although trenching is unlikely given the shire of yarra ranges greenie policies. The town of Woori Yallock isn’t on the rollout, but is on the major backhaul from Healesville Vic which is on the 3yr mark.
But looking at the Tasman Hwy, going SE of Scotsdale, Tas on the NBN map (turn sat photo on). I can count at least a dozen premises that <1km of fibre would connect. Another cluster SW of the town. Not everything can be done at once, but rollout from existing areas is supposed to be the plan. With 1km of fibre not being planned there, for so many, not much chance for any deadend street with larger acreage properties.
So being 700m from the last run of suburban size blocks leading out of town, add the rest of the problems, seems to add up to Buckley's chance. Additionally the copper is already burnt out by powering RAM8 units, so any precious top hat or FTN plan isn't going to cut it here, nor many other places.
Liberals are on record as saying the Yarra Valley and Ranges don't need upgraded comms too, not that that means much.
“Gash urged residents of smaller villages to write to the Prime Minister to express their outrage over the sudden exclusion of their homes from an NBN fibre optic broadband connection.”
This. This is what REALLY makes me catatonically mad. Labor have stated SINCE 2009, that it would be 1000 PREMISES. And now, 3 years later, because the Coalition are so desperate to find something to latch onto, they use something which is LITERALLY pure spin to confuse the many people who simply don’t understand the NBN and saying “LOOK LOOK LOOK!!! They’re discluding you on purpose!!! LOOK!!!!”
This is low, LOW politics. This is the sort of stuff I expect from the Republicans in the US.
I’ve already written to Hartsukyer and now to have Gash come out and say it and she’s my old freaking Federal member!! I LIKE her!
I’m so sick to death of this sort of rubbish politics, from ANYONE. Even Conroy in this instance “Well, we won’t get ANY fibre in regional areas under the Coalition”….what a joke. Come on Conroy, stand up, turn and face them head on and DEMAND, like Turnbull did constantly in Parliament during the early days of NBNCo, that the Coalition put up or shutup. Don’t relent, don’t quieten down, attack. This is one of the SINGLE policies Labor has that in 90% of it, it is a forward thinking, prudent and sensible policy and yet Labor are letting it languish and be challenged by imaginary made up fairy dust!!
Sorry for the rant, I’m just so over this utter farce of a Coalition attitude. I know I’m angry in the blood, but does anyone SERIOUSLY remember another time a Opposition has been THIS ridiculous in its’ arguments on a policy??
“Sorry for the rant, I’m just so over this utter farce of a Coalition attitude. I know I’m angry in the blood, but does anyone SERIOUSLY remember another time a Opposition has been THIS ridiculous in its’ arguments on a policy??”
Not since after the beginning of Tony Abbott’s leadership.
“it doesn’t matterly overly much”
Should be:
It doesn’t matter overly much.
It’s interesting, a few months ago if the Coalition said something like this Conroy would have probably taken the factual path, ie. “if you look at the documentation it has always been premises”. But now he’s gone straight for the jugular and attacked the Coalition’s (lack of a) policy.
For better or worse?
Churchill summed it up and it bears repeating and sharing.
“The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Lie
From the Senate Committee sitting last year:
Senator IAN MACDONALD: Just let me confirm: government direction was for 1,000 premises in a town, they get fibre; and for 500 premises in a town, where the backhaul went through the town, they would get fibre?
Mr Quigley : Yes.
——
LOL
lol epic post. I may do a separate article just on that.
Reminds me of Hubert.
Anti-NBN critic A (B, C, D or E, as they all the same person) write a thesis of typical anti-NBN rhetoric and Hubert’s answers is… “false”
Gold…!
“Gold…!”
True! ;-)
Tony Abbott reminded us recently that he did not believe that we needed an NBN. In an ideal world where people were all intelligent and logical, any comments from members of the coalition about who is getting what and when would be ignored or ridiculed. Unfortunately….
Comments are closed.