Turnbull slams ‘pro-NBN zealot journalists’


blog Your writer couldn’t help but be amused and a little flattered to see Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull take a few minutes out from outlining the Coalition’s telecommunications policy to the Financial Review newspaper this morning to slam certain, uh, rogue elements of Australia’s media. The AFR reports (we recommend you click here for the full article):

“He said specialist technology journalists were fanning a pro-NBN zealotry among tech-savvy citizens who wanted the ultimate broadband regardless of more feasible alternatives.”

The comments come just weeks after Turnbull accused the ABC of creating “relentless propaganda” to support the NBN project, in a stance which the Liberal MP described at the time as “embarrassing”. Oh, dear. Maybe the Earl of Wentworth is finding that not everybody regurgitates his copy as dutifully as Communications Minister Stephen Conroy appears to think the mainstream media tends to? It’s a tough world out there for multi-millionaire Liberal leaders trying to get their message across.

Image credit: Blizzard Entertainment


  1. I think he’s just sore that every time he published a blog post on his own website his arguments are instantly demolished in the comments posted by users below it. And he never rebuts them, so his website is a wonderful resource for people wanting to find out why the coalition’s broadband plan is such a poor cousin.

  2. MT is getting a bit sensitive about this. Also haven’t seen a “more feasible alternative” from the Libs just a lot of talk.

  3. Turnbull also says he has a fully costed plan “ready to go”.

    Okay Malcolm, lets see it. Stop obfuscating the argument with rhetoric and put your costings where you mouth is.

    • He will release it

      the day before the election so no analysis can be done on it

      Malcolm Turnball is a zelot on this topic anything but FttH based on a political leaning and nothing else certainly not facts

      He really is just another dirty pathetic politician he has sold his ass for a job on the front bench so sad

      • Well, to be fair, that would be echoing Rudd/Conroy/ACLs tactic re the internet filter.

        nb: acknowledging the ACL as the principal morals advisor to the first two jokers…

    • So I read the first article, and it said pretty much nothing about the coalition policy.

      There is *another* article with the title: “Coalition’s NBN policy a little clearer“. I hope it actually becomes a little clearer.

      Right now I *still* have no idea what their policy entails. Who they are going to be subsidising. How much. How their system encourages infrastructure competition. All I know is that it will include FTTN and HFC networks.

      All I know is Turnbull dismisses technology media for not knowing/reporting enough about technology as deployed internationally. Which confuses me, because Turnbull himself has said nothing that surprises me about international infrastructure deployment, and the only place I ever read about that stuff is in Technology blogs (like this one). I have never once heard about a deployment of infrastructure in the main stream media, and Turnbull himself has never added any “new” facts, only a different opinion overlaid upon those facts.

      • Nope. No clearer.

        just “Probably FTTN, Probably Cheaper, Probably a little faster”. Still no more detail in the policy despite how much the AFR repeats the phrase.

        I still see 20% of the network quality, 10% faster for 33% of the cost.

        Not a great value proposition. And we have to tack on the future subsidies for broadband in the bush, which should be costed into the plan as an ongoing perpetual payment.

  4. I think the more pressing issue for Turnbull is how many people who work in IT are actually going to vote for him. It is very obvious to people that know what they’re talking about that the coalition has lied consistently, while it’s not so obvious to others.

  5. From the FinRev story.

    “Gartner telecommunications analyst Geoff Johnson said Mr Turnbull’s plan was right if the objective was to deliver broadband speeds of 12 to 50 Mbps widely as soon as possible. “The burning question then becomes . . . what next?”, Mr Johnson said. “How does the world expect to do greater than 50Mbps? . . . the answer is FTTP (premises). FTTN is the easy bit and is relatively short-sighted; the technical world will want to see the whole picture, not just the easy quick bit. Also, the NZ situation gets structural separation but Australia’s outcome is full separation and that is what every country’s regulator typically wants to achieve over time.” ”

    This, for me, sums up why I am against FttN – what next?

    If MT has given us all the clues to his plan, summarised by “look at BT” then the conclusion I come up with is that he wants the cheapest option to cover needs for the next 10 years. But what happens then? Rip it all up (50% being written off, as per MT’s website) and rebuild? The magic bullet theory of some new technology? Or perhaps, just perhaps, a FttH rollout happens…

    Like many other comments, he’s right. From the perspective of getting an upgrade faster (faster to rollout, not faster speeds) and cheaper, then FttN is the better option. But if he wants something that isnt going to need upgrading within a decade of rollout, then no, its not the better option.

    And for me, thats the elephant in the room with the FttN plan. An opinion that gets me labelled a zealot.

  6. This man does not know a good piece of Infrastructure if he fell over it, not the sort of material for the PMship, NO VISION.

  7. Fully costed? What happened to the CBA he kept saying is absolutely necessary as the first step…?

  8. I have a lot of respect for Mr Turnbull, and even though we would all like the best possible internet speeds both now and in the future, the stance Turnbull will (probably) always have philosophically is that the free market and supply and demand should be the driving forces that bring about whatever products and services we have, not the government.

    I love the idea of awesome internet speeds, but I don’t really like the culture of “we know what’s best for everyone and we’ll decide for them” that can creep into governments. And just because they may even be right doesn’t mean I want them to start thinking for me.

    On the other hand, I wonder if this NBN is the modern equivalent of roads, and if the government won’t build it will end up a mess with dirt roads and toll booths everywhere.

  9. Malcolm, when in a hole, don’t dig! We’d love to give you a go if you had something useful to say.

    ps Renai for PM! Lead the media rebellion!

        • All the more reason you would be better for it. You dont want the job. So you wouldnt be a power seeking leech on the country trying to guarantee you would be back after the next round of voting in the popularity contest.

        • Compared to whom? I often wonder if we wouldn’t be better governed by a citizens’ caucus, similar to jury duty. And I’m reminded of the irrepressible Gore Vidal: “Any American who is prepared to run for president should automatically, by definition, be disqualified from ever doing so.”

  10. Dear Malcolm

    It’s simple. I’ll explain so even you can get it, have you ever heard the old phrase: “You don’t win friends with salad”?

    Your “broadband” “plan” is a salad. The proper NBN is meat. You are a vegetarian trying to force everyone to eat your salad.

    That makes YOU the zealot.

    You don’t win friends with salad!

    You don’t win friends with salad!

    You don’t win friends with salad!

  11. Plan fully costed? If it were to be release today?

    Bring it on Malcom. Even AFR can only come up with “policy is a bit clearer”.

    Let the light shine on it. Surely, if the plan is so good why not show the world. Afraid the government will still your ideas. I doubt it.

    “The Coalition will not yet release its policy in full but Mr Turnbull’s words will dismay advocates of the national broadband network who say a FTTH rollout will future-proof the country’s telecommunications infrastructure.”

    Can’t wait to get dismayed. Let’s do it now.

  12. A journalist has only two things to report when it comes to the NBN. Either they report on it’s progress and how it’s actually, you know, being built right now. Or they report on how the Coalition is going to… um, what?

    There’s been nothing new from the Coalition since around May or whenever it was that Malcolm announced he was going to built FTTN. No costing, no details: who’s going to build it? What’ll happen with NBNCo? Will we see a return on the money they’re planning to spend? Will their NBN be on-budget? For how much? Instead all we get is petty nitpicking of what people assume the Coalition’s “plan” is and complaints that nobody is taking them seriously.

  13. You have to wonder whether throwing Malcolm into the Comms portfolio and shackling him to this woeful wireless scheme is some kind of long con by Abbott – force him to argue for something that he *knows* is a terrible alternative, and thereby destroy some of his credibility with progressive voters on both sides of the Liberal/Liberal Lite fence.

    Heh, who am I kidding. Abbott is like a bulldog chasing a car. That would involve way to much…. thought.

  14. Facts are just Left-Wing Bias.

    Top pic tho, 4 minute zealots ftw.

    I hate to sound like most of the internet Mr Turnbull, but QQ MOAR!

  15. You are all zealots who won’t put your money where your mouth is.

    If you were a true tech-savvy citizen, you would do what I did.

    Buy a house <1km from a ADSL2 telephone exchange for 22mbit internet.

    Then sign up to Telstra ultimate cable for 100mbit internet speeds and live in the "NBN world" now.

    The limit in my house is now quite frequently my wireless connection NOT my internet speed.

    Its for this reason I don't support the NBN in its current existence. (FWIW, MT is on the right track but he just doesn't know why he's right and for what ever reason won't put some more effort into a plan).

    You all keep saying wireless is inferior to fibre when it comes to speed. Of course it is, but that's like saying a desktop is faster than a tablet. Technically true, but remember you are a MINORITY in the world. We are moving towards an "always connected" world. You can't do that with cables. It HAS to be done wirelessly.

    Let those (like me) who wan't ridiculous speed pay to get it and set up our own little micro-ecosystems to splash around in. But I guarentee, in the future for the vast majority of Australians, mobile data networks will be significantly more important than an amazing little fibre optic cable through which you can get a gazillionbillion bits per second through.

    • Self Proclaimed ‘Tech Savvy’ Internet Hero moves house for faster internets; fails to spend eight dollars on cat6.

      • “Self Proclaimed ‘Tech Savvy’ Internet Hero moves house for faster internets; fails to spend eight dollars on cat6.”

        Extremely, extremely, funny!

    • “You can’t do that with cables. It HAS to be done wirelessly.”

      Yep okay. So how do I get the internet to those sites that need to serve a public area. Microwave ? No. More wireless? No. O wait, its Fibre.

      Okay so when saturation occurs on a site thats serving 100 people that has a 100mbps capacity, whats the estimated speed to expect? 1mbps. Awesome, I can see a 1GB file taking a very long time to download… Then on top of that saturation, you then have cell shrinkage. Thats where the cell’s maximum throughput is now degraded due to wireless being soaked up by active connections. You may have seen this in the form of ‘SOS Only’ on your iphone. This is cell shrinkage. The coverage pattern changing because of over subscription.

      Your plan has many flaws. Wireless is inferior. It serves ‘A’ purpose, not ‘ALL’ purposes.

      • You missed the point, or maybe it wasn’t clear.

        I didn’t say you don’t need fibre at all; you just don’t need it to every house in Australia.

        ie FTTN, wireless last mile.

        • Okay, so given your ‘plan’ how many sites would you need to serve a standard residential zone of 10,000 people @ 100mbps given the average speed would be 1mbps? If you wanted to achieve more than 1 mbps what would you need?

          IF and lets assume ‘if’ you wanted to achieve this @ 1mbps over 10k people, you’d need:

          1000 new network sites. New network sites would need between 10mhz and 20mhz of available spectrum. 1000 new network sites covering 10k people @ 1mbps served by 100mbps cabling to all sites. Then if you wanted 100mbps for 10k people covering a residential area, you’d need 5x that many sites. Why 5x? because spectrum isnt divisable by the amount of people served in perfect sequence. Given theres only 5.6ghz of available spectrum at any one point, you’d need to allocate ALL frequencies on all spectrum channels to achieve maximum penetration and support.

          You’ve then gotta predict placement, positioning of the mast and antennae, then placement of applicable structure. It needs a rack mount to be housed, adequate generation in emergency then more equipment for monitoring, cooling and overflow in event of congestion.

          What you WANT to do isnt possible. If i made this more clear, Ive done my job.

        • “I didn’t say you don’t need fibre at all; you just don’t need it to every house in Australia.”

          Stupid statement. The MAJORITY DO NEED IT. Less fibre = less value. If you get a 100/40mbps connection the value of that connection is of more value with a network containing more 100/40mbps connections (in an ideal world it would be symmetrical). That’s isn’t going to happen without fibre. If I get one of those 100/40mbps connections I’d feel a bit ripped off if I couldn’t use ti to it’s FULL potential because there aren’t enough premises capable of the same speeds.

          “ie FTTN, wireless last mile.”


    • What an awesome solution. All 22 million Australians need to move into a HFC cabled area that is within 1km of a Telstra exchange.

      What could go wrong?

      • LOL! Maybe THAT is Malcolm’s secret broadband policy. Why wire up Australia with fibre, when everyone can just pack up and move next to (or inside) their local telephone exchange? And the rest of us can simply be forcefully migrated into an HFC enabled area (which for me is only several thousand kilometres anyway, but I’m being such a nitpicker).

        This plan will work particularly well for the nation’s farmers. They’ll just have to urbanise their operations.

    • A few questions Why did you buy a house near the exchange and then get cable internet?

      What real speed do you get through your Cable internet at 6pm? A Speedtest link would be prefered

      You say your wireless router is your slowpoint yet 802.11 n has a throughput faster than your internet connection

      Mobile wireless is slow due to congestion and you seem to suggest that more people use it which will make it even slower which I do not believe is possible since right now congestion in residential area at peak times causes a connection that can not be used at all

      • Well put. Its a cute picture but the tech side has more holes than swiss cheese and the economic argument behind it is utterly arrogant.

        For instance, I live 1.1km from the exchange, get less than 17Mbps due to bad phone wiring i cant get changed, and Telstra dont connect HFC to MDUs despite the fact that mine would be trivial work wiring wise theres an easy conduit in the basement roof under every apartment for the phones. Just push that cord up on through. Nope no go.

        In summary, I am: Within 5km of the Perth CBD, Within 1250m of the Exchange(by wire length, Its actually ~750m following the roads), In a HFC cabled area, and paying through the nose to live here.
        For that I get… ADSL2 on a shitty phone line ~17Mbps down ~750Kbps up.

        Im also fairly certain that in a FTTN my premises wold likely not recieve any improvements at all due to the fact the exchange is so close that my “node” would probably be either the exchange, or still using the same bad wiring that is presently cutting my ADSL performance by 25%.

        I would have to lease a fiber from Amcom or someone to get a better connection here, and that would probably be cheaper over 12 months than getting a new house closer to the exchange.
        I’m already making a plan to moving to a part of Perth that has Fiber that will be completed, LNP FTTN be damned.

        • I’m still trying to get past the ‘FttN, wireless last mile’ comment myself.

          He makes a comment about us moving to an always connected world, then emphasises in a response that always connected world is in a fixed location…

      • Why did you buy a house near the exchange and then get cable internet?

        That’s what made me think the post was satire.

    • “If you were a true tech-savvy citizen, you would do what I did.”

      What a brilliant idea!! Why don’t we start a home swapping business? Let all the tech-savy people swap houses with the non tech savy people. No worries with money, family, jobs, kid schooling. Bad luck for those who can’t do it.

      As for your prediction of a future wireless world, it seems rather incompatible with the notion of being tech-savy.

    • So… you call us zealots, yet you go to the (obviously simple and easy solution) that to get better internet, everyone should move houses.

      I am sorry Adrian. This is precisely why we aren’t zealots chasing super fast internet. If we were zealot-want-internet-hang-the-cost-selfish-bastards then we would: move house and get cable. Instead I think the statement that best describes us as: “Informed users that don’t want the government to waste money”.

      Wait… HOLD ON THERE! Yes I said don’t want to waste money when talking about spending 50 billion dollars. You see, you are 100% right that if we really cared we could move house right now. By that same logic, why would we want to spend any money at all on making the average internet connection available around all of Australia equal to what we can have now? Surely if we were going to spend money, we would spend it on a network that A) Connects as many people as possible, and B) provides as many of those people, the best thing possible for the time (and for the known future).

      Wireless covers A, but fails on B.
      FTTN covers A, but fails on B.
      FTTP covers A and covers B, and facilitates higher density wireless networks for the future. No ubiquitous fibre = no super-high-density-high-bandwidth wireless. Without fibre on every corner, we can’t have our wireless tower on every corner required for your wireless future.

      I honest to goodness think that any money spent by our government on our telecommunications technology should be geared to meeting demand for next year*, not demand of next week*.

      * timeframes quoted are illustrative not literal

  16. Poor Adrian, I don’t think his Young Liberal speaking notes pack gave him enough technical details to troll effectively.

  17. C’mon, fess up, Renai.

    You HAVE been running ‘Adrian’ attributed posts here to stir us up and get us going, haven’t you?

    After all, surely ‘Adrian’ couldn’t exist in the real world. Nobody could be that stupid…

  18. My God Renai,
    Don’t you understand that by educating the electorate, you are endangering Malcolm’s ability to get a gig???
    You need to keep your eye on the prize…electing the Liberal Party into the majority is far more important than any trivial needs that the “people” might have…

  19. The really shocking thing about all of this is that now that I’ve been described as a ‘pro-NBN zealot journalist’, I am relatively certain that I’ll never be able to get a job at The Australian newspaper. It’s like all my journalistic career dreams have ended in one day. I’m shattered. I don’t know where I’ll turn next. Where does one go from here?

  20. ITT: Politician struggles with non-manufactured grassroots movement.

    I’m a little shocked at Mr Turnbull’s attitude to be honest. There seems to be a fairly general clamour among people to cut Telstra out of the equation, having been bent over by them quite enough over the years, and get fibre to their home. Sure, there are those that don’t, thats fine, but the general feeling by most Australians seems to be “can I have it yesterday please”.

    Mr Turnbull really does seem to ignore this completely, and its got me beat why. All I can think of is that he is saving up for a leadership challenge, and if hes successful he can claim that FTTN and opposition to the NBN was all Tony’s doing. Can you imagine how many votes the Libs would get just by stating that the NBN is a good idea and they fully support it? Practically everyone younger than dirt would have a major obstacle to voting coalition removed overnight.

    Would there be fallout from flip flopping on this? Probably, for like a week maybe. After that we would all be back to fixating on Hockeynomics and eleventy billion dollar budgetary holes.

    • Agreed… It’s this watered down version of the ‘Liberal NBN’ that will decide on who I vote for. I don’t care about most of the other issues although i would probably naturally side with the Liberals.

      I live near Wollongong which is scheduled to start the NBN process next month. I’m not worried about not getting the fibre – I’m worried about the rest of Australia missing out! I see this as a visionary project that is not even supposed to lose money in the long term. The ‘bandaid’ short term goal of Malcom’s plan is very short sighted in my opinion and it is costing him my vote.

      • My problem with the Liberals plan (besides it seeming to be a hodgepodge) is they will just be throwing money away. I haven’t seen MT mention a return on their “investment” once!!

        At least Labor plans to make 7.1% on the $37B they are loaning the NBN…politics have gotten weird in Australia, the Libs seem to have a lot of “commy” ideas and Labor seem to be the ones that actually have business plans for stuff! :/

        • A long time ago someone gave me some advice that I’ve always remembered. When buying something, look for what they DONT tell you.

          Buying a car and they dont mention bootspace? Thats because there isnt any. Buying a computer and they neglect to mention RAM? Usually because its a weak spec.

          New TV didnt mention how many HDMI ports? Probably because there is only 1. Mobile you’re eyeing off forgets to mention anything about battery life? Experience says thats because its rubbish…

          Liberal NBN plan doesnt mention ROI because they arent planning on getting any ROI.

          Why highlight what could be seen as a weakness?

          • @GongGav: Actually if your going by that philosophy the Coalition plan looks much much MUCH worse seeing as all the information on any concrete, planned out and costed policy can be summed up in one word – “none” =P

          • “New TV didnt mention how many HDMI ports? Probably because there is only 1. ”

            How many HDMI ports do you need? You only need one. Wait, why do you need HD anyway? SD is good enough. Wait, what productivity benefits can be gained from having a video picture? Stick with radio…

  21. It’s pretty rich of Turnbull to throw these sorts of allegations around when Delimiter has been very accomodating in letting him have his say by publishing his articles on the site. If Delimiter was truly biased, that would never happen.

    • That’s a very good point. From what I’ve seen Renai has always been very fair with his NBN coverage and given equal air-time to all well known commentators on the NBN, whether positive or negative. Obviously there’s been a particular focus on Turnbull, given he’s the biggest opponent of the NBN, and there’s a good chance (albeit a scary one) that he will be our next comms minister.

      Turnbull has been given every chance to set the record straight and has still failed to answer the most basic of questions put to him by Delimiter readers, let alone release his so called “ready and costed” policy for the public to contemplate and weigh up against the NBN which he so readily damns.

      Pretty laughable that Malcolm spent the best part of last year arguing for a cost benefit analysis on the NBN, but now when it comes to crunch time, he doesnt even have a plan, let alone one that has any genuine benefits to be costed.

      • It seems to be a case of Malcolm’s Rules:

        1) I am always right even when I am wrong;

        2) People who do not share my belief in myself are ignorant cretins;

        3) And if you dare to disagree with me – refer to Rule 1.

        • You must have read Turnbulls latest tirade. Here a a few “gems”:

          “the vast majority of Australians are only concerned as to whether their connection enables them to use and enjoy the services and applications they want. ”

          What are those “services and applications they want”? Seems Turnbull has already decided for them. How very thoughtful of him.

          “The Coalition’s approach to the NBN Co is not political or ideological, but rational.”

          The coalition’s approach to the NBN is in NO way rational and never has been. The arguments emanating from coalition members has never been consistent in anyway either. “The NBN is a waste!” “Roll out to my suburb first!” etc etc etc. What it is is EXACTLY what Turnbull claims it isn’t. It is political. Else we simply wouldn’t be seeing such HYPOCRISY from them regarding the NBN.

          “there need be no anxiety or uncertainty about that, and we will do so sooner, cheaper and more affordably for users. ”

          I am uncertain that the coaltion will be able to do it sooner, cheaper and more affordably for users but apparently I dont count. Turnbull is only interested in a broadband policy that satisfies just enough people to get the coaltion just enough votes at the next election. Nothing more. It is political.

  22. “…by following the lead of BT’s fibre to the node rollout in the UK.…
    Call me stupid, but didn’t I read recently (probably here) that the Brits were actually re-thinking their FFTN plans and moving to FTTP instead?
    Of course trade journos are pro NBN zealots Malcolm. Why? Because they know it’s gonna work!
    And so do us punters. We also know that the savings to the Power and Health industries alone will more than pay for the NBN…
    In his heart I suspect MT knows the NBN is a Good Thing. But because politics in this country is so adverserial and juvenile, every idea and anything for the Common Good is reduced to its dollar cost and becomes a source of bitter argument and is reduced to the level of a 6th form debating society…

  23. “I love the idea of awesome internet speeds, but I don’t really like the culture of “we know what’s best for everyone and we’ll decide for them” that can creep into governments”

    How can NBN co be telling people what is best for them, given that people can have anything from the best to the least?.

    I suppose you prefer Telstra deciding what you can have depending on whether it is profitable or not.

  24. Malcolm Turnbull is about to appear on ABC Lateline – still sprouting cheaper, faster, mixed up technos…

    Turn your teles on now…

      • Yep, thoroughly enjoyed Emma bringing the smackdown to the Earl, particularly that he has invested heavily in France Telecom (bringing FTTH to 15 million households by 2020) and not invested anything in BT…

        • Malcolm has been pushing the France angle for a couple of days, spouting their HFC cable infrastructure.

          As someone who has spent quite some time in rural France, I can assure you, spouting the existing French model is not going to help. If you can even convince them to connect you – (most villages have what appears to be a “node”, but I’m not sure what the upstream connectivity is) – the speeds are as near as makes no difference to “useless”.

          A simple Skype call is heavily pixelated, jittery, and delayed. Hardly “enough”. Raw access speeds – (though I’ve never done a speed test while there) – are painful.

          In summary, probably why France are moving to an FTTP model.

      • This was my favorite bit:

        “MALCOLM TURNBULL: Well, if they’re different in 20 years time, we’ll make some further investments in 20 years time.

        EMMA ALBERICI: But then in 20 years time won’t it take another 10 years then to potentially build it, by which stage we would have already built it; doesn’t that make sense?”

        Turnbull owned by pure logic.

        • He keeps saying that the Coalition can do it in a third of the time and for a quarter the cost. If we just ignore the “cost” part for a second (since a quarter of zero is still zero), the NBN is scheduled to be completed by 2020 which is 8 years for now. If the Coalition reckons they can complete their build in a third of the time, that means they’ll be done by the mid-2015.

          If that’s not an outright lie, I don’t know what is.

          • Also Dean, the copper network (presumably built by the old PMG) took 35 years to reach 90 percentile, so NBN to 93 percentile in 10 years or less is ‘warp speed’ by comparison.

            The big problem these days is getting politicians to see beyond the current election cycle – a prime example of our immaturity

            Question from the floor. In another post someone mentioned a lack of opportunity to be share holders in the NBN – a good point, but if you invest in government bonds linked to the equity fund, isn’t that indirectly the same thing?

          • “… if you invest in government bonds linked to the equity fund, isn’t that indirectly the same thing?”

            No different.

            Shareholders have the right to elect directors and their return is based on company profits (dividends) which can vary from year to year and may not even be paid. They have the right to sell their shares at the market value

            Bond holders get a fixed rate of return for the life of the bond and get their money back at maturity.

  25. “We can do it cheaper, quicker and slower…”

    And how totally arrogant of Malcolm Turnbull to decide who needs 100mps and who doesn’t…

  26. Turnbull put forward a better case than I expected. I’m sure “more affordable” and “quicker to build” appeals to many in the electorate.
    Not that I support his view, or likely his (soon to be announced) policy.
    The two flaws are 1) relying on private enterprise, which inevitably segregates best quality to inner city, wealthy corridors and leaves the majority unsupported, and 2) assuming business exists only in business districts.
    The whole Liberal attitude unsurprisingly is based on a very conservative, old fashioned view of society. That fast broadband needs to be supported only for business premises, hospitals and universities. And that residential broadband only needs to serve social media and video download.
    The creative industries, of which I’m experienced, have largely devolved to home working.
    Film making, film & tv editing, post production, photography, and music making/production are all moving to no cost private residences. These creative processes require movement of extremely large media files.
    All over Europe creative people are working at home and sharing these large files, plus video conferencing etc…
    To pre-determine that most businesses will continue to operate in currently recognised business districts in Australia, consigns Australia to a 20th Century business culture, and does not reflect the very real changes that have already occurred in other, competing economies.

  27. Put me right off when Malcolm Turnbull said that his plan will accommodate any of the apps on the market today. What about tomorrow Malcolm? Very short sighted. No vision for the future..

Comments are closed.