Turnbull clams up on NBN ‘jobs for the boys’

140

news Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull yesterday actively avoided taking questions from the media about whether it was unethical to appoint several ex-Telstra executives with personal connections to the Liberal MP but little experience with network infrastructure rollouts to help NBN Co undertake the Strategic Review into its future broadband model.

Over the past week, the Financial Review and The Australian newspapers have revealed that several former Telstra executives with close personal connections to Turnbull have been appointed to assist NBN Co with a Strategic Review of its current and potential future models for deploying the National Broadband Network. The two executives are JB Rousselot and Justin Milne.

Rousselot was most recently the executive director of digital media and IPTV at Telstra, a position from which he departed in May 2013. Prior to that position, Rousselot held a number of other senior positions in Telstra over a period of a decade, including a post as executive director of Telstra’s Media division. Before this period, the executive was chief executive of IP telephony startup Interline, as well as working in investment (in the Australasian Media and Communications Fund), as well as working as a consultant at Booz Allen and in entertainment (Disney).

Crikey reported in June (in an article which predicted the appointment of both Milne and Rousselot to help Turnbull reshape the NBN) that Rousselot has a deep history with Turnbull, having formerly worked both at OzEmail, which Turnbull helped found, as well as Turnbull’s own boutique advisory firm Turnbull and Partners. However, in none of his many roles over his career did Rousselot work directly on deploying fundamental network infrastructure of the type NBN Co is rolling out.

Yesterday morning the Financial Review added former Telstra executive Justin Milne to the list.

The executive was chief executive of early Australian ISP OzeMail from 1999 to 2002, in the years immediately after it was listed on the NASDAQ and the Australian Stock Exchange with Turnbull’s assistance (Turnbull helped fund and run the company throughout the 1990’s), and the pair worked at OzEmail at the same time. Turnbull sold his stake in OzEmail for $57 million in 1999 as the company was bought by US telco WorldCom.

Subsequently, Milne went on to work in senior positions at Telstra, leading the company’s BigPond ISP division and also, later, its media division, throughout the years until May 2010, when he left the telco. However, in none of those roles did the executive directly work on significant network infrastructure rollouts at Telstra.

Milne has also retained links to Turnbull over the past decade. For example, Milne was one of the speakers at a forum held by the Liberal MP in August 2010 in the suburb of Paddington in his electorate on Labor’s controversial mandatory Internet filter policy, which Milne was also personally against.

In addition, Milne is known to be a supporter of the Coalition’s FTTN model. In April this year, the executive told Business Review Weekly he would choose FTTN over FTTP because it was “orders of magnitude” faster (in terms of time to rollout) and cheaper to deploy.

Crikey reported as early as June that Rousselot and Milne were being set up for roles with NBN Co. At the time, Turnbull denied any commitments had been made to anyone.

Yesterday afternoon, Turnbull attended an event in the Sydney suburb of Paddington to launch a new technology startup incubator space formed by Telstra. However, the Minister did not take questions after speaking at the event. Given the fact that technology journalists from most major media outlets were present at the event, Delimiter requested Turnbull hold a brief doorstop interview following the proceedings to address the appointments of Milne and Rousselot to NBN Co, as well as other matters. It is normal behaviour for Ministers to take questions briefly in doorstop interviews after events of this nature attended by the media, and Turnbull has done so regularly in the past.

However, the request was declined, with Turnbull’s spokesperson citing time pressures, and Turnbull left very shortly after the formal section of the Telstra event was over.

The Minister also declined to comment on the issue to the Financial Review when the newspaper published its initial report on Milne’s appointment this week. A spokesperson for NBN Co also declined to comment to Delimiter yesterday on the issue of either appointment.

Delimiter has filed a Freedom of Information request with NBN Co seeking any documents pertaining to the two executives’ appointment at the company.

opinion/analysis
My full thoughts on the appointment of former Telstra executives Justin Milne and JB Rousselot to aid NBN Co in conducting its Strategic Review can be found in this extensive article on the subject in Delimiter 2.0 (subscriber content). A sample paragraph gives you the flavour of what I think about the issue:

“NBN Co’s Strategic Review will be conducted by a cluster of ex-Telstra executives with prior personal connections to Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull and the Liberal Party, supported by external consultants. Does anyone still believe the result will be independent, objective and ‘technology-neutral’?”

Do I think Turnbull should publicly discuss these appointments? Yes, I do, if he wants to avoid the perception of impropriety. It shouldn’t be a big deal for the Communications Minister to discuss the appointment of two executives he has a personal history with to senior roles at NBN Co.

140 COMMENTS

  1. Shock Horror
    Now the real question WHY? which also applies to the technology agnostic schmozzle to unfold

    • “Why?”

      They don’t need a reason to put their snouts in the trough, do they? it’s just what they do.

    • The libs clearly want the NBN to fail. First they appoint a failed Telstra CEO, now they have appointed a failed “triple play”, “Content is king” advocate (couldn’t make it work at Ozemail, couldn’t make it work at Telstra, no doubt its the next NBN “must have”).

      What next?

      Larry, Curly and Moe?

    • Why?
      It’s quite clear from the beginning that Malcolm is stacking the deck in his favour, by first ensuring that the staff are all on his side, then second issuing reports that make his and his Party’s view the better looking one then that provided by the Labor party.

      The media will be provided reports that have lots of detail but no depth, indicating that FTTN is the way to go financially over FTTP.
      After all the Liberal fanboys, Rupes mouthpieces, and shockjocks get up enough steam about belittling the Labor approach and drown out any other opposition, Malcolm will jump in to ‘save the day’ and offer a compromise that really isn’t, and force FTTN down our throats.
      What won’t be mentioned is where the labour force will come from, how much more they will need to be paid, and how much FTTP extension will cost at the most (maximum guaranteed, not a ‘likely’ estimate figure off the back of a napkin).
      They also won’t apologise for the delays that created during all this review process, citing it had to be done otherwise billions more would have been wasted under Labor… blah blah.

      I think I’ll start looking at real-estate in New Zealand.

  2. The pessimistic would look at Nokia as a case study of what might be in-store for NBNCo.

    • They will be mobile phones.. but only down to the last few metres, then you have to plug them into a socket :)
      Shame, would have loved to see Delimiter question Turnbull

      • Soth said = “Shame, would have loved to see Delimiter question Turnbull”

        I’m not sure why as Delimiter has shown to be very much a supporter of the coalition agenda regards the NBN.
        At best it would have just given MT an opportunity to air his narrow minded outlook for Australia’s future.

        • Hmm I think Delimiter has been very good at telling both sides of the story, just look back on the many articles written criticising Turnbull & the Liberals NBN.

  3. Not surprising. Despite Turnbull’s grandious bullshit pre election, NBNCo internals will be locked up tighter than ever. Other than a few reports, with no verifiable detail, bagging out everything that has gone before.
    It’s like “stop the boats”. It’s more like “stop reporting the boats”. The problems with the NBN rollout will vanish into a puff of no comment.

    • Well said. The way things are shaping up this is certainly going to be a Howard 2.0 government.

    • Add in Turnbull’s bleating about wanting to do things faster and cheaper, and he’s managed to touch all three articles of the Civil Service faith – it takes longer to do things quickly, it’s more expensive to do them cheaply, and it’s more democratic if they’re done in secret.

      • You couldn’t have put it better.
        I just want to make it known I didn’t vote Liberal/LNP. I knew the level of evil we would be getting. To all the struggling families that voted for them, I say suffer!

  4. One has to question why you would appoint someone for a review of possible network deployment technologies when said person has come out strongly in favour of one technology, publicly no less.

    Such a conflict of interest would normally preclude that person from selection so why has it been allowed?

    • Because it’s as Turnbull always behaves. Its another case of do as I say, not as I do.

      This is nepotism – nothing more. Jobs for Turnbull’s mates under the guise of “experienced telco executives”, despite none of them doing anything remotely similar to NBN.

    • @Mike

      ‘Such a conflict of interest would normally preclude that person from selection so why has it been allowed?’

      So what is the selection criteria on who should be appointed?

      • “The only observation I’ve made is that it is remarkable that such a large board doesn’t have anyone with hands-on experience in building a telecommunications network or running one and if you were assembling a board, for a project of this kind, that’s the sort of experience you would want to have on it,” Turnbull said on Sunday on the Financial Review’s Sunday television program”

          • And let’s speculate, shall we? When short of a worthwhile answer, what do we do? Ask a question.

            Fibroid, you are so boringly predictable. Yawn…

            The point was you asked about criteria. When a reply which shows that those hired didn’t fit MT’s own criteria, what do you say? Oh, wait there may be more who will in the future .Remarkable coming for someone who keeps telling everyone about the evil of conjecture.

          • The Coalition version of the rollout is not even close to being started if you factor in it won’t happen until after the NBN Corporate plan is presented to Parliament sometime in the first half of next year.

            More than enough time in the next eight months or so in which to get persons with more hands on network experience appointed.

          • Oh, so you believe no experience is needed to decide what and how to do the rollout, only to execute it?

          • No, that’s not what I said at all, there is at least eight months to go before it is executed, which means more appointments could be made before it is executed. (pun intended). :)

          • “At least 8 months” you say? So at least mid June 2014, before he will even start “executing”…you suggest?

            Hmmm, doesn’t leave a lot of time before all Aussies were promised part of MT’s plan does it?

            And… when was that Fibroid? 2016, wasn’t it?

            But of course when in opposition you were skiting that MT’s plan will be available to all “by 2016″… very sneaky. Of course now I’m certain that you will be making sure the “by” is left off and counting each and every one of those precious days in 2016…

            MT even gets an extra one, if I’m not mistaken…

            Well he has until Sept 2015… I’ll even accept 23:59 on the 30th, to deliver his (sadly inferior, using Telstra’s dilapidated copper, taking Australia backwards, almost identical gov. spend to FttP, distant second) FttN to me, as he promised…

          • But the existing rollout doesn’t stop while they get their Corporate plan together to present to Parliament, if the FTTP rollout came to a grinding halt 24 hours after they got elected you would have a point.

            The minimum speed standard with the 2016 deadline includes all of the FTTP rollout up to when and if the FTTN rollout starts sometime next year, it is possible you have a period of overlap as well where you have FTTN and FTTP rolling out at the same time.

            The FTTN rollout will accelerate the fibre connection rate between 2014-2016, so the 2016 deadine of a minimum of 25 Mbps can still be met.

          • The rollout had effectively been reduced. Areas where work was going to commence are not going ahead. Only work already underway will be continued.

          • “But the existing rollout doesn’t stop while they get their Corporate plan together to present to Parliament, if the FTTP rollout came to a grinding halt 24 hours after they got elected you would have a point.”

            Consider him having that point, then – as Lionel said, only contracts for existing deployments already commenced are continuing. I’m also not certain where the transit network is at – most of that was due for construction in 2015, so while extensively planned, much of it won’t be contracted yet. FTTN is going to need that transit network though, so halting construction of that will blow great big holes in the feasibility of any broadband infrastructure project…

            But the reality is that only construction to deliver 900k connections is being honoured. Over the next six months that means construction of transit and GPON to deliver FTTP to nearly another two million premises will not be commissioned. I don’t know what your definition of ‘grinding to a halt’ is, but this seems the very definition of it – the 900k is just the grinding as the behemoth slides to a stop.

          • @TrevorX

            ‘Consider him having that point,’

            I said grinding halt , which means ALL build stops, all build has not stopped.

            ‘then – as Lionel said, only contracts for existing deployments already commenced are continuing. ‘

            Yeah I know, that’s what the Coalition said would happen well before they were elected, and it is.

            ‘I’m also not certain where the transit network is at – most of that was due for construction in 2015, so while extensively planned, much of it won’t be contracted yet.’

            So on the one hand you say you are not certain where it is at, then you say much of it won’t be contracted yet.

            ‘so halting construction of that will blow great big holes in the feasibility of any broadband infrastructure project…’

            But you don’t know if it is halted or not, because you said ‘ ‘I’m also not certain where the transit network is at ‘, so I assume you have no idea of how this will impact the FTTN rollout, if at all.

            ‘ I don’t know what your definition of ‘grinding to a halt’ is,’

            See above, it is a rollout that has STOPPED.

            ‘but this seems the very definition of it – the 900k is just the grinding as the behemoth slides to a stop’

            No it isn’t, the Labor FTTP build continues on , build contracts were even made in the last dying months of the Labor NBN Co just before caretaker provisions applied to the Labor Government before the election which will take us well into 2014, and some into 2015.

            Like these for example.

            “NBN Co has renewed one of the most lucrative contracts to build the national broadband network with Leighton Holdings-owned contractor Silcar in a deal worth up to $300 million over the next 12 months.”

            “NBN Co held snap talks on Sunday and Monday with Silcar to try to sign the contracts before caretaker conventions came into effect at 5.30pm on Monday.”

            http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_co_renews_lucrative_contract_9BqF2e7dpi2RIpDaOQA1yI

            http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/media/news/nbn-co-signs-contract-to-connect-additional-flats-and-units-to-the-nbn.html

            Going back to the original point which is the Coalition have minimum speed deadlines at break points of 2016 and 2019, nothing so far after only one month of a Coalition Government and only one month of the FTTP rollout continuing on under this Government indicates these cannot be achieved.

          • “Yeah I know, that’s what the Coalition said would happen well before they were elected, and it is.”
            They would honour existing contracts, and implied quite strongly the Tassy build, which was contrated would go ahead. True to every time Turnbull uses weasel words, he doesn’t let the contracts proceed where they haven’t commenced. Look, I know you’ll spin it and view with your ultra rosey glasses, but he lead people to believe if a contract was signed that the work would go ahead. Don’t bother trying to justify it, no one here buys your shit.

            “blah blah blah”
            Round and round and round you go. Face it, the guys a liar and your making excuses for him.

          • @Lionel

            ‘They would honour existing contracts, and implied quite strongly the Tassy build, which was contrated would go ahead.’

            Well it’s a bit more than just implied.

            “Mr Turnbull confirmed a previous pledge honouring all existing contracts signed by NBN Co to roll out Fibre-to-the-Premises (FttP) in Tasmania as “the alternative would be to breach them and that is a course we would not countenance”.

            As NBN Co has all of its Tasmanian contracts in place, it effectively means whatever the election result, all houses and businesses planned to receive FttP will receive it.”

            “Tasmanian Senator David Bushby also dismissed Ms Collins by saying the Liberals had costed their policy on Labor’s full Tasmanian roll-out, confirming it would honour Mr Turnbull’s earlier pledge to fulfil all contracts.”

            http://www.examiner.com.au/story/1711548/turnbull-confirms-nbn-will-honour-contracts/

            Over to you Lionel.

          • “Mr Turnbull confirmed a previous pledge honouring all existing contracts signed by NBN Co to roll out Fibre-to-the-Premises (FttP) in Tasmania as “the alternative would be to breach them and that is a course we would not countenance”.

            @Fibroid
            You do know that delays can continue until the contracts expire right?

          • @midspace

            ‘You do know that delays can continue until the contracts expire right?’

            What’s that mean in the context of the discussion, even if Labor had got back in the Tassie delays would still be there, I don’t know what your point is.

          • Well, that pretty much confirms what I said. You only think the people are important for the execution, not the decisions on what to execute. What should be execute will be decided by Turnbull with his cronies backing.

  5. If previous views on infrastructure preference precludes you from appointment I assume that precludes anyone that has publicly stated a preference for FTTP.

    You may have a preference for a infrastructure type, you just have to make sure it is not publicly known, or you have publicly stated you don’t have any preference.

    • Yer, that’s it. Just random coincidence. Could have picked anyone. But just by chance he happened to pick people who he was friends with and the few who supported his plans.
      I am glad you have opened me up to this marvelous way of rationalisation.

      • It’s certainly not random chance, but if someone was picked that had obvious links to the Labor NBN or a known preference for FTTP there would be no howls of protest at all, just approval it is all ‘balanced and fair’.

        • A mixture of people with different views goes a long way towards avoiding “group think” . Admittedly, it is less likely to give you the result you want.

          As usual Fibroid, with your deep desire to defend the Coalition at all cost, you fail to see that having pro FTTN view is OK. What isn’t is having only people with pro-FTTN. That’s what makes it unbalanced.

          It just shows how an obsession with a particular point of view can obscure one to the most obvious points.

          • One person has shown they have a preference for FTTN, as far as I know it’s not Milne weighted with 99 votes, everyone else has 1.

        • Don’t be retarded.

          The review panel is expected to investigate the current situation and provide a set of recommendations.

          The issue of concern is the direct connections to the Minister, which is a far cry from the “technology agnostic’ approach repeatedly stated by Turnbull.

          Really, it’s very simple. If you want a specific outcome, you stack the panel with people who will give you that outcome. Turnbull knows what the response would be, if it were a genuinely independent panel.

          But I am sure you’ll respond with “but but FTTH can’t have that blah blah” as if that’s some kind of logical statement.

      • In all fairness to Fibroid, he is correct in that it would be difficult to find anyone with some degree of bias. Certainly if Malcolm has personal experience with these individuals, he may well trust them to do the right thing.

        However if Malcolm was serious about what he stated he could have tiered the announcements in such a way that the potential bias of one or two would be lost in the neutrality or alternative bias of others.
        You know be somewhat “political” about it.

        At the moment this suggests that Malcolm is only interested in getting the answer he wants as opposed to the right answer for Australia.

        • The point isn’t the technological leanings of the panel — it would be, as you say, difficult to find people who didn’t either prefer one solution, or the other.

          The panel is supposed to independently review and provide recommendations. They can achieve that regardless of personal leanings because the Strategic Review would be a group derived outcome. The problem is, that the board is far from independent.

          To be honest I am surprised that anyone thought it would be different. Turnbull is trying to secure validity for a FTTN network. If that means getting a bunch of mates to rubber stamp it, so be it.

          • So there is no link between the review process and the implementation of Coalition policy, in fact you would prefer if they forgot about the existence of the Coalition policy altogether, because simply admitting to having read it could preclude you on the grounds of bias.

          • Indeed…

            I’d be interested to see Conroy’s Panel of Experts and if they were as close to SC as MT’s new boys are to him…?

            If so, well c`est la vie.

            If not, it would mean that MT has already (at least 8 months short of even executing his plan, according to one minion) failed the usual suspect NBN detractors own standards.

            Standards which they expected and (if little to no association) actually received of/from the actual NBN but don’t expect to receive and are quite ok in not receiving, relating to the fake NBN…

    • What?

      The review should be carried out by independent individuals with NO connections to the minister. End of story.

      Technological leanings are less important than political. This is what Mr Turnbull has stated should happen, but has none-the-less decided to stack the board, and is now stacking the review panel. Suprise.

      This is no chance of a valid, balanced approach to the review.

      • So that would preclude anyone in the review panel with a preference for FTTP or that has any association with the current Labor NBN rollout or in the decision as to why it was chosen?

        • Sorry? Again you make assumptions and present them as an argument.

          I just said that the review board should be politically agnostic, more than technologically agnostic, if the intention is for a fair and reasonable review.

          Stacking the review board with a bunch of chums, isn’t professional and is purely a continuation of the echo-chamber bullshit we’ve come to known and love from Turnbull.

          • Which doesn’t respond to the point I made at all, are you happy with appointments that have links to the Labor NBN and/or a known preference for FTTP.

          • The ideal, but highly unlikely, would be to have people who have the long term interest in what is best for the country, regardless of vested interest. Having like-minded old mates on board can only lead to MT’s preferred solution. Surely, they wouldn’t be so ungrateful as to disagree with him.

          • Well if we assume the ‘preferred solution’ is Coalition policy you are certainly not going to stack the board with persons who want to implement the Labor policy who lost the election with that policy are you?

          • I know you don’t like conjectures. What are you thought on assumptions?

            Furthermore, in the Fibroid black and white world, there can only be two solutions LNP or Labor. It would never occur to you that there could one that is best solution for Australia, regardless of political views.

      • “The review should be carried out by independent individuals with NO connections to the minister” bs. all high-level political appointments have always been people you know personally and trust. Milne and Rousellot are not EXECUTING or OVERSEEING the net rollout… they are REVIEWING the operation. More than quali AFAIAC.

        • LOL guys, seriously…

          Whenever NBNCo had a whiff of favourtism/political jobs for the boys, you were the first to cry foul…

          Yet now it’s all ok…marvellous what a difference an election/change of gov. makes “to some” eh?

          FFS, at least have equal rules for both sides.

          I personally, even as a fervent, actual NBN supporter, expect no more nor less transparency from MT than I did from SC. Expressly because my motives are apolitical

          Sadly it is apparent that typically, you guys do not have such open minded, apolitical ethics :(

          • Same. I didn’t like it that Mike Kaiser slipped in, and I don’t like it when the Turning Bull does it either.

            Particularly since its a national build the more hands off in design the better – fewer opportunities for nepotism and so forth. If MT was ever upset that Labor were being prescriptive in their tech choices – and I think he was – he has no standing to do the same. Stop stacking Nbnco like this, its ‘I’m technologically agnostic!’ BS all over again. If you really were, why not rely on the merits of the supposedly superior policy instead of gaming the solution?

            Leave it up to a truly independent review to decide. Anything else is rank hypocrisy, after all your bashing of Labor practises. Yes, do as you say, not as you do. This attitude was worrying in opposition after the truth in parliament etc speech, its even more so now.

        • Yeah, you don’t stack a review panel with a bunch of mates if you want to have an independent review.

          I mean really, it’s about as obvious as it gets.

          • It’s a strategic review with the aim of implementing Coalition NBN policy, upon which they won the election, it’s not a strategic review with the aim of implementing the opposition party policy.

          • The outcome of the review will undoubtedly make modifications to the policy, as to how major they are we will have to wait and see, what the Labor NBN supporters are hoping for is that the review outcome will be to rip up the Coalition policy and let’s go with the old Labor policy warts and all.

            I don’t think so.

          • Why would they modify it? You can’t improve on perfect, can you?

            Love the warts and all stuff. Couldn’t they implement an improved version? You know without the warts?

          • To be fair, the Labor plan wasnt perfect. It might have been 93% of the way to that goal (see what I did there?) but there was definitely room for improvement.

            Messing with a single wholesale capability wasnt part of that.

            But you could tweak with the POI’s, pricing, FttN in the unlucky 7%, areas things like that, and make the Labor plan better. Or allow ISP’s to roll out FttB/FttN at their own cost if they chose, rather than lock them out of the game for decades. Or even FttH outside the footprint.

            I wouldnt have minded if the Labor plan made allowances for the ISP’s to step in and try to solve the MDU issues (along the lines of TPG’s idea) for example. A simple process of allowing ISP’s to leverage FttB type connections to MDU’s would give a significant benefit to properties that are unlikely to see better without an expensive refit (looking at you, apartment blocks of the ’60’s & ’70’s), and fleshed out the premises figure fairly fast.

            And saved NBNCo the hassle of sorting the problem out. They could even ahve leveraged off that themselves, arguing that the ISP’s were still using the NBN fiber, so charging an AVC of some sort.

          • ‘what the Labor NBN supporters are hoping for is that the review outcome will be to rip up the Coalition policy and let’s go with the old Labor policy warts and all.”
            No, and you have been told by every FTTP NBN supporter that that isn’t the case.
            you do get those in favour of an FTTP NBN don’t care about the politics right?

          • Why would you need a review of the coalition policy, if it is as wonderful as you have been annoyingly telling us? You know BT and all that. Just copy what BT have done, after you get the pristine copper network for free from Telstra. Piece of cake really. No need for a review, strategic or otherwise.

            Or maybe, I’ve got it all wrong. Malcolm is unsure about the practicality of his policy. So, what does he do? He gets like-minded old mates to tell him that his plan is fantastic and everything is wonderful. But hang on, if that’s right why do you need to pay them a bucket load of money. Just a few phone calls should do the job.

            The truth is, if you have a good policy and you get elected, you just implement it. You don’t have a review. You just do it.

          • Got of all of that but there is one key part of Coalition policy they could not possibly begin any negotiation or put together any strategic plan to do so until they got into Government, the Telstra FTTN agreement.

  6. I wonder when this review is done whether it will be released what the review panel was charged with finding. Will it be ‘What is the best possible network for Australia’s future?’ or will it be ‘What can be done as quickly as possible for as little money as possible so we don’t have to talk about the NBN anymore?’

    We know what Turnbull will be asking them to find out, but will he admit it?

    • As I stated in a previous discussion elsewhere there is the little matter of Coalition NBN Policy that they presented to the electorate well before the election, so it depends how the review process proceeds, is it a brief that the policy produced in April doesn’t exist and let’s start all over again, or is it a brief to provide input for the plan to present to Parliament in the form of the 2014-2017 Corporate plan on how that Coalition policy will be implemented.

      • And once (if) the gov. change the policy they took to the election, will you be here daily bagging them, as you did the last government, when they altered their plan…?

        Rhetorical, (no need to answer – not that you would have answered anyway, the hotties are normally ignored) plus, we all know the answer already…

        So just sayin’

      • If the review is stacked to “prove” the Coalition plan is “best”, they aren’t exactly “technology agnostic”, are they…

  7. This whole deal is, and always has been, about who gets the money. This whole NBN deal has been frustrated for years while vested interests argue with government about how they are going to fleece the public, again.

    The NBN will be built as a FTTH network. The only thing left to decided is who ends up paying for it and gets control of the river of cash it will generate.

    • ‘The NBN will be built as a FTTH network’

      Yes, eventually (as it should be anyway), but before that Turdball & his ‘mates’ are going to waste billions & billions on an inferior copper based FTTN which is a huge step backwards…..god I hate where the Libs are taking us !!!!

      • Billions are about to be wasted and what is left of our technology base in Australia is about to be flushed out to sea will the rest of the effluent… If our government will not invest in the infrastructure investment and startup companies will simply move offshore where the infrastructure is better. Why would anyone want to learn technology at uni now we are going further behind the rest of the world. Very sad…

      • “‘The NBN will be built as a FTTH network’
        Yes, eventually”

        Err, no, it won’t. If NBN Co are tasked with reverting to FTTN for 71% of the build and infrastructure competition is introduced, a FTTP NBN will never be built. FTTN will be. Then Telstra, TPG/Pipe and Optus (and probably iiNet when they realise it’s the only way to survive) will build their own private FTTP networks in heavily built up high profit areas. With their major source of revenue slashed, NBN Co will be left holding the bag, with the most expensive parts of the network (satellite and wireless) chewing up funds at a far greater rate than revenue they can turn over from a rapidly dwindling market. Eventually they will be sold off for a fraction of the build cost just to stop the funds hemorrhaging out of the budget, and they will only get a buyer because of the value in the transit network – the FTTN side isn’t just worthless, it will be a liability.

        The end result is there will already be such a patchwork of FTTP private networks and NBN Co will be such a disaster that no future Government will be able to argue for further upgrades. The affluent elite, centres of business and metropolitan residential where it is profitable to build private FTTP networks will get fibre, but it won’t be the NBN or even a remote likeness. Regional Australians will have to put up with unreliable FTTN, wireless and satellite indefinitely.

        So you can forget about the LNP seeing sense or a future ALP Government coming to the rescue and completing it as it should have been, the facts don’t even remotely support that conclusion.

        • Indeed Trovor…

          In other words a $30B impost, to give us a slight upgrade in speeds, whilst largely leaving the same shitty, incumbent/copper reliant pre-NBN comms system in place.

          *sigh*

        • @TrevorX

          ‘Err, no, it won’t. If NBN Co are tasked with reverting to FTTN for 71% of the build and infrastructure competition is introduced, a FTTP NBN will never be built.’

          Except in greenfield areas and all the brownfield areas that will have it under existing FTTP build contracts that will take is into 2014-2015, other than all those thousands of residences being connected every month it is ‘never’.

          ‘Then Telstra, TPG/Pipe and Optus (and probably iiNet when they realise it’s the only way to survive) will build their own private FTTP networks in heavily built up high profit areas.’

          Which they then have to make available to all access seekers, so iiNet can access Telstra and Telstra can access iiNet and Optus can access both and Dodo can access them all at NBN Co and ACCC set pricing.

          ‘With their major source of revenue slashed,’

          Not that it all of the above has happened yet nor approved by the ACCC and to what extent the NBN Co actually misses out, because if privately funded rollouts take place they are areas the NBN Co can save CAPEX by not rolling out.

          ‘NBN Co will be left holding the bag, with the most expensive parts of the network (satellite and wireless) chewing up funds at a far greater rate than revenue they can turn over from a rapidly dwindling market.’

          Rapidly dwindling market?

          ‘ Eventually they will be sold off for a fraction of the build cost just to stop the funds hemorrhaging out of the budget, and they will only get a buyer because of the value in the transit network – the FTTN side isn’t just worthless, it will be a liability.’

          Nice story, and with the rest I won’t quote is the best example of conjecture on top of even more conjecture and the totally ignoring of Coalition policy content and the role of the ACCC you will ever see.

          • Actually, if Turnbull relaxes the competition rules on cherry picking, and ISPs deploy, they may not have to wholesale. In fact companies like TPG trying to angle for FTTB deployments, are entirely basing on this very outcome.

            This has been explained to you before, repeatedly; and yet you keep passing this assumption as fact. Regulation exists around the current build. That is not guaranteed to remain – so you cannot presume those same regulations will have any place in the future construction.

            Who knows what will happen, once Turnbull receives the all-clear from the review panel to push FTTN out.

            Even Telstra may not be required to wholesale FTTN services, if ISPs are permitted to overbuild. It would end up as an ACCC matter.

          • @Brendan

            ‘Actually, if Turnbull relaxes the competition rules on cherry picking, and ISPs deploy, they may not have to wholesale.’

            It’s bit more than just relaxing the rules, you want him to put a black paste on square on top of the Section headed Infrastructure competition on Page 10 of his policy, and re issue it.

            ‘This has been explained to you before, repeatedly; and yet you keep passing this assumption as fact.’

            I keep quoting Coalition policy and you state that is assumption?

            ‘ Regulation exists around the current build. That is not guaranteed to remain – so you cannot presume those same regulations will have any place in the future construction.’

            Well until legislation is passed to change the current ACCC regulation we can only go on the current legislation.

            Just as an aside I would have thought the Coalition would have a hard time getting legislation passed in the Senate that decreases ACCC powers, and makes it easier for the likes of Telstra and Optus to dominate the market more than they do.

          • It’s bit more than just relaxing the rules, you want him to put a black paste on square on top of the Section headed Infrastructure competition on Page 10 of his policy, and re issue it.

            Why would they bother investing in infrastructure then? If everyone else was able to access it at an ACCC set price, most companies will just wait for NBNCo to build it. Malcolm’s “Infrastructure competition” clauses are, and always were, a sad joke unless there is something more to encourage investment,

          • Well it’s not as if they make zero revenue from that infrastructure, investors have to weigh up if the ROI is enough to justify the spend on that infrastructure, even if they have to share it at the wholesale level with competitors, keep in mind we are not talking about large NBN Co like footprints here.

          • How does a FttN build demonstrate ROI potential when they cant guarantee people will use that network?

            FttH build could do that, FttN build cant. Just one of the issues that pro-FttH have with node based rollouts – the cherry picking encourages telcos to overbuild, and therefore bypass NBN.

            That only leaves the scraps left for NBN to try and get a ROI from.

          • Well it’s not as if they make zero revenue from that infrastructure, investors have to weigh up if the ROI is enough to justify the spend on that infrastructure, even if they have to share it at the wholesale level with competitors, keep in mind we are not talking about large NBN Co like footprints here.

            How could the ROI justify it when it’s set by the ACCC? It makes more commercial sense to ride off the back of NBNCo, let them have the headaches with Telstra negotiations, asbestos, labour issues, etc.

            In a commercial environment, you can’t have a set price “open” network that will make the owner money unless the state compensates the owner. If NBNCo pay/compensate the owners to nationalise the network, then that’s basically communism (and I find it really interesting that the Coalition seems to be backing that now days!).

  8. “Yes, I do, if he wants to avoid the perception of impropriety.”

    It is hard to avoid the perception of impropriety when the impropriety is factual and glaring.

  9. So Labor and NBN Co miserably failed to build the NBN, with very very little to show for 6 years work. Of course fully supported by sites like Delimiter. Now it is all Malcolm’s fault?

    Delimiter and its small group of supporters will whinge about anything, perhaps you should take stock and reflect on how easily your were conned by Conroy, Albanese and NBN Co. So called tech experts who could not see the obvious failures in the NBN roll out.

    Having lost the vote at the election you now throw more tantrums than a 2 year. Thanks goodness adults are now in charge. They willneed to spend some time fixing up the bloody mess created under Labor.

    • @the lone gunmen – are these the same adults who are sticking their heads in the sand WRT climate change?

      How about the same adults who are helping themselves to travel expenses that have nothing to do with their electorate or being an MP?

      Yeah, good to see the “Adults” are in charge now….

      These “Adults” are also shutting down questions and questioning of their actions. Abbott is a petulant child who’s throwing a fit when he doesn’t get his way.

      Thank god we’ve less than 3 years left until the next election when the behaviour of the “adults” can be dealt with.

      • But Rohan, climate change isn’t real. Duh.

        And the lone gunmen would know, because Andrew Bolt keeps telling him: https://www.google.com.au/search?q=%22the+lone+gunmen%22+site%3Ablogs.news.com.au

        Back a bit more on-topic. I’m pretty sure we’ve been whinging about Labor’s NBN as well. But I didn’t consider a delay of a few months to be disastrous enough that the whole project needs to be turned up on its head, not least of all because it would imply a much worse long-term outcome. And none of us are saying that it’s Malcolm’s fault. But I would say that creating the situation that Labor inherited in 2007 is very much the coalition’s fault.

        If adults are people who deliberately go out of their way to knock at the doors of those most open-minded, knowledgeable and enthusiastic, people like Paul Budde or Simon Hackett, then they’re only adult in the way that they’ve got their preconceptions set and unwavering. Preconceptions that are based entirely on what’s “quick” and “cheap” to do.

        I have no problem that this NBN thing here is going to succeed. Except that he metric won’t be as focused on the general benefit of Australians 15 years hence as much as on Telstra’s market capitalisation.

        http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-22/joe-hockey-announces-commission-of-audit-details/5038314

        Hardly an hour goes by where the adults don’t do something of at least some concern.

        • I had this argument a week or so ago and got torn down over it. I maintained (and still do) the same thing – what appear to be big issues now wont be big issues at the back end.

          Consider a 100,000 shortfall in rollout today. If the peak rollout hits 4,000 a day, that adds 25 days to the overall build. Scale that up as much you want. 1,000,000 shortfall @ 4k/day is still only ~8 months longer for a vastly superior technology base.

          If the peak rollout hits 6k/day, as the business plan hoped, such a shortfall is 2/3rds of that timeframe. Roughly 2 weeks per 100k. If the rollout hit 10% of the total number, thats only around 20 to 30 weeks longer.

          But that doesnt make good news.

          *edit* I should say that I consider 1,000,000 shortfall with a 4k/day rollout peak as the worst case scenario. If it was worse than that, it doesnt really add anything significant to the issue.

          Still loving this edit function :)

  10. The Liberal footsoldiers coming out in force today, defending Turnbull’s nepotism and cronyism. Bunch of hypocrites. Brainless goons. No names mentioned. Starting to feel like a Hollywood South American dictatorship.

    • yeah buddy when *YOU* become Minister in the future and have to make highly-sensitive political appointments you work closely with whose potential failings ultimately reflect back on you, deliberately ignore anyone you know and go appoint some complete stranger you never met, no personal dealings before, no basis to establish immediate trust and confidence… LEAD THE WAY and show how it’s done!! (but first, go out and win an election).

      • Two defences come out of that:

        “I had to resort to cronyism because I’m so well connected I didn’t have a choice.”

        or

        “I had to resort to cronyism because I couldn’t trust anyone else.”

      • I hope you realise that by providing an example of this irrational defense of Turnbull’s cronyism, you’ve automatically accepted the labels “Liberal footsoldier”, “hypocrite” and “brainless goon”. Now let’s get you a prop gun, a beret and a nice military uniform.

        But okay, you can hold me to that. I hope I’ll have your support in winning that election. Vote 1 Harimau for President, 2040.

        quink and Observer have already, really, said what needs to be said. Your argument is ridiculous. As if no one else is trustworthy, experienced and capable other than those you personally know. But you know, that’s the idea, isn’t it? You don’t want someone trustworthy, experienced and capable, you want someone you personally know will toe the line and produce a politically favourable result.

        • Don’t be obtuse. Of course, there are plenty of T/E/C people outside of our circle of acquaintance. But there is no national register or certification of T/E/C-ness. How do you as decisionmaker best know someone is most T/E/C other than personal knowledge or dealings with them? Why not minimise the odds of getting the wrong person by relying on your first-hand knowledge and understanding of potential candidates? You think the time and energy careerists invest in “social business networking” and “alumni associations” are for fun? THAT’S HOW THE WORLD WORKS. Build a bridge and get over it.

          • Yes, yes…

            You miss the point.

            When the previous gov. did it, and seemingly to a lesser extent, the same hypocrites (not necessarily you) who now condone it… screamed to high heaven.

          • Turnbull’s hypocrisy, secrecy and blatant cronyism is also “how the world works” – but we draw attention to it and we criticise it so that he doesn’t simply get away with it, so that we can “make the world a better place” to borrow another cliché. Not everyone is so defeatist. What I wonder is, why don’t you want others to draw attention to and criticise Turnbull’s actions?

            You might try to convince yourself that “it is what it is”, that there isn’t anything remotely sinister about the choice, that there is no ulterior motive, and that it won’t negatively impact on the review and the project as a whole, but in my opinion that makes you hopelessly naïve and wilfully ignorant.

            Let me make a prediction. The review will find that Turnbull’s suspicions about the cost of the NBN and the timeframe of delivery were prophetic, and that the best mix of technologies going forward is the same as what he took to the election. Malcolm Turnbull, what a man of vision and foresight!

            I hope I’m wrong.

          • ….and the Government who won the election with a substantial majority on a different NBN policy than the Government that was booted out actually gets to implement that policy.

            Who would have ever thought that’s how it would happen.

          • Still trying to be cute.

            However, the government is not implementing their policy yet. Remember your words Fibroid they need to get Malcolm’s mates to do a strategic review of the policy to see how to go about it.

            You must agree it’s a bit strange to have a policy that rest on a negotiation that has not taken place yet.

            It’s a bit like I am going to renovate this house but before that I need to negotiate with the owner to see if I can buy it. Actually in this case, it is more like I need to negotiate with the owner who has already leased the land to me and I am pretty confident that I won’t have to pay more because the house is worth nothing now that I am leasing the land.

          • It’s not strange because the policy has in it a key component, that is use of Telstra copper.

            What did you expect the Coalition to do, sign contracts with Telstra with a Coalition NBN Co that didn’t even exist to be approved by the Telstra board and shareholders on the promise ‘trust us we will win in September’?

          • What would I expect them to do?

            To look at what’s best for the nation in the long term. Not to try extract the most out of a network they sold for plenty and now want to buy back for nothing. A network that no matter how much more can be squeezed out of it with technological advances will never rival what fibre can do.

            You keep talking about the coalition having a policy. What they have is a rough, yet to be properly worked out idea, with a price cap. That’s why Malcolm needs a review, so he can formulate a proper plan.

            Unlike others here, I have no idea what he will do but I can’t wait to see what he comes up with.

          • +1 Observer…

            Unfortunately, as we have discovered over the years… trying to explain such obvious commonsense to some people, when the commonsense is contrrary to their immovable ideology, is a lost cause.

          • What did you expect the Coalition to do, sign contracts with Telstra with a Coalition NBN Co that didn’t even exist to be approved by the Telstra board and shareholders on the promise ‘trust us we will win in September’?

            For Malcolm’s sake, that deal had better be the “No more than has already been paid” one that he was saying it would be…

          • 1. “substantial majority”

            2. “on a different NBN policy”

            Both of these parts of your statement are factually incorrect. You are attempting to inject demonstrably false information into the debate.

            1. The Coalition of Liberal and National and Liberal National parties won a majority of seats (90-55), but not a majority of the vote. On first preferences, the Coalition won 45.55%. This is obviously not a majority, let alone a substantial majority. Even on a Two-Party Preferred basis, the Coalition led 53.45-46.45; while a majority, this is not at all a substantial majority – with a swing of just 3.46% in the next election, Labor could easily re-take the majority.

            2. The Coalition victory was won largely on a swing away from Labor, and not toward the Coalition. It was not won on the Coalition’s policies, but, among other things, their mass-media-supported criticism of the Labor government, and their politicising of several issues, including the carbon price, refugees and asylum seekers, and the NBN as well. It is telling that minor parties like the first-time Palmer United Party (which, as it happens, supports FTTP) absorbed so much of the lost Labor/Greens vote, and that the swing towards the Coalition was so small.

            The Coalition does not have a mandate to implement all of the policies it took to the election; however, it does have a mandate to govern. Unfortunately for all current and future Australians, that gives them the executive power to make drastic changes to government business enterprises like NBN Co without a vote in the Parliament. But let’s not sugar-coat it by claiming they have a substantial majority, or that their policy(ies) has any significant support.

            Even ignoring the factual incorrectness of your statement – your statement was not relevant to the current discussion: Turnbull’s cronyism and its irrational defense by certain commenters.

          • Thanks for the treatise on the election result, but of course you ignored how a political party wins a election and gets to form a Government in their own right.

            It is the first party to receive 75 seats in the House of Representatives vote, as the Coalition ended up with 90, you can safely say by any measure they won Government with a comfortable majority.

            That Government will get to implement their own NBN policy as they deservedly should, you really need to move on.

          • “That Government will get to implement their own NBN policy as they deservedly should, you really need to move on.”

            Err, we have all moved on and awaiting the perpetual actual NBN doomsdayers to do likewise instead of continuing their old habits…

            Still awaiting one decent explanation how the gov spending just under $30B on FttN is value compared to just over $30B for FttP… all I ever get is a cyclopic, spiel about totals which totally ignores the crux of the old trusty chestnut – taxpayer dollars.

            By the way the terms forming government in one’s own right and being in a coalition to do so, are contradictory, but I won’t childishly nitpick as you would… because they did win.

            As such, please take your own advice FFS, let the old Labor/actual NBN hatred go (even just until the next election) and try to justify the unjustifiable dumb FttN network, with a straight face…

          • “That Government will get to implement their own NBN policy as they deservedly should,”

            Just like Tony Abbott allowed Labor to implement their ETS policy, right. What makes it even worse in that particular case is that the Coalition went to the 2007 election with the same policy.

          • What’s it got to do with Abbott, he didn’t hold the balance of power in either of the houses of Parliament.

          • Fibroid

            It has got plenty to do with Abbott. Don’t play dumb. You don’t need the practice.

            When in opposition, what mandate? When in government, people should respect the mandate. This is called double standards.

          • What’s it got to do with Abbott, he didn’t hold the balance of power in either of the houses of Parliament.

            He still voted against…well…everything, including the good stuff.

            A conservative at work explained it to me at the time, “That’s what oppositions do, they oppose things!”.

          • It is not a substantial majority, unless you’re looking at one set of figures and ignoring reality – something you have great practice doing, I’m sure. I wrote,
            this is not at all a substantial majority – with a swing of just 3.46% in the next election, Labor could easily re-take the majority
            A substantial majority would imply that they have a strong and safe position, or that they have much more of the public’s support. Neither of these things is true, Fibroid.

            As for letting the new government simply get on with its plans, re-read the comment you originally replied to. It applies to you as well,
            but we draw attention to it and we criticise it so that he doesn’t simply get away with it, so that we can “make the world a better place” to borrow another cliché. Not everyone is so defeatist. What I wonder is, why don’t you want others to draw attention to and criticise Turnbull’s actions?

            As for your other comment about “moving on”, I WAS moving on, YOU were the one who brought up the previous government when Labor wasn’t part of the discussion. How incredibly stupid of you!

          • Thanks for the treatise on the election result, but of course you ignored how a political party wins a election and gets to form a Government in their own right.</em.

            Exactly, they won a mandate to form government. Nothing else.

  11. I’m surprised you missed Anna Cicognani – where ever Justin goes so does his wife. Talk about jobs for the boys i think its almost written into his contract that she must be automatically provided a job as well.

  12. Rousselot has been selected for his IPTV bandwidth knowledge in order to KILL IPTV in Australia so Murdoch can continue to profit from Foxtel via cable.

    Murdoch and Abbott of course did a deal — Murdoch would promote Abbott and attack the ALP for months leading up to the election, and Abbott would make sure to cripple the NBN so it could not carry on-demand IPTV services, and allow Murdoch and Foxtel his near-monopoly control of cable TV. Why have a $8 a month Netflix account when you can pay Rupert Murdoch $100 month cable subscription? And even more for anything remotely on demand.

    So Turnbull, even as a techo (of sorts), is prepared to destroy the environmentally sound future of working from home for Australian workers in dynamic new ways by crippling the capability of a FTTH network all in the interests of seizing power. Instead of nation-building, the Coalition is into nation-crippling, setting the country back a generation in capability.

    http://cafewhispers.wordpress.com/2013/02/26/revealed-the-media-conspiracy-against-the-government/

    • actually the CONSPIRACY is much bigger than that… I know for a fact from sources I cannot reveal at risk of death that Murdoch is just a puppet for the ROTHSCHILDS who have been plotting World Domination for decades. Murdoch doesn’t actually own News Corp. Think about it. How can you go from owning a small little Adelaide rag to owning the world media. Secret funding from Rothschilds!! I also know a future Abbott policy is MANDATORY FOXTEL SUBSCRIPTION in lieu of a tax penalty for non-subscribers.

      • I know you’re joking, but to be honest, it wouldnt surprise me if a licensing fee was introduced “to help the FTA television industry”, with exemptions given for demonstrated Pay TV subs. Like medicare levy surcharge being offset by health fund membership.

        I’m scaring myself that I even consider that plausible, let alone possible… But the mechanic to do it is in place.

        • What’s funny is that youse guys just have no idea how politics works, how people are driven by the need for power, and how the Libs work with Murdoch. Go back to your mums’ basements guys! You know that’s where you belong and where you like it the most – dank and dark and acting like mushrooms.

          This ‘conspiracy theory’ perfectly explains the irrationality of the decision re line speeds, extra power costs, large fridges at the end of every street full of high maintenance cooling fans and batteries and power supplies and DSLAMs, copper wire pair gain problems requiring expensive labour cost resolution, etc etc. And all to get one tenth of the FTTH line speed! That’s clever network design right there.

          Of course there’s an agenda.

          • Dont look at me, I’m on your side!

            As you have replied to me though, I can only assume you are refering to me at least in part with your response. So I feel I have the right to reply.

            Firstly, where the hell do you get off questioning me or my experience? You dont know me, so you dont know how wrong you are. You dont know the politicians I call friends, nor do you know my job and the understanding I have for things political as a result.

            You dont know my family, so you wouldnt know THEIR experience, and the fact that one of my siblings lectures on these sorts of topics around the world.

            Dont assume you can understand someone from a single comment, because on this site you’ll find people have far more understanding than you realise.

            I’m very much pro-FttH, and while I wouldnt go as far as to say its a conspiracy to give Murdoch some sort of Dr Evil level control, I’m not going to argue against an agenda to give Big Business as big a boost as possible. After all, that seems to be standard Liberal policy.

            In the name of “competition”, let them dictate to the public how they will access basic utilities, and how much they will pay seemed to be pretty common with Howard, and I’m not seeing anything different with this mob so far.

            If you didnt mean me, I appologise.

  13. Just waiting for Steve Visard’s appointment to add even more comedy to Turnbull’s routine.

  14. Bring in people from overseas that are completely independent of any Australian political party and know about the technology behind FTTP/FTTN, the amount of equipment and power consumption of FTTP is significantly lower than FTTN, work force will need to be greater to maintain the network service providers will be charge more to offer the end user (customer) a significantly inferior service offering internet speeds which are available now (ADSL +2) or worse as you reach 400m or more away from the Node so the question is why should Australia be kept so far behind the rest of the world when it comes technology.

    • And now is the best time to do so with the Aussie Dollar so high, bringing in overseas talent will be cost effective.

    • @Robo

      ‘so the question is why should Australia be kept so far behind the rest of the world when it comes technology.’

      The rest of the world is rolling out FTTN as well, so I guess that means the world is falling behind the rest of the world, which is a interesting twist on the dog chasing its tail scenario.

      • The rest of the world is also rolling out a hell of a lot of fibre.

        This is like saying “the rest of the world is riding horses”. This is accurate in that horses are still very much ridden across the planet, but ignores the fact that the rest of the world also commutes by vehicle, aircraft, trains, boats, etc.

        The world is responding to the growing need for high speed services. Incumbants are simply stripmining copper to retain control, because it’s the only way they can respond to competition. Telstra would have already been well down the road of FTTN if there was a genuinely scary big provider pushing them hard for business.

        Instead, we have an giant incumbent that never felt threatened enough to pull the trigger.

        Anyone else building a new network (as apposed to overhauling one) is dropping in fibre; if you don’t own the copper, it’s a no-brainer.

      • The rest of the world is rolling out FTTN as well, so I guess that means the world is falling behind the rest of the world, which is a interesting twist on the dog chasing its tail scenario.

        The RotW isn’t stopping an FTTP rollout to start an FTTN one…

          • Well, we have already stopped rolling out FTTP. No new build orders are to be made. It remains to be seen whether we proceed with your favourite technology, or if we continue with FTTP.

          • “Neither are we”

            With the “experts” Malcolm is stacking it with, I seriously doubt that statement mate :(

Comments are closed.