Fifield invites Australians to comment: Who has the better NBN?


news Communications Minister Mitch Fifield has invited the Australian public to comment on whether it has more confidence in Labor’s near universal Fibre to the Premises version of the National Broadband Network, or the Coalition’s Multi-Technology Mix, in a fraught parliamentary session yesterday in which tempers again became heated over the NBN topic.

In Senate Question Time yesterday (Tuesday), Labor Senator Jenny McAllister alleged that under the Coalition, the cost of the NBN had blown out by a total of up to $26.5 billion, and asked the Communications Minister whether this amount would be funded by private debt.

After Fifield confirmed that the Government was planning to cap its equity contribution to the NBN at $29.5 billion, with the remainder of the company’s costs to come from private sector funding, McAllister then asked Fifield whether the Government would be forced to underwrite that private sector funding through an explicit government guarantee.

This is a question which has been circling the NBN project for some time. As its costs have risen, the Coalition has maintained it would not fund the project beyond $29.5 billion. However, some have questioned whether capital markets would be prepared to take on the rest of the NBN project’s funding without an explicit government guarantee that they would not lose their money in the event that the NBN project could not make a return on its investment.

In response, Fifield said:

“Let me put a fairly straightforward proposition to colleagues in the Chamber. What would colleagues around the Chamber— indeed, let’s talk more broadly: Who would members of the community—have more confidence in: a plan which was produced and overseen by former Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull or one that was prepared and overseen by Senator Conroy?”

In response, an uproar was heard within the Senate Chamber, with senior Labor Senators Conroy and Penny Wong strongly objecting to Fifield’s comment.

It is not the first time this week that the NBN has been one of the most contentious topics in the Parliament, especially in the Senate; due, it appears, to the presence of both Senator Fifield and Senator Conroy in the upper house.

On Monday, for example, Western Australian Liberal Senator Linda Reynolds asked Fifield to update the Senate on the progress of the NBN project, in the context that the company released its latest quarterly results on Monday this week.

Senator Conroy also interjected during that debate.

“I am very pleased to be able to advise the chamber that the rollout of the NBN is powering ahead under the Coalition,” said Fifield in response, detailing the NBN company’s progress. And in response to Conroy’s interjection: “If I had a word of advice for Senator Conroy, it would be: Just let go!”

Asked by Reynolds whether there were any threats to the delivery of the NBN, Fifield said:

“Well, there is a threat from someone opposite who just will not let go. But we are going to ignore that threat and just get on with the job of building the NBN.”

“Today’s results are in stark contrast to those that the other side presided over. As Professor Henry Ergas observed today in his very good column in The Australian newspaper, NBN’s revenues at the time the Coalition took office were 91 per cent short of the 2013 corporate plan objective. The company, under those opposite, did not even know how much it cost to connect a premises.”

“No wonder the Australian Financial Review referred to Senator Conroy’s approach as an expensive joke.”

Labor Senator Deborah O’Neill later asked Fifield further questions on the NBN, relating to the so-called ‘counterfactual’ which Maloclm Turnbull (as Communications Minister) and Finance Minister Mathias Cormann had asked the NBN company to carry out into a Fibre to the Premises model for the NBN.

The move has been interpreted as representing material that the Coalition Government could use to discredit the idea of the NBN returning to a near-universal FTTP model.

O’Neill also highlighted comments recently made by conservative commentator Andrew Bolt with regards to the NBN. Bolt had heavily criticised Turnbull for his handling of the project, stating Turnbull had “fumbled” the catch on the NBN and let the project blow out to twice the cost and four years behind the delivery that Turnbull promised.

Following the questions, the Senate Chamber again descended into an uproar, which ended in both Fifield and Conroy arguing across the floor on the issue of the NBN.

“I think there is only a very small number of people who are on that side of the chamber in this place and on that side of the chamber in the other place who still contend and persist with the fantasy that Senator Conroy did anything approaching a halfway decent job with the NBN. The entire nation knows it is not true,” said Fifield.

“The NBN was going nowhere very fast under Senator Conroy. As we all know, there was not the work done for the planning of the NBN that I acknowledge those opposite did in the planning of the NDIS. There was not a 1,000-page Productivity Commission report laying out a blueprint. There was a coaster with scribble on the back. That was the comprehensive plan that Senator Conroy left the nation, and, in the rollout under him, it showed.”

I suggest that readers might like to post their opinion below this article in response to the following question put to the public by Communications Minister Mitch Fifield:

“Who would members of the community—have more confidence in: a plan which was produced and overseen by former Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull or one that was prepared and overseen by Senator Conroy?”

Video credit: Parliamentary Broadcasting


  1. I suggest Fifield start a hashtag campaign called #YourNBN and see how that goes.

    In all seriousness, this is farcical. Fifields comments are akin to me walking in after my wife has done the dishes, vacuumed, cooked dinner etc…and claiming that I’ve done a great job on the housework because I didn’t toss my jacket on the floor (and that she hasn’t cleaned up the others clothes on the floor and consequently hasn’t done as much as me). It’d get a cast iron pan to the head and I’d deserve it.

    • I second the suggestion and double-dare Malcolm Turnbulls prime-ministership to take up the challenge… they are 21st century global jokes and they know it until election dayand will sweat every day and Shorten will grin knowing they know that we all know!!!!

  2. Conroy had a plan for the future.

    Turnbull was told to destroy it and he did!

    Fifields plan is to bitch and moan by the sounds of it.

    • Simon Hackett at first like the fibre for all model. Until they found out it was un-competitive for business model and took upon themselves to push for FTTN model

      • Simon went into the board promising to “fight the good fight from within” (haven’t got the exact quote to hand, but it’s a close paraphrase) for maximising FTTP compared to FTTN. He agreed with the MTM to a degree, especially in utilising HFC as an interim step. Since then, barely a peep…

        • His issue re competition were more POI as well. Pretty sure has always been a fan of fibre.

          Not surprised SH has been quiet one due to well being a board member and probably not allowed and 2 being somewhat focused on his next venture.

      • if Hackett made a turn around NBN(Co) would be emphatically pushing him to write a long piece about why, it would be a slam dunk for Turnbull and Fifield but we hear next to nothing which suggests he is stifled by his involvement.

  3. While I’m not a particular fan of Conroy or Turnbull, if it comes down to a question of would I prefer between the original (mostly) FTTP or the MTM approach, then there is no question that FTTP is a vastly better investment for both the government and the community

  4. I lost all hope for the NBN and Australia’s long term broadband future after Labor lost the election.

    Every time the Coalition open their mouth about it My feelings are reinforced.

    They seem hell bent on spending a substantial amount of money and TIME on a “solution” that will not present Australia an acceptable broadband future even before the thing is finished and will certainly be obsolete well before it’s paid for.

    • It looks like the Liberals want the NBN completed no matter what so they can take some credit. They have stuffed it up but will do anything to make sure it works even with costs where they are right now. There is no doubt the costs will rise in the future. FTTN for the price of FTTP. I think we are getting a pretty good deal. Don’t you?

      • No one has shown that this a undeniable fact – “FTTN for the price of FTTP”.

        Overseas experience where both types of rollouts are well established, (unlike here) show the complete opposite is fact.

        • Overseas FTTN roll-outs didn’t require the purchase of a PSTN (they had already recovered the costs of their network build decades ago and where merely squeezing as much life as possible out of their existing assetts) or the build of new systems to manage the FTTN – they also started between 5-10 years ago when FTTN was a genuine option!

          Wake up Alain, this isn’t the 50’s anymore!

        • Its called distance. In Australia we have oodles of it.

          Distance is Cu worst enemy so the costs here are simply going to be higher (as we if nothing else need more nodes pp due to distance between everyone).

        • I think it’s time people started boycotting your comments in the same way you comprehensively ignore facts and evidence supplied to refute your ignorance. With every article on the NBN you spout the same idiocy, and people keep taking the time to correct you, only to have you come back and repeat your factually baseless misinformation. What happened to people being held to standards of fact and evidence?

          • I think it’s about time Alain got a PermaBan, he’s clearly in violation of the Comments policy:


            * Comments which display a lack of rationality or reasonableness. For example, a number of commenters on Delimiter over the past year have engaged in the debate, but consistently avoided acknowledging substantive issues raised by other commenters in relation to their argument. Instead, they have deliberately diverted the discussion down another path, annoying many other commenters.

            * Comments which inject demonstrably false information into the debate (for example: “Fibre broadband only offers speeds up to 50Mbps”). Often I will leave these be, if other readers correct the record. But if it’s done consistently, it’s a problem.

          • Ooooh reality is alain!!
            Why is there only like 2 recurring trolls on the Internet?

            And why do they continue to change name I wonder.

          • @ Derek..

            “I think it’s about time Alain got a PermaBan, he’s clearly in violation of the Comments policy”


            … we (those actually in reality) need others who read the comments here, who are still perhaps a little unclear as to why FttP is far and away superior to MTM, to see how desperately irrational, completely contradictory, always argumentative, repetitive (even when disproved, the same BS is claimed over and over) and childish those who oppose FttP, simply because of their illogical ideology, actually are…

            And guess who is the shining light in demonstrating this at pretty much every comment?

          • Valid point Rizz, Im just fed up with the more than half a decade of Blatant dishonesty and FUD from the Libs and their minions – frankly I cant believe I voted for those morons for the first 15 years of my voting life!!!

            Never Ever again!!!

  5. One of the videos I heard a fight between conroy and angry german cormen

    “We have 6 million premises”
    Conroy: They all ours…. 600,000 connected customers

    Then Angry german sentor chimes in to say
    You (conroy) got fired!

    Conroy shouts
    “You got ten. Ten connections!”

    • Actually, the twat is Belgian. I realise he sounds like a Hun; he acts like a Hun, but no….he’s Belgian.

      But the sentiment’s the same.

      (BTW, as he lives in the Applecross area in Perth, he’s got FTTP. Wanker!)

  6. I hate all sides of politics. After 20 years of the politics of distraction we have the zenith of buffoonery and the nadir of all leadership or sense.

    Sooner. Faster. Cheaper. And more affordable. Who am I quoting? Conroy or Turnbull? I will play some chill house music to let you decide.

    Answer: the quote was from Turnbull. He has flouted the quote.

    • Sooner. Faster. Cheaper. and already obsolete.
      Let’s keep Australia in the dark ages forever….

  7. 272,032 supporters already petitioned for Conroys better NBN FTTP plan.
    Turnbull just turned around and said we’ve had our democracy now go away.

    • This, quarter of a million votes isn’t nothing.

      For the sake of completeness, I would take a plan helmed by Conroy over one helmed by fi field.
      I would be unable to decide between a fttp (labor style) plan helmed by Turnbull, versus Conroy, but the current lib plan is a turd. And they haven’t even tried to polish it.

    • Did that petition end up being actually tabled/accepted? if not its probably time to bring it up again in response to said query.

    • Renai, in answer to the actual question:

      “Who would members of the community—have more confidence in: a plan which was produced and overseen by former Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull or one that was prepared and overseen by Senator Conroy?”

      I would trust Conroy’s NBN because unlike Turnbull he A/ didnt spend his entire time lying his a$$ off & B/ when proven wrong actually listened eg abandoning the Net filter & C/ Conroy was trying to build national infrastructure for the benefit of all of us, as opposed to TurnBull who has used the NBN to feather the nests of his Telstra share owning Crony mates!

      • /giggle

        Talk about rose coloured glasses…

        Conjob only did one thing right, and that is pick the technology that guaranteed that the technocratic self styled anti-luddites from Whirlpool would be guaranteed to flock to. Everything else was a complete farce and he did nothing but sweep his constant snafu’s under the rug…

        Conjob didn’t abandon the net filter until it was a complete non issue (ie. even the libs who love that right wing bullshit wouldn’t back it), so he didn’t listen there in the slightest.

        Conjob wasn’t building squat for the ‘benefit of us all’, he was one upping his own FTTN plan after he demurred on separating Telstra prior to the non compliant submission which tanked their share price and showed Conjob up for the incompetent tool that he is.

        Sling mud at Turnbull and the Libs as much as you want, I have absolutely no issue with that, but don’t come in defending Conroy for being transparent and responsive just because your ass is chapped that you won’t be getting fibre.

        ps. Oh yeah, you might remember it was Conjob and co. that originally struck the deal to pay Telstra a shit tonne of money to take over their network rather than forcibly separating them and dealing with wholesale directly…

        “Prime Minister Kevin Rudd announced the deal at a joint press conference with Telstra chief David Thodey.

        The Government will pay $9 billion to access Telstra infrastructure – including pits and ducts – to avoid duplication.

        A further $2 billion will go towards dealing with structural separation issues, including setting up a new company, USO Co, to meet Telstra’s universal service obligation for the delivery of standard telephone services, payphones and emergency call handling from July 1, 2012.”

        I’d say you guys give the polli’s a run for their money in the creative writing department, but I think you’ve spent so much time peddling BS as truth that you’ve actually convinced yourself it is the truth…

        • Anti-Conroy label: Check
          Anti-Whirlpool label: Check
          Attempt to (irrelevantly) link filter to NBN argument: Check
          Assume criticism exists because critics aren’t getting fibre: Check
          Ignore entire RFP process: Check
          Attempt to rewrite original $11 billion deal under FTTP NBN: Check

          It’s like a list of Orgasmo’s greatest hits, transplanted directly from Whirlpool. All refuted many times before, whether they were his originally or others attempted to make them. Good grief. I’m just waiting for the emcee to tell me he’ll be here all week, try the veal.

          • Ah Murdoch my old frenemy… =)

            You’ll notice I included a bit about not caring if you attack Turnbull or the MTM. Plus, never defended it. I just can’t stand for political revisionism which paints Conjob out as some sort of saint because he baited his hook correctly.

            Not that the facts ever mattered to you or the rest of the scrum over at WP that would throw feces like enraged primates whenever anyone didn’t toe the populist line. ; )

        • So, let’s pretend your entire post is factual – Turnbull could have made sweeping improvements to the NBN while having it remain as a FTTH network, yet he couldn’t even get that right?

        • but I think you’ve spent so much time peddling BS as truth that you’ve actually convinced yourself it is the truth…

          Pretty much what I was thinking when I read your comment.

          It’s almost as if you knew what you were writing was bullshit and anticipated others would point it out so you preemptively said “nah ahh, you guys”

          • Cool, so you’re not only incorrect, you’re unoriginal as well. X D

            Here’s an idea, apart from picking FTTP, detail a list of things that Conjob actually did right in regards to the NBN. It might bring some weight behind the argument that the ALP’s NBN plan when viewed in anything other than the narrowest tunnel vision…

            Cut Telstra a big fat cheque? Check.
            Bet the farm on FTTN first? Check.
            Staged elaborate button pressing ceremonies when services were not actually ready to use? Check.
            Attacked everyone who didn’t absolutely agree with him, creating/contributing to an environment of toxic partisanship? Check.
            Constantly promised far beyond the ability to deliver? Check.
            Presided over enormous cost blowouts (ignoring the debate between spend and invest)? Check.

            And so on and so forth.

            The one thing Conjob got right was his choice of technology. Everything else was a shambles. Don’t face up to it if you wish, it’s no skin off my nose as I’m 100m from the node which should go live in the next month or so and so should be on close to 100 Mbit. Only 8 odd years after the ALP first promised to be finished in 2012. ;)

          • Org
            You could do all those checking for Turnbull to I think the best two promise far beyond the ability to deliver as for it to be completed by 2016 doesn’t ring a bell.

            Presided over enormous cost blow outs $29B now $56B

            You might be 100M from the node but how far are you from the pillar since the average length of new copper being purchased from NBN to connect node to pillar is 350M.

          • Cool, so you’re not only incorrect

            Fairly sure I am correct. Blow-ins like you occasionally like to add their “wisdom” to the debate but add nothing new. We’ve all heard the same flawed debunked arguments and relentless whining a thousand times already.

            Thanks for stopping by!

          • @org
            “Cut Telstra a big fat cheque? Check.”
            MTM … Check
            (+ the big blank cheque to cover their maintenance bills)
            “Bet the farm on FTTN first? Check.”
            MTM they bet the farm but didn’t realise their mistake … check
            “Staged elaborate button pressing ceremonies when services were not actually ready to use? Check.”
            Hmm I swore I’ve seen quite a few Polli’s in safety vests in recent news releases (no FttN or HFC at the time either)!
            LNP … check
            MTM … check
            “Attacked everyone who didn’t absolutely agree with him, creating/contributing to an environment of toxic partisanship? Check.”
            LNP … check
            MTM … check
            “Constantly promised far beyond the ability to deliver? Check.
            Presided over enormous cost blowouts (ignoring the debate between spend and invest)? Check.”
            every expert said faster,cheaper,sooner wasn’t possible but MTM just kept on despite
            MTM … check

            such a good argument you’ve got there mate ;)

          • Indeed HC..

            They all play the same worn out tune…FFS

            Thing is they talk about previous mismanagement with costs and hold-ups… but they’ll readily accept the third rate MTM (fully costed at sub $30B) blowing out to as much as $56B and the promise of “for all Aussie households by 2016” blowing out by 4 years.

            But I guess when one calls Conroy, Conjob and calls the other Turnbull (it’s a wonder it wasn’t Mr Turnbull Sir… lol) one just reinforces my findings yet again, that no one has ever opposed the previous FttP network for any rational and well thought out reason.

            They did/do so purely out of their own ridiculous cyclopic, illogical ideology.

        • You enjoy yourself. One fact here:

          Since mid 2013 all Federal politicians have got Telstra to connect FTTP to their offices.

          That’s right. Not FTTN. Not Gfast. Or anything else.

          • Andrew T
            I know Barnaby Joyce move his office from Tamworth to Armidale for the FTTP

        • what? conroy picked FTTN mate. they changed tech after they were criticised for it and underwent consultation about the best route

          • actually I see you know that full well and addressed it in another comment about Conroy’s performance, I’m a big FTTP supporter but find Conroy’s manner really off putting and think his sarcasm and attempts at jokes derail him just when he has been making sense.
            I wish it wasn’t so because it didn’t help sell FTTP and here we are.

    • Considering the take-up figures of NBN fibre, I doubt that the LNP are worried. 78% have opted for 25Mbps or slower on fibre. This means if they move to a HFC or FTTN area they are unlikely to experience any difference. Unless fraction of the 17% (and falling) who are selecting 100Mbps who voted Liberal at the last election are willing to change their vote over the NBN then politically it is a dead issue.

      • Oh, I didn’t realise that me signing up for 25Mbit was a vote for FTTN. If I knew I would have gone for something higher. I think the fact that FTTN was even considered is absolutely criminal. This infrastructure is supposed to last 50-100 years. FTTH is future proofing for this demand.

      • [Citation required]

        According to Quigleys PDF ARPU is up on even the NBN Co aggressive modelling which requires a certain % of high end users (if you’d said 50Mbps those figures might have sounded more realistic). Last time it was reported the 100Mbps and 50Mps uptake was still far above expectations as well?

      • Opted for, or taken because that’s all they were presented with? Telstra and Optus hide the speed options deep on their website.

        However, that’s beside the point. The point is what will people want in the future and what will be able to deliver that – copper or fibre? I remember when I got 56k dial-up, blisteringly fast compared to the 14.4k I’d been on before that, and more than adequate for my needs at the time.

        I’d be livid had I not been able to upgrade since.

        • Telstra and Optus hide the choice and at least 3 others are advertising on price. TPG, Dodo and Southern phone are all offering unlimited calls and data for $69 a month. Their plans start on the 12/1 and they call it an up to 12/1 service.

      • @ Mathew,

        As opposed to 50/12 you were telling us about daily for the last five years, you mean?

        So you finally admit you were wrong..

        Thank Christ.

        But I’m guessing the 78/25 will now start appearing relentlessly *sigh*

        BTW – is that you deteego?

        • Indeed Rizz. Funny how the goal posts have moved.

          Apparently the numbers mean 65% are on 25mbps plans and higher. That is much more than the “50%” the corporate plan “predicted”.

      • As Mathew well knows, countries that have a completed (or near completed) network, the speed take up has risen 36% in Europe & around 50% in New Zealand ANNUALLY.
        By 2020 Europe is expected to have more then half of the population on over 50mbps plans, while at this rate New Zealand will have almost their whole country :)
        Mathew’s argument is moot and should be ignored at all costs.

      • Mathew, you again fail to realise that the 22% who chose 50 Mbps or higher are the ones actually paying for the build.

        The NBN Implementation Report of May 2010 identified the key revenue risk as the number of users times the average revenue per user.

        Because FTTP offers much faster upload speeds, a quarter of users are choosing higher speed tiers, and boosting wholesale ARPU which is currently already at $43 per user.

        This is the main reason that we should be building FTTP as a nation. The government is in a position to ensure universal urban availability of fibre, whereas corporations are obliged to maximise shareholder returns. If the government is building the NBN, it can use FTTP where possible and cost-recover, or hand cash to copper/coax owners to refurbish their assets, which will not generate the required wholesale revenue from users due to its underperforming upload capability.

      • Got a new record to play Mathew? Did your 50% on 12/1 break? what will it be in the next couple of years? 50% on 50/20 or less?
        Yes, the majority don’t need 100/40 now, we get it, but the build finishes in 2020 and a build to support 100/40+ for the majority will take another 5 years. Way before then you’ll have run out of goal post to shift.

      • I think it’s about time Mathew also got a PermaBan, he’s clearly in violation of the Comments policy:

        * Comments which display a lack of rationality or reasonableness. For example, a number of commenters on Delimiter over the past year have engaged in the debate, but consistently avoided acknowledging substantive issues raised by other commenters in relation to their argument. Instead, they have deliberately diverted the discussion down another path, annoying many other commenters.

        * Comments which inject demonstrably false information into the debate (for example: “Fibre broadband only offers speeds up to 50Mbps”). Often I will leave these be, if other readers correct the record. But if it’s done consistently, it’s a problem.

      • If it’s a dead issue then why pop in every chance you get and post incorrect shit that has been confirmed wrong unless your mate Reality needed a extra troll.

  8. Well, if we’re comparing Conroy’s original plan to the current plan we need to make sure we’re using the right information. It has been established in senate estimates that the current figures being thrown about for a FTTP rollout include all the expense for switching back, so they become irrelevant. However last February the parliamentary secretary to Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull, Paul Fletcher, stated that their review found Labour’s original plan for FTTP would cost $55.9 billion.

    Given that the cost for the MTM is blowing out to around the same figure, I wholehearted prefer Conroy’s original plan, warts and all. Not that I think we’ll be able to go back to it now.

    • (not sure DW) the question is as I see it: Who would you trust more to build our telecom/broadband network for our future:

      Conroy + Quigley (NBN Co) with FttP


      Turnbull + Morrow (NBN™) with MTM

      This isn’t a he said she said about costs or timelines (or that fibre is technically surperior tech) its about who would you trust to get Australia to where it needs to be in regards to our national network.

      • Quigley and Conroy, thanks.

        Morrow is a smug sleaze who refuses to answer the Senate questions he is obligated to at least attempt to answer, or give valid reasons why not.

        • +1

          simple answer for me. i see massive problems with the FTTN proposition and while the FTTP would have taken time to complete and been more expensive at the front end its lifetime earnings and costs outstrip the current policy handily. no question the FTTP route is my preferred one.

      • Personally I’m going to trust the team that gives me the best bang for my buck. And from the information we have on hand that is Conroy & Quigley.

        There are also many other reasons I prefer the original FTTP plan, but to me this is the most powerful.

      • Though if I was to comment purely on how much I trust Mr Turnbull I’d point out the sheer volume of disinformation he’s produced regarding the NBN. When he started promising to deliver everyone speeds of 25mb/s by 2016 it was a red flag that he is either lying or incompetent, it was never going to happen.

        tl;dr: I have zero trust in Turnbull.

      • Quigley and Conroy are the obvious choice for any that have read and watched whatever they can about the NBN.

    • I just sent this.

      to,,, (LNP federal member as I am in QLD) (My local Member)


      Good day,

      A question was asked of the members of the community in a recent parliamentary session by Communications Minister Mitch Fifield
      “Who would members of the community—have more confidence in: a plan which was produced and overseen by former Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull or one that was prepared and overseen by Senator Conroy?”
      I would like to take the time as a member of the community to state outright that I have more confidence in the plan that was overseen by Senator Conroy.
      “Faster, Sooner, Cheaper” was sold to us by the Coalition during the election. Faster was simply never true. Anyone with an understanding of technology knows that.
      Sooner, appears to be very close to untrue, any potential savings have been lost in 2 years of deliberations. So now the timing difference is so small as to not be worth it when you compare the difference in benefit.
      Cheaper, also appears to be laughable, when you look at the Takeup, and the ARPU that the current rollout is benefiting from (noting that only elements of the Labor plan have been actually implemented at this stage)it is clear that the original Plan was not only accurate, but in light of the “blowouts” that NBN has stated were caused by the MTM, it is fast looking like the cost difference between the plans will be minimal. Which being that we are receiving a vastly inferior solution that is already behind the rest of the world, is simply not acceptable.
      Far from “saving us money”, I now wonder how the MTM will ever meet its Return on Investment requirements in order to pay off the government bonds that were issued to pay for the rollout, and who will have to foot the eventual bill?
      So I repeat. My confidence is with the plan that was overseen by Senator Conroy.

      Thank you for your time.

      • Since I am in an area that is marked as getting FTTP next year as a residual Labor Brownfields FTTP rollout, I will be the pragmatist philosopher and say that I have no choice: I can only trust Labor/Conroy/Clare/Quigley. Fifield has given me nothing to trust.

      • I sent your comment too Woolfe.I’m a Q’lander.I sent last one to my local Member Terri Butler.

      • Woolfe,

        Could you redo that email and put figures on your conjectures, you know something that has some actual data to prove you points rather than an a general ‘I love FTTP MTM sux’ vague gut feel thrust to it.

        • Wasn’t aware the good minister was asking for figures when phrasing the question as “Who would members of the community—have more confidence in: a plan which was produced and overseen by former Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull or one that was prepared and overseen by Senator Conroy?”

        • As Ryan said, I have answered the question. My confidence is with the Conroy plan.

          There is plenty of data. Some of it you drew my attention to… Thanks by the way :-)

        • @ alain…

          And you could just say Woolfe, I don’t agree with you, but I can respect your right to your own view and certainly respect your conviction by writing to the politicians.


          You could just be an argumentative, childish dickhead.

          Hmm, I’ll just leave it at that…

      • Sent my copy, with a few additions :p

        EDIT : “Additionally, I would like to request a Royal Commission be held in respect to the former Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbulls compete mishandling of the NBN, specifically in regards to promises made prior to the last election whereby former Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull made specific promises to the public, including but not limited to:

        * those promises such as providing a service that could deliver a ‘minimum’ of 25Mbps to all Australians by 2016 when latest reports indicate an ‘up to’ 25Mbps service will be delivered to all Australians by 2020 (which is equivalent to pre-existing ADSL2+ services),
        * those promises such as the LNP MTM plan being “fully costed” at $29 billion when latest reports indicate an incredible and outrageous blowout of up to $56 billion, with more likely to come as the project begins its FTTN and HFC rollouts
        * those promises such as the LNP MTM plan beginning to roll out 6 months post-election when rollout started a full 24 months post-election, attributing somewhat to aforementioned cost and timeframe blowouts

        Such gross manhandling of one of the most visionary and grandiose projects to ever be undertaken in this nation is well recognised within the media – labelling Malcolm Turnbull as Australias worst ever Communications Minister – and MUST NOT go unchecked.”

  9. Conroy FttP if given a choice (I did vote labor last time around because of it to no avail).

    Both sides had and still have issues with their plans but Conroy’s is at least the lesser of two weevils (sue me I watched the M&C movie last night).

  10. Labors plan is superior. No brainer.
    The public still favoured it after the Coalition got elected, and they still do now.
    The only way the Libs can counter it is to make up figures, and hide how they derived them. When reality hits though, the MTM is shown to be a farce every time. Years behind schedule, massive blowout in costs, poor management, poor prioritisation, lack of vision – no plan for the future.
    No rationally thinking person can come to the conclusion that Turnbull’s MTM is the way to go.

  11. How could anybody say they’re in favour of the coalition “plan”, we still really have no idea what it’s going to look like, given we’ve spent the last 2 years dicking around. I do think that FTTB could be a good way to get quick runs on the board in high value areas, TPG have shown this can be done, you would then at least have some income coming in, NBN just needs to get out there and get on with it. We have no idea what the HFC network might deliver, but it seems like its much more work than they thought it would be to bring it up to speed. FTTN just seems like a disaster waiting to happen, given we already know they plan to replace old copper with new.

  12. Would i prefer FTTN? a technology that what you pay for your get in terms of connection speed (eg, pay for 100/40 you get 100/40 sync rate) or would i prefer FTTN? a technology so out of date you are once again bound by the “up to” speeds like ADSL, which is prone to interference and cross talk.

    In my view FTTP is the way it should have gone, leveling the playing field and preventing people from being overcharged for a service they can’t get like on DSL.

    FTTP all the way

    • If you are in the 78% on fibre who opted for 25Mbps or slower then you don’t really care if it is FTTN, HFC or FTTP.

      • A figure no longer relevant since it comes from (prehistoric) outdated information, and wasn’t used in the correct context (that of a Corporate Plan) but used instead to attempt to claim as if a minority percentage of the population was going to be representative at the end of a now outdated (i.e. the original 93% FTTP) rollout.

        • Murdoch,

          “A figure no longer relevant since it comes from (prehistoric) outdated information,”

          It’s from the First Quarter Results FY2016 released 9/11/2015 and the figures on the speed tiers mix are as at 30th September 2015.

          That’s prehistoric is it?

          • So lets just get this straight.

            The original plan called for an expected 50% on 12/1 and they would be able to pay for network and would have revenue available to complete the build.

            According to that document you are quoting. We have 38% on 12/1. So that means we have 12% who were expected to be paying for only 12/1 that are actually paying a greater amount.

            So based on those figures, we likely could have paid for the build sooner than the expected dates. Well isn’t that interesting.

            Holy crap. Maybe just maybe… they knew what the hell they were talking about…. Duhn duhn duhhhhh….

          • Huh just had a look at the old corporate plan, and they estimated just under 80% of user 25mb and below plans. Of that 50% were on 12 mb.

            Surprisingly close to actuals today interestingly. I wonder why that is. Maybe because they had people who knew what they were doing making the estimates. In fact the more I look at it, the more clear it is to me, that all of NBNco’s problems were external. From the external contractors hired, to the delays caused by Telstra.

          • The original plan called for an expected 50% on 12/1 and they would be able to pay for network and would have revenue available to complete the build.

            Woolfe to expand on this the 50% on 12/1 figure was up till 2017 after that it declined steadily until 2028 at 36%. Now considering it’s at 35% now that should say something, more so when you consider the original plan said minimum expected on 100/40 would be 13% and it’s at 17% now…

            So based on those figures, we likely could have paid for the build sooner than the expected dates. Well isn’t that interesting.

            Yep. Actually going by the minimums expected in the original plan the biggest revenue raiser would have been the 250/100mbps plan from 2022 until 2028. In 2028 the 500/200mbps plan would have been the biggest revenue raiser. From 2017 onwards most of the revenue would have come from speeds 50/20mbps and higher. In 2028 38% on speeds slower than 50/20mbps would have only accounted for 20% of the revenue raised while the bulk of 62% on plans 50/20mbps and higher would account for 80% of the revenue raised. All the revenue raised until 2028 under the proper NBN plan would have paid much of the $56 billion for the patchwork plan currently being rolled out. Of course there’s no way to know what could have happened now since those higher speeds will not be made available on fibre for 93% like the proper plan called for.

            I await another goal post movement…

          • Woolfe,

            “According to that document you are quoting. We have 38% on 12/1.”

            That is the Sept 2014 figure , Sept 2015 is 35% and they did not go to 100/40 that dropped from 18% in 2014 to 17% in 2015, a increase of 4% from 2014 to 2015 went to 25/5.

            “So that means we have 12% who were expected to be paying for only 12/1 that are actually paying a greater amount.”

            I am looking at the speed tier mix table in that report I don’t know how you get that 12% actually paying a greater amount conclusion from .

            “So based on those figures, we likely could have paid for the build sooner than the expected dates. Well isn’t that interesting.’

            I don’t have revenue per speed tier information (if that’s how you are drawing your conclusion) , where are you getting that information from to come to that conclusion?

          • @Reality:
            “I don’t have revenue per speed tier information (if that’s how you are drawing your conclusion) , where are you getting that information from to come to that conclusion?”

            From logic….

            It doesn’t cost NBN more to provision a higher speed on a line, but they charge more for it accordingly.

            Logically then, they have a higher revenue from a higher speed tier that they sell for more….

          • R0 you cant use logic mate, that might cause our resident Lib astroturfer’s to engage their brain and I suspect the consequences would be quite catastrophic.

            Just think how hard it’d be for him suddenly being aware that all the beliefs the IPA/LNP programmed into him are basically fairy tales … and without happy endings too!

          • Reality
            For FTTP it cost the same to deliver 12/1 $24 or 100/40 $38.
            So if NBN makes $2 revenue on 12/1 then it makes $12 on 100/40

          • @HC.

            Good points. I thought it appropriate only dealing with current actuals though. Sometimes Reality can be confused.

            @Reality As Ronin says, Logic. Basic Economics… Etc. The Cost of building/maintaining a 12/1 fttp connection and the 100/40 fttp connection are identical.

            “That is the Sept 2014 figure , Sept 2015 is 35% and they did not go to 100/40 that dropped from 18% in 2014 to 17% in 2015, a increase of 4% from 2014 to 2015 went to 25/5.”

            Oops my mistake.. so its even less on the minimum amount then. Well shit this just gets better and better. A 50% assumption is now down to 35%
            And 3% jumped up a speed tier between 2014/2015 and 1% dropped down.

            At the Speed tier ratios NBNco predicted, they expected an ARPU of $36. At the actual Speed tier ratios, NBN is getting an ARPU of $40.
            That’s $4 more attributable to the difference in speed tiers, because at this point the only “costs” involved with the FTTP rollout have according to your guys gone up, which in theory should mean ARPU should be lower. Right? RIGHT???

            Oh and another thing. The original plan had 250/100 plan starting this year. It only had a small percentage there but still worth noting.
            Curiously the estimation by CP 2012-15 was pretty bloody close to reality, although they do assume a higher 12/1 tier. Imagine how accurate it would have been after 3 more years of actual rollout.

          • The original plan had 250/100 plan starting this year. It only had a small percentage there but still worth noting

            I think SkyMesh are using it to provide 100mbps symmetrical but I’d be happy with that, I mentioned a few times I would opt for the 250/100 plan. It is effectively 100mbps symmetrical but I’d gladly lose the extra 150mbps for the improved upload speed that makes it a seller.

            Bit off topic but I remember a time when the religious copper zealots were whining about everything NBN related they said things like “ISP’s cant innovate with the NBN etc” and here you have SkyMesh proving them wrong. Must really suck being them, it isn’t even 2016 yet!

          • It’ll suck even more for the faithful minions when it is 2016 HC and we haven’t all got the promised, definite (not UPTO) 25mbps minimum… UPTO to 50mbps…

            Remember a blinding, super fast 10mbps – 35mbps more than we will actually need all the way up until 2013… wow.

            How many days now before we can ‘officially’ gloat and say the 3 word slogan…?

            “Told ya So”

          • 414 days Rizz. 414 days.

            Let’s see what magical things GimpCo can achieve in that time though :-)

            Should we place bets on how many GimpNodes will adorn our streets by then?

          • HC and Rizz
            I would be very surprised if our resident naysayer Reality would even comment on it
            His claim in post below of they won on there NBN policy. When that same policy has blow out by $26B and by another 4 years.

          • “That’s prehistoric is it?”

            He’s using more up to date figures these days? That’s a new one for Mathew. He just loves to parrot the old figures from Corporate Plans from the 93% FTTH era.

            Even later figures makes it even more irrelevant, lol.

            What’s a majority of a minority of connections mean these days? Very little, and considering the rollout is still progressing, even less.

            Mind you, and as a preview of coming attraction, I predict that Mathew’s figures will bear out over time, simply because once you cap the connection speed for anyone outside of fibre because of the state of the copper, then of course nobody is going to take 100 Mbps if the copper won’t allow even close to that, right? ROFL!

      • Agree Mathew according to the CBA half Australians only need 15Mbps but surggest to have speeds of 47Mbps to cover most Australians.

        The other note which the MTM has copied if the same revune model where if NBN can get 20% on the 100Mbps they would be paying more than the bottom 80%

        • Indeed Jason,

          Perhaps we should just do as our friend and endlessly quote one line form 1 doc…

          Pg 34 CBA – In 2023, the median household (the 50 per cent proportion of households, as indicated by the line from the vertical axis across to the 2023 profile) requires bandwidth of 15 Mbps.

          To argue my tax dollars shouldn’t be wasted on white elephants and gold plated Ferraris…


          • I know Rizz it’s such a flawed argument can’t wait till next year when APRU drops becuase of FTTN and HFC.

      • Which is fine for say 10-20 years when they realise they do need more and can’t get it because the infrastructure installed would need to be replaced, thus another long winded political farce to upgrade the technology again.

        Thing was it was the perfect user pays model (despite what poor analogy critics came up with). If you needed or wanted 100/40 all you had to do was pay for it. If you only want the 25 Mbps you can just pay for that. FTTN doesn’t have that luxury. The infrastructure limits what can be done.

      • Sure. But now ask them the question whether they will feel the same in 10 years.

        The key difference is that FTTP is upgradeable at minimal cost.

        So if you have fttp today and choose 25mbps or slower, then you are good. If in 5-10 years time, you decide you now want to have 100mbps or slower, then you are fine.

        In the FTTN plan. If you choose 25mbps or slower. First you may not actually get that speed on a regular basis unlike on fibre. Second in 5-10 years, you may not be able to get 100mbps or slower without a large cost to upgrade equipment.

        Being that the costs of the Rollout are now fairly close, and the Time of the rollout is now fairly similar, and the ongoing maintenance is definitely higher. Which is the better solution? The one that is future proofed or the one that will require more expenditure?

        • Indeed Woolfe. If they cannot get the speed they want now (distance etc) until the network is upgraded to different tech (FttP/dP) they are stuck on whatever it is or they simply have to move houses!

      • [citation please] there Matthew.

        I’d be interested in just how out of date that so called 78% is!

      • Nonsense – there’s more than just speed that’s attractive about FTTP. Reliability, robustness, guaranteed speed, not susceptible to weather or interference etc.

      • The Zombie reality deniers rise again. Muuuurrrghh! Am I right, Mathew?! So good to see you up and about again, grunting at the sky and tearing with bloodless fingers at the inconvenient facts you find surrounding you. Hey, at least you’ve found a purpose for going on, huh? Who knew that such passion could be found in doggedly sticking to one highly mistaken fiction and fact denying, year after year. You’re a credit and inspiration to double digit IQ holders everywhere :-)

      • It is possible for a person who chooses a 25/5 plan on fibre this week to really care that they have the choice to increase their plan later and to care about the service their families will get next week or next year.

        Don’t assume that you know what others think about or care about.

      • WRONG. Next year I am slated to get FTTP as a residual part of Labor’s roll out. Labor’s roll out Matthew. I will probably start off with a 25/5 plan. Just to get used to it all. And to see what my needs are. But that DOES NOT LEAD TO YOUR CONCLUSION. I DO CARE about what kind of technology I get. I get a lot of rain here for a start. Rain plus copper = rot so fibre is all good. I also still care about the potential for higher speeds. Your bogus argument is like someone looking at car speeds and saying “people choose on average to drive at 80 k/h so we will limit cars from going faster”.

  13. It’s not about Conroy or Turnbull. It’s about getting the best value for taxpayers money. Cheaper is not good value. And the cost has blown out anyway, so either way, in the long term 93% was absolutely the best policy. Though hfc should be left till last.

    • Yes but some people still can’t see this. They continue to blame the other party, play favourites and remain ignorant of the facts. Can’t believe Fifield even asked whether they preferred Turnbull or Conroy in the Chamber. This isn’t a popularity contest. The decision on what technology is used should not be based on who is Communications Minister. This isn’t about the person. It is about the technology used throughout the NBN. Just because Turnbull is more popular, it doesn’t make MTM the better choice. But unfortunately this is what Australia voted for two years ago. If this goes on for another term, then this country is in real trouble. On the bright side, at least more people are now beginning to support FTTP. This is a good sign and if this continues then the Liberals will be more pressured to change something in order to stay another term.

  14. I much prefer the new network.

    Less competition for my little foxtel empire! My good mate Malcolm made sure I’d have a successful empire for years to come (I’ll write nice things about him in my newspaper and get him re-elected).

    • Rupert you cunning little robber baron you! You are an artful puller of strings. You foil the best laid plans of mice and men.

    • Keeping in mind Labor signed a agreement with Telstra way back in 2011 to allow Foxtel to use HFC for their own use even though the BB use was going to be switched off, I am intrigued on how the Coalition MTM is of even more benefit to Foxtel?

          • I missed the part where Foxtel are contributing to the HFC build costs.

            Can you point me to it?

          • Alain
            Is Foxtel chipping some of the $1100 connection cost? No. They are pay an agreed access cost which if that cost increase they only pay the agreed cost.

          • Derek O,

            They are paying for access at non-commercial “mates rates”!

            I don’t know what the rates are, so what are they and what should they be?

          • Richard L,

            “I missed the part where Foxtel are contributing to the HFC build costs.”

            The HFC x2 is already built.

          • You seem to miss a lot alain, which is clearly displayed in your well, factless comments…So that in mind, perhaps you aren’t a shill on a mission, but rather just completely ill-informed.

            My guess is both…

            But hey, I have seen your comments for years and you still amaze me the way you seem incapable (or just stubbornly one eyed) of understanding some facts, but are also capable of bending and twisting beyond any other human beings rationality, other facts, to argue black is white.

            I see by your previous vague responses too, you also missed the fact that in relation to MTM, over and above the $11B, the tax payer me (and probably you) have to foot the bill for not only copper and HFC maintenance (suggested in some quarters to be in excess of $1B pa) but also, we are paying for the costly upgrades (upgrades which improve copper and HFC, to then being only light years behind FttP ;).


            You see with the progressive FttP network (as opposed to the current FRAUDBAND retrograde network) these obsolete copper and HFC networks were rightfully sent to the glue factory. Which meant that these extra maintenance costs and costly upgrades, were eliminated.

            I now look forward to some ridiculous interpretation from you, in relation to what I just wrote about the extra cost relating to obsolete copper and HFC, which I’m sure everyone but you, not only understands but accepts.

            In fact reading the comments, I’m sure most here (except 2 or 3…LOL) accept that paying such huge sums in maintenance and upgrade costs, towards obsolescence is clearly, to all but the most faithful… plainly, fucking ridiculous.


          • Lol Reality so HFC x2 is already built so the NBN is wasting billion upgrade it when it doesn’t need it lol

      • Indeed Richard L…

        This has been explained to alain (Reality) many times and he knows it…

        But just why anyone is compelled to keep lying just to be argumentative beggars belief.

      • Sigh.

        Let’s use a recent example. About a week ago Optus bought the EPL rights. Now, with FTTP say Optus have far better opportunities to use streamed online EPL plans to compete against Foxtel. BY contrast with less FTTP and more junk, lower speed, congested MTM that is delayed, Foxtel isn’t hit as hard by Optus.

        Kinda makes sense?

        • Andrew T,

          But the NBN Co owns both FTTP, FTTN and HFC with wholesale access available to all users, so what’s stopping Optus using HFC for EPL?

    • Sorry Rupert, you didn’t understand the question posed by your new minister, he specifically asked for *Australians* to indicate which model they’d prefer.
      As a US citizen you don’t qualify.

  15. “There was not a 1,000-page Productivity Commission report laying out a blueprint. There was a coaster with scribble on the back. That was the comprehensive plan that Senator Conroy left the nation, and, in the rollout under him, it showed.””

    When are the journalists going to start challenging this massive lie. It’s an insult to all those who contributed to the expert review panel. It’s an affront to their work, their qualifications, their ethics, and the intelligence of all but he shock jock’s audiences and those who have not the slightest interested (many of whom complain when their connection slows down).

    How many pages was the report that was supposedly squished onto the back of that coaster?

    • Sir Richard Branson used a coaster when planning Virgin Music. That seemed to turn out OK.
      Don’t dis the coaster!

      • Richard Branson long before he was a Knight of the realm also hired a hippie called Mike Oldfield to create Tubular Bells music that sounds like someone on the gear.

        So don’t dis the tubular bells!
        Especially when they are copper tubes.

  16. Quigley, left alone by politicians to just get on with the job. Everyone else has been politically motivated.

  17. Based on many of your insights as well as the many well researched and well reasoned comments on top of Paul Budde’s blog comments and of course Mike Quigleys recent clarification
    I am confident in saying that I trust Labor’s NBN much more than Turnbull.


    P.S: Still looking forward to read your thoughts on Quigleys “Exploding Malcolm Myth” pdf…….

  18. Conroy’s (FTTP) plan.
    I too, voted for Labour in an effort to retain the 3 year planned build for my area only to have it completely obliterated from the NBNCo map in favour of a delayed HFC deployment.

    I am now saving up to apply and purchase a full FTTP service. I reject HFC/FTTN.

    “Do it right, do it with fibre”

  19. That’s pretty easy: Conroy and FttP, any day of the week.

    Conroy is no saint, and had his share of bungles, but his plan was sensible and put the long-term future of the country ahead of short-term political gain.

  20. What about the largest petition in australias history, handed to the liberals and dismissed out of hand? Poll after pool suggesting nearly 70% of Australians preferred the fttp model. The nonsense that the network was designed in a coaster is garbage. The original idea may have been but the network was designed extremely well with built in redundancy. Don’t see that with MTM. They don’t even know the state of the copper network they bought work our money. Both sides of parliament need to realise that just because a party is voted in because another party was making bad decisions DOES NOT mean we think every policy is bad.


  21. The whole roll out is stuffed – home/node. Politics made sure of that. Also remember Conroy and his filtering, no saint. I’ll be offered node and will refuse. Hopefully I can hang on with ADSL until FFTH comes back in to favour.

    • Unfortunately you won’t have a lot of choice, areas with FTTN have the standard 18 month cut-off for legacy services like ADSL.

      • which basically means most places area good 3 years away from that happening assuming no delays (if you go off their service is available dates on their spreadsheet).

        • Yep, but if you get to the point where you’re being offered FTTN you’re pretty much stuffed. No-one is going to immediately replace the expensive FTTN equipment with FTTP, at best they’ll switch to rolling out FTTP in brownfields and come back to the FTTN areas whenever the rest are done. Or possibly later.

  22. Well, technically, there was absolutely no plan for my area during the time Malcolm Turnbull was comma minister. So if you are asking me to comparing having a “building to comment within one year” plan in 2013 compared until absolutely no plan in 2015…. I think it’s obvious who’s side I am on.

  23. So did anyone else pick up on that Fifield seems to be pushing MT out in front rather than trying to take on ownership of something now under his purview?

  24. The original 93% FttP plan.

    But seeing how coalition clowns have made such a mess of it that outcome is unlikely so this question can be posed with no impact. It’s disingenuous. Even more so when I expect when they don’t get the answers they like they’ll refer to every one that doesn’t agree with their fraudband patchwork plan as “fibre zealots.

    • As a bonus they get free “positive comments” they can reuse by “genuine people” who “agree” that “MTM is the best way forward”.

  25. “Quigley, left alone by politicians to just get on with the job. ”

    Seems to be the best option to me too!
    Once put in place the Pollies should keep out of it, till its photo taking time. Do they reroute roads after every election ?

  26. Well since I am currently stuck on 4mb/sec ADSL in Perth Metro, I have no idea what is better, I would prefer fibre to my house but probably anything is better than what I have now.

  27. Without a doubt, the one that was prepared and overseen by Senator Conroy.

    Turnbull lies on the NBN have been fast and furious since Abbott ordered him to destroy it.

    The lies include saying that he had not cancelled the FTTP rollout in Tasmaina and that a connection to the household would cost $20,000 per month. There has been a consistent stream of lies. I am not talking about being misinterpreted, or information that was given to him that was out of his control to be correct, but plain dishonest distortion of facts that he knowingly new to be wrong when said.

    And now NBN Co is buying millions of dollars of copper to fix up the last mile, one just has to wonder just how much worse it can get.

  28. “Who would members of the community—have more confidence in: a plan which was produced and overseen by former Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull or one that was prepared and overseen by Senator Conroy?”

    Simple Senator Conroy one it was much much better.

    yes some amendments needed to be made with FTTB for units & the savings Simon Hackett found with the role and to switch it to FTTDP/FTTP not FTTH to speed up the roll out.

    The other way of putting it is this: One plan that was visionary and long term versus a expensive short sighted plan that HAS to go to fibre anyhow with this century. DO IT ONCE DO IT RIGHT.

    Also if the coalition bothered to listen to any TRUE experts or companies in the world they would realise that just about all of them are replacing FTTN with FTTP with alot of the original cited companies by the coalition have dumped FTTN due to the ridiculous expensive maintenance costs.

  29. There’s NO doubt that labour’s NBN vision was the superior one – Turnbull himself has said so and supported similar in the past. His problem is he’s now stuck with the legacy of Abbot’s MTM, and for political reasons can’t actually be seen to be agreeing with Labour on anything. The liesand misconceptions about the MTM being “better, cheaper, faster” are now coming home to roost and he’s ducking for cover on the issue. I think they’re too deeply into it now to change back to the FTTP model though, too many contracts have already been rewritten, too many commitments made, etc. The nation would now be best served, and Turnbull able to save the most face if he had a “realisation” that there’d been “miscalculations” made and they were moving to an MTM model that had the built in intention to be progressivley upgraded to an FTTP model “in the foreseeable future” as demands/needs are shown for it.

  30. FTTN and HFC are obsolete. FTTN is basically ADSL services. Businesses have had to wait months currently for line repairs to even get internet. It will still be the same under FTTN. Even if you pay the extortion price to connect to FTTP it will not be passive I believe therefore require power therefore disruption and downtime.

    The Liberals never wanted an NBN that is a fact. Turnbull said ADSL and 12mbps was enough.

    Only Labor’s plan will be adequate for business and future economies and value for money for the tax payer.

    The Liberals plan will cost more than FTTP after you factor in remediation and maintenance. HFC will never deliver because Foxtel is stealing all the channels, no matter how they spin doctor it will will fall over from congestion like it currently is.

    Liberal NBN is selling people what we already have faulty HFC and ADSL services. A disgrace.

    I’ve suffered massive downtime and therefore loss of income on both telephone lines and HFC, due to noise of course.

    Fixed wireless is just as much of a joke I believe and never should have been considered. Many people I keep hearing say they can’t get connected because lack of line of sight. The towers are acting as repeaters too it seems. Seriously slapped together stop gap measure.

  31. One of many problems is inequity. I will have Cable (HFC) and you will only have Copper. My HFC will perform better than your Copper based connection. So depending on where you live…….. BUT the back links and the OS links (routing). The NBN/MTM is just a ever more expensive, poor performance, internet connection available (with varying performance) to some! Malcolm Turnbull’s (Tony Abbott) mess. (MTM).

  32. As far as HFC goes it’s a lucky dip. some currently can barely get 30mbps as they are at the back of the node. It really depends where you live and in the case of sydney how many millions you pay for a house. I cannot afford any house in a HFC area and it’s looking like where I will buy will be stuck on telephone lines as much as it pains me to have to degrade from a HFC 100mbps connection. I really am trying to avoid moving back to telephone lines and the nightmares involved with it reporting and dealing with faults.

  33. Unfortunately, the problem with Minister Fifield’s childish challenge (and childish it truly is) is the same as, with all due respect, Renai’s invitiation.

    The people that are likely to make their opinions known through the mass media, especially the commercial newspapers, will be those who, generally, have little technical expertise, and who will not understand the lost potential of the Labor NBN. As a rule, all they will know is that they’ve got their connection, or received a construction date, under the Coalition’s watch, and so will assume that the Coalition is responsible.

    In contrast, those who DO actually have any technical expertise, or even education, will frequent fora like this.

    In each case, partisans will find others of like mind to reinforce their views, and nothing will be achieved. Certainly there will be no way to know what Australia’s preferred option is.

  34. Conroy and Quigley of course.

    And what is telling is that after more than two years, those connected to the MTM number in just the hundreds. Therefore Sen Fifield and the LNP Govt are attempting to take credit for the work done by the previous govt and NBNCo administration. That in itself is very telling.

    As for missed deadlines, Turnbull’s MTM has missed every deadline set for itself, even prior to the election and despite umpteen reviews and studies. The current management of NBNCo appears to consist primarily of ex Telstra execs on the public teat and with a Govt more than happy to both condone and encourage it.

    • heh missed deadlines, FTTP was set for 2021 and slipped to 2022 or so as I recall. So 10% late. FTTN was meant to be complete in 6 weeks. Its completion date as i recall is 2021, so its already overdue for completion. It’ll be 600% late by a similar metric.
      Now that is some grade A project management there.
      The critical difference is, FTTP NBNco were giving dates to conroy who repeated them, FTTN turnbull was giving dates to NBNco, who then turned around and said “tell him he’s dreamin” much like everybody else with half a clue.

  35. I would say FTTP but with some FTTN(not MTM though) in areas that would have been covered by FW in smaller communities where FTTP may not at least initially cost effective but FTTN would be better suited than FW.

      • most country towns have a cluster of standard density in the town proper, then the rest of it is rural. If you can take 40% of the load off the fixed wireless network for cheap then it may well be worth it, and fttn can(should?) be able to provide > 25mbit to most residents in a town with one or two nodes.

      • Irrelevant. Labor’s plan would never have taken FTTP to these rural townships. In fact it their plan was to disconnect ADSL in the local exchange and replace it with wireless.

        • Such a broad generalisation of “never taken FTTP to these rural townships” is not correct, considering that 93% of premises in Australia does not exist in capital cities.

          *sigh* If you’re going to generalise, at least do it with correct information.

          • NBN wireless and satellite are the intended models for rural Australia by both Labor and the Coalition, you are insisting on correct information, so tell us all about which rural areas were going to get FTTP.

            Note also the term used was rural townships, not regional like a Geelong, Bendigo, or Albury.

          • I know of at least one town that I’d consider rural that was due to get FTTP. Blackwater, QLD has a population of 5,100 and was slated for FTTP under the original plan.

          • Correct me if I’m wrong here…

            So please, someone who actually knows (err, so not you alain or Richard, I need facts – of course your own syrupy input on the Coalition’s wonder everything, is most welcomed if only for its, usual comedy and the WTF are these blokes on value. But again I remind you, myself, Delimiter and it’s other posters, deal in facts – thank you)…

            …anyhoo, wasn’t the original plan for FttP to all towns with a population of over 1000?

          • wasn’t the original plan for FttP to all towns with a population of over 1000?

            IIRC it was all towns with premises over 1000 Rizz.

            But there was no plan to disconnect ADSL from towns not getting fibre. They would still have that option with fixed wireless available.

      • @(un)reality & Matthew

        Do you lot ever get out of Australia’s CBD’s? Maybe its an east coast issue (ie far higher population densities) I can name a good dozen outer metro suburbs and then hobby/semi rural satellite areas’s around Adelaide (<40minute drive from CBD) that will cost insane amounts to provide with FttN (they aren't the fixed wireless group either … I've checked there isn't a proposed tower within cooee). My Sister owns a property that will probably end up with a Node either just for them or sharing with their neighbour (and they'll be stretching the Cu Lengths to maybe not make the 25Mbps). FYI they are currently on range extended ADSL. So that's 1 node for 2 people on the bare minimum of plans (because they sure as eggs won't get 100Mbps!)

        • I hate to look like I am agreeing with them in any way, but 89% of our population lives in “Urban” areas.

          Now that still leaves 4% who would have been covered by FTTP in Rural areas.

          But it is important to note that Australia is actually a very urbanised nation(despite being the 3rd least densely populated nation in the world). It’s actually one of the reasons why a mass rollout is a good idea. Because more of the nation is in “easy” reach of centralised areas.

          • Considering the Bureau of Statistics classifies anything over 1000 people (Major Urban and Other Urban) as “Urban” that’s not really a surprise claim to make. But I wouldn’t call some of them “urban” by any stretch of the imagination outside the Bureau.

            It can (and does) make for interesting political spin when appropriate though (not accusing you of spin btw Woolfe).

            Basically, and collectively, we need to be aware of the boundaries of what’s considered “urban” in this country, and realise that when some people use that term as a point, they don’t necessarily mean it in context of it’s BOS definition, particularly if they continually parrot a politically partisan view.

          • @Murdoch.
            No worries. I was basing it on the Wikipedia entry in all fairness. I had a quick look at the ABS details. Couldn’t find specific “urban v rural” definition.

            Did get this (I have rounded percentages)

            68.6% Major Cities
            19% Inner Regional
            9.4% Outer Regional
            1.5% Remote
            .8% Very Remote

            If you add the top 2, it is 87%. But that was in 2009. What I have been reading is a trend to further urbanisation in Australia, so I presume if you continued that trend, it may be where they got the 89% value from.

            Definition is
            Inner Regional Australia is defined in the remoteness structure as those areas where geographic distance imposes some restriction upon accessibility to the widest range of goods, services and opportunities for social interaction. Examples Tamworth, Rockhampton, Ballarat, Hobart(!!).
            (Darwin is considered outer regional Australia)

    • PS. the intention was always to cover towns with 500 or more premises with FTTP and come back for the Fixed Wireless towns once the main rollout had completed.

      • I wish more folk realised this. Especially since they are (and are justified) complaining about coverage in those regions.

        Under MTM the money will be spent after completion upgrading the core network to FTTP (ultimate goal) so they’ll have to wait twice as long (the Cu ‘alternatives just aren’t feasible for out in those regions).

  36. At this point after years of back and forth, I’m going to go with neither plan. Unless the two parties can reach a compromise, achieve bi-partisanship and deliver an NBN on its original intentions of universal access, reduction of Telstra power and cross subsidising rural areas, then it is a waste of time and should be handed back to the market.

    The original 93% FTTP was a good plan in theory and would have been great to be implemented, but there are too many significant drawbacks in achieving MDU’s deployment and time to customer. The MTM plan is continually undermined by the weak point in technology such as FTTN which is not scalable in future without a new deployment, and is further impacted by the failure of the company to act under GBE terms accountable ultimately to us the public.

    Ideally at this point I would like to see the NBN enter into a compromise between the two parties, and agreement to move forward with such a large national infrastructure project under bi-partisan terms such as
    – Shift to SR Scenario 4: FTTP+HFC+FTTB (limited FTTN)
    – Halt of FTTN in large deployment usage. It simply is not upgradeable to enable universal access, which to myself means it is a discrimintatory speed model. FTTN can not universally reach 1gbps speeds in the future (it can’t even universally reach 100mbps now).
    – Agreement to FTTP to serve non HFC and non MDU’s.
    – Agreement on planned DOCSIS3.0 and upgrade to DOCSIS3.1
    – Agreement on planned G.Fast in FTTB implementations (FTTN will only deliver significant improve < 20%)
    – Agreement on FTTdp review to determine feasibility in difficult to deploy FTTP areas (heritage areas, significant roadworks etc).
    – Termination of the NBN Senate Select Committee
    – Revised terms on transparency of the NBNCo, including open data principles and financial openness
    – Political party agreement to ensure financial guarantees to the company, and support to a functioning executive and management team
    – Add NBN equity to the ongoing budget and removal of IRR

    Chances of the above happening are low, but we're at a point now that the government is ultimately going to fail with a GBE that does not have the appropriate support or capability to deliver a sustainable and scalable infrastructure for which the public will ultimately benefit. Our country deserves and needs more in an industy which is crucial for supporting and growing a Service Economy, which Australia is continually destined to be.

  37. Given that the question was not about the technology – combined with the fact it makes no difference for me as we’ve just ordered our FTTP service I’d like to comment on one of the biggest differences between the rollouts.

    Accountability and Transparency.

    Considering the catch cry of the liberal party with regards to public accountability and transparency I find it particularly galling that the change in government has resulted in continuous claims of “commercial in confidence” and actively blocking of information when it is requested.

    We had a series of political reviews immediately the new government took over, we had a minister that claimed the greatest issue with the labour NBN was that there was no CBA prior to implementation yet changed to the MTM without a CBA (because it apparently was no longer necessary).

    We hear consistently that the labour NBN was behind schedule (caused primarily by Telstra pit remediation due to asbestos) which we are expected see as labours fault, yet the additional 2 years renegotiating the Telstra definitive agreement (including taking on the responsibility for the NBN to remediate problems) which was going to be done in 6 months is not apparently the fault of the liberal government?

  38. Have no doubt in my mind that the original plans of FTTP put forward by Conroy and Labour were much better for the country and in the long run cheaper than FTTN that we are being handed by a guy who should have known better.

  39. I’d prefer neither since they both have it wrong.

    With the assumption that Simon Hacketts words are justified in regards to HFC. Provided contention is alleviated and DOCSIS 3.1 is implemented i can give them credence to use it. I was initially against this until i reviewed it in depth. It’s still a bandaid solution compared to FTTP but at least with some work it’s more agreeable then most of the other technology in play.

    With regards to FTTB (suggestion of Malcolm Turnbull initially) i have always been in support of using this where the building infrastructure is adequate to deliver at least in the order of 1Gbps speeds. Copper is still viable in the context of a LAN (indeed i run 10Gbps over cat6) therefore there is no reason not to take advantage of this where infrastructure allows.

    At last we come to FTTN… The coalition are being stupid in regards to this. Why would you deploy a technology that:

    a. Is proven to have higher maintenance costs over the period of its life.
    b. Is proven to under deliver on capability (UK for example).
    c. Will need to be upgraded anyway (BT again as an example, verizon, etc).
    d. Relies on infrastructure that is directly contributing to poor internet capability in this country.

    Furthermore the coalition are being stupid in regards to a few other things empirically based and verified by science (climate change) but from those senate comments made just now they have no problem peddling it out to the public who’s guilibility and intelligence are questionable (we voted in Abbott ffs). Shall we recap?


    “I think there is only a very small number of people who are on that side of the chamber in this place and on that side of the chamber in the other place who still contend and persist with the fantasy that Senator Conroy did anything approaching a halfway decent job with the NBN. The entire nation knows it is not true,” said Fifield.

    Without Conroy and the former labor government we would not HAVE an NBN.

    Ignoring the fact that the coalition are butt buddies with Murdoch who is in an equal partners agreement with Telstra in regards to HFC. Doing anything to Disrupt such a monopoly held by a liberal party donor on entertainment would not be good for business and thus not reflect well on them. (evidence of this, netflix vs foxtel since they opened in Australia).

    Ignoring the fact that because of the aforementioned Telstra over the past 2 decades has barely done ANYTHING to deliver better quality data services over fixed line (their CSG made me sick).

    Ignoring the fact that in regards to policy (most likely due to the relationship mentioned above) as Ed Husic points out –

    The coalition had virtually no good innovations or idea’s when it came to broadband… 19 failed attempts is not something that can be casually put down to a mistake. Whether its due to lack of education, qualifications or just plain common sense the coalition have failed miserably in this area many times before and there is no reason to think this time will be any different.

    Ignoring all these things… They still have the delusion that the labor government by wrestling Telstra to the table (using the 4/5G spectrum IIRC) and negotiating with them in an effort to provide better comms to the whole country is a fantasy?


    “The NBN was going nowhere very fast under Senator Conroy. As we all know, there was not the work done for the planning of the NBN that I acknowledge those opposite did in the planning of the NDIS. There was not a 1,000-page Productivity Commission report laying out a blueprint. There was a coaster with scribble on the back. That was the comprehensive plan that Senator Conroy left the nation, and, in the rollout under him, it showed.”

    The NBN is not going anywhere fast under ANYONE! The whole point of a long-term infrastructure project is that it’s… well long term…

    Forget Conroy for a minute the whole point of a government funded project is because it’s unsuitable for private enterprise to take on but it’s still in the best interests of the nation that somebody does it. Therefore to somehow imply ad hominem that it was any one persons fault because it’s going slow is ridiculous.

    Whether it be the rate of return isn’t great enough, the cost, the time, whatever the constraints are that make it unsuitable for private enterprise it doesnt make it any less worth doing to improve the quality of life and or opportunities of the nation in question.

    In regards to the planning / funding Neil degrasse Tyson makes some interesting points on this in regards to the examination of history, true it’s in the context of getting into space but the same principles can be applied to any big infrastructure projects.

    Deity worship: good luck establishing an FTTP god.

    War driver: somehow i don’t see it being a thing, with recent issues surrounding islam you never know but i wouldnt count on it being a thing, let alone somehow linking the war drive to better comms infrastructure.

    Economic return: FTTP NBN has an calculated ROI of about 7%. Anything under 25% rate of return is rejected upon presenting it to the private sector according to peter ferris (architect of original NBN) –

    On top of this RMIT calculated NBN would be adding around 2% GDP to the Australian economy (representing around $25 billion annually) so while it is worth it, it takes a while to make back the capital.

    As to the plan being drawn up on a napkin… and then reviewed by a panel of experts as well as validated by serveral financial institutions not to mention the liberal governments failures as an example of what NOT to do.

    Even if the plan was drawn up in haste (no thanks to previous liberal governments inaction on the state of broadband) at least it had a practical goal… the betterment of broadband in this country and thus improvement of all services that depend on communication (education, health, entertainment, e-commmerce, IoT, etc). Tell me what purpose did reintroducing and then retracting the concept of knights and dames have?

    Are the libs really in any position to comment? Look at their own clowns in government. They promised an nation-wide rollout (among many other things) would be done by 2016… how’s that going?

  40. I support as much fibre as we can get. I also have a great deal more faith in the skill and integrity of Quigley over Morrow

  41. FTTH is the ONLY NBN to be building.

    FTTN will need to be upgraded and replaced at more cost Fixed wireless is a terrible technology.

    Again… FTTH is the only option for the future.

  42. I prefer Conroys team.
    Ftth is better as it’s only needing attention once, then it’s done.

    Typically, lnp want to uphold the public view of governments always skimping out and having to revisit projects multiple times.
    Suppose, in doing so they get to provide more jobs for longer, but that’s not the efficient way of doing things.

  43. I’m a fan of FTTP all the way. Build it once and save in the long run. The only thing FTTN is good for is future employment, ripping it out and upgrading again in 5 years or so.
    Move the TV stations to IPTV over the fibre and sell of the freed up spectrum to mobile networks.

    The coalitions version was driven by politics even though they know it was the wrong path to follow.

  44. The MTM NBN in its current state is the Millstone around the Neck of the Abbott Opposition in Government.

    So focused on tearing apart anything the then government proposed were they, they found themselves backed into a corner of their own making, unable to continue on with a perfectly viable and far superior scheme, simply because they had expended so much effort in discrediting it while in opposition. Even if he agrees with the (vastly superior) all-fibre model, Turnbull having been the mouthpiece of the fight while Comms Minister is now in the position where going back on that model would be acknowledging his own complicity in the swindle, as well as his ‘willing subordinate’ status to the leader he deposed. So the country has been duped out of a sound future, our money wasted, all down to nothing other than partisan politics at its filthy worst.

    Which model would I prefer? Conroy’s. No question. That’s coming from a professional with seventeen years in the telco industry. Our future is Fibre.

  45. I like the ALP’s fibre to the premises plan better. I just don’t like their track record. After they way they completely botched their hastily forgotten and discarded 1 laptop for every school child idea among other things, I don’t have much confidence in their ability to deliver what they promise when it comes to technology.

  46. Conroy + Quigley (NBN Co) with FttP


    Turnbull + Morrow (NBN™) with MTM

    My only reply would be:

    Conroy + Quigley (NBN Co) with FttP

    Conroy had a vision for all Australians, and Quigley was the Engineer who made that vision a reality. Well until we had a change of Government and he was shafted and rollout changed from ubiquitous FttP to MTM.

    I think that Australians declared how they actually felt in the NBN petition. See:

    As reported here in delimiter:


    • Mark Ryan,

      The ultimate result of that petition where you were only motivated to sign it if you wanted FTTP was that Labor lost the election very soon after.

      Worked a treat eh?

      • Indeed they did win…

        They won on a platform of many things, here’s some – no cuts to health, no cuts to education, no increases to GST (Abbott called Rudd out as scaremongering for doing so), improving the debt/deficit, complete honesty, complete transparency and stability (no dumping of PM’s)…

        Worked a treat… :/

        • +1

          This is hilarious….even though sadly it is not even an exaggeration.
          Very witty nonetheless.

          Well done Rizz. I enjoy reading your informative comments as well but I just had to comment on this one……CLASSIC

        • Of course NBN policy is only key decider if Labor win a election, when the Coalition win NBN policy had nothing to do with it.

          Labor crowed about how they had a mandate for their NBN from the 2010 win, it was a hung Parliament until a couple of independents and a green helped them limp over the line, the NBN policy limped in with them, and the rollout limped along for the next three years.

          Along comes the 2013 election the Coalition romp it in in their own right with a well publicised alternative NBN policy and a healthy seat margin and Labor are booted out, NBN policy and all.

          Now that’s a mandate.

          Here we are in November 2015 pretending all of that never happened and come post election 2016 it’s back to FTTP business as usual.

          It’s a total fantasy, it’s bizarre and actually quite sad.

          • Reality
            By the 2016 election there 2013 NBN should be complete for only $29B how’s that policy going by the way

          • WTF are you on about now…? Earth to planet alain.

            Q, Who said the government doesn’t have the right to implement their NBN policy?
            A. no one, FFS.

            What is being said is… it’s dumb policy… or as the people who now roll it out said it’s FRAUDBAND… got it now?

            Regardless cute comment…

            Because you ignore (surprise surprise) as I clearly linked to you previously a number of times, post the 2010 election that (wait for it)…

            *** “the Liberal Party did their own investigations as to why they didn’t win the 2010 election and FttP NBN was highlighted as why they didn’t win seats in Tasmania”***

            Considering it was a hung parliament I’ll ask you that tricky question you couldn’t answer yesterday, again. Ready ?

            1 + 1 = ?

            But if you need further clarification of these “facts”, ask Peter Reith, who came to this conclusion.

            But of course the facts are of no consequence to you, ever, it seems.


          • That’s simply not true. Even amongst coalition voters the FTTP plan was preferred. There are numerous polls etc at the time that showed majority support for the FTTP plan over the Coalition plan.

            However as others have pointed out, elections aren’t won on single issues usually.

          • Woolfe,

            “That’s simply not true. Even amongst coalition voters the FTTP plan was preferred. ‘

            I don’t think that’s entirely correct.

            “The release of the Coalition’s new National Broadband Network policy had a dramatic effect upon support for Labor’s existing policy, analysis of polling data shows, with a large chunk of Coalition voters abandoning their previous long-term support for Labor’s existing NBN policy in favour of the new Coalition alternative.”


            “There are numerous polls etc at the time that showed majority support for the FTTP plan over the Coalition plan.”

            Yes I am aware of those polls, putting aside how the question was asked in many of those polls it didn’t translate into Labor votes.

            “However as others have pointed out, elections aren’t won on single issues usually.’

            Indeed, I expect the NBN at the next election will be a less of a issue than 2007, 2010, and 2013, it reached an issue peak in 2013 because we had six years of history of the same NBN policy rollout to consider.

            So after nine years I think voters have had a gut full of the NBN (either policy), it’s reached the ‘whatever’ stage, you might have a chance of less of a FTTN rollout under Labor, it will depend how quick they can legally halt FTTN build rollover contracts and re negotiate them to FTTP I guess.

          • :/

            “Yes I am aware of those polls, putting aside how the question was asked in many of those polls it didn’t translate into Labor votes.”

            Err of course not… he was talking about “Coalition voters”, supporting the FttP NBN… So of course it didn’t translate to Labor votes, because they were, “Coalition voters.”

            Got it now?

            Please try to keep up, or at least stay only 10 paces behind.

          • @Reality. As Rizz pointed out. I specifically stated coalition voters.

            Hence they were people who voted coalition over Labor.

            But also, when asked by ABC. 500 000 people provided responses on the vote compass for the election.

            Broadband was considered 6th. Issues like the Economy (28%) Asylum seekers (13%), Health, Climate Change and Education(10,9,9%) were all ahead of it (7%) (Percentages rounded)

            Unfortunately we don’t get to vote on individual policies, people have to vote on the issues at hand. The Economy was pretty much the number 1 issue.

      • The petition was started after the election by LNP voters who thought they could change the minds of Turnbull and Abbott.

  47. As a number have said here, i would choose Conroy.

    However, i’ll qualify it by adding that this choice is primarily driven by the fact that he (and Rudd) had a vision. It was something positive, something to get behind. It was good for Australia, good for its future. The cost, while important wasn’t a huge deal. If it cost 70B or 90B wont really matter in the long run due to the future benefits it would bring – it was something that just needed to be done. It had positive energy behind it, people could understand it – even if they didn’t really understand or use the internet. Replacing the aging copper for fiber just made sense. It was more reliable, more robust and cheaper to maintain. It also removed Telstra from the equation, building in areas where the incumbent telco refused to due to cost reservations.

    The coalitions MTM is merely a stopgap. A hodgepodge concoction purely designed to meet a political agenda. There’s nothing visionary, its using old tech – that telcos around the world are starting to abandon such tech for fiber. Any MP who thinks this is legitimately a better plan is too worried about the short term cost and not considering the long term benefits of fiber.

    There’s also the fact that FTTP overall is the cheaper better option in the long run. While upgrading HFC and FTTB are good intermediate options to quickly upgrade existing infrastructure, FTTN just does not make sense. I have no respect for any MP that actively pushes the MTM – it shows a clear lack of understanding, especially if that MP is the communications minister. The whole thing is politically motivated now. Engineering and facts play no part in the decision making process anymore.

    So i would rather have Conroy, as despite his brash character, at least when he was in he understood what was good for the future for australias communications infrastructure and took the right actions to make it a reality. All Fifield sees is political opportunity and motivation.

  48. If you are going to have a large inefficient government monopoly (as people claim all government things must be) then it stands to reason you might as well have it provide the best possible service.
    Now we get a large inefficient government monopoly providing a second rate service and spending billions of dollars on a product that must then be replaced as soon as its finished for more billions of dollars. Now that is government waste. Short sighted, second rate, and twice the price.

    Needless to say I support FTTP, it is the only option on the table that provides a long term solution to the last mile infrastructure problem.

  49. It’s pretty clear that FTTN is a mongrel technology not appropriate for building the next century’s telecommunications. I’ve got more confidence in Conroy’s plan.

  50. Dear Sir,

    I WHOLE HEARTEDLY want Sen Stephen Conroy’s plan steered (most professionally) by Mr Mike Quigley.

    The LNP’s backwater go-nowhere over priced junk plan, i do NOT!

  51. MTM (in particular FTTN) is a massive fail. Way too short sighted and does not recognise the importance of broadband to Australia’s economic and social future. The Coalition has wasted a lot of time and money trying to denounce FTTP and promote its lame duck alternative when they could have just got on with FTTP and made it better if they had to change anything at all. So to answer Mitch Fifield is a no brainer – your MTM (I won’t even refer to it as the NBN) policy is going to come back and bite you very soon, once more people come to realise what a wasted opportunity and poor an investment it actually is.

  52. Destruction of the future was Coalition Party’s idea, all he is doing is another distraction, more talk = less action to fix the problem, just like all of Coalition Party’s policies or lack of.

    Which means no plan.

    Most of the country is stuck on Fraudband 1.0 (ADSL Networks), now your building Fraudband 2.0 Networks, same shit, same problems.

    Also Your MTM Network is being built in area’s where there is already faster internet, such as South Brisbane, and TPG areas.

    Further to this, my parents place, has 5 different technologies already here, and you are already building a Fraudband 2.0 there.

    My parents place (the area) has ADSL, ADSL2+, Cable, FTTP in Greenfields, and Wireless.

    So your wasting a whole lot of extra tax money just for overbuilding competition. When your only concern should be upgrading to the next generation networks, which is GPON and NGPON2 networks.

    Fifield has no right, to comment on Australian broadband, when all he is doing, is another distraction from the problem.

    That’s right, Fifield wants you to be distracted from the problems that his now boss Malcolm Turnbull created.

    Thus the idea of “Malcolm Turnbulls Mess”.

  53. The Liberals are beyond a joke. FTTP is the only solution, anything less is a farce.


  54. My answer to the question is that it doesn’t matter who came up with the plan, what matters is the actual outcomes of the plan itself. But then I suppose Fifield knows his party’s plan doesn’t stand a snowballs chance in hell when you get down to brass tacks, which is why he has to play games.

  55. I think if you look at what Quigley achieved by taking a company from nothing to essentially what it is today, is nothing short of amazing.

    I don’t think most appreciate the level of effort, planing and risk that would have gone into it.

    The coalition has done little if anything at all over the last few years, apart from announcing their three year roll out plan a lot of which is simply upgrading the existing HFC network (very challenging)

  56. Irrespective of any outcome of a ‘you invite yourself’ survey where the majority prefer the Conroy plan of 2013 FTTP to 93% by 2021 is gone, dead and buried.

    Labor will keep the Coalition HFC plan and the Coalition FTTB plan without any change, just on those two platforms alone serving a hefty percentage of our capital cities high density population the new Minister Clare two stage Labor NBN Platform will be MTM – but he won’t call it MTM. :)

    • The question was which plan did you have more confidence in? Conroy’s or Turnbull’s.

      As to Labor keeping HFC and FTTB. Pretty much would have to happen, coalition have locked us in.

      The questions are then
      A) what do we do instead of FTTN
      B) when do we start replacing HFC with FTTP

      Oh and it was always an MTM. MTM was simply the appellation applied by Turnbull to differentiate between the primarily fibre MTM and the lets reuse stuff MTM.

    • So Reality can labor claim the FTTB and HFC rollout if they win the next election like the coalition is for FTTP since they have only connected 29K with only 300 active on FTTN/B with no revune from them yet. I do remember there was this target for FTTN be done by 2016 only a little over a year to go.

    • @ alain

      “Irrespective of any outcome of a ‘you invite yourself’ survey where the majority prefer the Conroy plan of 2013 FTTP to 93% by 2021 is gone, dead and buried.”

      Yet you are the first to “reincarnate” the “dead, buried (you forgot cremated) previous plan’, daily, to try to deflect from the present and just how completely woeful MTM is.

      But then, you also contradict your own comments daily, so I guess this is just another day in the shill office eh ;)

      • Yeah. And Alain is probably an LNP shill who is using the FTTP that was connected to all pollies’ offices in mid 2013.

        Isn’t life so ironic? Alain could be called Alanis Morrisette.

    • How can you resurrect the Conroy obsolete plan that cannot be anymore, even Clare has said so.

      You can write Dear Mitch F, ” we are in love with FTTP” letters all day long, change to the degree required certainly ain’t gonna happen under the Coalition and it ain’t gonna happen under Labor.

      Anyone would think the election was next month when you observe the frenetic shrill activity in discussion sites like this, just as well it’s not next month, we all know the outcome of the last frenzy Labor like FTTP push in discussion sites like this before the 2013 election, a alternative NBN policy won the day, it’s like it had the opposite effect.

      • Answer the Question.

        Its not hard. Someone asks a question, you answer. You don’t even need to explain yourself. But at least answer the damned question!

        • Woolfe,

          “Answer the Question.”

          Sorry, with all this scroll down embedding in a increasing large discussion and having multiple conversations going on…. I have just found this post, could you repeat the ‘dammed question’ that needs to be answered please.

          • LOL

            “Let me put a fairly straightforward proposition to colleagues in the Chamber. What would colleagues around the Chamber— indeed, let’s talk more broadly: Who would members of the community—have more confidence in: a plan which was produced and overseen by former Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull or one that was prepared and overseen by Senator Conroy?”

            You know… the question that is the whole premise of this article, and the almost 270+ responses therein.

          • And the contradictions continue… FFS

            “Elections aren’t won on brodband policy”

            “We’ll find out election 2016”


            Yes we will, most unlikely, have a Labor PM.


            We will have a Liberal/Labor PM, you know one of the many Libs who were undecided whether to joins the Libs or Labor…lol, but as PM

            Regardless Abbott and far right extremism are gone, dead, buried, cremated… never mind :)

          • @Reality
            “We will find out election 2016.”

            So you can’t even answer a simple question? Which plan did you have more confidence in.

            It’s kind of telling that you don’t automatically state Turnbull’s plan. For all you negativity to Conroy and the Labor plan, and yet a simple question of confidence and you choose not to answer.

            Do I give you the credit for being a Troll or a Shill, or do I just assume you can’t comprehend?

            The truth I guess is probably a little of all.

          • @Woolfe, you wont get a straight answer out of him, engaging him in good faith is simply wasted effort. He’s merely here to conflate unrelated items and generally troll for “his side”. He’s not constructive in any way shape or form.

          • do I just assume you can’t comprehend?

            I’ve always assumed this. It hasn’t failed me yet.

      • Alain lol
        “Alternative NBN policy won the day”
        Let’s look at that policy
        $29B min 25Mbps be complete by 2016.

        Cp16 $56B once a day 25Mbps be complete some time around 2020.

        Doesn’t look like that policy won the day.

  57. Would it really be too much to expect of Versailles on Lake Blxxxy Griffin to move away from the money/ pollytics/ spin cycle and focus on advancing Australia fair?
    Away from gotchas and soundbytes.
    Only a 3 yo could be less amused by the eat your carrots or your peas approach.
    OECD policy advise has for a while talked of regulatory reform, competition for infrastructure (wireless seems to have powered ahead, wired hasn’t) and services, and neutrality of technology. Then again they also talked of 256 Kbps as broadband. (And I did note that for now 78% of those on nbn/ NBN are on 25/ 5 Mbps or lower.)
    Liebor and LyingN(C)P plans both feature a PMG mk2/ lite/ GBE/ agency rather than competitive tension for extended metro, and subsidy for regional and beyond.
    We got here at least in part because Aussat was offloaded to a start-up Optus with more than three times debt over equity, or privatisation of Telecom/ OTC as a vertically integrated company, cancellation of Opel Networks.
    Many European metros have fibre/ copper and HFC down their streets from different companies.
    Why nbn/ NBN couldn’t have focused on regional and beyond where the biggest pain is is beyond me, until one looks at cost per premise, and let competitive tension sort extended metro to regional.
    Always been surprised nbn/ NBN went for share rather than direct fibre, for something meant to last a generation.
    Sooner, cheaper and fast enough MTM sounded a lot better before it was upped to $56B and by 2020, then again it seemed unlikely FTTP NBN mk2 was going to deliver before 2025, or anywhere below $70B to $90B.
    TPG FTTB/ VDSL2 has shown to be capable of 50 to 100/ 20 Mbps, now. G.Fast/ VDSL2 for copper and updates to DOCSIS seem to have been held back due to sovereign risk.
    Chances are it’ll take a boo boo or hung parliament to get some fresh ideas on the why, how and what of superfast broadband.
    Bring on the conversation about nbn/ NBN privatisation, in chunks.
    I wouldn’t be surprised if HFC goes FoxTel, fixed terrestrial wireless ends up with Vodafail or SingTel Optus.
    Let’s see if more satellite wireless from Inmarsat, OneWeb, AsiaSat, etc etc will join nbn/ NBN LTSS …

  58. To the question (I will answer it, opposite to Senator Fifield): the question is a no brainer.

    By 2020, 58.4% of the premises in Australia cannot get the speeds on FTTN unless NBN Co is building much nodes so that they are able to implement G.Fast or start a rollout to fibre to the curb or fibre to the home (source:, last page). Either way, these upgrades are not-budgeted and not included in the Corporate Plan although they should be undertaken during the period covered by the plan. Consequently this Government and NBN Co delivers a so-called technical debt to our country and a network that is outdated for well over 50% of the premises by 2020.

    As I have stated on Whirlpool, my desktop analysis was that the NBN of this Government will cost eventually A$ 116b to end up with FTTP. This Government capped the funding at A$ 29b so the question is where the additional funding as to be sourced from. Constitutional investors are not going to take any risk not unless the Commonwealth starts to guarantee the funding. In other words, the average Australian, still will carry the full risk for this project.

    • Yeah. Moreover, Mitch Fifield was asked in Parliament 2 days ago if that capped funding of $29 billion could be lifted and he said no.

  59. It is interesting how the coalition have played this one. They almost refuse to challenge on the actual merit of ideas. Instead, they attack nonsensical and irrelevant targets.
    The Labor NBN was first drafted on a napkin. So what? What in the hell does that have to do with the merit of the idea itself? I don’t give a damn what the first draft was written on. I care about the merit of the idea.
    Malcolm Turnbull is more popular than Senator Conroy. So what? What in the hell does that have to do with the merits of their respective ideas? I don’t care who came up with the idea, I care about the merit of the idea itself.
    The few attempts the coalition have made to actually challenge the Labor NBN itself (rather than irrelevant and nonsensical targets) have relied almost exclusively on lies.

  60. Labour had a plan for the future using superior technology and ridding us of the inferior copper which we are now stuck with.

    The liberals have a plan which involves sticking with decades old technology and try to make us believe that it’s better.

    Only an idiot would believe this.

  61. “Who would members of the community—have more confidence in: a plan which was produced and overseen by former Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull or one that was prepared and overseen by Senator Conroy?”

    FTTP, Senator Conroy.
    It is the future not MTM

  62. To answer the posed question:
    “Who would members of the community—have more confidence in: a plan which was produced and overseen by former Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull or one that was prepared and overseen by Senator Conroy?”

    Without a doubt the plan that was produced and overseen by Senator Conroy.

    That isn’t to say that it was perfect, just the much better choice. Especially now in hindsight of two years of no progress.

  63. hash tag your nbn.

    ministers having a laugh because they are able to claim numbers because of the last government dot tumblr dot com.

    Our tax dollars hard at work so pillocks can stand up in parliament and continue to be pillocks. Here’s the thing, the lions share of work is due to the labor policy.

    I am really really sorry if that offends liberals. Don’t care. Facts remain – Turnbull’s efforts will only start to bare fruit in the next 18-24 months. In the mean time, every win is because of the previous policy.

    I am laughing here. Sort of like how the joker laughs. It’s laughter. But it’s not funny.

  64. Btw, even the MSM etc has conducted polls which consistently and overwhelmingly show Australians prefer the Conroy-Quigley NBN:

    Labor’s national broadband network is more popular than the Coalition’s cheaper version, according to the first national poll on the policies.

    Of those who had heard about the government’s NBN, about 63 per cent of those surveyed supported it, reveals the Fairfax-Nielsen poll of 1400 Australians. However, of those who have heard about the Coalition’s alternative, only 41 per cent back it.

    Support for Labor’s NBN was consistently high across the states with most registering levels of support between 60 and 70 per cent.

    and again here:

    An informal online poll taken by the ABC appears to have shown that voters have already rejected the Coalition’s rival National Broadband Network policy, with 78 percent of some 5,700 readers noting that they didn’t support the policy revealed last week.

    • yep, Fifield we don’t want your half a$$ed 2nd rate MtM, it limits our countries growth prospects!

  65. I’m really disappointed in Fifield.

    Has he got so little intelligence that he defers his ability to reason to a popularity contest? Malcolm Turnbull has lots of money therefore he must be right?

    The history of evidence is that Turnbull as shadow communications minister, then communications minister was wrong or ill considered on every claim of importance he made. Not only that but his conduct as a person in regards to his personal attacks on his political enemies is a measure of his disgrace. If the question is asked “who do I trust?” it is anybody but Turnbull (I’m still glad he ousted Abbott though). If Fifield can’t even see that this project is a whole lot more than a political pissing contest then my vote is by default for the other guys.

    • I’m not disappointed in Fifield as I never had high expectations for him – he’s got a track record of merely being a TurnBull patsy in the Senate and nothing has changed with him taking over the Comms portfolio.

  66. This screwed up situation is kind of making me glad that I’m moving to somewhere with good, fast, and cheap Internet – Eastern/Central Europe.

    I guess this is how a brain drain kind of starts…

  67. Who’s plan to have more faith in.

    Conroy and FTTH.

    Turbull stuffed things up with the NBN as shadow in opposition, coms minister in Govt, and as PM seems to be assiduously avoiding the issue. Of a certainty their pre-election promises on NBN are worthless and all the mucking around with their MTM means that it is going to be very hard for to get a proper NBN in place into the future. Its sad that this ALL comes about because of pure negative politics the Libs just could not admit that as an infrastructure project the FTTH NBN was worthwhile.

  68. Another for Conroy & FTTP

    In my opinion the outcome of the Turnbull/Abbott MTM will be a net negative for Australia.

    It’s a sickening loss of a great opportunity based on idiotic ideologies and ignoring facts.

  69. I’m a liberal support however not their nbn policy.

    i would prefer “one that was prepared and overseen by Senator Conroy”

    • The question is: is that enough to change your vote, or are you willing to live. In the last century.

  70. Quigley/Conroy/FTTP. What a bunch of self serving, visionless (apart from $’s in their own bloody pockets) destructive bastards the LNP are. But that’s the way they’ve always been. They sold Australia out in 1975 and do so every time they’re in power.

    • I don’t even call the LNP a party to be honest. I couldn’t put them anywhere on the political spectrum. If they are capitalist then where is the investment in self driving cars? And why kick the unemployed? If the poor get poorer then those people aren’t spending???

      I don’t get it with the LNP. I have never understood them since it took Hawke and Keating to float the Australian dollar and open up Australian global business in the 1980’s. I mean if the LNP were pro business why hadn’t those things been done before?

      They make no sense as a party. I’m not anti-capitalism – the computer industry is a textbook example oh how capitalism can bring better products to the consumer. But there isn’t any capitalist, free market party in Australia. There’s just this bastardised group of dickheads who have opposed every piece of infrastructure since Whitlam giving sewerage to wets Sydney, medicare, the telegraph, and now the NBN which they just want to fatten up, privatise and forget about.

      • I love how every spouts about the economic management of the Howard years. When the reality is that most of the benefit that came out of that was due to long term planning by Keating, and the Mining Boom, which they clearly had no control over.

        Having seen the mess the coalition has made of the budgets. I don’t think they actually have much economic credibility at all.

        • Indeed, most of the supposed economic credentials of the Liberal party are a product of luck and Murdoch propaganda!

          The reality is the Howard Gov was the most wasteful spender in our history – on top of the electoral pork barreling (mostly tax cuts we couldn’t afford in the long term), he also allowed spending on infrastructure to decline to record lows!


            The reality is books will be written on the massive difference Rudd made to the country when he backed Conroys FTTP idea within one term of Government compared with several terms of worse than nothing from Howard, Abbott and Turnbull.
            Note how ex-liberal leaders never say anything about the NBN…. this is the copper internet election we had to have and lib voters have forgotten all about those heady days of telling everyone how cosmically alligned with the universe they were: TALK ABOUT BEING ASHAMED !

            Who remembers when the libs thought they were invincible?? Now they know they are cooked forever and hubris awaits,….. again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  71. Didn’t someone say do it once, do it right.

    It should have been FTTP as it was shown to be the most cost effective way, so for me it’s the “prepared and overseen by Senator Conroy”

    #FifieldsFolly #MalcomTurnbullsMess #SuchAStupidQuestion

  72. As I’ve made it well clear that I believe a Royal Commission into previous Communication Minister Malcolm Turnbulls management and directives of nbn, along with the actions of current managers of nbn hired by previous Communication Minister Malcolm Turnbull it should come as no surprise that I certainly hold Senator Conroy as far more capable of delivering one of this countries most visionary projects.

  73. I’d vote for FTTN, perhaps with a slightly less gold plated NTU to keep costs down.

    • You do realise that under FTTN the last copper mile is what still matters? And Bill Morrow has said that the copper won’t be replaced for your last mile.

      So you are closer to the node and have better copper = you get a better speed for price X dollars.
      Person down the street with worse copper and who is further form the node = a worse speed for price x

      You pay the same amount of cash. You get very different speeds. If that is a fair outcome or a sane outcome then I will go into a UFC cage with Ronda Rousey.

      • I must have been having a really bad day yesterday, as I meant to say FTTP/FTTB.

        I do actually understand the infrastructure. I think the copper network should be never used again. It’s barely worth the copper that it’s made out of.

        HFC has some life in it from a technology perspective, but the current HFC networks leave a lot to be desired.

    • How come the less gold plated FTTN is costing more and will return less financially than the so called gold plated FTTP. For the same money, FTTP is better value any day.

  74. Given this government is keen on public votes, why not add this one to the marriage equality list, along w/ a Republic? Let’s tell them how we really feel all at once and be done with it? I doubt this snap poll on Delimiter, no matter how well intentioned, will be taken notice of. Sorry….

  75. Get in someone from one of the other countries, like NZ that has NBN to organize things. They know what they are doing.

    • Yeah. I can’t see Quigley coming back to have the over 55’s lobby group called the Liberal Party kicking his head in again. We are a 19th century quarry economy, banana republic dump.

  76. Ummmmm, it’s a total no-brainer. Labor’s FTTP NBN is technically superior in every single way over FTTN and the MTM debacle.

  77. The “new” NBN is a stopgap and an exercise in national mediocrity. Developments overseas, on overseas telco news sites, will certainly lead you to this conclusion.

    Your service won’t be terrible, but it won’t capture the imagination like such an expensive nation-building project should. It will not be significantly faster. For $50 billion + ongoing costs, that is not value for money.

    It is a very expensive blackspot project that also piles on broadband in so many areas that are already well served. I thought this was the cut-price NBN.

    It’s very safe to predict that the “new” NBN will only make Australia fall behind, rather than getting ahead as would have been the case with Labor’s all-fibre NBN, after being at the bottom of the OECD heap. Even if everyone has 5G overseas. Australia has been all about ugly, cost-saving solutions for an outcome that’s just OK and the “new” NBN is symbolic of this. Why not change that perception? What do we have with which to go up against the Asian Tigers, apart from temperamental mining?

    Labor needed to change the policy on blocks of flats and highrise from FTTP to FTTB. But I refer you to this long list of what Labor did achieve:

    All NBN progress to date, apart from 375 active MTM subscribers to 30 September 2015, is based on Labor’s NBN. By the time of the 2013 election, Labor’s NBN was within budget contingencies and just over 3 months behind schedule, 3 years into a 10-year project. That is not a reason to ditch it!

    I quote the then Chief Technology Officer of British Telecom: “Fibre to the [node] cabinet is one of the biggest mistakes humanity has made. It ties a knot in the cable in terms of bandwidth and imposes huge unreliability risks.” This was in the UK where there has been maintenance of the copper network, unlike in Australia.

    HFC will turn out to be a fairly good interim solution. But starting FTTN/FTTC at this late stage and at such great expense is a monumental error.

    On the balance of all of this, with Labor’s NBN’s significant flaws, it is the better NBN.

  78. “Who would members of the community—have more confidence in: a plan which was produced and overseen by former Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull or one that was prepared and overseen by Senator Conroy?”

    Senator Conroy. That’s why national opinion polls still favour Real NBN over #fraudband. Even though support for the original has decayed, it’s still 38% vs. 28%. Lib got elected despite their bad plan for NBN, not because of it.

    Why he asks this rhetorical question? If he was serious, he would ask it in a national forum where members of the community could respond instead of asking it in his dunny before realising there’s no toilet paper and losing all attention on the question.

      • And the funny part is labor’s FoD cost claims turned out to be conservative, as I predicted!

        • Indeed. Even I didn’t give that credit in the day.

          Although in all fairness, I think it likely it was spin, that just happened to be right :-)

          Edit— 300th comment ;-)

      • HC check it out from Renai’s link… to prior to the last election…

        Deep Thinker (Tosh?) doing his best alain impersonation and talking complete gibberish.

        Mathew (yes you guessed it) stating 50/12 multiple times…

        And Fibroid (alain/Reality) doing the same then as he still does here/now… pointless childish pedantics…

        But here’s the best one from Firbroid, his smoking gun, from his beloved Coalition and their cheaper, faster, network …

        ” NBN Co to provide broadband services with a minimum download rate of 25 Mbps by the end of 2016 in all areas of Australia… ”

        Tell us again alain, ROFL…

        • NightKhaos destroyed both of them.

          Turns out he was totally right, but we knew that two years ago.

          That was the plan they endorsed. That is the plan they (presumably) voted for.

          So where is the scrutiny?

          So where are the complaints about how long it’s taking to roll out when they were so desperate for an improvement over ADSL2+ no matter how insignificant?

          So where is the apology saying “yep, you guys were right, the coalition fooled us but never again”?


          They had no credibility then and they sure as hell don’t have any now.

          What we get is goal posts moving all over the place and “bu bu bu Labor”

          • Turnbull has to deliver on something as he has no positive narrative to take to an election except for refugees which he desperately does not want the smell of.
            A river either grows or it stagnates and dies: I sense he will backflip somewhere on the NBN to grab the headlines!

          • bozza,
            This is true, there’s nothing for the election, but he’s in a bind because the only backflip possible now is to extend FTTP to areas that are not yet contracted for HFC or FTTN. It would be our one bright spot. Will he do it???

    • Nice flashback. So far the limited examples we’ve seen on FoD are $20,000. May end up being that Labor were not far off the mark.

  79. Honestly, I don’t see how ANYONE could honestly think the FTTN/ “mixed Tech” approach is better.

    It’s obsolete as it goes in, it doesnt save any money ( long term) and quite frankly, wont get NBN to the majority of Aussies all THAT much faster.
    I used to be of the opinion that the people making the decisions were stupid but now? I’m having a hard time believing ANYONE could be this stupid and am starting to suspect that someone ( or a few people) know exactly what’s going on but are more interested in the money they’re getting under the table to push this ridiculous FTTN plan ahead.
    Full fiber has 10 Gigabit potential. I’m not saying we’ll ever see ( or even need to see) that but the product is capable of delivering that speed. It’s about as futureproof as you get.
    FTTN is telling us anywhere between 70-50Mbps if you’re lucky enough to be close to the node, significantly less if not.
    How and WHY is this still a debate?
    For an answer to that I direct you to my suspicion above. It’s the only reason I can think of.

    • Steve, the problem is not that MT et al are stupid, (well some of them are eg Ergas), but they have done this intentionally so all the Liberal party cronies can cash in on a project that is now going to require multiple upgrade steps to get to the end game of Universal FTTP and as a result stretch the Crony gravy train out to 20 years from 10!

      As they say, follow the Money trail.

  80. Simple and sweet…FTTP hands f@$#!&g down!!! Turnbull has sold us down a generation of sub standard, innovation sucking, expensive and impractical technology.

  81. The MTM model is a disaster for Australia in the longer term. FTTN will be more expensive to maintain than FTTP, and the breakup of the universal infrastructure for competition has ensured Australia will continue to languish with an anti-competitive telecommunications regime.

  82. Labor’s policy was exactly what the country needed to move into the digital future. The LNP are far too ideologically blinkered, and bought off by the likes the Murdoch to see that.

  83. Conroy and Labor are prepared to let everyone have access to it unlike the Libs who want to exclude any who can’t afford the final link from the node which is going to cost more than the fairer alternative.

  84. Conroy and Labor undeniably had the better plan. FTTP is the only way to go. It’s cheap, holds more bandwidth, uses significantly less power compared to copper, doesn’t degrade and isn’t affected by corrosion, but ultimately FTTP provides extremely fast download and upload speeds compared to copper (FTTN). That’s not even the best part – the fact that Fibre Optics use light to transmit data means that the fibre optic technology only gets faster and faster over time. Copper is the complete opposite, it uses electricity to power the data transfers but the longer the copper is, the slower the speed of the data transfers will be, and then the copper will need to be powered by another source of electricity, meaning costs of copper skyrocket. It is literally a choice between using the speed of light, or using electricity. Last time I checked, the speed of light is the fastest thing in the known universe.

    Copper is dead. It wasn’t designed to carry the internet traffic and cannot support it at all, even in a hybrid system like the current and completely unjustified MTM on such a huge scale like Australia’s vast landscape will not work and will cost (and already is) significantly more taxpayers dollars than the cheaper and obviously better alternative of FTTP. Not to mention the FTTN won’t be capable of the bandwidth or speeds that Australian’s will need in the next ten years.

    Turnbull know’s that Labor’s NBN plan was better in every way, but he was told to change it by Abbott, who was told to ruin it completely by Rupert Murdoch.

  85. …there’s a company called e-solar that is using todays available computing power to actuate all it’s solar panels and make them turn in the right direction… just saying: efficiency breeds success and applications evolve to take up the capacity- a simple concept known as JEVONS PARADOX applies to all such ‘resourcefulness’!

    As for ‘Un-resourcefulness’.. well: I believe Bill Gates had something famous to say about the automation of inefficient processes! Illogical is what illogical does.. go ‘free’-markets !!!!! [/rolling eyes]

    Wait: make that, “GO THE CLEVER COUNTRY!!!!”

  86. Retrofitting Malcolm’s half baked 2nd rate fttn to the real McCoy Labor’s FTTP will cost even more. For Pete’s sake lets do FTTP once and do it right.

    • Wait, …the professionalised middle-man needs rental payments: this aint no middle-manned-free zone buddy … princesses need connected try-hard fat cats to lap up Hollywood delicacies with don’t you know?!!?

      Bikies have been wearing Paris-Hilton sunglasses and driving soccer-mum AWDs for almost two decades now: it’s all been written!

      –> yay, reality shows for everyone!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  87. The fact that Fifield has to even ask this question shows he is not fit for the job and is merely a liberal lackey, once again playing politics with Australia’s telecommunications future.

    To Mr Fifield, any sort of politician who is there truly for the betterment of this country and not for his own glory knows what the answer is. You know the answer Mr Fifield, show some gumption for the good of this country, and do what is right.

    Mr Fifield, you are playing politics just like your telecommunications predecessor rather than getting on with the job and installing the best network that Australia deserves. (Fibre to the home)

  88. In 20 years time, I wonder how many people will be glad we went with the quick and dirty mix of technologies that are already largely obsolete by world standards. How much will have been saved and how much quicker it will be built is likely a “road not taken” question, but the Liberals are now finding out the answer is “not as much as we thought”.

    At times it’s hard not to think the primary motivation of the liberals is the prevention of the NBN from being a successful Labor legacy (which Labor at times indeed did their fair share of preventing).

  89. @ Martin H (21/11): Yes he will do it because he has nothing but the Abbott legacy of stopping the boats and Howards 9-11 legacy(that labour voters definately swung for 2 elections even though they hated man: and that certainly includes me) and you can’t win an election without a good news story.
    What else has Malcolm got ? He needs a good news story to win the election and the budget aint going to do it so he needs to backflip on mal-net.

    The newspapers all know the election drums are pumping: I dare say Renai will take the opportunity to pop a few zingers ;>

  90. I see a hodge podge of vested interests, rarely the public’s, technically clueless politicians incapable of raising the debate beyond permanent invective, the slowest rollout timeline and execution on Earth, ludicrous PR and communication, minimal transparency and accountability, Australia shifting from an aspiring player with potential status to merely a small retail outlet in the global digital economy.
    I see many disconcerting, depressing or enraging bits emanating from NBN, but no, sorry, calling that a plan would preposterous.

  91. Wow. Just wow. Did anyone watch the third video?

    Sen. Stephen Parry is absolutely pathetic on the standing orders with regards to questions in the Senate.

Comments are closed.