Fifield praises Coalition’s “spectacular” NBN turnaround

127

news Communications Minister Mitch Fifield yesterday praised the Coalition Government he is part of for what he described as its “spectacular” turnaround in the progress of Labor’s National Broadband Network project, labelling the project’s founder Stephen Conroy as its greatest “threat”.

In Senate Question Time yesterday, WA Liberal Senator Dean Smith asked Fifield a number of favourable questions — known as ‘Dorothy Dixers’ regarding the Coalition’s stewardship of the NBN project, inviting Fifield to comment on why it was important to undertake detailed planning prior to embarking on large infrastructure projects such as the NBN, as well as what the Coalition had done to improve the performance of the project.

In response, Fifield strongly attacked the previous Labor Government, which initiated the NBN project during the tenure of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, and Stephen Conroy as Communications Minister.

“I think everyone in this place knows that the NBN is the largest and most complex infrastructure project in Australian history,” said Fifield “… Yet, when those opposite were embarking upon this venture, they cut every single corner they possibly could. They avoided a cost-benefit analysis.”

“They abandoned normal cabinet process. And, when Senator Conroy, as minister, appointed a board, not one person on the board had telecommunications experience—not one out of eight. While Senator Conroy was in charge he waited for more than a year after appointing the executive chairman to actually issue a statement of expectations to the company.”

“Where this chaos and mismanagement really showed was in the financial and operational targets. By the time of the election the rollout was already years behind forecast. And, after receiving $6.5 billion in funding, less than three per cent of premises were passed, and there were only 50,000 users on the network.”

The turnaround in the NBN’s fortunes under the Coalition, Fifield said, had been “nothing short of spectacular”.

The Minister specifically highlighted the Coalition’s progress in deploying the NBN across northern Australia, listing numbers of premises able to be connected in regional cities such as Cairns, Townsville, Mackay and Darwin.

“Possibly the best example is the Territory,” the Communications Minister said. “The NBN is powering ahead there with 40,000 premises in Darwin now in the footprint and about 6,700 left to cover within the next year. The next rollout site to kick off this week will be the centre of Alice Springs, with about 9,200 premises in the forward build schedule for Alice, starting with around 2,000 homes and businesses.”

Asked whether there were any threats to the rollout of the NBN, Fifield pointed to Conroy — who was interjecting into the Minister’s response — and said: “‘Senator Conroy’ is the primary answer to Senator Smith’s question.”

“And I think even those opposite know that if Labor did come back into government, as much as we like [Shadow Communications Minister] Jason Clare—and we genuinely do on this side—it would actually be Senator Conroy who had his hands on the levers. I think that is something that not only those of us on this side but many on the other side might be more than a little concerned about.”

opinion/analysis
At least on paper, Minister Fifield is correct — Labor did make relatively little rollout progress with the NBN, compared with the progress which the Coalition has made in the past several years.

However, what Fifield did not mention — so we will do it for him — is that major infrastructure projects are always like this. The first few years of any huge project are devoted to design and setup work, with early trials of construction going on. The NBN company always planned to rapidly ramp up its rollout progress as it got to the middle and then later period of its rollout period.

In addition, when judging the Coalition’s performance with respect to the NBN, I believe we should be looking primarily not at the Fibre to the Premises portion of the rollout — which was initiated under Labor, but the Multi-Technology Mix approach initiated by the Coalition. I’m talking about the Fibre to the Node and HFC cable portions of the Coalition’s MTM approach.

When you examine these technologies, you quickly find that the Coalition is guilty of the same crime it is accusing Labor of — spending several years preparing for the rollout of broadband infrastructure, before actually accelerating its rollout. Very little real-world connections to FTTN and HFC cable infrastructure have been made under the Coalition.

In his comments this week, Fifield is very much claiming credit for rolling out FTTP infrastructure — something Labor initiated and that the Coalition was always against.

I wonder whether the worm will turn in a few years and if we’ll see a Labor Government attempt to claim credit for its huge success in deploying technologies it was against — FTTN and HFC cable. It’s certainly possible. What goes around certainly comes around in circular Canberra.

127 COMMENTS

  1. “not one person on the board had telecommunications experience—not one out of eight.”
    This seems like a semantics argument at best, or am I mistaken?

  2. Well done. Claiming success on the back of the previous government instantiated project.

    golf clap dot tumblr dot net.

    The only reason NBN is powering ahead anywhere, is that it’s been deploying fibre as fast as the contractors can plough it in. Since the shake up that saw a few contracts be re-negotiated, the deployments have picked up speed.

    Coalition can’t claim that it’s “turned it around” for at least another 2-3 years, at least until MTM technology tree starts to see some kind of ramped up deployment. Until then it’s riding on the shirt-tails of fibre.

    All it’s succeeded in doing is put more of Conroy’s network in; that’s not really something it should be gloating about – to be fair. ;)

    • I wouldn’t say they’d picked up speed just carried on at the same pace. They had their area’s shrunk too which helped. Most of the reasons for progression were things like Telstra stopped dragging the ol asbestos remediation feet etc.

      Have to love the LNP magic wand … one wave and poof a 3000+ strong (employees) company appears out of nowhere, A national fibre backhaul network … poof! 2 satellites … poof! Satellite ground stations … poof! I could go on but I’d be here all day (there’s near enough to 2 dozen major milestones/achievements NBN Co managed under labor).

    • Coalition can’t claim that it’s “turned it around” for at least another 2-3 years, at least until MTM technology tree starts to see some kind of ramped up deployment. Until then it’s riding on the shirt-tails of fibre.

      Indeed, but this was to be expected. Coalition clowns notorious for taking credit for the hard work of others when it’s politically convenient.

    • It makes you wonder why Labor lost the election and the Coalition romped it in with an alternative well publicised NBN policy.

      • Coalition “romped in” because the constituency hated the previous mob. But feel free to ignore all the polling data that clearly supports it.

      • For those of us who understand that people don’t vote on one issue alone, no, it really doesn’t make you wonder.

      • “an alternative well publicised NBN policy”
        A fully costed, ready to go plan! Which we are still waiting for.
        25mbps for ALL Australian’s by 2016. Which we are still waiting for.
        I think you meant “a bunch of well publicized NBN lies”

        • Which was revised in the NBN Strategic review of December 2013, but you keep referring to the $29B as if it hasn’t been amended, it has, move on.

          • Lol Reality
            Yes revised in the SR with a $12B blow out and a 5 year completion blowout. That was only 3 months after being elected. So now you admit of the $26B blow out from there pre election policy

            But then you haven’t moved on when you make statement of “Coalition romped it in with an alternative well publicised NBN policy.” when that was before the SR

          • Yes I know the SR came after the election, they had to wait until they were in Government to do one.

            The SR also listed even more massive blowouts than the MTM plan from the final Labor CP figures of 2013 if the Labor FTTP had continued, but you obviously don’t want to go there.

          • Lol Reality
            So what was there policy before the election a brain fart.

            But yes let’s go there before the election the coalition claimed that FTTP would cost $90B but the SR cost was worst $71B best $64B (only $8B more than the current blowout.). So really the SR show that there was a saving of $20 – $25B on there own figures but now we have a $26B blowout on there own.

          • The only technical experts saying the MTM policy pre-election was realistic were the ones that were paid to do so by LNP. (or hired by some limited news media types).

            Everyone else said Telstra 2+ years to reneg (seriously it took Labor that long but a mere few years prior wtf), Cost would be world leading by a huge margin at that projection (ie impossible given Australia’s size). Timeline wasn’t physically possible let alone realistic based on real world roll-out figures elsewhere.

            This was the fully costed and planned™ done deal by Mr MTM. 100% guaranteed. Sadly LNP policy was a complete fantasy that the LNP shills bought hook line and sinker because golden boys Malcolm and Tony said so.

            They now had something to stand behind vs a vacuum so could happily bury their heads in the sand.

          • Jason K,

            “but the SR cost was worst $71B best $64B (only $8B more than the current blowout.)”

            No, the FTTP peak funding estimate from the 2013 SR was $73B, with a completion date of 2024.

            Once again you are deliberately misquoting the MTM blowout which is in a range of UP TO $56B, it’s not a static $56B because that’s the only way you can cook the comparison to make it look worse than it is.

            You also would prefer to ignore the updated figures for the SR from December 2013 released for FTTP from the NBN Co CP 2016 released August this year.

            Peak funding for the all FTTP rollout in the range $74B-$84B with a finish date of 2026-2028.

          • Oh ok alain…

            So once again you held (and still hold) the previous mob to each and every pre-election word and ridicule(d) them for altering… but the other mob, hey that’s ok maaaate (wink)…

            There’s that word again – hypocrite.

          • I would hardly laud the fact that the so called best in the business and world leading board members can only narrow down the potential cost blowouts to the nearest $10 billlion.

            I mean GBE’s go over budget and generally long term (20+ years) projects are no different (5-15% is fairly normal and if you manage that you have a success on your hand) but when they do they know just how much down to far less than a billion $ if not a the nearest million (and yes thats projects of scale the size of NBN or bigger).

            I mean an error margin like that is admitting we don’t know what we’ve done and we don’t know what we’re doing pure and simple.

            If the accountant types can come up with reasons why that margin is valid (and preferably with some example anywhere else in the world that might have a precedence) I’d be very interested.

      • NBN hasn’t been a major factor in elections since it’s inception, one way or another. Either FTTP or FTTN (ergo ALP or LNP) supporters claiming otherwise are kidding themselves… Yep, it was one of the reasons an independent tipped towards Gillard, but that seriously exaggerates it’s influence on the wider community (eg. if FTTP were such a changer of minds, Gillard should have romped in a comfortable win as opposed to a fingerhold minority gov.)

        eg. Turnbull vs Abbott, same policies, different management style, wildly different polling. Shorten vs LNP, depends who he’s against (vs Abbott, the pick of the litter, vs Turnbull, Short-who?)

        Fifield isn’t doing anything that Conjob and co. didn’t do as well, which is to say the entire situation is fricking deplorable and status quo. Hands up everyone who is surprised. Anyone?

        • INCORRECT…

          Peter Reith (former Deputy Leader of the Liberal party) and Julian Leeser did a 2010 election post mortem for their (Liberal) party.

          Their findings were: –

          “The failure to properly explain the Liberal Party’s broadband policy and the Labor Party’s effective scare campaign was a major cause of the Party’s failure to win seats in Tasmania. This was the nearly universal view of people making submissions to the review and is borne out by research undertaken by the Liberal Party”.

          ” The Tasmanian State Director told me that, based on Liberal polling, we were 50/50 in Bass on a 2PP basis, 10 days out from the election. Then the NBN issue really got going. The post election polling confirmed that the NBN was a major reinforcement for people to vote Labor in Bass. If we had negated NBN and offered, in a timely way, a decent Tasmanian package, Bass might have been a win instead of a loss…”

          Guess what this means when there was a hung parliament…

          • “Guess what this means when there was a hung parliament…”

            ” Bass might have been a win instead of a loss…”

            Key word is ‘might’ which means they might have lost Bass anyway.

            Never mind there was no ‘might’ next time around, the Liberals won Bass from Labor in 2013 with a healthy 10.8% swing, I guess the electorate of Bass were not that enthused with the Labor NBN plan.

            Oh and as you know the 2013 election was not a hung Parliament, the Coalition romped it in.

          • ROFL alain…

            No wonder you are the undisputed king of Delimiter bannings, with such stupidity…

            No one else on earth is so ridiculously immature to argue here, except you *slowclap*.

            As usual you childishly ignore the 99.9% of clear intent and argue over the 0.1% of maybe (just as I have said you always do – thanks for reaffirming).

            But I guess having had all those skeletons of previous contradictions resurrected by me, you feel butt-hurt and following previous refusals to reply at all, now you are compelled to respond come what may, even with typical imbecilic drivel

            “Then the NBN issue really got going. The post election polling confirmed that the NBN was a major reinforcement for people to vote Labor in Bass.”

            So for the 4th time for not even one vague guess, see if you can work out what Reith/Leeser are saying here…

            Ready… 1 + 1 = ? Go on even guess!

            Yes the Coalition did romp in, in 2013… Did you vote for Turnbull, they guy who partnered Whitlam and Wran…and had to toss a coin to decide which party he should join?

            GOLD…

          • But Reality the Coalition said they could deliver there NBN by 2016 for only $29B. But then we have a government that would say anything to get in and now do the opposite once elected.

          • Come on Jason get with the alain/Coalition spiel…

            The last mob had to stick to every pre-election word, or bam…instant derision…

            But pre-election words and even on the mothers grave promises from “our guys”… can chop and change at willl…

            FFS don’t you know that Jason…

            Yes their disgraceful hypocrisy is mind boggling my friend :/

          • That a tiny fraction of the electorate (ie. 2-3 ppl) got to decide Australia’s government over an issue that didn’t swing major amounts of voters?

            Seriously, you’re celebrating a hung parliament (ie. the very definition of ‘no real winner, but we have to give the cup to someone’) as a hallmark of the power of the NBN to move people??

            That’s kinda precious in just how pathetic a straw grab it is.\= )

            The NBN in it’s many and varied forms has always been overestimated in it’s ability to move the electorate. It didn’t save Rudd from his awful poll figures, it didn’t hand Gillard government in her own right and it didn’t stop Abbott from taking office (/shudder). Time after time, FTTP has failed to swing the predicted crushing victories to the ‘progressive’ party championing it. If it was supposed to be some sort of beacon of prosperity shining a bright light across the land, then I guess it was setup in a valley.

            Eh, keep on believing, keep on whining, keep on crying, it hasn’t changed a damn thing in 8 years and I don’t see it making any difference any time soon. At some point I would have thought the crushing defeat of almost complete irrelevance would have dampened some of the enthusiasm, but denial is a potent thing I guess…

          • Org’Asmo…

            Seriously, just how you and the other usual suspect naysayers here, can read whatever you want into a person’s comments, including stuff that wasn’t mentioned or not even vaguely inferred, is amazing in a pitiful sort of way…

            Point to where I said or even inferred I celebrated a hung parliament? No you can’t because I didn’t, so please at least try to keep the BS to a minimum, thank you.

            So to the actuals…

            You said – “NBN hasn’t been a major factor in elections since it’s inception, one way or another.”

            So I simply brought to the table information from 2010 proving you absolutely wrong. Information from those who didn’t gain government in 2010 and their reasoning for not winning government. And yes at elections like 2010 those handful of votes made a difference, surely that’s common sense, with everything so close (hence my hung parliament comment)?

            Yet, instead of saying – gee I didn’t realise that – you morph into some political stupidity. So if all that Rudd, Gillard, Abbott nonsense was inferring broadband didn’t matter in 2013 – “I agree it didn’t matter in 2013 and here’s a scoop – I never said it did” – so why the BS? I was referring to a report from 2010 from those who were affected. That’s it. No hung parliament celebrations, no political grandstanding… just one report.

            Got it this time?

            Seems obvious you sadly aren’t equipped to accept the Coalition’s own findings on reasons they themselves didn’t win the 2010 election (and they clearly say broadband was a major one in Tas.) because it proves you completely wrong.

            So if you want to keep arguing, ranting and making up lame excuses because you were wrong and are unable to accept you are wrong… well argue with Reith and Leeser, because these findings were their findings, not mine/the messenger’s.

            Thanks for popping in.

    • Brendan B,

      “The only reason NBN is powering ahead anywhere, is that it’s been deploying fibre as fast as the contractors can plough it in”

      Yes that’s called fulfilling outstanding build contracts from the fading months of the Labor reign, the Coalition said that’s what they would do while they reviewed the NBN and reviewed their MTM model, and that’s what they did.

      The same will apply to a Labor win in 2016, they will fulfill outstanding build contracts which will include FTTN while they review the Coalition plan and review their own pre election NBN promises.

      I expect the the first re-negotiated vastly scaled down FTTP build contracts won’t happen until 2017-18 at the earliest.

      • Nobody is claiming that isn’t what is happening Alain, what the point is, is that the Coalition is claiming all the progress as their own, when all they are doing is fulfilling contracts already in place from Labor.

        But you knew what they meant, you’re just being your usual LNP Shill self.

        • R0ninX3ph,

          Well it is their own, last I heard Conroy and the Labor NBN Co are not running the show anymore.

          I suppose all Greenfield FTTP since 2013 is all thanks to Labor even though it is Coalition policy, on that basis if Labor win in 2016 and keep FTTB and HFC and keep building outstanding FTTN contracts we can say it’s all thanks to the Coalition and Labor cannot claim any progress in those areas as their own.

          • Any contracts signed pre-2013 election being claimed as Coalition construction wins is disingenuous, save for Greenfields as they are getting FTTP from either plan.

            You’re correct, it would still be disingenuous to claim HFC numbers and FTTB numbers as Labor wins if they are indeed in Government from next term.

            Now what? I have admitted it would be hypocritical to do so, what is your next rumbly-tumbly argument to avoid the issue?

          • Gotta love the each way bet…

            Every NBN problem past and present is the previous mobs fault.

            All Greenfields connected are the current mobs diligence.

  3. Do all ultra conservatives live in a bubble where they are purely incapable of seeing reality or are they just compulsive liars?

    Perhaps it’s just those rad cons who are featured in the articles and their faithful lap dog commentators here?

    :/ unbelievable

    • The conservative party since federation has been arsehole central. Fucking us all up with Fraudband continues a tradition of pouring shit on any progress: Medicare, Whitlam’s sewerage of West Sydney, Superannuation etc. And an aresehole like Garfield Barwick is their hero – a sack of shit who fuckbuggered the tax laws to make us poor and the rich richer.

      The LNP is a shit heap party bursting with dickheads. It’s that simple. It always will be.

    • I suspect the logic is something like :

      I am the best.
      Therefore it is in the public interest for me to be running everything.
      Therefore my party needs to be in government.
      Therefore I need to promote my parties policies.
      Therefore promoting my party is in the public interest.
      Since what I am saying is in the public interest, it is not lying.

    • Do all ultra conservatives live in a bubble where they are purely incapable of seeing reality or are they just compulsive liars?

      This is another little from column A and a little from column B things Rizz ;-)

  4. I’ll go out on a limb here and say it’s really not correct – you can’t connect premises without back haul (the Transit network) and backend systems in place. This takes substantial time. It is not just disingenuous and misleading, it is #@&$ing fraudulent to misrepresent this process.

    I also note that the Minister has failed to take responsibility for his party delaying the project by refusing to come to the party with necessary legislation, nor does he acknowledge that Telstra held up the project through both delaying negotiations and failing to either remediate their asbestos laden pits and ducts or even communicate the scale of the problem.

    • It’s like anything. You can cherrypick any issue to argue that 8 + 78 = 564. At that point it’s not an argument – it’s at best rhetoric and at worst a pack of lies.

      • Very accurate assessment to claim it’s cherrrypicking. He only counts Labor’s NBN with “users on the network”, but heralds the LibNBN numbers “in the forward build schedule” or “numbers of premises able to be connected”. This Fifield guy just keeps clinging to some alternate reality.

    • ~2 years worth of delays right there sadly, imagine if we were 4 years ahead of where we are now … yeah thanks LNP you’ve done us Aussies proud!

  5. When he says they’ve turned it around I’m presented with a vision of a semi-trailer, jack-knifed across a freeway, causing tailbacks for kilometres.

    They can’t do intentional irony but the unintentional stuff would be priceless – if it wasn’t the nation paying for it.

  6. Yes great turnaround from a $29B completed by 2016 to a SR $41B with only 4.5m premises by 2016 to now a CP16 of $56B with only 2.5m premises by 2016.

    Getting slower and slower.

    • Jason K,

      “Yes great turnaround from a $29B completed by 2016 to a SR $41B”

      Incorrect comparison, again.

      “now a CP16 of $56B”

      Deliberate misquote of figure, again.

      “with only 2.5m premises by 2016.”

      It’s not the end of 2016 yet.

      • “Incorrect comparison, again.”

        No it isn’t, the LNP went to the Election claiming a fully costed plan for $29B for 25Mbit to all premises by the end of 2016, comparing that to anything after the election is actually a “correct” comparison, as it is comparing the Coalition policies.

        He is not referring to the funding cap.

        • The SR of December 2013 changed all of that, I am aware of it and it was well publicised in the press at the time and here in Delimiter at great length.

          Labor changed NBN policy post 2007 election win, they changed the funding requirements between 2007-2013, and no doubt would have changed it again from 2013 on, welcome to the world of Government controlled national infrastructure rollouts and pre election promises.

          • Yes and…

            Who was (and still is) the first person to criticise the last mob for any alteration post election, hold-ups etc…?

            That’d be the very same person who now forgives the current mob for any post election alteration, lengthier hold-up and massive UPTO (lol) $15B cost blowout.

            There’s a word for such a person – hypocrite!

          • Yes reality
            The SR showed the lies of an NBN policy the brought to the election of it could all be done for $29B and complete by 2016.

            What changed in the election policy to the SR the add of HFC which we see an increase from $29B to $41B. But after 2 years with out building anything the figure of the same model has increased upto $56B a blowout of $26B from there pre election policy and a blowout of $15B from the SR while labour FTTP model after 5 years cost had increased by $3B

          • Jason K,

            You love quoting from the SR so much and providing your own unsubstantiated assertions what infrastructure type is responsible for the blowout, but you are very careful on what figures you select for use in your very selective comparisons.

            You omit the SR figures on FTTP, the last CP 2013 from the Labor NBN Co had peak funding estimated at $45.6B, the SR calculated it at $73B with a completion date of 2024.

            It’s obvious why you prefer to ignore it.

          • Did you miss this alain…?

            Yes and…

            Who was (and still is) the first person to criticise the last mob for any alteration post election, hold-ups etc…?

            That’d be the very same person who now forgives the current mob for any post election alteration, lengthier hold-up and massive UPTO (lol) $15B cost blowout.

            There’s a word for such a person – hypocrite!

            Still no comment… no I thought not.

  7. The Human Genome project. Most people will be familiar with it to some level. One of the largest scientific undertakings of all time, where scientists undertook a global effort to map out the entire Human Genome.
    The project was commenced with a plan to complete it in 20 Years.

    Seven years into the project – about a third of the way through the expected timeline, less than 1% of the Genome had been mapped. That’s 33% of time spent, yet less than 1% achieved. Many people called for it to be shutdown. I’m sure an accountant would have cut it at the first opportunity. An LNP senator would have for sure.
    Yet 7 years later, the project was finished years ahead of schedule.

    Why? Because the early years were spent in testing several methods, and like any early process, it was highly manual and slow. As the scientists became more proficient, and as technology advanced, computers became more powerful, the mapping process accelerated. and what looked hopeless 7 years in “on paper” became one of mans biggest ever achievements.

    See any parallels?

    • “See any parallels?”

      They found the gene that makes conservatives stupid? It could also be similar to the NBN project, except ours was stuffed up by beam counters, the cause of many a failed IT project.

    • Last year I was at a friends for a house warming. We put up a portable gazebo, I said it would take us roughly 30 minutes. 10 minutes in, all we had done was sort the poles, connected them, and laid them out where they needed to be, but nothing had actually gone up.

      We hit that 30 minute goal, but we didnt have anything off the ground for over 10 minutes, and didnt have the skeleton looking like a skeleton for 15 minutes. But if we hadnt done that preparation it would have taken an hour more.

      LNP has come in at that 10 minute mark and claimed credit for the preparation.

      • And have then decided that after sorting everything out and getting the start of the Gazebo up, to wander off and put up a couple of wobbly pieces of tin balanced against a plank of wood.

    • John Griffin,

      Are you referring to the Labor NBN model or the Coalition NBN model?, your analogy could apply to either.

      • Really? OK, explain how on earth his analogy applies to the MTM model. I’m really interested. Show me the workings or that reality distorting brain of yours.

      • If you could read the text, rather than glossing, you would see: “Many people called for it to be shutdown”. I don’t hear many people claiming the current NBN “progress” should be shut down, simply that it’s the lemon version or the lite version.

  8. Perfectly encapsulates why these projects fail and why taxpayer’s continuously receive poor value for their money.

    Political parties repeatedly guilty of underestimating both time and costs, overestimating revenue. Yet few hold them to account, and when we do we’re shouted down.

    “However, what Fifield did not mention — so we will do it for him — is that major infrastructure projects are always like this. The first few years of any huge project are devoted to design and setup work, with early trials of construction going on. The NBN company always planned to rapidly ramp up its rollout progress as it got to the middle and then later period of its rollout period.”

    Govt projects are always like this because 1) those proposing them have zero commercial experience (paying millions to consultants happy the provide the outcome they’re paid for), and 2) after commencement there’s little accountability.

    Renai the project failed to meet kpis they set in their own corporate plans. Failures repeatedly called out to fanboy abuse. It failed to ramp up as predicted even accounting for delays in negotiation. Whenever those with experience tendered for work they were rejected, NBNCo knew better and chose resources from inexperienced companies.

    NBN is a big project, but not particularly complicated. It uses existing third party technology, that dozens of telcos had already delivered to millions of premises.

    The “bulk drop” epiphany of CP13 (unreleased) is extraordinary. They could have approach any number of similar fibre rollout projects for exactly the same advice. What trials were needed?

    Even if we accept govt intervention on this scale was required (I certainly don’t) blowout in costs/time of both models confirmed. MTM cheaper and quicker to deliver also confirmed (by Quigley himself). HFC & FTTB investment agreed as solid workable solutions (by Quigley and others). Many million more premises (4x) work have been connected today but for the FTTH delusion of the Labour party and it’s belligerent cheerleader Conroy. Where’s the accountability for ten’s of billions of taxpayer funds and the effort required from the few to raise that amount of money?

    However the cost will continue to exploded. Wait for the promised revenue fail to materialise. The belief such infrastrucure will transform economies also misplaced; video-on-demand and social media bile for 90% of users.

    • Richard
      Yet you don’t hold the current gov accounted able for the current mess they have created. All you so far even with this statement is blame labor and Conroy.

      You claims Turnbull pre election policy as ambitious yet in 3 months is cost had blown out by $14B and time from a 3 year complete to a 7 year complete. The CP16 which shows the figures for the SR for FTTP as wrong now has blown out to $26B of there pre election policy. Turnbull claim he done a lot of research on that policy talked to people.

      How many connection of HFC and FTTN have the connected since the got elected Richard. You claim it to be faster so far it’s anything but.

      So the real when are you going to hold the current government accountable for the mess they have created instead of blaming the previous government.

    • If someone like you were running it I am sure it’d be a great success… oh, they have people like you running it now. Oh well, seems bean counters are in the habit of making costly camels.

    • “It failed to ramp up as predicted even accounting for delays in negotiation.”
      “CP13 (unreleased)”
      “blowout in costs/time of both models confirmed.”
      “MTM cheaper and quicker to deliver also confirmed (by Quigley himself).”
      “Many million more premises (4x) work have been connected today but for the FTTH delusion of the Labour party and it’s belligerent cheerleader Conroy.”
      Complete fabrications. [Citation Needed] for each.

      “Where’s the accountability for ten’s of billions of taxpayer funds and the effort required from the few to raise that amount of money?”
      Agreed. There needs to be a Royal Commission into Turnbull and Cos horrendous misimplementation of the MTM.

    • “Political parties repeatedly guilty of underestimating both time and costs, overestimating revenue. Yet few hold them to account, and when we do we’re shouted down.”

      Richard,

      I’m not sure if you got the memo, but the Coalition are currently the party with majority. I’ve tried to suggest holding Turnbull to account for his part; in fact I have repeatedly asked you to hold the current government to account for it’s part.

      You refuse to believe there is in fact a reason to do so. I find that quite remarkable; and very myopic.

      The costs will indeed continue to spiral – thank you for joining the conversation and recognising MTM is a key contributor. Even if there is some form of implant that impedes your ability to recognise who is actually in charge of it.

      • @bb basic failure of the fanboys to comrpehend what is clearly written.

        It’s Rubbish I’ve not been critical of the current govt’s performance. The NBN was Conroy’s policy, no party can come in after 6 years and tens of billions spent and undo it. As posted (repeatedly) the coalition is responsible for their part in the failure (already called out), and their comparive successes.

        Revenue failures will be no greater under MTM than FTTH (thankfully costs will be less). We’ll have customers on many technologies to demonstrate.

        • $40 ARPU Richard.

          Above both the coalitions and Labor’s estimates.

          And that is ONLY on the Labor portion of the NBN.

          How do you account for that?

          Oh and the estimates of users. Labor estimated 50% on 12/1 connections. With an additional 30% (give or take) on 25/5 connection.
          In actuality we have 35% on 12/1 and 45% on 25/5. The other 20% is fairly similar.

          So lets look at the correlations. The ARPU is up by $4 on NBNco’s Original Labor plan prediction. The only reason to account for that is that we have a smaller number of users on the lower tier, than was expected.

          Explain that away.

        • ROI under MTM is half that of the prior lot and the prior lot have been audited out the wazoo.

          Fail to see how that equates to failures will be no less under MTM.

  9. You know, i was thinking the other day that if NBN co had originally gone for a FTTN/MTM approach back in 2009, chances are the majority of Australia would have the NBN by now. NBN co (and labor gov) decided that the long term benefits of FTTP was better than having it sooner, so chose FTTP. The coalition are right that MTM is cheaper and faster to build than FTTP. BUT, not so much when you consider the near 3 year delay caused by switching over to MTM and the high maintenance costs.

    All of the coalitions arguments make sense if it was the original plan, they make no sense now though (except for FTTB, but i think NBN co would have changed to that anyway). They have wasted so much time and money and we end up with only a patchwork network to get us by, not a state of the art communications network. All i can do these days is shake my head in dismay for what could have been. The blame for this squarely rests on the coalition and turnbul’s shoulders.

    • Indeed and the most galling part…

      Back in 2007 when such technologies were plausible, the same political entity now governing derided it, said they could build a faster, cheaper version and referred to the very same FttN they now laud and roll out, as fraudband.

    • All of the coalitions arguments make sense if it was the original plan, they make no sense now though

      This is exactly what we we’re all saying before the last election. FttN would have made sense years ago. To roll it out in 2015 while stopping a FttP plan in build also considered to be the end goal takes a special type of idiocy. It lacks logic and logic is not to be expect from those that have dedicated their life to thinking mediocrity is acceptable.

    • I understand you (and others) trying to be reasonable by acknowledging FTTN would have been cheaper and faster had it been the original plan, but that simply isn’t true. Labor tried to go to FTTN, remember? They didn’t go forward with it because the cost was within spitting distance of FTTP, because Telstra had refused to play ball unless they received massive kickbacks. Labor decoded that if they had to pay Telstra for their copper network, they may as well replace it and shut it down and save $1bn a year just in basic/emergency maintenance. This wasn’t a case of sweetening the deal for Telstra to upgrade their own network, no amount of incentives was going to get Telstra to upgrade to FTTN unless they were allowed to run an exclusive business with Bigpond FTTN subsidised by the government and allowed to extract as much profit as possible. After all, that’s the deal they got during privatisation, why shouldn’t they get it again?

      Make no mistake – FTTP was chosen because FTTN was not viable.

      • “Make no mistake – FTTP was chosen because FTTN was not viable.”

        Well in the final analysis it was actually the FTTP rollout as the Labor NBN Co planned it that was not viable.

        Perhaps if they had at least kept HFC for BB for starters the no of premises activated would not have been so appallingly dismal during the six years they had control of the rollout.

        • Is that the same HFC which you previously said was a complete failure, hanging outside your place unused and only good for the pigeons?

          Oh look, yes it is the very same HFC…

          Remember now alain? You said that didn’t you?

          You did this previously to desperately attempt to liken HFC to FttP and ergo suggest (typically with no foundation whatsoever, just a dumb theory) that FttP would also be a failure, like HFC…

          Didn’t you?

          But even more humorously, you said the above after of course saying FttP can’t help but be successful, being a monopoly…

          Didn’t you?

          Funny how the narrative forever changes back and forth to fit the daily BS…

          Go on answer those simple questions (hint all answer begin y and end with es). So don’t just disappear or FUD everything up with dumb diversion. Grow some and tell the truth even just this once.

          • ROFL…

            What a surprise, you can’t even admit to your own humiliatingly contradictory comments.

            But we both know that… even though we both know what I claim above is 100% true.

            However I note you didn’t deny, so ;

            As such I rest my case.

            Ooh BTW – Rather than Google (you might find facts) I can simplify my comments in future, so that even the infantile can understand, if that will help…?

            You’re welcome.

        • News : Turns out Rome was built in a day! More from your intrepid and insidious reporter ‘Your New Reality, OBEY’ after the break!

          Re: ‘final analysis’ [Citation Needed]

          Because you’re making shit up again.

          • Hotcakes,

            You only ask for [Citation Needed] when anyone dares to criticise the Labor NBN, any criticism of the Coalition NBN including deliberate misquoting of MTM CP and SR estimates can continue without any of your ‘ [Citation Needed]’ or ‘you’re making shit up again’.

            Why is that?

            Anyway this will do for starters.

            “It’s official: Labor’s NBN project has failed”

            https://delimiter.com.au/2013/10/14/official-labors-nbn-project-failed/

          • Missed this one “following” the link you so desperately cling to, did you alain…?

            https://delimiter.com.au/2013/12/12/please-accept-apologies-wrong-turnbull/

            Renai: …”I must hold the Coalition in contempt for breaking all of its promises. Delimiter is, after all, an evidence-based site. And the evidence today is that the Coalition is not sincere about delivering super-fast broadband to all Australians. Please believe I will hold the Government and Turnbull personally to account on this basis from now on.”

            Now say don’t warp back to the past, as you err, keep forever warping back to the past to deflect from the Coalition’s complete fuck up MTM…

      • When i mean cheaper, i mean the initial outlay. If we all had the NBN by now (FTTN/FTTB/HFC), i don’t think many would have minded the high maintenance costs. The benefits of fast internet might effectively negate the cost. We could then transition over to FTTP for areas where maintenance costs were becoming too high – eventually converting the whole network.

        I actually agree with the original decision by NBN co to go full FTTP. I was more pointing out that the turnbulls MTM only makes sense if it was the original plan. Changing things half way through has greatly messed it up etc. Even if labor mismanaged it a bit, the coalition have done far more damage to progress than labor ever could.

        • elementalest, I do understand what you’re saying and why. I’m not disagreeing with you just to be a prick – FTTN was evaluated quite extensively, and even as an initial plan it was not viable. Do you remember Telstra being thrown out of the negotiations/tendering process because they didn’t even bother meeting the brief? They knew full well that they held all the aces in a FTTN project, so they were playing hardball. I would have loved to see the look on their faces when Conroy announced the FTTP NBN. There would have been some angry calls to the LNP demanding they sort this out, with the LNP asking for significant support to regain power and return Telstra to the top of the heap.

          You’re completely right that turning the NBN into the MTM fiasco was a retrograde method of wasting billions for a highly inferior product, a decision far costlier than FTTN would have been if that’s the pill that had been swallowed at the beginning, but building FTTN instead of FTTP from the outset would have cost nearly as much and left Telstra entrenched as a monopoly owner (even if they were structurally separated, no one could seriously believe the two entities would ever truly be arms length). It would *not* have been cheaper. It may have been faster though, depending on how long negotiations would have taken… Telstra may well have dragged things out hoping the LNP would return to power, though, which would leave us with broadly what we have today, anyway.

    • Instead what they did was consult an independent panel who ended with what an 1100 page document saying that it would cost too much in the interim since FttP was where we needed to be anyway (ie it was simply too late back then for FttN as the immediate upgrade to P after would mean we pay double and lose out on returns from N expenditure).

      Sure that would put have and did put us at the front of the pack when it came to developing broadband but the benefits then prescribed it as a worthwhile investment.

      Since then country and incumbent one after the other have decided we had it right back then and followed suite with transitioning to Fibre roll-outs whilst we did the big U bolt in reverse.

      • Ah, i do remember something about that now. I guess the cost argument from the coalition/turnbull is just plain wrong. The speed aspect is still valid – getting faster network speeds sooner would help with productivity in certain industry, providing opportunity sooner. This would ultimately mitigate the higher costs.

        Though, what i really liked about the FTTP model was the reliability it brought. Maybe the MTM model was never a valid option on any level?

        • 100% agree with getting speed sooner the issue is that we don’t as a country or GBE own any existing assests that would allow us leverage off of. (and also the current 2-3 year delays being highly predictable put a big dent in the sooner).

          Buying Cu network to only have it needed to be replaced upon completion (or before work even starts in case of HFC) negates the years upon years of revenue extracted by whomever owned it prior. Even if it did just cost $29B the fact it needs replacing the minute its done means there isn’t the ROI to justify that initial outlay, even at half the fibre cost per premise or less (say $1.5k) the individual connection needs to be used for a significant time to recoup and you have to recoup 100% because you bought that asset rather than already owned it.

          If NBN can’t recoup and get an ROI then its got to be written off which leaves the tax payer holding the semi inflated ball and everyone else is suddenly wearing invisibility cloaks.

  10. I can agree with him to a certain extent. Turning a massive, nation-building, already-in-progress infrastructure project into a gigantic pile of horse shit certainly is a spectacular turnaround.

    • + 11 Billion… That’s what we paid Telstra for the privilege of maintaining the CAN wasn’t it?

      • Indeed Woolfe…

        As well as us paying to upgrade the CAN (replace copper with, err, new copper, WTF???) and also “maintaining and upgrading” HFC, whilst of course allowing the “owners” (good ol’ conservative boys) to access the free upgrades for their pay TV…

        Yes we have some smart ones pulling the strings (well pulling something) in power now eh?

  11. “I wonder whether the worm will turn in a few years and if we’ll see a Labor Government attempt to claim credit for its huge success in deploying technologies it was against — FTTN and HFC cable. It’s certainly possible. ”

    I’ll make a slightly different prediction. In 5-10 years time the MTM will be an orphan. Nobody will know where it came from or why it’s here. The only thing anybody in Canberra will be sure of is that it was someone else’s fault.

    • Well it they might claim credit for HFC and FTTB but probably not that naughty bad FTTN COPPER thingy, that’s making your policy too much like the Coalition.

      I like Fifields sense of humour in the above statement:

      “And I think even those opposite know that if Labor did come back into government, as much as we like [Shadow Communications Minister] Jason Clare—and we genuinely do on this side”

      We are of course all waiting with bated breath what Clare announces as Labor NBN MK2 for the 2016 election, the Labor think tank must be working overtime to try and make it look different to the Coalition policy.

      I have one tip for them, rename HFC and FTTB as something else, that should do it.

      :)

        • It’s not so much renaming for the purposes of ‘making it better’, it’s renaming infrastructure type because you need to distance yourself from Coalition policy in the electors eyes.

          • I’m struggling with the great irony that is expressed in the double-speak above.

            Keep moving those goal posts though. Maybe if you rename them, you could distance yourself from your own commentary in the past?

      • “that’s making your policy too much like the Coalition”

        You do understand that majority here aren’t here for political reasons, right? They have opinions based on what they believe to be the best way to do a nationwide communication upgrade. They don’t make decisions on which is the best way to do it based on if the guy wears a blue or red tie.

        • + 1 Darren.

          May I add…

          Conversely, anyone who says FttN was fraudband previously but now supports fraudband, or claims HFC failed, yet now laud HFC, or bag the previous lesser hold-ups but fully accept the current lengthier hold-ups (re MTM) or claim faster speeds aren’t/won’t be required, yet laud g.fast for faster speeds, etc, etc is clearly not here to make decisions for any other reason but their own disgracefully blinded, politically submissive, stupidity.

          • + Eleventy Million.

            At this point, all we are arguing down is the final 30%, HFC is going to be used for the foreseeable future, FTTB is fine for MDU’s, Wireless and Satellite isn’t changing, so all we are arguing is the final percent that isn’t covered by FTTP/FTTN after the next election.

            My area back in Adelaide is due to be built with FTTN “soon” so I am not going to be getting away from FTTN, but I can still fight for those who aren’t on the rollout map, to get the right solution for the future, and 800m of copper isn’t that.

          • You missed one Rizz, anyone who previously whined about forcing users onto fibre yet now think forcing them onto FttN is acceptable.

        • Darren,

          You need to adapt to the times, the best way to do a nation wide communication upgrade from 2015 onward is to forget the old Labor model from 2008, that’s over, it’s not possible to implement FTTP to 93% by 2021, it wasn’t back then and it certainly is not now.

          What you and others need to help the Coalition lose the next election based on NBN policy is to provide well thought out advice on what Labor NBN MK2 needs to look like, I think they will need it.

          Just yelling fraudband, MTM is horseshit, deliberately misquote NBN Co MTM funding estimates etc and the constant looking back over your shoulder at a failed Labor NBN plan from 2007-13 as if it was nirvana although making you feel good is a complete waste of time.

          • @ alain (Reality…lol)

            “You need to adapt to the times”

            By embracing century old, obsolete copper…

            “Just yelling fraudband”

            No repeating the term fraudband, which those who now embrace fraudband first used. And as a consequence laughing at those who dubbed fraudband and their trusty mindless minions who also called it fraudband previously, but who also now all embrace fraudband.

            “MTM is horseshit”

            Yes it is, congratulations for joining the rest of us here in actual reality.

      • If we’re all very lucky they’ll do one of two things:

        1) Shelve the whole NBN project and shut any future work down, saving money on rolling out something utterly useless for the medium-long term.
        2) Go back to FttP rollouts.

        Seeing as how neither 1 nor 2 is likely, we’re just going to have to accept that we’re going to waste tens of billions on a short term solution with no future scalability. Because politics.

      • I highly doubt HFC is going to be lauded anywhere, not in the least since there’s an infinite maintenance contract in place (even when say fibre replaces it … which will happen eventually).

  12. Seeing as how neither 1 nor 2 is likely, we’re just going to have to accept that we’re going to waste tens of billions on a short term solution with no future scalability. Because politics.

    Nailed it.

  13. If only there was a way that Liberal party members could be denied access to FTTP and made to suffer FTTN…

  14. Actually Fifield is quite right, it has been a spectacular turnaround. The LNP has taken a visionary project for the present and future, and turned it into a costly debacle for the 90’s.

    Quite impressive – they had to really work at that.

Comments are closed.