“A whole mess of garbage”: Ludlam blasts Turnbull’s “mongrel” NBN

167


news Greens Senator Scott Ludlam has given a fiery speech to Parliament this week damning the Coalition’s version of the National Broadband Network as instigated by Malcolm Turnbull, labelling it as a “whole mess of garbage” and as being held together with “gaffer tape and plastic bags”.

Ludlam outlined his views on the Coalition’s version of the NBN — which integrates the legacy copper and HFC cable networks owned by Telstra and Optus into Labor’s previous Fibre to the Premises version of the NBN — in a speech in the Senate this week associated with Labor’s move to enforce radical transparency on the NBN company.

Ludlam, the Greens Co-Deputy Leader and Communications Spokesperson, said the Coalition announced its NBN policy at “one of the bizarrest press conferences that I have ever seen”, with a proposal for “a cobbled together, half-baked national broadband network that was going to cost $29.5 billion”.

“Instead of futureproofing the country with an end-to-end fibre network we would use a bit of copper, a bit of HFC, some satellites, some wireless towers—we would have this mongrel network big parts of which would be obsolete on the day they are built and will need to be torn up and replaced with the kind of end-to-end fibre network that this parliament legislated for,” said Ludlam.

The Greens Senator pointed out that the cost of the Coalition’s vision had increased from $29.5 billion to $41 billion, and then to $56 billion. “How on Earth did we get here?” he asked.

Ludlam said Australia was now “stuck with an obsolete copper network that you have to scrape the garbage out of when you discover it has been taped together with gaffer tape and plastic bags”.

“We are stuck with a reliance on Telstra, who know where the bodies are buried, and are pretty happy to offload their network, which different spokespeople at different times have said is no longer fit for purpose, back to the taxpayer,” he added.

“The network rollout is way behind schedule. The fibre to the node network is way behind schedule. The satellites are apparently at or approaching capacity. Australians are getting a telecommunications network that will be slower, more expensive and delivered later than an all-fibre build. What act of genius put this together? Who dismantled something that was going to work?”

Ludlam acknowledged Labor’s NBN vision had been delayed.

“It was delayed by asbestos in the pits, it was delayed by a subcontracting pyramid that was six layers deep in some places, and it was delayed by the inherent complexity of doing something as complex as this—decommissioning a network that is decades old in some parts of the country and not particularly well maintained, and replacing it with an entirely new technology. Yes it was running behind schedule,” he said.

“But instead of coming in and cleaning out the messy subcontracting arrangements that had been put in place and throwing strong parliamentary oversight over the build, the coalition demolished it and now we are left with the mess that we are in today.”

Ludlam also addressed the issue of privatisation of the NBN company, which has recently been recommended in Infrastructure Australia’s 15 year vision for the future of Australian infrastructure.

“Now we read … that apparently there are moves to privatise this shambles, apart from the fact that you wonder where on earth you will find a buyer for a half-a-billion-dollar cobbled together mishmash of a network such as the one you are trying to build,” he said.

Ludlam said that the NBN was like road freeways, water distribution pipes or electricity networks — Australia should not have overlapping infrastructure in these areas, or with respect to the NBN, as a result of “trying to set up some arbitrary form of competition at the wholesale layer”.

“You want the wholesale NBN network in public hands, where the bosses can be brought into Estimates committees and cannot hide behind commercial confidentiality, where budgets are tabled, where questions can be asked and answers can be provided, and you want that at the wholesale natural monopoly layer. You want NBN Co to stay in that box and to do one thing and do it well,” he said.

“Then you want to let competition rip at the retail layer.”

Ludlam said it would not be easy to sell off the NBN company in any case.

“What kind of network is it that this government even proposes to sell? It is a huge loss-making entity at the moment because it is barely even a quarter built, because the rollout is a shambles.”

The Greens Senator said he did not lay blame for the fate of the NBN at the hands of its current management, appointed under the Coalition Government. “This is no disrespect to the people who have been dealt these cards, to Mr Morrow and his team,” he said. “I genuinely wish them well but they have been set up to fail. The least we can do is not make things worse.”

“As we have our debates about what kind of telecommunications network is fit for purpose, we see Mr Turnbull, Minister Fifield, Mr Wyatt and other spokespeople talking about agility, talking about innovation, talking about a future focus, talking, heaven forbid, about diversifying our economy away from bulk exports of depleting low-value commodities.”

“What better way to underpin these other vitally important parts of our economy than with world-class telecommunications? My home town of Perth is in Beijing’s time zone, which stretches all the way to eastern Europe. What better way to connect with the rest of the planet than with world-class telecommunications, and what we have been served up is expected to be blindfolded to the basic data underpinning the projections of this network and how fast they think they can get it built—and it is a network that will be obsolete on the day that it gets switched on.”

“We have to be able to do better than this.”

opinion/analysis
Stirring speech from Ludlam with respect to the NBN. I recommend you watch it through, as it outlines the Greens Senator’s views on the NBN pretty comprehensively.

We haven’t seen Ludlam in the NBN debate very much recently — I suspect his new portfolios in areas such as foreign affairs are keeping him busy and away from what is, after all, a very long-running debate over the NBN. However, I would expect to see a great deal more commentary from Ludlam if the Government tries to move forward with privatising all or part of the NBN, as it appears from both the Greens’ past NBN amendments as well as Ludlam’s own comments that this is a particular point on which the Greens hold a very strong view.

The NBN, ultimately, will always be Labor’s policy. But sometimes what is forgotten in the mix is that support from the Greens was instrumental in getting it across the line, especially in the Senate, and that the Greens also placed a number of legislative controls on the network, especially the conditions under which it could be sold. Ludlam — who has been the Greens’ Communications Spokesperson throughout the whole period — will not be keen to see all of this unwound.

167 COMMENTS

  1. I’m going to use another splendid bugger’s script to enunciate exactly how I feel about the Coalition’s MTM.

    “And I’m sorry you can’t do this. I really am because I wouldn’t have to fuckin’ sit here and watch you fumble around and fuck it up.” – Will Hunting, Good Will Hunting.

    Kind of a blunter way to Scott Ludlam’s eloquence, which was an excellent watch. Thank you Renai.

    I wish more politicians would “get” technology like he (and a very small cadre of others) does. Maybe that will come in time as the old guard exits the political arena. That’s the only hope I see for future technology policy in Australia.

    • Kind of a blunter way to Scott Ludlam’s eloquence, which was an excellent watch.

      Indeed. Certainly has a very succinct way of calling a pile of shit a pile of shit.

  2. Watched it a couple of days ago. Senator Ludlam, keeping the b*stards honest, or at least trying to :)

    I’m a bit of a fan or the Senator. He gives some great speeches.

  3. Conroy and Ludlum really hate Turnbull’s MTM as much as the rest of the country. Good on them for their awesome speeches in the past few days.

    • The rest of the country actually rejected Labors’ NBN and accepted the Coalition MtM, is that what you meant?

      … and if happens again, what country will you be referring to?

      • Now Reality they have rejected it. It’s that now we can not do anything about a policy that now cost more than the original FTTP plan taking just as long.

        • The FTTP plan that has peak funding at $74-$84B and a finish date 2026-2028, or some other plan?

          • Keep dragging out your Lib mates propaganda numbers and we’ll keep ignoring you.

            later.

          • Lol Reality thank you for providing that as that is the cost if we go back to FTTP from this mess including all blowouts from the mess we have now. Or do I need to supply the senate link for you again.

            As last know figures for FTTP was $44B.

          • lol no it isn’t lol and no lol $44B is not the figure lol and you know all of this. lol

            That’s why put in deliberate spelling and grammar mistakes and heaps of lol’s , because you don’t want it to make sense eh Rizz?

          • Well that’s to the CP16 and FTTP price a lot less than the SR we know the SR is wrong so the last known correct numbers of labor FTTP rollout is $44B.

            Or please show the correct figures lol.

          • To get the correct figures you go to the latest CP, the latest CP is CP16.

            Do you look at Telstra Financial Reports from 2010 and say that shows how they are performing in 2016?

          • Reality
            The cp16 has MTM figures not if they had continued FTTP. So still waiting on those figures.

          • The CP 16 has plenty of FTTP figures, the peak funding I have already quoted multiple times, the other FTTP figure you might like is brownfields at $4,400 cost per residence.

            Just because you shut your eyes on those pages of the CP and dream you are in 2010 doesn’t mean they don’t exist.

          • Jason, he doesn’t understand the difference between continuing a rollout, or starting again absorbing all money wasted until that time. Why do you bother?

            Talking to him is like playing chess with a pigeon. You can play perfectly, but in the end the pigeon is just going to knock all the pieces down, crap everywhere and strut around like it won.

          • Lol devoid of reality trying a dervision again we are talking about peak figures here Reality not CPP.

            We are talking about the current (upto lol) $56B vs labor FTTP of $44B as you have still fail to provide alternative figures for labor FTTP lol.

            Or should I start quoting (upto lol) $84B 2 steps to FTTP vs $44B 1 step to FTTP.

            @R0 I dot. It just to watch his spin and deflections. Plus it’s funny as hell. One to try and get another guy belly laugh when he claim HFC was in the pre election policy and link the very document that said it didn’t.

          • Basic napkin math of 10.9m premises with FTTP at $4400 per premises puts the cost at $48Bn, even if you assume $20Bn for the transit network and wireless + satellite (which is still more than they have currently spent) you’re looking at $68Bn.

            Compare that to the current “UP TO” $56Bn for FTTP FTTN HFC MTM we currently have…. Nah, $12Bn over the whole build time isn’t worth it for a network that will last a century. Better go with copper that wont last another 20 years.

            Or, if we go with HFC in the HFC footprint like Scenario 4, the rollout costs for FTTP drop down from $48Bn at $4400 per premises, to $30Bn, suddenly that $68Bn is down to $50Bn, which is lower than the “UP TO” $56Bn the current MTM is going to cost.

            If you then assume that around 500,000 of those premises in the FTTN area are actually FTTN and wouldn’t get FTTP, then you’re actually looking at $29Bn for the FTTP portion, so $49Bn for the total rollout. But no, lets assume the $74Bn in the CP is totally not at all absorbing all the costs from the mess so far… Nah, must be the price for Labors NBN originally…..

          • Which is dishonest of the LibTrolls because they ignore the continually updated architectures and economies of scale as the roll-out ramps up. Verizon et all all started out with similar costs to build FTTP but their costs dropped to less than a 1/3rd as they continually refined their builds.

            PS iirc 93% was ~9 million premises, the other million was FW/Sat.

          • “If you then assume that around 500,000 of those premises in the FTTN area are actually FTTN ”

            Should read “FTTN are actually FTTB”

            @Derek, I am just pulling the numbers from the CP itself, as they don’t break down the FTTN/FTTB numbers I had to fudge it a little, so just added them all together.

          • “The FTTP plan that has peak funding at $74-$84B and a finish date 2026-2028, or some other plan?”
            Some other plan, namely (and quite obviously, given the simplistic context of this conversation) the original FTTP vision that had peak funding under $50b and a finish date of 2022, NOT the Liberal clusterfuck you are referring to that would only come to the amount you quoted if the FTTP rollout was re-started TODAY.

          • Well that’s to the CP16 and FTTP price a lot less than the SR we know the SR is wrong so the last known correct numbers of labor FTTP rollout is $44B.

            Or please show the correct figures lol.

            And back it up with the data behind it ;o)

          • I don’t have to back up anything, I use the figures of the NBN Co CP 16 as direct quotes, you have to prove them wrong using your own modelling, and I mean in 2016 figures not back to 2010-2013 modelling, that era is over, you need to catch up.

            I can be convinced, go ahead.

          • “I use the figures of the NBN Co CP 16 as direct quotes, you have to prove them wrong using your own modelling”

            MTM is current at $46Bn – $56Bn of peak funding yes?

            The rollout is 2.4m premises getting FTTP (unknown number of brownfield/greenfield), 4.5m getting FTTN/B (unknown number split between N and B), 4.0m getting HFC, 0.6m on Fixed Wireless and 0.4m on Satellite.

            Even if we are overly pessimistic, you’re looking at 10.56Bn for the FTTP portion (assuming ALL are brownfields, which they aren’t, at $4400 per premises), 10.45bn for FTTN/B, 7.2Bn for HFC, 2.94Bn for Wireless and 3.16Bn for Satellite, using the CPP figures from CP16 for a total infrastructure cost of $34.21Bn to get to the $46Bn of the CP16, you’re looking at an additional $12bn. Kay?

            HFC in the HFC area and FTTP everywhere else in the fixed line rollout (save for FTTB in MDUs though, we still dont know how many that is so lets just call them FTTP for the sake of argument) has, HFC (4.0m premises) at $7.2Bn and even assuming all the properties are brownfields, FTTP (6.9m premises) at $30.36Bn with Wireless and Satellite the same as the MTM rollout, for a total infrastructure cost of $43.66Bn + the same $12Bn from the MTM as the additional expenditure, you have $55.66Bn.

            So, MTM you’re looking at $46 – 56Bn to rollout, where a modern scenario 4 you’re looking at (even when fudging numbers and not including greenfields FTTP AT ALL) $56 – 66Bn.

            So, what is essentially $10Bn more over the build of the project, which is what… a 10 year build? $1Bn more a year in peak funding, for a vastly superior and actually futureproof network.

            D’oh, those CP16 figures….

            Even less now to go and roll FTTP out to the remaining fixed line footprint if you don’t go back and overbuild the FTTN already built/in construction/end of planning stage.

            But who wants to let facts get in the way of a good argument based entirely on ideology?

          • I don’t have to back up anything, I use the figures of the NBN Co CP 16 as direct quotes, you have to prove them wrong using your own modelling, and I mean in 2016 figures not back to 2010-2013 modelling, that era is over, you need to catch up.

            Exactly, you use a CP with no data what so ever to back it up.

          • “Exactly, you use a CP with no data what so ever to back it up.”

            And when someone does reply with the same data from the CP thrown back at him, there is no response.

          • @ alain

            Calling other’s Rizz all the time adds credence to your posts?

            Really?

            You and another are actually doing the FTTP argument a favour, but you don’t actually get it, with all the meaningless repetitive ranting and electioneering…

          • I can be convinced, go ahead.

            And as to this childish comment, I don’t need to convince you, you need to provide the evidence that the figures you present are factual, which you obviously can’t do, as Malcolm wont allow the nbn ™ to release them. As such, most of your “arguments” are basically press releases.

            You sure you not one of “The 60”?

          • Calling other’s Rizz all the time adds credence to your posts?

            I am Rizz!!!

            Well, not really, I stand with Rizz though ;o)

            Sheesh, I guess the next thing he’ll be saying is “There’s Rizzes under the bed”!!!1

      • “The rest of the country actually rejected Labors’ NBN and accepted the Coalition MtM, is that what you meant?”

        Was there a referendum on this that I missed ? I’ve seen some surveys recently that say the opposite.

        I’d have to assume your not talking about the last election as I recall there where many policies debated and put forward for the electorate to vote on. Plus the fact that Labor at the time were a bunch of back stabbing no-hoppers that the country obviously wanted to get rid of.

        • If not a election how else do you tell what Government policy is rejected and what is accepted?

          • I think most voters cast their vote on party lines regardless of policies. The problem with that is when a party gets elected they tend to think that gives them a “mandate” to implement any policy or thought bubble that enters the party room.

            That particular thought process doesn’t usually end well as Campbell Newman can attest.

            I don’t like to say it but the NBN policy was never seen as a major policy among any of my friends and co-workers before the last election. I don’t think they realised just how important an Infrastructure policy it really was. I’d like to think that had they understood the importance it may have changed their vote however I think the last election was more about booting Labor out of power than anything else.

          • “If not a election how else do you tell what Government policy is rejected and what is accepted?”

            What happens then when a Governments policy it takes to an election is based on lies?

            Like all business districts will have FTTP, then giving business districts FTTN instead?

          • If not a election how else do you tell what Government policy is rejected and what is accepted?

            The election showed Australia rejected the Kevin and Julia show. Polls show Australians not just accepted FttP, but were overwhelmingly in support of it.

            Do your parents know you’re skipping school to post on internet forums?

          • Jason K,

            Don’t forget the $29B complete by 2016

            Well I have forgot it, because it has been revised back in 2013, didn’t you know?

          • Polls show Australians not just accepted FttP, but were overwhelmingly in support of it.

            I don’t care what the polls say, and I won’t go into how NBN poll questions are phrased for the moment, because unless the polls translate into either keeping a Government in or kicking them out they don’t have any effect on a NBN model change do they?

          • “Well I have forgot it, because it has been revised back in 2013, didn’t you know?”

            And yet, all the “missed targets” or “revised targets” by Quigley were all evidence of complete failure. Keep beating that hypocritical drum there.

          • So Reality what your saying is this gov had a pre election policy costing (upto lol) $56B vs labor FTTP $44B. And instead of complete by 2016 it was really 2020

          • I don’t care what the polls say, and I won’t go into how NBN poll questions are phrased for the moment, because unless the polls translate into either keeping a Government in or kicking them out they don’t have any effect on a NBN model change do they?

            Is this the bit where you have a tanty and go off in a huff and sulk, never to reply to this point again?

      • Alain’s contradiction corner yet again, delicious…

        So completely contrary to your previous stance (read: childish arguments) that the NBN has never and isn’t a factor whatsoever in how voters vote, you now say “the rest of the country rejected Labor’s NBN and accepted the Coalition MTM”…

        So which is it?

        It’s Friday if that helps.

        You’re welcome.

        • Of course the pro FTTP fans always rant about the polls, the polls say most of Australia wants FTTP , really, most of Australia answered the polls did they?

          Punters who want FTTP answered the polls.

          Irrespective the Coalition are not going to look at ‘you invite yourself to vote’ poll results and say whoa let’s roll our FTTP.

          If you want to change the NBN model you need to boot out the Coalition, what will be really interesting is how different the Labor NBN policy MK2 will be, their new funding estimates will be even more interesting.

          • Polls?

            You reply to me and I didn’t even mention and DGAF about polls.

            As such, apart form the obvious, WTF is wrong with you?

            Oh that’s right keep deflecting from your humiliating contradictions as you perpetually must … ROFL.

            You’re welcome.

          • Punters who want FTTP answered the polls.

            That’s some tin foil hat you have on there Reality ;o)

  4. “But instead of coming in and cleaning out the messy subcontracting arrangements that had been put in place and throwing strong parliamentary oversight over the build, the coalition demolished it and now we are left with the mess that we are in today.”

    This is the core LNP policy failure with NBN. All they did was take a big project that was already complex and had room for improvement and made it more complex without actually improving anything I’m not surprised it is now a complete shemozzle.

    • yep, they could have actually improved the NBN by:

      * bringing all the project and contractor management in-house (like Telstra & Optus did during the 90’s Cable wars)
      * overriding the ACCC POI decision an putting it back to 14 (N+1)
      * restructuring the charging model to remove CVC and accommodate for current and future high bandwidth use.

      but instead they completely fk’d it up and have done almost irreparable damage to our nation in the process!

  5. Editor: this seems a VERY big jump… “increased from $2.5 billion to $41 billion, and then to $56 billion”

    2.5 billion ?

  6. It was Turnbull that said in a worse case scenario it would cost 96 billion.

    Is it coming true, 1/4 built at 56 billion? The worse case at his own hand.

  7. The lower house has rejected the Senate amendment. Not sure where it goes from here. Can the Senate force it through?

      • It has the possibility of becoming a trigger for a double dissolution election, if rejected again by the senate (under the right circumstances).

  8. 80% of time, senate dont challenge, but sometimes they do. And I think this is one they will, and quite possibly trigger a DD.

    • I think the second rejection has to happen a minimum of 3 months after the first, so unless they manage to delay voting on it for 3 months…. It wont become a trigger. I did think that the LNP already has a trigger for a DD that they could use…. I could be wrong.

    • Paul do you know if there was a response was it like bah bah bah $84b y28 lie bah bah

  9. The Senate can let it die or insist on its amendment.. What happens from there, who knows..

  10. Spot on Scott!

    I especially like this bit:

    “You want the wholesale NBN network in public hands, where the bosses can be brought into Estimates committees and cannot hide behind commercial confidentiality, where budgets are tabled, where questions can be asked and answers can be provided, and you want that at the wholesale natural monopoly layer. You want NBN Co to stay in that box and to do one thing and do it well,” he said.

    • I liked that bit as well, of course as Ludlam knows the NBN estimates committee is driven by the agenda of which party controls the estimates committee.

      The last Labor Government had the Coalition in control of the NBN estimates and Conroy and Quigley were under the pump, now it’s payback time with Labor in control and Morrow and Fifield under the pump.

      • and Quigley sat there and stated fact for fact no matter how bad it might look. This current mob its taken on notice or CiC if it doesn’t read like their 60 PR folk wrote it!

  11. Help an aussie out who hasn’t lived in Australia for the last 13 years… whats “MTM?”

    • Multi-Technology Mix.

      Or Malcolm Turnbull’s Mess

      Instead of FTTP, fixed wireless and satellite, it’s now FTTP, FTTN/B, HFC, fixed wireless and satellite.

      • Or in the case that you live in Tasmania but outside of Hobart and/or the few wireless towers they put up in the countryside, satellite only.

        Keep in mind that the original promise was full FTTP/wireless by labor and mister fucking turnbull himself.

        • Turnbull never said full FttP, he specifically always avoided mentioning Fibre! Just used generic BS terms like fast broadband and hence pulled the wool over said eye’s.

          This was pointed out buy overlooked by the apple isle.

          • Yeah I have to agree, he cleverly avoided saying that Tasmania would get FTTP, though, he didn’t do any work to correct people who assumed his statements pre-election meant FTTP. He let them believe whatever they wanted to believe.

          • Yeah, he only agreed to honour the existing contracts, but the contracts didn’t specify FttP (as pointed out helpfully by Ziggy after the election).

    • The MTM focuses on technologies (namely FTTN) that the party now in power called ‘fraudband’ when a similar solution was put forward by Labor, and rightly rejected in favour of the near-all (93%) FTTP model.

  12. The Greens Party as one of their core philosophies is all about recycling, including of course E-waste and the care of the environment.

    When the opportunity arises to recycle on a massive scale for a National Broadband network rollout as in re using copper for FTTN and HFC for the same payments Labor was going to pay to shut them down, the Greens have decided the overbuilding with new and shutting down existing infrastructure is the way to go.

    • There’s smart recycling and stupid recycling, ripping out the copper and sending it to a metals recycler is smart, trying to reuse the copper to provide 21st century comms is clearly stupid!

      • Thank you Greens spokesperson, I guess ‘stupid’ as a philosophy is as detailed as it will get.

        • Ok detail… The reason your straw man argument is in fact a straw man is that you can’t “recycle and re-use” copper in place of fiber and say its the same thing. That’s like saying I’m just going to use my broken down 1980’s Toyota Taurus that only start every other time in place of the brand new Ferrari and expect the same results. The copper network as it is is already a shambles and getting worse with Telstra neglect. I have 2 friends who work as linesmen for Telstra and they tell me all the time how much of a joke the network is and how stoked Telstra is that the government is stupid enough to take ownership of it for pathetic and petty political reasons. Copper will never have the throughput that fibre does, and copper breaks and is flooded out in its pits every time it rains so it is ridiculously unreliable in a country that is trying to compete in the first world.

          Since you are trying to preach to the Greens about THEIR own policies which you clearly don’t understand, you might consider that they are also extremely supportive of progressive economic policy which states that no one should have a right to greater benefit based solely on the size of their pocketbook, especially when it comes to infrastructure. You big L Liberals are happy to lie to yourself and anyone who will listen about “job creators” and “free markets” etc etc as if you had a clue what that really means and you are so invested in that set of lies that even when the free market shows itself to ALWAYS take the shortest route to a dollar (which usually includes illegal or at least immoral activity), you pretend as if its just an insignificant nothing.

          Any serious economist worth listening to will tell you that certain aspects of our daily lives need to be handled by the collective in our social contract which is the government. Is the government going to screw things up sometimes? Of course they are, especially when the party that bleats all day long about how bad government is at everything gets into power and proves their own point by being the worst managers of pretty much everything. Then its always left up to the “big tax and spenders” on the other side to clean up the CONservatives mess by raising taxes and doing the hard work that makes them look bad in the polls which is all it seems anyone really cares about anymore.

          This NBN is a joke and everyone knows it and the other advanced and even some of the not so advanced who are rushing to put fiber everywhere are laughing at how silly Australia can be to let conservatives destroy the progress great australian innovators have made in the world. Want to see true brain drain? Watch how fast all the best and brightest move to more advanced countries when this joke of a network in Australia keeps them behind everyone else.

          • ‘Joe Bloggs’, lol Derek O

            can’t “recycle and re-use” copper in place of fiber and say its the same thing.

            I didn’t say it was the same thing.

            The copper network as it is is already a shambles and getting worse with Telstra neglect.

            Yes that are some parts that are bad, and will be re mediated, doesn’t mean therefore FTTP is the ONLY solution for all of it.

            I have 2 friends who work as linesmen for Telstra

            Please spare us the I know a friend who is a Telstra linesman stories, doesn’t everyone?

            Since you are trying to preach to the Greens about THEIR own policies which you clearly don’t understand,

            I understand it, recycling is on their web site and is a core policy, I would have thought the Greens Party out of all the parties would be the first with a MtM policy instead of being a Labor same as.

            Want to see true brain drain? Watch how fast all the best and brightest move to more advanced countries when this joke of a network in Australia keeps them behind everyone else.

            So is that happening in the UK, France, Austria, Germany now or is this something thing unique to Australia? a country apparently that has unique copper and unique HFC totally unsuitable for BB despite it being used the world over successfully for BB.

          • Alain (Why the name change, trying to hide from google searches which hide your past lies?)
            “So is that happening in the UK, France, Austria, Germany now or is this something thing unique to Australia?”

            I can speak for France – they’re going for FTTH (now predominantly offered at 1000:400) and have dedicated another €20B of funding to push this forward over the next decade. This is after the previous government made the same decision.

            http://www.reuters.com/article/france-broadband-idUSL6N0BKDWT20130220

            Read the article, their stated reason for doing this is exactly what you are trying to refute. They want a fibre based network working at the highest speed possible as they see it the way to guarantee a prosperous future for their country.
            That’s what’s especially sickening about you, you don’t just want to keep what’s yours, you want to drag everyone else lower.

          • to speed up construction of high-speed fibre broadband networks

            The generic term fibre network doesn’t necessarily mean FTTH to 93% of France’s residences does it?

          • “The generic term fibre network doesn’t necessarily mean FTTH to 93% of France’s residences does it?”

            Its only you lot that tries to conflate and confuse people by claiming FTTN and HFC are also “fibre networks”.

            To the layman, if you said “fibre optic network” it means the same as saying “copper network” aka, it is ALL that one medium.

          • wow, Reality can’t even see the difference between “recycle” and “reuse”.

            That’s just sad man.

          • R0ninX3ph,

            Its only you lot that tries to conflate and confuse people by claiming FTTN and HFC are also “fibre networks”.

            I don’t have any problem knowing the difference between HFC, FTTN and FTTP, the rest you just made up, and what has that got to do with the France link where FTTH is never mentioned once.

          • The generic term fibre network doesn’t necessarily mean FTTH to 93% of France’s residences does it?

            Orange is promising 100 per cent fibre deployment in nine new French cities by the end of 2016 and plans to start offering gigabit speeds to all fibre customers from the end of this month.

            I guess it’s how you take the generic term “100 per cent”…

          • Tinman_au,

            I guess it’s how you take the generic term “100 per cent”…

            Like the way you did the switch there, so you decided to ignore the actual linked article about France and their Government fibre initiative we were discussing and switch to a private rollout announcement by Orange and then pretend it’s all the same thing.

            Exactly, you just don’t get it.

            oh so you can’t explain it, I thought as much.

          • “The point of distinction is crucial why?”
            And there you have it, folks. Alain doesn’t even know what he’s arguing for.

          • Like the way you did the switch there, so you decided to ignore the actual linked article about France and their Government fibre initiative we were discussing and switch to a private rollout announcement by Orange and then pretend it’s all the same thing.

            The French government is paying the private companies (like Telecom Orange) to install fibre.

            http://www.reuters.com/article/france-broadband-idUSL6N0BKDWT20130220

            Stop wagging school, and come back when you can discuss things like an adult.

          • @ alain…

            “I don’t have any problem knowing the difference between HFC, FTTN and FTTP…

            I will go into bat for you here alain, you do indeed know.

            1. HFC networks are failed networks only good for the pigeons to perch upon, aren’t they? That’s exactly what you said a few years ago.

            2. FTTN was/is fraudband wasn’t/isn’t it? We all know that, especially the Coalition now rolling it out, who dubbed it fraudband.

            3. FTTP is the work of satan, the socialists and fibre zealots or other groups equally uncouth.

            You’re welcome.

          • Tinman_au,

            The French government is paying the private companies (like Telecom Orange) to install fibre.

            Yep, that’s exactly how it is being done in Australia, the government is paying Telstra and Optus to roll out fibre for their customers.

          • Yep, that’s exactly how it is being done in Australia, the government is paying Telstra and Optus to roll out fibre for their customers.

            What colour is the sky on the planet you’re living on?

        • “Thank you Greens spokesperson, I guess ‘stupid’ as a philosophy is as detailed as it will get.”

          It’s all the detractors have ever shown, so calling a spade a spade seems appropriate at this point.

      • Wait a second, someone is actually making the argument that whether/how the old copper gets recycled is going to determine which broadband system to go with? That’s some ass backward thinking right there.

        • No someone is making the argument that the Greens Party should have their own NBN policy, based on a core value of reuse or recycle.

          I assume the Greens NBN 2016 policy detail will wait on what Labor decides to do, then it’s a case of we will have whatever they are having.

          It’s hard to distinguish between Clare and Ludlam.

          • So what alain…?

            Once again all you are doing is demonstrating your own political obedience to one side and subsequent hatred of the others.

            Feel free to stop being a parrot and join the rest here who, without shackles, simply want what the open minded believe is the best comms outcome for Australia, whilst holding all politicians to account.

            Once those shackles of subservience are off, who knows…

            …you may finally, actually discover rationality and common sense?

            You’re welcome.

          • “I assume the Greens NBN 2016 policy detail will wait on what Labor decides to do, then it’s a case of we will have whatever they are having.”

            It might interest you to know, that the Greens are a completely different party to Labor, and they already have their broadband policy stated on their website.

            They support FTTH as the medium of choice for the NBN. That is their policy.

          • Yeah I know their policy is the same as Labor, that’s what I said.

            It’s handy because if Ludlam is busy with other tasks Clare can MtM bash, and if Clare is busy with the ‘WTF do I do here Labor NBN policy detail 2016’ Ludlam can step in.

          • “Yeah I know their policy is the same as Labor, that’s what I said.”

            Two parties having a similar policy makes them the same party?

            So… The Nationals calling FTTN Fraudband makes them Labor, because they supported FTTP? Oops.

          • the Nationals calling FTTN Fraudband makes them Labor, because they supported FTTP?

            No, because they changed their mind (they are politicians), but you know that.

          • “No, because they changed their mind (they are politicians), but you know that.”

            Right, so its only the Greens who are Labor because they support FTTP. Good to know.

            I think I’m going to start calling you Black Kettle, because you like to ignore Black Pots.

          • The Greens have their own policy, it’s just very similar to the ALP’s.

            http://greens.org.au/nbn

            I guess they are similar to each others because, unlike the LPA, they actually give a shit about the future of ordinary Australians…

          • R0 said Two parties having a similar policy makes them the same party?

            I guess Reality thinks that makes the Labor party, the Liberal party too, they have the same refugee policies!!1

    • “When the opportunity arises to recycle on a massive scale for a National Broadband network rollout as in re using copper for FTTN and HFC”
      Except that is not what is happening when those two networks are being overbuilt with copper and HFC instead of recycling the copper and HFC already in place.

      • Recycling of the copper and HFC networks would have occurred if they had been overbuilt (they would have dug up and recycled larges parts of them).

        Instead, they are REUSING them.

        It’s an important difference, as the same issues and problems with the current network will be carried over to the reused one.

        • (they would have dug up and recycled larges parts of them).

          They would? and who is ‘they’?

          Instead, they are REUSING them.

          oh I see, so as a general Green philosophy, re use is out, recycle is in.

          So if you pulled down the HFC then installed it again that is recycling and is ok?

          lol

          • Considering how often Alain recycles the same old discredited propaganda you’d almost think he was a green, he’s not that bright tho as it’s not so much recycling, as parroting.

  13. The MTM is to a true NBN as would’ve been if the ALP govt in the 1990s claimed to building a national rail network by upgrading Australia’s multi gauge interstate railway networks by just swapping out the existing old rail tracks with shiny new ones on the existing gauges and wooden sleepers, instead of what they actually did which was to convert it all to standard gauge on new concrete sleepers.

  14. Ludlam on MTM –

    “Slower, more expensive and delivered later than an all fibre build… what act of genius put this together”?

    Anybody?

      • I was actually thinking someone closer to home, eminently more qualified, because he says so… but your answer fits too :)

    • Slower, more expensive and delivered later than an all fibre build…

      Amazing how Australia is unique in the world where FTTP is faster, cheaper and delivered earlier than FTTN that uses existing infrastructure, the major portion of which is the run into the residence which is the most time consuming and costly component of FTTP and of course HFC that uses existing infrastructure.

      How does that work?, err umm it just is.

      • So Reality if MTM is faster as you claimed then all the FTTP that was going to be done since the election that was cancelled should have FTTN or HFC by now wouldn’t they.

        As you don’t like comparing BT rollout to the MTM rollout for when it’s started at the end of 2013. As you claim that how slow it is it only started 6 months ago so. So since BT connected 16m home in 6 years in 6 months MTM should have connected 1.3m home on FTTN.

      • @ alain.

        We ask ourselves the same thing, poor meaningless and mindless puppet.

        But in actuality it doesn’t change the “reality” that Ludlam is 100% correct..

        You’re welcome

        • 100% correct we are the opposite to any other country in the world when it comes to FTTN vs FTTP costs and deployment time because we just umm err are.

          Sounds convincing to me.

      • Quoting myself:

        “MTM is current at $46Bn – $56Bn of peak funding yes?

        The rollout is 2.4m premises getting FTTP (unknown number of brownfield/greenfield), 4.5m getting FTTN/B (unknown number split between N and B), 4.0m getting HFC, 0.6m on Fixed Wireless and 0.4m on Satellite.

        Even if we are overly pessimistic, you’re looking at 10.56Bn for the FTTP portion (assuming ALL are brownfields, which they aren’t, at $4400 per premises), 10.45bn for FTTN/B, 7.2Bn for HFC, 2.94Bn for Wireless and 3.16Bn for Satellite, using the CPP figures from CP16 for a total infrastructure cost of $34.21Bn to get to the $46Bn of the CP16, you’re looking at an additional $12bn. Kay?

        HFC in the HFC area and FTTP everywhere else in the fixed line rollout (save for FTTB in MDUs though, we still dont know how many that is so lets just call them FTTP for the sake of argument) has, HFC (4.0m premises) at $7.2Bn and even assuming all the properties are brownfields, FTTP (6.9m premises) at $30.36Bn with Wireless and Satellite the same as the MTM rollout, for a total infrastructure cost of $43.66Bn + the same $12Bn from the MTM as the additional expenditure, you have $55.66Bn.

        So, MTM you’re looking at $46 – 56Bn to rollout, where a modern scenario 4 you’re looking at (even when fudging numbers and not including greenfields FTTP AT ALL) $56 – 66Bn.

        So, what is essentially $10Bn more over the build of the project, which is what… a 10 year build? $1Bn more a year in peak funding, for a vastly superior and actually futureproof network.

        D’oh, those CP16 figures….

        Even less now to go and roll FTTP out to the remaining fixed line footprint if you don’t go back and overbuild the FTTN already built/in construction/end of planning stage.

        But who wants to let facts get in the way of a good argument based entirely on ideology?”

    • Anybody?

      I can answer this one Rizz. Was it the same clowns who promised 25mbit download speed for “every household and business” by the end of 2016?

      (307 days to go btw)

      • Since revised long ago, the revision is ignored because it doesn’t help the MtM bashing agenda.

        • So Reality you are fine if labor claims in there 2016 NBN policy they can do FTTP in 3 years for only $29B because the policy can be revised.

          • Indeed, I expect a low ball FTTP funding figure pre election from Labor because they are not rolling out to 93% of Australia any more are they?

            Of course they are subtracting from that all the millions they will get from ‘recycling’ the copper and HFC they will remove as priority one. ?

          • No Reality if labor copy coalition aproach and claim they can sliver FTTP to 93% in 3 years for only $29B you would be fine if they change there policy to double the cost and time frame because it’s been revised

          • We can actually look at what is likely to happen under a Labor 2016 policy.

            Independent telecommunications analyst Ian Martin said any shift in policy would come with a major rise in costs because of the difference between connecting homes with fibre optic cabling and fibre to the node.

            “Fibre to the premise will clearly be a lot more expensive,” he said. “It’s just hard to say how many lines you’ll have to replace in the [current system].

            “Labor itself probably won’t know until it does its own strategic review so it’ll be another year or so [after a Labor election victory] before you can answer that.”

            wow way to go NBN, Labor win in 2016 then a year or so after that they kickstart their revitalised FTTP rollout in 2017-2018 sometime (assuming that’s what the review tells them to do).

            Those areas that were targeted for FTTN before then are going to be really happy.

            We are stopping the FTTN rollout and will let you know at some point in the next two years after a review when you will be scheduled for a FTTP build, but the review might actually say we shouldn’t have stopped the FTTN rollout for your area/s in the first place.

            http://www.smh.com.au/business/nbn-would-go-back-to-fibre-optic-under-australian-labor-party-says-jason-clare-20151013-gk8fih.html

          • As shown above, all Labor has to take to the election is scenario 4, and use NBN’s own CP16 figures to show they can provide an infinitely better outcome for only a pittance more outlay.

          • Lol Reality completely missing the point.

            What I am saying is Labor can have a policy and say anything like have 93% completed in 1 day for $1B and you would be fine with that policy because it can be revised.

          • So you are both comfortable with a 1 year plus full review after a Labor election win before FTTP is rolled out again or not as the case may be?

          • R0ninX3ph,

            As shown above, all Labor has to take to the election is scenario 4, and use NBN’s own CP16 figures

            So if it is that simple why haven’t they done that yet?

          • “So if it is that simple why haven’t they done that yet?”

            I know its hard for someone so completely partisan to understand, but, while I support the Labor NBN in the first place, it doesn’t make me a Labor member, you should ask Labor why they haven’t released their policy.

            Though, it was fine for the LNP to leave their policy announcement until 6 months before the election…. Not apparently okay for Labor.

          • Labor has plenty of time to release their policy although if the noise about a July election is correct it’s getting tight, the point is they could copy and paste the ‘R0ninX3ph theory’ and they could release it next week.

          • Labor doesn’t need to release their policy just because there are rumours about when the next election will be.

            Besides, talking about what Labors policy might be is largely irrelevant. It doesn’t matter to the conversation of whether the MTM right now is a shambles.

            You go on about “fanboys living in the past” but you’re so obsessed with what Labor might do…. What kind of life do you lead where you’re literally afraid of your own shadow? Jesus.

          • R0ninX3ph,

            That’s what’s amazing about FTTP cheer leader logic (if you could call it that), happy to bash the MtM model 24/7 and anyone who dares to disagree with the ‘born to rule with FTTP’ mentality, but when the subject of what Labor is going to do about it it is met with a glib Besides, talking about what Labors policy might be is largely irrelevant.

            So how is it to be fixed and when and at what cost and time frame?

            Largely irrelevant – brilliant.

          • Yes, whatever Labor take to the table is largely irrelevant to the conversation at hand.

            The conversation at hand, is the shambles of the MTM, it isn’t Labors job to fix it. It isn’t their shambles. Labor aren’t in power now.

            You bringing up Labors policy is just deflecting from the conversation.

            All you do is deflect, wont engage with people who actually pull apart your bullshit “logic” using the same figures you like to quote as scripture.

          • R0ninX3ph,

            it isn’t Labors job to fix it. It isn’t their shambles. Labor aren’t in power now.

            But Labor didn’t have any problem asking the Coalition to fix their problem.

            Shadow Communications Minister Jason Clare has admitted the national broadband network’s rollout was “too slow” under Labor and criticised the Coalition for not improving it.

            http://www.afr.com/news/politics/national/coalition-should-have-improved-labors-nbn-clare-20140609-iwo59

            Brilliant – you have to love Clare’s honesty if nothing else eh?

            :)

          • Again, Reality, I’m not a Labor member.

            Why are you attributing things Labor politicians say, to somehow mean I support their hypocrisy?

            I hate hypocrisy in all forms, so keep strawmanning.

            Labors policy has no influence on what is happening with the MTM now. We are talking about the MTM shambles right now, we are not talking about what anyone is going to do in some kind of theoretical future when Labor win the next election. We are talking about right now.

          • Independent telecommunications analyst Ian Martin said any shift in policy would come with a major rise in costs because of the difference between connecting homes with fibre optic cabling and fibre to the node.

            From Network Insight Institute:

            In 1994 Ian joined BZW as one of the first telecommunications analysts in the Australian capital market. BZW was the lead adviser to the Government on the Telstra IPO in 1997.

            Yeah, great advice to John Howard there, wasn’t it…

          • Lol Reality completely missing the point.

            The really amazing thing about that Jason is not that he misses the point, it’s how far he goes to deliberately miss the point ;o)

        • @ alain.

          Labor NBNCo FTTP revisions were regularly referred to by you as broken election promises/NBNCo mismanagement, just a few years ago, weren’t they?

          So after saying that, how can you or anyone, now regularly keep defending or worse, using the same types of revisions as an excuse, for the Coalition’s MTM/MBM ™?

          It’s not a leading or trick question, got an answer apart from the obvious?

          I guess this is where you’ll either …

          a) disappear for now (to return at the next article stating the same BS) or
          b) go the childish route…

          I wonder which this time?

          You’re welcome.

          • The amusing part is that if the hypocritical statements stopped, then we could actually start having meaningful discourse.

            I do actually see some merit in using a combination of technologies for the rollout to get it completed, get the revenue stream going and then upgrade regions from there.

            But that isn’t what the MTM is about. The CPP figure in the corporate plan is an average, which means some brownfields FTTP is going to be far cheaper than that “$4400” figure, and some will be more.

            If they were to set an upper threshold to the CPP of brownfields FTTP, we might see that figure drop down, if you’re only taking FTTP to 50% of the population initially, it could be far lower, with more difficult areas services by FTTN and HFC areas services by HFC (for now).

            There is something to be said for the multi-technology rollout method that makes sense, but to blindly state that in ALL situations because the average CPP of FTTP is higher than FTTN it means FTTN is best to roll out? Is ridiculous.

            Given we dont get any real detail other than being given a figure and thats it, its ridiculous and can be spun anyway you want.

          • I don’t have a problem with FTTP, it’s great for greenfields where there is no existing infrastructure, it’s great for brownfields where FTTN remediation is not cost effective.

            What I find ludicrous and always have is you pay Telstra $11B and Optus $800M to shut down their infrastructure because you want to overbuild it with brand new.

            It looks as if Labor may keep HFC, the irony of that is that our HFC suburbs are the most suitable for FTTP (if HFC was absent) re ROI, which makes your ROI on FTTP to what is left after HFC is rolled out and the FTTN rollout is slowly halted even worse than it was before.

            If Labor keep the FTTN rollout going while they await on a 12 month plus review to finish almost makes the newly started brownfield FTTP rollout in 2017-2018? to whatever areas are left a political exercise in ‘we need to be seen to be different’.

            That restarted delayed FTTP rollout will need to be the fastest rollout in the history of all FTTP rollouts.

          • “What I find ludicrous and always have is you pay Telstra $11B and Optus $800M to shut down their infrastructure because you want to overbuild it with brand new.”

            You realise why they had to do that? At least with Telstra… Because they would just follow NBN Co around with trucks to cherry pick the high revenue areas again, like they did with Optus and HFC in the ’90s.

          • @R0ninX3ph

            I was always in favour of a more hybrid approach that what the ALP went for, upgraqding the HFC for the short term, and FttB for example.

            Heck, even Fttdp in remote areas where it makes sense.

            Where the Liberal policy falls over for me is their blind adherence to FttN, if they’d stuck with everything else (FttB, HFC, etc) and stuck with FttP instead of FttN they’d have had a winner IMHO, it really would have been better, faster, cheaper and Australia would be getting the updated infrastructure it will need to compete internationally in the future.

            Hopefully Labor with go down that path if they get in.

        • “Since revised long ago, the revision is ignored because it doesn’t help the MtM bashing agenda.”
          People making promises that indicate they have no idea what they’re talking about, going on to make claims about things they have no idea about.

          It seems right that we should trust what they say 100% without any evidence, right?

    • wow, thats a damming article!

      I don’t think anyone could have seen that coming! Oh, wait…

      @Reality How does it feel when the ideological wheels fall of your politically motivated numbers wagon? ;o)

Comments are closed.