NBN cost blow-outs Turnbull’s fault, says Labor

124


news The Opposition has turned allegations of cost blowouts in the National Broadband Network project back on the Government, stating that the project’s continually falling financial return problem should be laid at Malcolm Turnbull’s door for his controversial Multi-Technology Mix.

Late last week, The Australian newspaper relied on a set of leaked documents from inside the Department of Finance to report that a switch back to a Fibre to the Premises model for the NBN would cost the Federal Government an extra $8.5 billion and potentially cause a wider Federal Budget black hole.

The newspaper reported (we recommend you click here for the full article) that it had obtained a set of internal documents put together by the Department of Finance that showed that the NBN was at risk under a revised Labor NBN strategy of seeing its Internal Rate of Return drop below 2.5 percent.

This could mean that some or all of the cost of the NBN would be placed back on the Federal Budget as an expense, rather than as a capital investment, as the NBN currently sits on the Budget. The Australian put the cost at $8.5 billion, but without publishing its calculations on the issue.

Regardless of what policy either Labor or the Coalition takes to the Federal Election, however, last week’s Budget also revealed that the NBN was in funding trouble either way, with the falling IRR making it unclear whether the project could successfully seek funding from the private sector to complete its rollout.

The Coalition has blamed the issues on Labor, but in a statement issued late last week, Shadow Communications Minister Jason Clare pushed the issue back the Government’s way.

In the statement, Clare pointed out that the NBN company had warned the Government in 2013 that switching to a Fibre to the Node model for the NBN would reduce revenue and the NBN project’s ultimate rate of return, in its incoming brief after the 2013 Election:

“As the FTTN Network provides lower speed and reliability of services, customers will be less likely to migrate to faster services and will likely not be able to migrate beyond the highest tier, best efforts service … this will likely result in lower Access Virtual Circuit (AVC) revenues, and reduce Connectivity Virtual Circuit (CVC) revenues as data volume growth may be reduced. The lower ARPU growth and resulting lower revenues may be the most significant financial consideration in generating the required financial return in NBN Co implementing the Coalition’s plan.”

Last week, Clare said Turnbull’s “arrogance and incompetence” in persisting with the ‘Multi-Technology Mix’ for the NBN, which includes FTTN, had cost taxpayers billions of dollars in returns on the NBN investment.

“Malcolm Turnbull recklessly ignored advice in 2013 that switching to his second rate copper NBN would damage the rate of return of this critical infrastructure project,” said Clare.

“Under Malcolm Turnbull’s disastrous stewardship of the NBN, the return to taxpayers on their investment has crashed from 7.1 to as low as 2.7 percent.”

“Malcolm Turnbull recklessly ignored [the NBN company’s] advice and went ahead with his second-rate NBN. Sure enough, evidence to the Senate Estimates Committee on Thursday night confirmed that the [average revenue per user] and revenue from FTTN is lower than from FTTP and the IRR for the project has now dropped to as low as 2.7 per cent.”

“As if this wasn’t enough, in only two years as Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull almost doubled the cost and more than doubled the timeframe for rolling out his second rate NBN.”

“Malcolm Turnbull said he could build his second rate NBN for $29.5 billion and get it to all Australians by 2016. We now know it will cost up to $56 billion and take until 2020 to roll out,” said Clare.

“These cost blowouts and delays have compounded the lower returns to 2040 that result from Malcolm Turnbull’s second rate copper NBN. It will take a Labor Government to fix the mess Malcolm Turnbull has made of the NBN and improve the return to taxpayers.”

Opinion/analysis to follow.

Image credit: Parliamentary Broadcasting

124 COMMENTS

  1. A useful article, linked posted on the weekend. Looking forward to Renai’s analysis.Nice to have these (obvious) points, made for several years by a few of us, getting a wider airing.

    NBNCo MTM’s published IRR trending to zero, I’ve called below zero. FTTH higher revenue way short of that required to cover higher costs (numbers also provided by me). Then add the further delays; FTTH being much slower to rollout.

    Given the equity already committed by taxpayer’s the quoted $8.5 budget impact is more like $18.5b! Ten billions of taxpayers equity will need to be written off before NBNCo can generate a commercial return (plus indefinite losses).

    A surprise to many the IRR is dependent on costs and revenue;-)

    Of course Clare remains in denial that the blowouts and delays occurred the second the they were tossed out. Both parts of Conroy/Quigley “on time and budget” mantra destroyed with actuals last week. Always insightful when data is actually analysed.

    Last Friday’s release of NBNCo’s 3rd quarter results are also deserving of comment.

    • Its all well and good to point at Labor, but Labor haven’t been in control of the NBN for nearly 3 years.

      Any and all blowouts, and any costs that may end up on the budget following the election, fall squarely at the feet of your favoured LNP.

      • Are you sure? By the sounds of the current government everything that goes wrong in our lives (and our pets lives) is Labors fault!
        My dog is very angry at Labor at the moment…

      • Any and all blowouts, and any costs that may end up on the budget following the election, fall squarely at the feet of your favoured LNP.

        Nailed it.

    • https://delimiter.com.au/2015/11/09/quigleys-right-says-morrow-15bn-nbn-blowout-mostly-relates-to-mtm/

      But of course those who claim they could have written MTM will never see the truth, as the H U G E ego won’t let them.

      And that reuse of infrastructure is going along well too, I see, oh wait…

      https://delimiter.com.au/2015/12/03/641-million-nbn-copper-remediation-costs-blows-out-ten-times/

      At every step MTM is an unmitigated disaster beyond comparison in Australia’s construction history… nicely written plan Richard, NOT.

      You’re welcome

      • I think we should just start calling Mal “Malcolm the Destroyer”, it was obvious to any sane rational person that MtM was going to be a financial millstone around NBN Co’s neck and the evidence is continuing prove this on an almost daily basis!!

        The ALP needs to have a Royal commission into Mal’s destruction of the MtM if it wins Gov!!

      • At every step MTM is an unmitigated disaster beyond comparison in Australia’s construction history

        Indeed Rizz. Pointed out many years ago what would happen and it was obvious to all but the copper fanboy knuckle draggers. I doubt they will admit they were wrong and we were right either but more about this on the 16th ;-)

        • @R that article was written after the election ie therefore failures the coalitions responsibility;-) (see above)

          Interesting reading Renai in comments defending against the abuse and bile from the squealers. “Informed discussion” they call it.

          • I challenge you to provide evidence of the “abuse and bile” from that article.

            If you think the words “cheap shot” as abuse and bile, then I wonder how you can turn on the television without being insulted.

          • Don’t be silly Soth, Reality can’t read that. He wouldn’t ever pay for Delimiter.

          • FTTP is part of the Coalition MtM mix, always has been, your point is what?

            I assume where the Colation NBN Co roll out FTTP ‘it works’.

            If Labor get in in two months we can headline:

            ‘Coalitions MtM plan is still working’,

            … unless Labor shut down the HFC and all FTTN and FTTB infrastructures built and planned under the Coalition NBN rollout.

          • Negative it would read
            ‘official-coalitions-mtm-project-failed’
            See that suits my claim, so like you, I paste it.

          • In the real world, the Coalition Mtm is any technology except FTTP (it’s a four-letter word to them).

          • FTTP is part of the Coalition MtM mix, always has been, your point is what?

            They only used it when winding up the previous contracts, unless you have a new link to show their more widespread use of it?

          • FTTP is not just about brownfields, in fact it is more suitable for greenfields as in the Coalition model where you are rolling new infrastructure.

            When you own the copper and HFC infrastructure it is more cost effective and faster to deploy the NBN in these areas by upgrading and using that infrastructure rather than overbuilding it with costly and slow to deploy $4,403 CPP brownfields FTTP.

          • Lol devoid how much faster is it when the current MTM is only $8B cheaper and 2-3 years sooner SR S2

          • Which tells us nothing about speed of deployment or CPP, is that what you meant it to show, or do you just like linking irrelevant coloured graphs?

          • Well Rizz we know he has trouble with Hansard but now having trouble with pictures too

          • It’s all good Jason, we are open minded people at Delimiter who take pity on the less fortunate, such as our “special” friend here, who has NFI.

            ;)

          • Which tells us nothing about speed of deployment or CPP, is that what you meant it to show, or do you just like linking irrelevant coloured graphs?

            Doesn’t it??!

            So your supposition is that it’s slower and more expensive? Explain why it’s growth rate is over 60% while coppers is decreasing almost 20% a year world wide.

            Over to you.

        • As I understand it, both NBN and MTM have failed to meet timeframes for premises passed & services delivered, however the NBN was on budget (as per that link, thanks) whereas the MTM budget has blown out massively (now up to $12B more than the $44B expected for the NBN).

          With everyone saying that FTTP is the endgame, I cannot see how spending tens of billions more on other technologies is worthwhile, unless the timeframe for delivery of FTTP was going to be so far off track that an interim service at that cost was required.

          Do we have the latest projected end dates for the initial NBN and the MTM as it now stands?

          • lol devoid lying again

            Corporate Plan 2016.

            FTTP rollout 2026-2028. As a restart of FTTP with the blowout cost of the MTM

            Labor FTTP 2021
            SR FTTP had at earliest 2023

            MtM rollout 2020.

            See fixed it for you

          • We cannot time warp back to 2013 and pretend Labor won the election and the failed FTTP rollout (50% cut back on original estimates) continued on, your Labor NBN Co predictions are well out of date.

            Current CP 16 figures stand as being the latest predictions of all infrastructure CPP options, until the next CP is released.

          • Lol devoid when claiming the cp16 FTTP figure as a continuation of labor rollout out when it’s not.

            But the CP16 also states “no better estimates exist than the assumptions applied in the Strategic Review dated December 2013.”
            Hence why I put but labor target and the SR target.

            Hence why if fixed it for you. But keep lying if you must doesn’t look good against the facts.

            ahh but what about the 75% cut back as of the original coalition policy 25Mbps for all by this year for $29B lol.

          • “Do we have the latest projected end dates for the initial NBN and the MTM as it now stands?”
            The latest projected end date for the *INITIAL* NBN was 2022, or if you believe anything the Liberals publish, SR13 says 2024. CP16 refers implicitly to SR13 as the latest figures available.

            MTM now 2020 blown out from 2016.

          • Oh I forgot we have even later figures from the NBN Third Quarter results released last Friday, it enforces the FTTP CPP from CP 16 at $4,403.

            FTTN CPP comes in slightly cheaper from CP 16 at $2,275.

            BTW Further bad news for the so called ‘need for speed’ argument.

            80% signed up for fixed line 12/1 and 25/5 plans as at March 2016, up from 76% previous period March 2015.

            Fixed line 100/40 demand has dropped from 19% March 2015 to 15% March 2016.

          • Lol devoid you gone completely off topic right there nice detour sign.

            Big F for fail

          • Hotcakes,

            The latest projected end date for the *INITIAL* NBN was 2022,

            You mean a projected end date made in 2012-13 by the Labor NBN Co, the organisation that had to drastically reduce their projected rollout estimates by 50% at the end in 2013.

            CP16 refers implicitly to SR13 as the latest figures available.

            The CP 16 has the latest updated figures (CP 16 came after SR13, the hint is one has 13 after it the other has 16).

            CP 16 – FTTP finish 2026-2028 peak funding $74-85 Billion.

            MTM now 2020 blown out from 2016.

            MtM never had a finish date of 2016.

          • Lol devoid a simple yes or no loaded question is the “CP 16 – FTTP finish 2026-2028 peak funding $74-85 Billion.”

            Is its labor FTTP rollout or not continued from 2013 yes or no.

          • “You mean a projected end date made in 2012-13 by the Labor NBN Co,”
            Obviously, yes. The question was about the *INITIAL* rollout. Hence why I knew I had to highlight INITIAL, because you would miss it otherwise. Turns out you missed it (twice) anyway. How embarrassing for you.

            “the organisation that had to drastically reduce their projected rollout estimates by 50% at the end in 2013.”
            Are you saying – for the 19th time to go unanswered – that Labors’ target by the 2013 elections was to only cover 46.5% of Australians with FTTP?

            “The CP 16 has the latest updated figures (CP 16 came after SR13, the hint is one has 13 after it the other has 16).”
            … and then goes on to site figures for a FTTP rollout beginning TODAY, ergo NOT the *initial* rollout asked about.

            How embarrassing for you. Especially after your little 13–>16 ridicule. Brought on by the following quote, which you quoted yourself:
            “CP16 refers implicitly to SR13 as the latest figures available.”
            Reading comprehension. Seriously. Please. Get some.

            “MtM never had a finish date of 2016.”
            Please provide Citation of where the Liberals claimed pre-election that the MTM finish date was 2020.

          • @ alain,

            Thanks for the continued laughs …

            “We cannot time warp back to 2013… “

            … he says, as he time warps back to “again” post the many times retracted Delimiter article from… wait for it 2013…

            GOLD

            You’re welcome.

          • Fixed line 100/40 demand has dropped from 19% March 2015 to 15% March 2016.

            Demand has dropped? Where did it say that?

          • Well devoid going by your own standards where a cost decrease of FTTP CPP from the SR to the cp16 is the cause for the blowout in the cp16

            So with a decrease of 19% down from 15% must be an increase in demand.

          • What do you call it?

            I call it: as the pool of folks unable to get 100/40 has grown, the percentage of those on it has shrunk as a proportion of the whole.

            There’s that lack of critical thinking getting in your way again.

          • It’s long been noted that Alain will hide when having logic thrown at him only to reappear in the next article, regurgitating the same garbage he always does.

            It’s interesting to note that he’s this time chosen not to respond to logic AND replied to the same thread anyway.

            His silence on every one of these occasions can only be deciphered as admission of failure to produce a coherent argument against.

      • @r Yawn
        https://delimiter.com.au/2015/11/05/quigley-releases-detailed-evidence-showing-mtm-nbn-cost-blowout/#li-comment-705806

        Relative performance of the NBN models covered end of last week, your “invaluable” contributions were sadly missed from the discussions. We did get to learn Motorola’s 68k was a 8/16 RISC processor though;-).

        You are correct the NBN policy is an “unmitigated disaster beyond comparison in Australia’s construction history”. The belief govt could deliver such a vision called out from the beginning. Govt delivers little of value, cost explosion also predicted (I’ve had to up my initial taxpayer cost from billions to tens of billions).

        My position (almost as if I wrote the plan you selectively quote) was infrastructure reuse would cost billions less, be faster to rollout, majority of revenue captured by available speed matching customer demands and therefore reduce the loses to taxpayers (at the time you were arguing it wasn’t taxpayer’s money).

        Today we find NBNCO’s ARs confirms such a position, ACCC confirms it, as does the Department of Finance. Even Quigley (after he left of course) has acknowledge the cost blowouts, and comparative cost and deployment advantages of MTM. That leaves the squealers with Conroy, Clare and the ALP / Greens;-)

    • And yet you insist on focussing on the original plan as the main failure here.

      You use figures that you know would not have remained at the level they are, in order to further batter your idealism across. (You also consistently compare figures that do not contain certain costs, with figures that do)

      The Original plan ended when the MTM started, and yet it is the original plans infrastructure that was more than meeting its ARPU. Hence it was the original plan that would have been able to cover the costs as expected.

      We have now had cost blowouts to $56 billion dollars. This did not happen in the original plan.

      Opex… You say double. I will be interested to see the end result.

      Why don’t you actually argue properly. With correct figures, instead of trumping up the lies and mistruths that you consistently bring to the “discussion”.

      • “And yet you insist on focussing on the original plan as the main failure here.”

        The policy is the failure. Poor delivery has only exacerbated it.

        “The Original plan ended when the MTM started, and yet it is the original plans infrastructure that was more than meeting its ARPU. Hence it was the original plan that would have been able to cover the costs as expected.”

        “Original plan”‘s costs weren’t as expected (shown last week and in SR13). Current ARPU is not enough to cover the increase. Actual not likely to grow at the forecast rate either (indeed significant pressure to reduce CVC).

        “Opex… You say double. I will be interested to see the end result.”

        Not just me, real-world overseas examples have put the direct opex of FTTN as 0-100% of FTTP.

        “Why don’t you actually argue properly. With correct figures, instead of trumping up the lies and mistruths that you consistently bring to the “discussion”.”

        Translated: why don’t you ignore the actuals and agree with the borg;-)

        • “The policy is the failure. Poor delivery has only exacerbated it.”

          You can’t say that. The original policy was never brought to completion, so it is impossible to say it was a failure or not. It is simply your opinion, and even then it would depend on what you are basing failure and success on.
          What are you basing “Failure” and “Success” on?

          “Current ARPU is not enough to cover the increase”.
          You have no proof of that. You keep pointing out the figures you used etc. But those figures are based on either the original rollouts figures that were coming down, and based on every other rollout in the world, would likely have reduced further.
          Ultimately the ARPU shows that the assumed revenue that was coming in per user was higher than expected, we cannot say whether they would have been more behind in their expected timeframe, because the rollout stopped before it really got started. Project Fox suggests that both time and cost would have reduced significantly, which mirrors the learnings from other rollouts across the world.

          As for SR13. I am astounded you would refer to that document at all. It has been shown several times now to not be indicative of actuals. Frankly the majority of the figures in it are called into question, except where verified by an independent 3rd party.

          The reality is the FTTP CPP would have come down. You have to acknowledge that, because it is replicated across other similar projects across the world.

          The “reality” is that right now, due entirely to the Coaltion switch to the MTM. We have a cost of $56 billion which is 13 billion greater than the costings done for the original, and 27 billion higher than the amount proposed by the coalition at the election.

          The original plan may well have blown out in cost eventually. But we will never know.
          The MTM plan however was ALWAYS going to blow out in cost. They built it into the very underlying structure of the MTM. They have taken over networks that are not as good as FTTP, and the TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP on these networks WILL be greater than simply shutting them down and rolling out FTTP.
          You know as well as anyone, that by splitting focus across multiple different system types you are reducing efficiency, not gaining. Further you are forcing an eventual upgrade to occur later along the path, because the current systems are NOT adequate for future growth.

          I don’t “Agree with the Borg” simply because it is the Borg. I agree with them because they are right.

          FTTP is the technology of choice for anyone rolling out a new network. FTTP has a long future, and provides a stable and low operating cost long term.
          The financial capital cost of FTTP is indeed higher, however the long term benefit is far and beyond anything that can be provided by the “interim” measures.
          To take an existing rollout and to change it to the mess that is MTM is and was always a farce. It was a political expedient and nothing more. IT is why the cost has blown out. Actuals have proven this at this time. THAT is reality.

          • FTTP is the technology of choice for anyone rolling out a new network.

            Indeed it is when you are rolling out a new network as in a greenfield housing estate.

            It is unsuitable as a overbuild option on top of working HFC and copper infrastructure which the company building FTTP owns, and why FTTN and HFC in that circumstance is the faster and cheaper cost effective choice.

          • Devoid can you point to any other company that has aquired the copper it HFC to rollout a network

          • JK,

            Careful with the wording there eh Rizz, acquired instead of buy.

            The reason the Labor government needed to shut down the HFC and copper infrastructure was to try and make the expensive and slow to rollout FTTP viable by overbuilding, especially the lucrative 4M HFC residences in inner city suburbs of our biggest capital cities.

            The Coalition were more business savvy, obtaining the incumbent (Telstra) and Optus infrastructure for the same price Labor were paying to have it shut down.

          • But devoid it wasn’t for the same price.

            Cost one NBN now pays for remediation of the ducts and pits. Was a cost under Telstra at a sum more than $2B.
            Cost two is asbestos is now NBN. Which was another cost unde Telstra.
            That’s just 2 cost for nothing which we still won’t know the true cost until it complete.

          • “FTTN and HFC in that circumstance is the faster and cheaper cost effective choice.”
            “The Coalition were more business savvy,”
            How do you then explain the FTTN and HFC mix plan now being $11-$25.6b higher than the sole FTTP plan?

            ” obtaining the incumbent (Telstra) and Optus infrastructure for the same price Labor were paying to have it shut down.”
            So you’ve again chosen to ignore the $1.6b contract for maintenance? As well as the other opex fees, naturally.

          • How do you then explain the FTTN and HFC mix plan now being $11-$25.6b higher than the sole FTTP plan?

            Your special 2012 ALP NBN Co FTTP calculator with built in bias keeps reversing the totals, or you need to change the batteries from 2010.

            FTTP peak funding is $74-84B vs $46-56B for MtM.

            So you’ve again chosen to ignore the $1.6b contract for maintenance? As well as the other opex fees, naturally.

            Maintenance and ‘opex fees’ (what ever they are), apply to any infrastructure, FTTP, FTTN, HFC Fixed wireless etc

            Your point is what, FTTN maintenance is unique because…..?

          • Lol devoid
            FTTP peak funding is $44B
            Or
            SR peak funding is $64B
            vs $46-56B for MtM.

            FTTP peak funding is $74-84B includes all cost blowout of the MTM and switching back to FTTP not if they continued.

            See fixed it for you.

          • “Your special 2012 ALP NBN Co FTTP calculator with built in bias keeps reversing the totals, or you need to change the batteries from 2010.”
            Odd thing to say, given that the Coalitions’ line from the 2013 elections was that FTTP would cost the country $70-100b and now we have Hockey saying MTM HAS cost us $71.6b.

            I’d double check you don’t have the +/- button pressed the wrong number of times if I were you.

            “FTTP peak funding is $74-84B vs $46-56B for MtM.”
            FTTP peak funding *was* (quit living in the past, Alain) $46b, vs $74-84b for MTM. As we all know, the end goal for NBN is FTTP 5-10 years after completion (from 2016) – and since the Coalition has set the country back 3 years from (their criminally paid-for SR13 estimate) 2024, the FTTP portion of the network needs to be restarted as of a year ago – which will amount in the FTTP figure you keep quoting from CP16.

            “Your point is what, FTTN maintenance is unique because…..?”
            How embarrassing for you, Alain.

          • @Reality

            The government didn’t own the infrastructure. If it had of, I may have been inclined to agree, we also would likely have had FTTN to start with way back when. But none of this was the case.

            So Stop attempting to justify purchasing the network at the cost of upkeeping it. The Asset was not worth owning, when replacing it will cost as much in the future as it does now.

          • The Coalition were more business savvy

            Really? Why won’t other businesses give them money for the NBN then?

          • FTTP peak funding is $74-84B vs $46-56B for MtM.

            FTTP peak funding is $37-42B vs $46-56B for MtM.

            Corrected for post-Project Fox deployment.

          • Tin-man,

            Really? Why won’t other businesses give them money for the NBN then?

            I am not aware it is for sale.

          • Morrow confirmed that NBN Co is using the findings of Project Fox to reduce the cost of rolling out fibre to the premises today.

            Please stay up to date.

            Oh, ok, so they implemented the 50% savings that Project Fox found and then they almost doubled the CPP of FttP.

            Got it.

            Seems a bit odd, don’t you think?

          • It’s long been noted that Alain will hide when having logic thrown at him only to reappear in the next article, regurgitating the same garbage he always does.

            It’s interesting to note that he’s this time chosen not to respond to logic AND replied to the same thread anyway.

            His silence on every one of these occasions can only be deciphered as admission of failure to produce a coherent argument against.

      • Woolfe,

        We have now had cost blowouts to $56 billion dollars.

        Incorrect.

        Why don’t you actually argue properly. With correct figures

        lol classic, you first.

        • Well troll Richard conveniently left out the $755 duct cost in his figures and compared them to Quigley figures which had them included and claimed it was a $12B blowout. Which according to his own figures was more a $4-6B

  2. Well, we all know the Coalition’s answer to this. “Jobs and growth, only the Coalition have a plan”
    That seems to the answer given to every other hard question they don’t want to address I’ve hard over the last few days.

  3. The LNP/Turnbull policy regarding the NBN has always been driven by political ideology rather than national economic or societal benefits. And the most appalling aspect of this is that they are prepared to do so knowing full well that it would cost our nation and it’s people dearly.
    The cost for the MTM have almost doubled, expectations of services have been drastically reduced, and the financial case (IRR) for the NBN has been destroyed. It’s a self fulfilling prophesy and will most likely lead to the sale of NBNCo at a substantial loss to the taxpayer.
    Imo Turnbull’s actions regarding the NBN are bordering on criminal and I suspect if he was acting as CEO of the company, then he would be liable to a class action by it’s shareholders (taxpayers).

  4. Hey Clare two months out from the July election what is your Labor NBN policy and how is that policy going to reign in the ‘cost blowouts’.

    So far you have committed $29M to provide FTTP to just 3,625 people in three rural towns in West Tassie (don’t ask when), is that a indicator of how you will control cost blowouts, pork barrelling millions electorate by electorate?

    • Devoid, Clare has a great plan to prevent more cost blowouts, it’s called build the bloody NBN properly with Fibre the way it was supposed to be done in the first place.

      Then there wont be any need to come back around in 5-10 years and throw away the already obsolete copper dogs breakfast that is MtM.

      You’re welcome!

      • I wasn’t aware that Labor NBN policy 2016 has stated we will build FTTP to 93% of residences by 2021.

        Perhaps you can provide the link on the ALP site to that policy, the only FTTP commitment they have made is to spend $29M to provide FTTP to 3,625 people in three small towns in West Tassie.

        Have Labor learned anything about slow and expensive FTTP rollouts from 2010-2013?

        Obviously not.

        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#ixzz4885WSqKY

    • Once again you know where to go to ask….

      Ask him on Twitter, why would he be reading the comments section of a Delimiter article, and why would he reply/announce their policy in same.

      Go ask him to put up or shut up on Twitter.

      • I don’t need to, two months out from the election other commentators are starting to catch on to the ‘keep it vague’ Labor strategy.

        the ALP under Shorten has yet to make clear what path it will take beyond the promise it will be “first-rate”.

        http://www.businessinsider.com.au/bill-shorten-still-hasnt-outlined-labors-nbn-plan-clearly-2016-5

        Labor has just to make sure they don’t do a policy repeat like last time.

        An independent audit of Labor’s National Broadband Network has found the policy’s formation was rushed, chaotic and inadequate.

        http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-05/development-of-nbn-policy-rushed-and-chaotic,-review-finds/5648122

        • “I don’t need to, two months out from the election other commentators are starting to catch on to the ‘keep it vague’ Labor strategy.”

          Well … the whole “NBN for everyone by the end of 2016” didn’t work for the Coalition, so only the foolish would make that mistake again until they get a closer look at what’s been fusterclucked.

          From your 2nd link, I’d suggest they don’t use that guy again.

          “The Abbott Government appointed former Telstra director Bill Scales”

          Ziggy Switkowski’s ex-chief of staff is hardly independent.

        • ” two months out from the election other commentators are starting to catch on”
          Then proceeds to quote a source from 2014. Totally about the 2016 election, natch!

          How embarrassing for you, Alain.

      • On reflection just two months and counting out from the election it will have met the first of those findings of the previous policy by default anyway.

        ‘rushed’.

        You betcha it will be.

        • The election was officially called yesterday, up until now you’ve been calling for Labor to release their policy without an election being called yet the LNP did the same last election, didn’t announce their policy until the election was officially called.

          Labor will release their policies soon, but if you want to find out what they are stop fucking asking on Delimiter and contact the shadow minister of note. Your ridiculous posts here asking for Labors plan constitutes spam.

    • … alain 2012

      …”I am sure the Coalition policy is in flux because they don’t really know until election day 2013 how much NBN Co FTTH will be laid and how many residences will be using it..

      Surprise, surprise, seems your endless demands and position on opposition policies now, are “again’ completely different to your previous position when the current government were in opposition.

      So you can wait until July 2 then?

      You’re welcome

    • Question for you Reality,

      Other than by saying we intend to go back to Primarily Fibre, what exactly do you want them to say?

      They don’t have access to the business dealings of NBNco, so they don’t know all the information required for them to make informed decisions?

      You know informed decisions… Oh wait, you support the coalition, who appear to be run by god bothering, terrorist fearing, refugee hating, libertarians at the moment.

      • It won’t matter to Reality what they say, they could copy the LPA “model” word for word and he’d go off like a frog in a sock about how the ALP has no vision.

        It isn’t about the NBN for him, it’s about who started it.

  5. As someone who is (Finally) getting NBN in WA via MTM, i can say that i fall into the category of someone who probably will not be getting the highest speed tier.

    With iinet i get two speed choices basically – 25 or 100Mbit. Now as i’m over 750m from the node (probably closer to 900m cable distance in reality) i’m expecting maybe 30-40mbit… Now as there’s no 50MBit plan from iinet anymore, why would i pay the extra $20/month for a 100mbit service when the cables are not actually capable of carrying even half that speed?

    Luckily, iinet has allowed me to ‘test’ the 100mbit plan to see how hard i can actually push the VDSL2 link… But i dare say after the first month i’ll be dropping down to the 25Mbit plan. But the telco engineer in me wants to know what this 40 year old copper is actually capable of using MTM.

    The irony is, that they’d be making more money from me (and i’m perfectly okay with that!) if they provided FTTH, and i’d go on a 100mbit plan instantly, no questions asked. Hell, i’d even upgrade to a higher speed plan if there was one available. I work in the industry, and have a higher than average expectation of how quickly (and reliably…) i want my services to operate at.

    End result of the whole NBN deal is… i get speeds roughly equal to what some people were already getting on ADSL2+.

    This is the future? No, it isn’t. I install “the future” with the GPON/Fibre networks that i design and install for my clients, privately owned and run FTTH and DOCSIS systems.

    • Internode, aka iiNet, aka TPG has a 50Mbit plan.

      You could always just change to them.

      • Currently on a contract with iinet… So until that clears. Not without imposing a penalty on myself.

  6. “NBN cost blow-outs Turnbull’s fault, says Labor”

    And they would be absolutely correct in saying so.

  7. Couldn’t care less whose fault it is. Which government will provide a network beyond today’s requirements?

  8. “Regardless of what policy either Labor or the Coalition takes to the Federal Election, however, last week’s Budget also revealed that the NBN was in funding trouble either way, with the falling IRR making it unclear whether the project could successfully seek funding from the private sector to complete its rollout.”

    A network that has more longevity without the burden of further, near-term outlay would undoubtedly be a lot more attractive to private finance. Either FTTdp, FTTP or HFC would provide this attractiveness. FTTN, none as any future increase in service to subscribers necessitates replacement with, at minimum, FTTdp. It appears that FTTN is approaching its day of reckoning.

  9. So, only 8.5 billiion to reverse the mistake? This shortfall could be significantly addressed by revoking the superannuation/pension, whatever they call it received by Turnbull and Abbot and their key cronies on basis of incompetence in office. Multiply out by their projected lifespans, and a significant portion of the funds could eventually be recouped!

  10. Got to love this NBN doesn’t even test the copper unless
    “Where a home install occurs, both fibre-to-the-node and fibre-to-the-basement Connection Guides have the installer connecting a Very-high-bit-rate Digital Subscriber Line (VDSL) configured device to the copper connection point in the premises, and performing a series of sync tests on site which includes performance standards covering Signal to Noise Ratio and Sync Rate.”

  11. gotta love the cognitive dissonance and polar denial arguments found on this thread.

    Onwards and downwards in a government death spiral as erection 2016 spins out of control.

    Lest we forget in the past six double dissolutions down under in Oz. The result was three sitting governments who thought they couldn’t lose lost both the plot and the election. Will Malcolm, be number four to fail win an election one can’t lose. Only the women swing voters of Oz can provide that answer.

    Clare , hit the nail on the head, the current fiasco of the bankrupt NBN is the sole responsibility of the Turnbull luddite fear of change mononeuron one fixed thought a time coalition party. That be the inconvenient truth.

    But then again those who are ethically challenged that their luddite fear of change”lnp” can do no wrong. Will refuse to face the inconvenient truth, that a man called Malcolm Turnbull, is not a leader worthy of licking his boots while he resides in the lodge in Canberra.

  12. He “practically invented the internet” in this country – according to himself, well now he’s practically destroyed it also

  13. Wow we can see there’s an election in the air…

    Every third comment is from a fervently, steadfast campaigning alain/reality…

    ROFL…

    PRICELESS

Comments are closed.