news Deputy Opposition Leader Tanya Plibersek this week said she had seen “incredible” interest in the National Broadband Network issue as she travelled around Australia on the election campaign trail, delivering Labor’s message that Malcolm Turnbull had “dropped the ball” on the project.
Labor’s original model for the NBN involved deploying a near-universal Fibre network all the way to Australian homes and business premises, offering up to 1Gbps speeds. However, citing cost and speed of deployment concerns, the Abbott and Turnbull administrations have substantially modified this model since taking power in 2013, integrating the legacy copper and HFC cable networks owned by Telstra and Optus, in a so-called ‘Multi-Technology Mix’ model.
On ABC radio in Brisbane on Monday, Plibersek was asked about the issue by a local resident who said they couldn’t get Netflix or work from home remotely because they couldn’t get reliable broadband to their house.
In response, Plibersek said it was “It’s incredible how many people have raised this with me as I’ve been travelling around the country during this campaign.”
The Deputy Labor Leader laid current problems with broadband coverage at the door of Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, who had been Communications Minister for the first two years of the Abbott administration.
Turnbull, Plibersek said, “promised that the whole of Australia would be linked up to high speed broadband – his NBN, by the end of 2016”. However, she added, there were currently “whole huge parts of Australia that aren’t anywhere near being hooked up even to the second rate NBN that he’s now landed on.”
At a separate doorstop in Strathpine north of Brisbane, on that same day, Plibersek made similar comments, describing the NBN as the largest piece of critical infrastructure that Australia needed for the future.
“… we know that this community is missing out on a first rate NBN,” the Deputy Labor Leader told reporters.
“Malcolm Turnbull promised that his NBN would be cheaper, faster, delivered sooner. In fact, it has turned out to be more expensive, slower and delivered late. The NBN is the most critical infrastructure of the future. It’s the sort of infrastructure that allows people to grasp economic opportunities well beyond the community they live in and Malcolm Turnbull has completely dropped the ball on it.”
“Malcolm Turnbull is very blah blah blah on innovation but so far he’s cutting funding for education and you can’t have innovation without education. He’s dropped the ball on the NBN which is the most critical piece of infrastructure to support innovation.”
On both occasions, Plibersek was asked what Labor would do to rectify the situation.
“More fibre would be better,” the Member for Sydney told ABC radio.
“Malcolm Turnbull promised that his NBN would be cheaper, delivered sooner and faster speeds. In fact, we’ve found out that it’s more expensive, it’s a slower connection and it’s going to be much longer to be delivered than he promised.”
“He said it would be right across Australia by the end of 2016 and we’re nowhere near that. We believe that the NBN should have more fibre, the technology of the 21st century and less copper – the technology of the 19th century.”
And on the occasion of her doorstop interview: “We’ll be making more detailed announcements about our NBN over coming weeks, but I can tell you this – an NBN under Labor will have more fibre than Malcolm Turnbull’s slow, second-rate, expensive NBN.”
The news comes as both sides of politics have been active on the NBN issue during the election campaign.
Although it has not yet announced its new NBN policy, it is not expected that Labor would return to its original Fibre to the Premises model if it wins the election. Instead, the party is expected to announce it will support a FTTdp model in which Fibre is extended to customers’ driveways but not their actual premises, as well as maintaining the existing HFC cable extension plans.
This model promises to deliver most of the cost benefits of the Coalition’s MTM model, while also delivering significantly enhanced speeds. However, it will also leave those on HFC cable with questions about long-term upgrades.
Like Labor, the Coalition has not yet officially confirmed its NBN election policy.
However, both the Coalition and conservative media outlets such as The Australian newspaper have launched pre-emptive attacks on the FTTdp model which Labor is believed to favour, leading to speculation that the Coalition will not modify its existing MTM NBN policy for the election.
opinion/analysis
It’s a little cute for Plibersek to blame broadband coverage problems in Australia solely on Malcolm Turnbull. After all, it is true that both Labor and the Coalition share responsibility for poor high-speed broadband coverage in Australia.
Labor spent 18 months from November 2007 pursuing a FTTN NBN policy — exactly the kind of ‘copper’-based policy that Plibersek slammed this week — and getting nowhere, before finally settling on its FTTP NBN policy in April 2009. Labor had six years to deliver Australia better broadband coverage. It made a great deal of progress on this issue, but also could have done a much better job than it did.
For its own part, the Coalition did almost nothing on this issue during the decade-long Howard Government, so it, too, can share a great part of this responsibility. And of course, Turnbull personally has done much to tear down the NBN since 2013, although it must be said that under the Coalition (due largely to the extensive setup period under Labor), the NBN company has delivered quite a lot of FTTP infrastructure around Australia.
However, ultimately I agree with Plibersek’s overall criticism of the Coalition here. It is true that Turnbull has not been able to deliver on the NBN policy he took to the 2013 Federal Election, and that Labor’s current NBN policy is substantially technically superior than the Coalition’s MTM model. That much should be obvious to anyone.
It’s also good to see this issue getting headspace amongst the top political leaders. One suspects the NBN will only continue to grow as an election issue over the next six weeks until polling day.
Image credit: Office of Tanya Plibersek
If you ask me, the Coalition should get zero credit for any FttP delivered in the last three years.
Considering their official policy is not to use FttP except as a last resort, and they’ve made damn sure many people who were scheduled to get it 2-3 years ago haven’t (looking at you, Tasmania!), then we can pretty safely say any FttP delivered since late 2013 was due to construction already planned or underway prior to that election.
I remember being so hyped when I first heard about something being investigated in 2007 for Australian internet… That seemed like a life time ago now :(
So sad we are still in the same mud throwing 9 years on.
The fact that Rupe and his rags have what can only be perceived as daily articles pushing their own selfish, greedy, thwart FTTP at all costs NBN agenda, shows it is an issue.
It’s not a ‘thwart FTTP at all costs NBN agenda’ because unless Labor NBN 2016 come up with a substantial FTTP rollout there is nothing to thwart.
Do you actually read what you type?
He’s a LibTroll, making sense is not a requirement, his job is to distract from and distort the conversation.
It is pretty funny when you break it down and think about it:
Before thwart, there was no thwart!
I see your thwart is as big as mine!
I doubt the Coalition has rolled out any FTTP of their own (i.e. not provisioned/planned prior to the 2013 election).
I’d be inclined to say “zero” Tim. The only FttP they have done, was to finish off the ALP contacts so they could proceed with their outdated version.
Can’t really agree with you there Renai. All the early hold up’s were (mostly) external to NBNCo and they had to setup core infrastructure to begin. And as has been proved recently, Mike Quigleys “Ramp up” did actually occur, so as Mike said, they would have gotten back on track with the milestones/RFS.
As to the Coalition, they have most of the responsibility for poor high-speed broadband coverage here. I’ve seen a lot of people in comments around the `net saying they were slated for FttP with the original NBNCo rollout, but they were removed when it became nbn™ and they haven’t been put back onto the rollout even yet. It also took them 2.5 years to get their “sooner” FttN even going as a commercial release.
The cap, as they say, firmly fits the Coalition…
Yep, I was slated for FttP in late 2013 to mid 2014. Here we are, two years later, and it’s going to be another 12-18 months before the nbn(TM) sticker gets slapped on the HFC I already have, and they claim ‘mission accomplished’.
Not to mention the 11 years the countrys’ telecommunications stagnated under Howards watch, causing the need for NBN in the first place.
Lets not forget the Telstra split that wasn’t.
Let’s not forget the Operational Separation of Telstra took place under the Howard Coalition Government way back in 2005.
The structural separation was promised by Labor and Conroy but after six years of Government it never happened
Yet Telstra operation is still leaking information with its wholesale and retail after 20 years
“Let’s not forget the Operational Separation of Telstra took place under the Howard Coalition Government way back in 2005.”
That being my point exactly …. that changed things oh so much! (hint … I am being very sarcastic).
You’re also correct they gave up on splitting Telstra and instead formed a new company entirely to obsolete the entire wholesale segment of said badly behaved behemoth! A much better option imho!
@ alain
And what a rip roaring success that Howard Coalition (your usual politicised mode of commenting, impartially…*FFS*) operational separation was too eh alain…?
Telstra’s constant trips to the ACCC and the courts to try to defend their “operationally separated” departments giving each other preferential treatment… wink.
Much like the Telstra FTTN deal the [quote] Howard Coalition Government achieved.
And, and the OPEL plan the [quote] Howard Coalition Government achieved..
And, and, and the ADSL2 switching on the [quote] Howard Coalition Government achieved too..
Oh wait… sorry the [quote] Howard Colition government and also their 2005 Telstra operational separation (lol) achieved SFA, didn’t it alain…?
But go the pretend… wink operational separation.
alain
You’re welcome
What, this one?
https://www.accc.gov.au/regulated-infrastructure/communications/industry-reform/telstras-structural-separation-undertaking
Like the heading says it’s a undertaking how do you know when Telstra is structurally separated?
When it is split into two separate companies with separate boards and CEO’s etc
With the NBN, whichever form it takes, be it all fibre or the MTM, Telstra no longer needs to be structurally separated… (Unless the Government, whoever they are at the time, decides to sell the NBN to Telstra and return us to the days that Howard brought us)
Essentially the FTTP process would have done exactly that. Structurally separate Telstra’s Retail/Wholesale from the underlying infrastructure.
Another understanding fail for Reality. Nice work.
Because that is the meaning of undertaking?
Just because they haven’t finished, doesn’t mean it isn’t happening.
And as Woolfe pointed out, the original ALP NBN plan would have made structural separation moot anyway.
Yet another LPA ballsup.
Woolfe
Essentially the FTTP process would have done exactly that.
Really, ‘FTTP the savior of everything’ how would FTTP have the effect upon Telstra of a SS?
tinman_au,
Just because they haven’t finished, doesn’t mean it isn’t happening.
Until it is finished it’s effect upon Telstra is SFA.
And as Woolfe pointed out, the original ALP NBN plan would have made structural separation moot anyway.
In what what way would Labor FTTP made SS moot, and how has MtM stopped that process, which is strange because on one hand you say the SS undertaking is happening, which has been mainly under the Coalition MtM era not the 50% off Labor FTTP rollout.
“Really, ‘FTTP the savior of everything’ how would FTTP have the effect upon Telstra of a SS?”
Because they would no longer have control of the network and also be retailing on it…..
You mean just like the MtM model?
Except with the MTM they’re free to overbuild profitable areas that have FTTN/HFC with FTTP.
They wouldn’t overbuild FTTP with more FTTP.
As the LPA has relied upon.
Thanks for pointing that out mate :o)
Seriously?
As John Smith said:
By transferring that monopoly from Telstra to the NBN, and then making the NBN accessible to many companies, they removed the “one is upon every occasion the highest which can be squeezed out of the buyers” from the equation.
You should “learn more” by not skipping school.
You even have to ask?
FttP isn’t “the savior of everything”. The NBN, being the provider of choice, would mean that Telstra (a private enterprise company in case you missed that, which seems to happen a lot with you), would not be the provider of choice. The nbn™ isn’t allowed to be an RSP (which I guess you missed too), so they have to wholesale to an actual RSP.
Which means, the nbn™ is the de facto provider of wholesale broadband (which I guess you missed on purpose).
Guess what that means Alain?
If you said “I suppose that means they now do the previous role of Telstra”, you get a gold star!
Anything else, you go to the back of the class.
You really are very tiresome, and kind of dense…(on purpose I’m sure).
At least you acknowledge it is actually happening now, that’s a start at least ;o)
Not sure what your point was Reality?
Other than that your comment was wrong.
Labor and Conroy were aiming to structurally separate Telstra by creating the FTTP NBN.
It never happened because its a big fucking job and some idiots decided that short term cost savings(which are getting less and less as time goes on) are better than long term cost savings.
Now whether the MTM results in the same separation is yet to be seen. We won’t know until it’s done. Just like with the Labor plan… You really are just a shill aren’t you
Agreed. My suburb was added to the 2-3 year forecast in 2011/2012 (I can’t remember exactly when) and since being taken off soon before/after the 2013 election it hasn’t made any kind of re-appearance since.
Suburb (well coverage area) next door had the planners from NBN contractors going around and I was in the 1 year bracket (different area) so I feel your pain.
Neither on any rollout plan so far as I can tell currently :(
Add my regional city to the list… We were on the rollout map for FTTP.
Build construction scheduled to start in October 2013.
A terrible disaster befell the nation early in September and we (like huge chunks of the rollout map / plan got wiped. (yep, a month before the build was starting.)
Here we are getting toward 3 years later, and we have just been bumped from March 2016 start to August…
My suburb was in the maps published by Labor prior to the 2010 election for stage 2. No sign of anything.
Labor’s 3 year forecast was more like 4 years and included anything where NBNCo planned to start initial planning. There was an 18-24 month lead time between initial planning and an area being ready for service.
And things are a lot better for you since the LPA got in three years ago Mathew?
Yes he will “eventually’ once he “eventually” receives the “eventual” faster [sic] FTTN, be one of the 50% on (the now UP TO) 12Mpbs in 2020 something…
That is if faster [sic] FTTN is actually available to him by 2020 something…
;)
Completely agree tinman, I’m on the Gold Coast and we were going to get FTTP within 12 months, even if it was delayed by 12 months I’d still have it by now…
We also had 3 FSAMs already being built with a 4th put on the map just before the election was held. I also believe this to be very important infrastructure especially in the lead-up to the 2018 Commonwealth Games…
When the Coalition took power, completely biased reviews were called to provide a platform for the government to use. A few months later, 3 / 4 of the FSAMs were removed from the GC rollout map, 6 months after that the last FSAM was also removed and 16 months after that we’re now “sort of” back on the map with HFC.
The same HFC which is easily over 1.5-2km away from my street, the same tech that will have to be run into my house too just like fibre, digging up my valuable non-existant rose bushes(lead in is in perfect condition btw).
Great value for money… NOT!!
you’re lucky you have a lead in. Quite a lot of the cable/HFC passed premises but if they didn’t sign up they were never wired up (in SA) short of being in an aerial area (even then often not).
Its sad but Foxtel seemingly just puts dishes on peoples roofs instead as well.
I think it is a little unfair to almost suggest she is being hypocritical because she supported the policy 10 years ago. An Fttn approach in 2007 I would argue was considerably more reasonable than an fttn approach in 2013/2016, especially after a fttp rollout had already begun.
Yes, 10 years ago FttN would have been at least half-decent policy. 10 years is a long time in technology, people who haven’t changed their minds in the last 10 years regarding technology, well, they’re the LNP.
Lets just put it like this 2007 is Pre – iPhone
Assuming she didn’t oppose the change to the superior FTTP plan, then you’re absolutely right.
Of course on the other side of the fence, opposing FTTN back in 2007 and then embracing it in 2013 absolutely beggars belief.
Well….things change, ya know. Tony “Don Quixote” Abbott had to create windmills for him to tilt at…
“Although it has not yet announced its new NBN policy, it is not expected that Labor would return to its original Fibre to the Premises model if it wins the election. Instead, the party is expected to announce it will support a FTTdp model in which Fibre is extended to customers’ driveways but not their actual premises, as well as maintaining the existing HFC cable extension plans.”
Don’t you read the Bendigo Advertiser? ;-)
Labor’s policy failed, Coalition policy failed. I think I see a pattern developing, give me a minute…
Plibersek is right, they do squeal loudly (mostly irrational bile). The lady not getting Netflix is a national disgrace;-)
Lol Richard which has failed the one you could have been commission to write. The reuse of existing copper. The $8B less than FTTP network. The faster but glacial rollout.
IMHO Government involvement was required due to a failure of the market Richard. Broadband offerings around the country were failing to keep up with technology advancements in all but the highest density areas.
In hindsight the failures of Labor were
1. Messing around with FTTN with Telstra in the first instance (though 10 years ago the minimal intervention approach would have been acceptable if Telstra was to play ball) and losing valuable time to deliver services.
2.After going the whole hog and promising to deliver FTTP, to then worry as much about limiting the NBN budget to 40 odd Billion instead of preferencing a more rapid roll out focussing on high density areas first. The outward in approach of regional first was costly and would require a longer period of time for revenue to start being generated.
Valid points. Conroy needed to engage an incumbent telco; his belief he could start and run one was delusional (as history has shown).
Targeting low value areas was terrible for their cross subsidy model. However I’d argue they could have engaged telcos to deliver into competitively services markets (vast majority), targeting tendered subsidies to underserved areas. Many successful examples around the world.
Then Conroy and Rudd’s inflated opnion of themselves; shame about their delivery (across the board).
As history has shown Richard the incumbent telco didn’t want to do anything but thanks for trying to rewrite history.
Yes many successful examples around the world where unlike ours there incumbent telcos where willing to do something.
I wasn’t aware that Telstra were engaged in serious negotiations with Conroy and Rudd about a shared NBN rollout in the period 2007-2013, perhaps you could point it out?
Lol devoid have you forgotten about the tender process
That’s not what I said, but you know that, that’s why you referred to some other irrelevance.
Yes that not what you said but I didn’t say anything about negotiations.
But then we did have the accc Telstra back in 2003 and Telstra decide to pull out of the negotiations
2003 lol
A “tender” is “A formal proposal to buy at a specified price” (well, to those that English anyway). Of course it involves “serious negotiations”, being a “formal proposal”. Perhaps you could ask your teacher next week, most primary teachers are happy to help with the 3R’s.
Of course Sol’s truculence on the matter with Labor, meant Malcolm decided to renationalise the copper, but, hey, it was a good deal, right?
“his belief he could start and run one was delusional (as history has shown).”
Yeah the PMG was another Labour disgrace, too. Nothing good ever came from that.
The letters were on time weren’t they?
:)
Only the bills :o)
Ah Dick, as usual you have it wrong … Labor’s Policy was destroyed, it did not fail on its own.
True, Labor shot themselves in the foot.
Good thing Malcolm came and saved the day and we’ll all have:
– Malcolm Turnbull, 2014.
We don’t talk about that…. “it’s been revised” even when revisions previously were literally the work of the devil.
So you think that a connection not capable of 0.5 Megabits per second is acceptable?
https://help.netflix.com/en/node/306
The governments’ (reinstated by Turnbull in 2014) idea of broadband is 0.5Mbps.
Wrong. The Coalition modified it.
Correct. And is still failing daily. At least they are consistant.
Well technically there were several large glaring issues with Labor’s policy!
brought to you by the numbers 121 and letter CVC ;)
Rollout underperformance wasn’t a problem? Cross subsidy model? Rejection of FTTB? Inexperienced subcontractor model? Fantasy CP? Management unable to evaluate performance, rejection of all exposure of failures? Non-priority of high value areas? Overbuilding perfectly good infrastructure? Toxic work environment? …
MTM
Rollout underperformance wasn’t a problem? Cross subsidy model?Inexperienced subcontractor model? Fantasy CP? Management unable to evaluate performance, rejection of all exposure of failures? Non-priority of high value areas? Overbuilding perfectly good infrastructure? Toxic work environment? …
Overbuilding of perfectly good infrastructure? – at least delete the bits that don’t apply Rizz.
Yes devoid
tpg FTTB.
Act FTTN.
Open networks.
https://delimiter.com.au/2015/10/17/nonsensical-farce-nbn-massively-overbuilding-canberras-fttn-with-more-fttn/
You left out this bit from the link.
NBN is using existing infrastructure where possible and where it makes sense to do so. There are a variety of existing networks around Australia, but not all of them make commercial or technical sense to integrate into the NBN network.”
So which is it devoid are they overbuilding or not
You are right. Labor Should totally have gone to Telstra first with an option to do FTTN with existing infrastructure, whilst protecting consumers by ensuring the ACCC retains control over the wholesale pricing.
I really don’t know why they didn’t do that in 2007? Do you Richard?
@Woolfe
> You are right. Labor Should totally have gone to Telstra first with an option to do FTTN with existing infrastructure, whilst protecting consumers by ensuring the ACCC retains control over the wholesale pricing.
Sounds exactly like what Labor planned, but Telstra wouldn’t cooperate. This is part of the reason we have speed tiers. Labor didn’t and still don’t grasp the potential of FTTP even after announcing 1Gbps just prior to the 2010 election in response to Google Fibre?
Mathew. Yes that was kind of my point.
I can’t help but notice you beating the whole google fibre inspiring 1gbps from NBN. Not sure why that is the case. Don’t really think it is a bad thing anyway. Not really sure what your point is. But you are clearly trying to tar labor with some nastiness. Of course you are mistaken in thinking that I believe labor are saints. The Labor plan had issues. Just a shedload less(and ones that could be fixed easily at low cost) than the Coalition idiocy.
“Labor’s policy failed,”
Labor’s policy failed at delivering the speeds required for Australia to be a world leader (1Gbps), except for a rich few (<1% in 2026 according to Labor) and on current fibre connection figures would barely see a minority (16%, down 3% in 12 months) in the second tier (100Mbps).
This is before we consider Labor's build was over budget, behind schedule and had a nasty sting in the tail of rapidly rising ARPU to over $100 month.
Lol Mathew
Coalition policy has failed to deliver anything this year.
But then even Turnbull own review said they where on budget. Cant say the same for the MTM going from $29B to $56B and 2016 now 2020
You know the rise in ARPU is due to the increase data usage. Which the AVC and CVC falls in cost. Who knows what they might have done with the cost.
And have you asked Malcolm (who has actually been driving the bus in the telecom area since 18 September 2013) why he isn’t providing 1Gbps to all Australians? No, didn’t think so….
Labor haven’t been running the NBN for 3 years. And pretty much all the issues they had were administrative. So you know somewhat easier to fix.
Unlike the Coalition mess. Which is mostly infrastructure problems, that will require overbuilding in the near term to fix.
Apparently Netflix only works over ‘more fibre would be better’, whatever that means.
It’ll work over ADSL too eh alain?
After all, that’s the very speeds you claimed would/will be good enough for the majority of Aussies previously and well into the future, didn’t you…?
Whatever that means… I think it means, DER alain…
You’re welcome.
“Don’t you read the Bendigo Advertiser? ;-)”
No one has responded to that. Hee hee, yes, where the local Labor MP gave us quite the eye opener.
[Censored for rudeness by Renai]
Yet another eloquent contribution.
Can’t fault the sentiment though.
Think u got that wrong R …. That’s actually ‘abuse and bile’.
Actually Richard, it’s called an Ad Hominem. You should know…
It’s actually comments like Richard and Reality that prevents me from visiting this site much any more.
There’s no debate on the nuance of any subject, because both reality or Richard side track the rest of the commenters into repeating the same things ad nauseum.
It feels like false balance. No one gets to complain about the minor points of either policy, because reality or Richard have just complained about rollout schedules from 7 years ago like they were the end of the world.
Cue 15 comments from basically everyone including Richard or reality going back and forth getting nowhere we haven’t gone before.
I get it, more comments makes the article seem more relevant, and without the pot stirrers we end up like an echo chamber, but I rarely want to comment any more. I honestly feel a bit like our eloquent friend here, but then I realise the comments I am reading are from professional trolls (or at least semi-pros), I then despair and close the article.
I don’t condone the above, but I’m just waiting for Richard or reality to bring up the toxic attacks on their character. Their behaviour reminds me of scientologists, spending their lives practising how to say the one thing that causes the person they are talking to to fly off the handle, then proceeding to say it as much as possible. We are only human, and their behaviour is intended (subconsciously?) to cause us to go off the rails so they can feel superior.
Predictable that it would happen. Every NBN comment thread is testament to our patience. Pity I have no more.
I know what you mean Peter. I often find myself pulling back on a (minor) critic of the NBN in general, from whichever side, because I know Richard/Reality will jump on it and blow it out of proportion.
In a lot of ways, they are their own worst enemies.
But while R&R are around, I think you are right.
Hi peter, I too find the ceaseless lib trolling tiresome, I’ve had to dramatically reduce my commenting because I was losing my temper.
I still come for the articles tho and I’m a subscriber too, imo we need more ppl reading the truth about the NBN and spreading information on the corrupt lib destruction of it to as many as possible so we can kick them out asap.
Then Imo we need a royal commission into the NBN under the lnp jackboot to expose what really happened. Unlike the union royal commission which basically found nothing, there are lots of skeletons in Turnbull’s NBN closet!
I don’t like the way Richard uses lies and misinformation to spread his agenda.
BUT that is no reason to act poorly. Most can forgive a moment of anger, but this is simply rubbish.
Renai you need to address this.
There is no excuse for Turnbull’s poisoning the well on the NBN when the current government was in opposition. While knowing better he should never have taken the trashing role Abbott told him to take.
Then again, despite his previously cultivated persona, he is a politician. He certainly behaves like one.
Continuity with change!
Or I am dumbstruck by yet more meaningless polispeak mud slinging! And yet she too offers no real solution. Stupid is as stupid does.
In a situation, where both the ALP and ‘the climate of fear of everything’ mononeuron one thought a time LNP coalition are guilty of complete incompetence in managing this megaproject.
Most interesting, ALP is using polispeak blame game, while still evading the real debate on a number of core issues in respect to NBN. The Abbott/Turnbull team should be charged with criminal fraud for wasting tens of billions of dollars of taxpayer money for chasing their pointless dead end pipe dreams.
The NBN project has been crippled by four developments. The $17.50 per mbps per month CVC pricing construct, the ridiculous 121 Points of Interconnect, the failure to use compulsory acquisition and legislate federal acquisition of electricity poles, conduit and a prebuilt fibre networks, and the terrible decision to sub-contract the building of our nation’s greatest megaproject.
Now for the most part the major telcos are very happy about the CVC pricing construct. It gives them a great excuse to justify why they their over-subscribing NBN services by a factor of 1,000-10,000:1. This leads to major peak hour congestion issues that all NBN users see. Now you know why 47% of the smarter users buy the slowest cheapest pipe, for they know they will be throttled to death.
Then we have the scandal of the many premises where the NBN cable passes, have yet to be given the final link.
The only way forward to speed this project to completion on time and under budget is to implement the current New Zealand model. The Government’s objective will be supported by investment in partnership with the private sector, and be directed to open-access infrastructure.
What time did they say the Lake Burley Griffin Tea Party begins again?
For once New Zealand is showing the way. The FTTP there is a success story and is financially managed very, very well.
Yeah, rolling out FTTP to only to 80% of the population of Melbourne in the approximate area size of Victoria using mainly cheaper aerial deployment is exactly the same as Australia.
No worries.
lol
Oh leave over. That is just pathetic Reality. You have been called out on your use of population size etc numerous times.
Economies of scale actually mean that the AU rollout would be theoretically cheaper per instance.
Further you are consistent in your use of BT’s rollout in the UK. If Chorus’s rollout in NZ can’t be counted because of population and geography differences, then BT’s rollout in UK must also be discounted due to Population and geography differences.
Pick one. No comparison to another nation, OR compare all. Stop picking and choosing just to support your argument.
Woolfe,
You have been called out on your use of population size etc numerous times.
No I haven’t.
Economies of scale actually mean that the AU rollout would be theoretically cheaper per instance.
Economies of scale??, is that why a FTTP rollout has a peak funding estimate of $74-84B finish date 2026-2028.
If the NBN Co could devote it’s FTTP construction resources only to the residential 80% of Melbourne funding and deployment times would be different, it wasn’t so it isn’t.
The original Labor FTTP plan was also not to use mainly cheaper aerial deployment but the more expensive in ground new and existing duct deployment.
It has all been discussed before.
https://delimiter.com.au/2016/03/09/nz-brings-fttp-costs-fttn-levels/#li-comment-721888
then BT’s rollout in UK must also be discounted due to Population and geography differences.
BT’s rollout point of comparison is the speed of deployment of FTTN vs FTTP, and also using existing infrastructure is more cost effective.
Oh guess what it’s the same as Australia, FTTN deployment is faster than FTTP and it is has a lower CPP than FTTP.
Pick one.
I will pick any I want to.
Lol devoid
Economies of scale??, is that why a FTTP rollout has a peak funding estimate of labor $44B or SR $64B finish date 2021-2023
See fixed it for you.
Lol BT does have a faster rollout they are but we don’t do we. BT average rollout is 60k a week the mtm is doing only 15k a week.
Yes, you have /sigh
According to whom? The SR?
Oh, OK, you win I guess…
You have. Because I have done it multiple times myself.
The information is incorrect. You are attempting to say that there is no equivalence in the NZ rollout, when obviously there is. You then attempt to say there is an abundance of equivalence in the UK rollout, when in actuality it is even more different.
Both of these have quite significant differences, in population and geography to Australia, indeed in many ways they are closer to each other than us. You are simply cherry picking results to show your side, or attempting to down results that support the other side. That is not reasoned debate. That is being a biased Shill and nothing else.
Weren’t you going on about how successful BTs UK FTTN rollout was as a model for us?
You know, until recently.
Hotcaks,
Weren’t you going on about how successful BTs UK FTTN rollout was as a model for us?
yes.
You know, until recently.
No, my view has not changed ‘recently’ or otherwise, you are confused.
You mean until they switched to FttP Hotcakes??
Yes, yes he was.
@ alain,
Your vast hypocrisy is almost taking over from your perpetual contradictions.
And on occasions I see you manage both…
Nice work, only 6 weeks to go…
You’re welcome.
Also the overwhelming majority of Chorus’s BB revenue is not FTTP.
As of December 31, Chorus had 1.223 million total broadband connections, consisting of 74,000 basic UBA services; 7,000 naked basic UBA; 763,000 enhanced UBA; 128,000 naked enhanced UBA; 94,000 VDSL; 45,000 naked VDSL; and 112,000 fibre services.
http://www.zdnet.com/article/nz-comcom-reviewing-chorus-copper-terms/
You left these context bits out:
Yes and how does that effect where Chorus’s revenue comes from now and in the future?
Dude, stay in school, we need innovative entrepreneurs that can pinpoint the way to the future like you!!!1
@Reality
Jokes aside, it means they are in the middle of their rollout of FttP, their copper is losing them money, but they are making it up on the FttP side (which they’ll finish in 2019….i.e. Before Malcolm Turnbulls “faster, sooner” crap) (And I’m more than happy to keep saying “Malcolm Turnbull is clueless”, as it shows up in isentia media monitoring).
Let’s be very clear about this. Abbott caused the problem by making cost the issue. The NBN is a 21st Century infrastructure project on par with the Snowy Mountains Scheme from the 20th Century. Access to fast broadband is an essential service, just like power and water. It is time we stopped arguing about the cost and just built the bloody thing.
Tanya Plibersek should have been the Labor leader going into the election. Bill Shorten has skeletons in his closet. It will be a close election, but a better leader might have been the clincher.
A friendly reminder that almost all NBN customers to date are on Labor’s rollout. Also, how FTTP was fumbled in Australia under the previous government doesn’t change anything about the fact that almost all new network builds overseas in 2016 are FTTP. It is still the sensible, economical and right thing to do and will remain so.
Indeed, that’s why new network builds here are FTTP and why overbuilding infrastructure assets owned by the company building new FTTP with FTTP is fiscally irresponsible.
But they are not devoid some are copper
Indeed, in fact Telstra has blamed the current government (a Coalition one) for making them them use copper.
Indeed Jason
Blown out 10x in just a matter of months, to $641m worth of cooper, to be precise.
Rizz
Don’t forget the 1800km $14m 6 months supply now a $44M
+1
Headline:
Another Labor MP spouts vague mutterings about ‘more fibre’.
Old 2013 FTTP fans go crazy, and high five in a frenzy of delight.
25mbps to all premises by 2016.
A fully costed and ready to go plan.
High five Soth ?
Newsbreak: Angry FttN fanboi shakes fist at cloud!
Probably cause he can’t access the cloud……
He’s certainly doing something very regularly with his fist…
;)
Incredible interest?
So what’s Ruddstra mk4 of 2016 going to comprise of …, should Liebor win?
Another satellite?
FTTDp/ G.Fast?
The LyingN(C)P seems to want to stick with nbn MTM mk3 of 2013 for now.
Incredible interest?
So what’s Ruddstra mk4 of 2016 going to comprise of …, should Liebor win?
Another satellite?
Fibre to the drive way instead of the street (or farm)?
The LyingN(C)P seems to want to stick with nbn MTM mk3 of 2013 for now.
What?
/shrug
I’m guessing it’s a “pox on both your houses” thing?
> This model promises to deliver most of the cost benefits of the Coalition’s MTM model, while also delivering significantly enhanced speeds.
Significantly enhanced speeds for who? The less than 1% that Labor predicted would connect at 1Gbps in 2026 or the 79% on fibre currently connected at 25Mbps or slower?
Unless Labor campaign on changing the artificial financial model and speed tiers that they put in place then every word about enhanced speeds is purely spin for the benefit of the rich.
Mathew and what about the real speed constraints that the FTTN delivers. Only 7% on 100Mbps when they expect 20% in 4 years time.
I don’t think he actually cares, he just wants to keep bitching about a government that hasn’t been around for three years, while tiptoeing around the current one that could actually make the changes he wants,
Something odd with that…I’ll leave it to the reader of him to decide what.
For me. Because I’ll pay for it. While bludgers like you want it for nothing.
“Significantly enhanced speeds for who? The less than 1% that Labor predicted would connect at 1Gbps in 2026”
Obviously, yes. Much better than the 0% that can be serviced on non-FTTP portions of the network.
Comments are closed.