news Mathias Cormann has proven unable to answer basic questions about the NBN project or the Coalition’s NBN policy, in a trainwreck interview yesterday morning which highlighted the Finance Minister’s fundamental lack of NBN knowledge about the project, despite being one of the two ministers in charge of it.
Yesterday morning Cormann appears on ABC radio on a segment hosted by Steve Austin. The interview appears to have been recorded in Parliament House in Canberra. You can click here to listen to the whole recording (the interview starts from about 38:20), or click here to read the transcript in Microsoft Word format (supplied by the Coalition campaign headquarters).
Cormann is one of two shareholder ministers ultimately responsible for the governance of the NBN project, along with Communications Minister Mitch Fifield.
However, throughout the interview, Cormann appeared to be unable to provide Austin with basic information about the project.
For example, Austin spent several minutes repeatedly asking Cormann — as the Finance Minister — how much the Government had spent on the NBN thus far.
In response, Cormann could not provide a figure — noting only that the Coalition had committed to spending no more than $29.5 billion on the project.
“Thanks for that, but I am not sure that it goes towards answering my question,” Austin responded. “Can you just give me the overall figure. What is the total cost to the Australian taxpayer so far please?”
In another question later in the interview, Austin asked Cormann to confirm whether the Coalition would release a new NBN policy for the election this Saturday.
“Where is your election NBN policy? Your updated election NBN policy? I understand you’re not releasing one this Federal Election. Is that correct?” the ABC host asked.
In response, Cormann said only: “We are delivering the NBN. We are making it happen. We inherited a mess from the Labor Party and we are making it happen.”
“But you’re not going to update or release an NBN policy for this Federal Election?” Austin responded.
“I am not going to make announcements on what we will release for the remaining parts of this campaign,” said Cormann.
Eventually, after Austin continued to pepper Cormann with questions along these and other lines, asking the Finance Minister to respond to issues such as Cisco Systems’ forecasts regarding Internet bandwidth growth and comments about the Coalition’s NBN policy made by founding NBN chief executive Mike Quigley last week.
In response, Cormann stopped directly answering Austin’s questions.
“You should probably get the relevant Minister Mitch Fifield on to your program to answer these sorts of detailed questions,” Cormann said. “Again this is probably a question that you should be raising with the Minister for Communications Mitch Fifield, who will be able to take you through that in some great detail.”
opinion/analysis
Wow. That is certainly one of the worst interviews I have ever seen a politician give with respect to the NBN, rivalling even some of the crazy statements which Joe Hockey has made about the NBN over the years.
I think two things happened here.
Firstly, although I don’t have any inside information, it seems likely that someone has briefed Steve Austin with a number of articles from Delimiter and other similar tech sites with respect to the NBN. With respect to some of this material — such as the issue of whether the Coalition will release a new NBN policy for this election — Delimiter has been the only outlet covering these matters.
Secondly, I think Cormann’s head is not full of NBN matters right now. Cormann is not only the Finance Minister, he’s also the Coalition’s campaign spokesperson, and so has to be across hundreds of issues on a daily basis. Eventually, something has got to give.
I’ve seen Cormann speak well on the NBN before, so I know that he can when he’s prepared. But clearly he wasn’t prepared for this interview — and it really shows.
I will also add one further point: This is one of the best interviews I’ve seen on the NBN over the past few years, from the journalist side. Kudos to Steve Austin and any ABC staff who briefed him. He covered a lot of ground in a very short time frame and completely flummoxed one of Australia’s most senior government ministers. Nice work.
Image credit: Parliamentary Broadcasting
Show Cormann two shovels and ask him to take his pick and he’d be flummoxed. He is not an intelligent man. You give these losers too much respect Renai.
You’re wrong: Cormann is an extremely capable and intelligent politician.
(Of course, many of us will disagree with his views on certain policies)
If you could see things from the inside, and see how many issues these politicians need to deal with simultaneously, you’d probably think the same. I am yet to meet a politician who is not intelligent, motivated and canny. Plus, they need to be extremely disciplined.
They have the hardest job in the world; which is why they make so many mistakes.
Evidence please?
You mistake rat cunning for intelligence far too often Renai and give politicians far too much credit. That’s your weirdest piece of fanboi behaviour. Perhaps it’s some form of Stockholm Syndrome.
Cormann is a loud blusterer but I cannot recall a single example of him saying a thoughtful, intelligent statement. Shouting people down and ignoring their salient questions is not equivalent to a cogent argument.
I’ve watched Cormann dozens of times live in the Senate and in committees for hours on end. The guy is smart and savvy. His staff are good too. Just because you disagree with the Coalition’s policies or his personal approach doesn’t make the man an idiot. Far from it.
I’m asking for evidence of intelligence, not your opinion.
A dissertation or thesis, an article written by the man. You claim to be a proponent of evidence based decision making but you keep making the basic mistake of trusting your own instincts over verifiable data. That’s the road to confirmation of your own biases. It’s not a personal criticism it’s a procedural one and one you should have learned by now. Can you show any actual evidence beyond anecdotal opinion that Cormann is intelligent as you have claimed?
And it has nothing to do with ideology, that’s a strawman on your part as I never mentioned it. I see as much poor thought on the Labor side, the only ones who seem to be learning from this are the smaller parties and even then ideology will often cloud their thinking.
Stephen,
I see as much poor thought on the Labor side, the only ones who seem to be learning from this are the smaller parties
So where is your evidence with ‘verifiable data’ that the smaller parties are learning from this, or is that just your instinct?
You may allege that he’s competent, but he displays none of this when he’s interviewed – he resorts to slogans.
The fact that record numbers of voters (25% in fact) are dumping both majors and supporting the Greens and independents would tend to support his idea.
http://www.news.com.au/national/federal-election/record-numbers-plan-to-vote-for-independent-candidates-or-microparties-poll-finds/news-story/03e0a6da4b941e152cd13fb102dbfff9
Unless you have a better suggestion, I’d say he’s right.
You generally get more sense out of Spokesborg Darius Horsham on Mad As Hell!
Peter Dutton? Cory Bernardi? George Christensen?
Eric Abetz, Kevin Andrews, Barnaby Joh Joyce, Abbot Tony, Michaela Cash and last but not least Kelly O’Dwyer. Just to name a few more.
It’s just that he thinks we are thick and that he (like many of them) need to speak on and on and on saying the same think over and over again. His Q &A performances, particularly Monday’s on the bank Royal Commission, have not been inspiring either.
Sounds like a couple of our friends here, doesn’t it :o)
Thats the problem with talking points….it keeps them all on message, but makes them look retarded and robotic if they stick too closely to them. The better politicians (like Julie Bishop) can ad lib and use the talking points as a guide, rather than something to parrott.
His speech is very robotic.
What a load of bollocks.the conservatives have nothing but lies to peddle.that’s what they run on and the one thing a bullshit artist can’t answer is a straight forward question, after all, to them the truth is a left wing conspiracy.the only thing these rejects need discipline for is keeping a straight face while talking out of their arse
Rwnai wries…
You’re wrong: Cormann is an extremely capable and intelligent politician.”
We are talking about the same low vocab ‘jobs and growth, jobs and growth, jobs and growth” Cormann?
Debt and deficit, debt and deficit, debt and deficit, sqwark.
To be fair Renai, when has anyone in this government been able to provide a sensible non-politicised answer about the current rollout during this election? ( Quick Mats …. Get to the choppppppeeerrr).
I stumbled across and article I’d written for the ABC on the NBN back in 2012 the other day. I was quickly dismayed by how little things had changed… Alas…
http://www.abc.net.au/technology/articles/2012/11/13/3631761.htm
Cabidas,
I was also dismayed to read this gem among others from your article.
To utilise HFC as Mr Turnbull suggests, requires massive investment. Investment that both Telstra and Optus publicly stated they wouldn’t provide long before the idea of any NBN was put forward. A cost that the Tax payer would have to provide, on budget, at the expense of roads and hospitals. Add to that, that HFC was actually designed to deliver TV, one way, not broadband, both ways. It’s an ok medium, but you wouldn’t want to spend money to let more people access it.
First of all it’s news to me it’s a HFC upgrade at the expense of roads of hospitals, is that all NBN infrastructure including FTTP or is it just HFC that is at the expense of roads and hospitals and FTTP is exempt?
HFC not designed for BB both ways really? so all the Telstra and Optus BB customers using DOCSIS 3.0 speeds on BB for all these years is just fiction, and the upgrade of HFC to DOCSIS 3.1 to even higher speeds as the largest internet provider Comcast in the USA is doing is also a fiction.
You must be appalled that Labor have decided to keep the Coalition HFC plan at the expense of hospitals and roads.
@ alain
Failed HFC (your words previously)…
There fixed that second lot of contradictory/hypocrisy today, for you alain.
Would you mind explaining how, apart from a change of government…ROFL… the same HFC you said was only good for the possums to run up and pigeons to perch upon, across from your place (so you had HFC and did’t want it)… failed previously, but has magically become great now?
I await a stupid, but Labor reply or the standard *crickets*. I wonder which this time…lol.
Apology accepted/you’re welcome.
Umm its the governments choice that they redirect money from Hospitals and roads to the NBN. they could have both, but never mention the stuff they spend money on as an option that could receive cuts, like negative gearing, capital gains concessions, subsidies to big business, Defence hardware we could probably do without except they need to win seats in SA by providing business and jobs there or middle class welfare that Howard bought in.
The argument of FTTP vs Roads and health is purely there to divide opinion and win votes. Its not a fact.
And let’s face it, the LPA aren’t afraid of pulling $80b from health regardless of what the NBN is doing…
Do you remember who it was that was pestering Labor to reveal their NBN policy on just the third day of the campaign? Was some Liberal shill here, cant be bothered going to figure which of the three it was.
Pretty sure it was alain though, so to see him defending the lack of a policy announcement now is a great laugh.
You are, unlike him, correct.
yes i did remember that too. quite amusing that its his Chosen People who have fobbed off producing a policy before the last moment (if, indeed, it does get produced at all?) instead of narsty ole Labor who actually produced it what, two weeks to election day?
do as i say not as i do and all that….
Justin,
The argument of FTTP vs Roads and health is purely there to divide opinion and win votes. Its not a fact.
Are you following the argument here started by cabidas?
The argument he put forward is :
To utilise HFC as Mr Turnbull suggests, requires massive investment. Investment that both Telstra and Optus publicly stated they wouldn’t provide long before the idea of any NBN was put forward. A cost that the Tax payer would have to provide, on budget, at the expense of roads and hospitals.
Where does FTTP come from?
Well….when a mummy FttP loves a daddy FttP a great deal…
;o)
So its not, as widely rumored, to be when a daddy HFC loves a mommy FttN?
Someone’s misled me!!!
That’ll give you a baby MtM Gav!
“we’ve laundered all your money to Telstra and Alcatel. To boost our own shares. That is what we do best. So stick with our current ADSL technology for a while.. “
I would have believed this more than what was said on that flop of a campaign ad.
A train wreck interview with another member of a train wreck government… Nothing to see here move along..
Cormann has to be one of the worst Government speakers I have ever seen. Sure, all Coalition losers sledge Labor, but that is all I have heard Cormann do. On top of that, I think he is also the rudest of the bunch. In every interview I have seen where he and a Labor person have appeared, Cormann continuously interrupts the other speaker. At least the others generally give a chance for the other person to say their usual talking points, before interjecting with their own.
nah, ScoMos skating on the question of the SSM plebiscite when queried by Scales with one of the more patronising (not to mention evasive) answers i have ever seen puts him top of the tree for me. i havent actually seen much of Cormann, so i will have to reserve judgement there. but if his tactic is to talk over, bluster and filibuster then that is right up there for me too. flip a coin i guess…..
Actually, theres a whole bunch of them doing that now (Julie Bishop for example). I think Malcolm’s confidence in the plebiscite, and his party following it, is misplaced.
“Firstly, although I don’t have any inside information, it seems likely that someone has briefed Steve Austin with a number of articles from Delimiter and other similar tech sites with respect to the NBN.”
Just a logical extension I guess …. ABC:D ;)
In response, Cormann could not provide a figure — noting only that the Coalition had committed to spending no more than $29.5 billion on the project.
That’s correct.
“The Australian Government has committed $29.5 billion in equity to NBN Co Limited (NBN), which is expected to be fully utilised by the end of the 2016-17 financial year,” the Budget says.>
https://delimiter.com.au/2016/05/03/budget-2016-nbn-co-running-money/
Cormann said. “Again this is probably a question that you should be raising with the Minister for Communications Mitch Fifield, who will be able to take you through that in some great detail.”
Yes, if there is going to be any NBN policy updates that’s who you would expect to announce it.
That’s a ‘train wreck’ interview?
It may be a “technically” correct statement, but it wasn’t the correct answer for the question asked.
But you know all about moving goal posts, don’t you Alain ;o)
There are thousands of budget allocations for all sorts things, the Finance Minister has to commit to memory every single one and how much has been used up for each allocation like the NBN progressively for every month, and if he doesn’t it’s a ‘train wreck’ interview?
Yeah ok.
Well it is his job isn’t it
This isn’t exactly the smallest budget allocation.
It probably ranks just after or before the submarines.
There are a number of large budget allocations, defence, health, social welfare, environment, etc etc, once again to commit all of them to memory as to how much is left month by month in each allocation in case a journo asks the question would be impossible.
The Minister in charge of the NBN might know how much of the $29.5B is left month by month but it would depend on the frequency of that information given by Treasury, the salient fact is it is going to run out around June/July 2017.
His role as a shareholder minister for the NBN is what makes it the trainwreck it was, not his role as Minister of Finance.
And just to add to that, is it any wonder nbn™ is out of control when even the shareholder ministers don’t know what’s going on :/
What answer are actually after, and why is it crucial beyond knowing the $29.5B funding is going to run out halfway through 2017, which was announced in the May budget?
What answer are actually after? What are you, a caveman?
And stop changing the subject, the relevant shareholder minister did not know the basic answers for a GBE that supposedly is a direct report to him. The fact that even HE can’t tell you when the funding will in fact run out, or how much they have spent to date, is laughable.
He wasn’t asked when will the funding run out.
I know reading is hard for you Alain, but the article clearly states what he asked, “how much [money] the Government had spent on the NBN thus far?”
If he can’t answer that, then he has NFI when the funding will run out, because he has NFI how much they’ve spent already.
And it’s an outrage that one of the people charged with oversight of the project doesn’t know this.
“Yes, if there is going to be any NBN policy updates that’s who you would expect to announce it.”
I would also expect that either of the 2 shareholder ministers (Cormann is one) would be quite conversant with the policy and facts as it is absolutely their job to know…
The NBN was not mentioned at the Liberal Party election launch on the 26th, are you expecting a major Coalition NBN announcement between now and Saturday?
The Coalition are taking a punt that business as usual with their existing MtM policy is all that is required.
Labor are taking a punt that adding some more FTTP to the Coalition policy and waving the magic wand around on funding calculations and the finish date is a winning strategy.
My money is on the Coalition approach.
@ alain,
My money is on the Coalition approach.
Noooo, say it isn’t so…?
We would never have known, ROFL.
You’re welcome
Not surprising, even Richard is saying it’s a “policy flop” (which I think we can all agree on)…they are better off avoiding it and hammering the whole “OMFG Brexit!! Vote us for stability!!”…
Well it’s not a policy flop, because the MtM policy is what the Coalition took to the 2013 election, if you want to look at policy flops in terms of the polling result the Labor 2013 FTTP policy was the policy flop.
Troll can you point to the 2013 people Lucy where it said up to $56B and use the HFC in the network.
But I will either expect silence or some distraction or claimed if revised. But the fact is the current MTM isn’t the policy that the coalition took to the 2013 election.
Keep telling yourself that if it helps ;o)
Rizz,
But the fact is the current MTM isn’t the policy that the coalition took to the 2013 election.
FTTN – yes.
FTTP in greenfields – yes.
Fixed wireless – yes
HFC – yes
Satellite – yes
Labor NBN 2016 Policy
Coalition FTTN – yes
FTTP greenfields and some more brownfields FTTP – yes
Fixed wireless – yes
Coalition HFC – yes
Coalition FTTB – yes
Satellite -yes
Not much difference is there?
LOL
Lol troll can you point to where in the 2013 policy where it said would use HFC
2013 policy
FTTN – yes.
FTTP in greenfields – yes.
Fixed wireless – yes
HFC – no only to allow Optus and Telstra to compete against the FTTN.
Satellite – yes
MTM
FTTN – yes.
FTTP in greenfields – yes.
Fixed wireless – yes
HFC – yes
Satellite – yes
There fixed it for you
Reality,
“But the fact is the current MTM isn’t the policy that the coalition took to the 2013 election.
FTTP in greenfields – yes.”
This from the same Coalition which avoids any FTTP.
Oh troll forgot
2013 policy
$20B cap funding peak $29B
MTM $29B cap funding peak upto $56Byep looks the same doesn’t it lol
So that’s a yes then, the MtM mix the Coalition took to the 2013 election is what they are rolling out now, and the Labor MtM policy is based on the Coalition MtM policy, so much so they just used CP 16 funding estimates and added a billion so it didn’t quite match up.
lol
So troll where was the HFC again in the 2013 policy can you point it out one more time
Malcolm could have saved money creating a website for it then, he could have just used your very, very short little list Alain.
More proof of Coalition incompetence…
I tweeted you an interview I had with Steve Austin a couple weeks ago and have also been providing relevant information to ABC.
A lot of politicians turn into Barnaby Joyce without a briefing/talking points, but being a shareholder minister you’d think he’d be a bit more across it.
A more interesting interview would be with the Labor Finance Minister asking them to explain the costing analysis behind the $57B funding figure for the Labor NBN Policy, and if the $29.5B is going to run out around halfway through 2017 as the last Budget indicated and most likely accelerated now that Labor is going to roll out the higher CPP FTTP, where the balance of the external funding is coming from.
Who cares Reality? They can just “revise” it after the election.
Exactly like the Liberals did. $29Bn, Fully Costed, Ready to go. Complete lies, told before the last election.
Renai this liberal flavored spam is getting really tiresome, timer for the ban hammer!
Will the ABC be motivated to interview the Labor Finance Minister about how the Labor NBN funding figure of $57B was calculated?
No.
Will the Labor Finance Minister want to do such a interview?
No.
R – Your self interview provided more clarity than Mats ….avoid running for parliament.
Who’s running nbn(tm)? Who’s paying the bills now? I don’t think it’s Labor? Do you?
@ alain,
Another typically stupid alain diversionary question…good to see you are keeping your 100% record in tact ;)
But last time I looked the “opposition” (there’s a little guarded hint for you) didn’t have a Finance Minister they had a shadow (see what I did there) Finance Minister.
Perhaps one day, before the mouth frothing starts to defend at all costs, you’ll feed the mouse first, so he can start pedaling and you can think before posting more foolish, incorrect comments.
Apology accepted/you’re welcome.
No. It would be a trainwreck.
Fixed that for you ;o)
$18b “invested” by taxpayers thru 31MAR2016.
Governance responsibility lies with the Board and the Company’s officers, not the shareholders. Reviews have been undertaken (unsurprisingly not positive):
http://www.minister.communications.gov.au/malcolm_turnbull/news/review_into_governance_of_nbn_co_released#.V3IyQ2OO6V4
So Richard if labor gets back in and does the same review saying to same thing about the current board would it be unsurprisingly too
Reviews under Labor said the same thing. You’d need to comprehend the link.
Happy to read the public info / reviews / leaks. All continue to expose this policy folly (if you know what to look for).
ButRichard you keep saying they are very competent. What the policy folly of the one you could have writen or the best policy was the tender that no one wanted to do
Reviews (under Labor and Liberal’s time) all critical of goverance under Quigley’s tenure. None yet critical of new management.
This isn’t complicate, then neither was finding the spreadsheet row. How did you get on?
“Reviews (under Labor and Liberal’s time) all critical of goverance under Quigley’s tenure”
Could you please provide links for those?
Lol Richard yes found the row how’s that counter factual going that you fell for that you claimed you didn’t.
@c already have!
@jk so the row that you and fellow squealers jumped on was there all the time. Unsurprisingly no correction. Time to reflect.
Wrong yet again, like goverance above. Don’t worry, just another piece you don’t understand. Back to flogging those iPads!
What piece don’t I understand that you fell for the counter factual hook line and sink. Then run away with the tail between your legs when not from the senate when morrow admitted it was not what you where claiming but from the release of the letter asking for the counter factual a month later.
Oh wait what was it you where using the best number at the time except they weren’t the best number at the time
Jk’s ranting gibberish. Can’t use a spreadsheet, no idea re corporate governance, can’t read CPs or ARs, believes cost and time for all techs is equivalent, Quigley was on time and budget…
His “devastating” evidence link has both unaware of senate estimates disclosures, at least I was in Iran. Wonders why I walk away from his threads, like so many of the squealer’s “debates”; not worth arguing once their ignorance (again) exposed. Like this thread.
On no Richard numbers man I have hit a nerve. Numbers man falling for the counter factual lol. The senario 1.5 which wasn’t even if they had continued but claim it to be. Thought it was your smoking gun didn’t you when the CP16 was released couldn’t stop claiming it. Not so good with number are you.
The policy he could have writen himself now costing almost as much as the SR FTTP. So looking at the SR now numbers man would an upto $56B MTM is still better than a $64B FTTP in hindsight now?
Oh look Richard being a whiny little bitch again… trying to “again” excuse the MTM debacle to appease his own HUGE ego, what a surprise.
Anyhoo…
Still awaiting an explanation (from you or the lap dog) in relation to this inferior, retrograde, MTM/FRAUDBAND – a complete debacle beyond compare – yes “the plan you claimed you could have been commissioned to write in relation to the promised, fully costed at $29.5B, ready to roll out to all Aussies by 2016?
GO
You’re welcome
It’s easy to see when you’ve hit a nerve with Richard, with his lack of education, his spelling and grammar go out the window :o)
Says the master of the “ranting gibberish” ;-)
JK exposing your ignorance takes little time, your squealing posts certainly annoying. 7 years ago ask to learn a little, clearly not possible.
We’ll go again with your latest: “almost as much”
peak funding: CP16 ~$49b, SR13 S1 ~$73, SR13 S2 ~$64b.
In the company of financial “geniuses” like Alex (Rizz) and TM.
Lol Richard why didn’t you used the $56B. $8B is not much more than for a policy you could have writen that has been have cost blowouts of almost $10B a year over the last 3 years.
I didn’t use $56b because it isn’t, that’s the upper figure of the range (i also didn’t use the lower figure ).
You don’t think the other peak funding (SR and CPs) figures are representative of ranges as well? Fairly specific numbers for such a large project over such a long timeframe. Only joking, you wouldn’t know how these forecast are prepared;-)
Yes Richard it’s a great forecast with and $10B NBN doesn’t know how much it’s going to cost lol. But then they where claiming it to be $41B the 2 years before that and $29B the same year. Looks like they know as much as you do. But then you could read the counter factual either.
Cherry pick much “expert”? lol, classic ;-)
The appalling truth is that even if these questions were put to Mitch Fifield, the out-of-his-depth Communications Minister, he would have identical difficulties answering them.
I get that feeling too, though he at least soaks up enough about it that he says things that sound kinda plausible when put on the spot. I doubt an interviewer could get any in depth discussion with him on the NBN like they could do with Conroy.
No one has done a in depth interview with Conroy on Labor 2016 NBN policy, in fact beyond his appearance in the Labor influenced NBN senate committee for the last three years busily head kicking Coalition policy, (as you do when you have the numbers) he has said little about the Labor 2016 NBN policy.
And why would they? Conroy is defence, not communications.
Sheesh, you get the basics so wrong so often…
Makes you wonder why he was on the Senate select committee on the NBN then?
Doesn’t make me wonder, but then I get you don’t understand how democracy works.
http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Senate/Powers_practice_n_procedures/Senate_Briefs/Brief04#senate
–There are a bunch of senators on the committee, http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/National_Broadband_Network/Committee_Membership
How many comms ministers/shadows do you see on the committee Alain? It’s entirely appropriate that Conroy be on the committee as he was the previous shareholder minister.
You would still have to be better informed than the average voter and listening intently to see through Marius’ soothing platitudes and unchallenged fibs/half truths: “Labor’s mess…Labor’s mess…Labor’s mess…”
The Big Lie repeated often enough.
Incidentally it is just on ten years since the nation was captivated by https://youtu.be/2yckqyg75oE. How far have we come in three words?
I watched Mathias Cormann on Q&A on Monday night, he didn’t look comfortable and Tanya Plibersek made him look amateurish, she had a better grasp of finance than Cormann has. Plibersek is usually respectful to her opponents but she couldn’t help laughing at him, once the guy gets of script he’s hopeless.
” it seems likely that someone has briefed Steve Austin with a number of articles from Delimiter and other similar tech sites with respect to the NBN.”
Not saying he read it, but I forwarded Steve Austin a link to Mike Quigleys speech that you linked on here last week, Renai. Could just be coincidental timing though.
He is good at train wreck interviews.
https://www.facebook.com/Woolley.Richard/videos/10205698560737463/
I’m guessing the correct thing to do would be peddle the unrealistic expectations the previous government keeps bringing up?
I don’t think that was much of a train wreck. Cormann repeatedly spouted his talking points about how they “were delivering” or said that the interviewer should ask the relevant minister.
Not a mention from the interviewer about how the bulk of those connections that the Libs have been connecting are FTTP connections that were negotiated by the previous Labor government.
Not a mention by the interviewer that FTTN deployment speed (only released September 2015) crapped all over the previous Labor FTTP effort either.
Yes, 36,190 after three years, terrific effort *golfclap*
Even the FTTP rollout was higher than that after the 1.5 year mark (by the 2013 election).
Comments are closed.