Election outcome to favour bush broadband

 

Independents are NBN believers.

A cursory look at the platforms of independent members of parliament would suggest a hung parliament could favour the prioritised rollout of broadband services in regional and rural Australia.

The balance of power looks to be held by four independent members and one Green member of parliament, Adam Bandt.

One of those independent members, Tony Windsor (New England) represents a community (Armidale) announced as early mainland sites for the rollout of the ALP's National Broadband Network.

"Country Australia deserves to have the best access to services," Tony Windsor told the ABC today. "We need equity of access to those services."

Windsor said he felt regional Australia was sold short when Telstra was privatised. "I don't trust anybody on that issue," he said.

Negotiations this week will be "one way of ramming that [message] home, to make sure whoever the Government is delivers what they say they are going to deliver."

Neighbouring independent member Rob Oakeshot (Lyne) has also spoken in support of an NBN (see quotes below).

Meanwhile Bob Katter [pictured left, below] officiated the dig of the backhaul network in Mount Isa in February and has oft commented on the decline of communications in regional Australia.

According to the web site for fellow independent Andrew Wilkie, who is close to securing a seat in Tasmania, "the National Broadband Network will genuinely provide essential infrastructure for Australia's future economic and social prosperity. It must be allowed to proceed."

The Greens have also noted a preference for the ALP's broadband plan, as well as fervent opposition to the ALP's internet filtering plans.

Ian Birks, chief executive at the Australian Information Industry Association (AIIA) said there will undoubtedly be a "focus on broadband in rural and regional areas" over the coming weeks.

"Broadband did become a mainstream and significant issue in this election," he said. "In several acceptance speeches, members recognised the broadband rollout as an issue in their electorate.

"Broadband will be a high order in negotiations over the next week or two," he said.

Today, Julia Gillard said the NBN has a "transformative power" to relieve the "pressure of distance" felt in regional communities.

Birks said the industry needed to "clearly explain the payback that can be delivered to regional and rural Australia from broadband" such as smart grids and e-Health.

Birks said that eHealth implementation, as part of broader healthcare reform and "beyond what the Prime Minister has promised", would be a key issue over the next term, as would smart grids, teleworking and ICT's role in ensuring environmental sustainability.

"As an industry, we are willing to engage with whichever party takes power to discuss the ICT agenda in detail," he said.

In their own words

In July, Independent member for Lyne Rob Oakeshot noted in a press release that the Federal Government needed to "take on the role of bridging the [broadband] gap" as "no private provider will do it".

"This is a population debate and infrastructure debate all rolled into one," he said at the time. "We will continue to centralise as a country if we don't get the NBN Co. roll-out right, and hitting the regions early is critical."

Similarly, earlier this month New England Independent MP Tony Windsor slammed The National Party for submitting to the Liberal Party's lower spend on broadband.

"When we last relied on competition to deliver telecommunication services across Australia, all the service providers focused on metropolitan Australia and left country Australians to fend for themselves," Windsor said at the time.

"Competitive service delivery went to the biggest markets so that the shareholders were looked after before spreading the service to where it was needed most to negate the tyranny of distance as it would in the country.

"I have been very supportive of the National Broadband Network rollout as I see it as the railway of the 21st Century that will only make doing business in and from country Australia easier and more attractive."

Copyright © iTnews.com.au . All rights reserved.


Election outcome to favour bush broadband
"I would take any predictions of 'completion' as being intelligent guesses at best and at worst a roll the dice. Since when did any Government project especially of this magnitude was ever ..."
By advocate
 
 
 
Comments: 26
DazzaJ
Aug 22, 2010 7:50 PM
The coalitions idea is far more feasible and affordable than this 43Bn dollar white elephant.
Technologies are available now with current infrastructure to offer decent broadband to the nation but because there is no money to be made then companies are reluctant.
Government should step in where it is not feasible for providers to do, but not compete in already well supported areas.
Internet cannot,or should not, take precedence over health, education, employment, housing etc etc etc.
The NBN will make no difference to the shortage of doctors in rural areas, or the closing of hospitals, or lack of affordable housing, or the high rate of suicide, or .. . . . . . ..
HubertCumberdale
Aug 22, 2010 8:48 PM
Good, wish we had more elections like this one, it's the only way these parties will ever respect Australian voters. I heard what Tony Windsor and Bob Katter said on the ABC, we really need more politicians like this and with the Greens we may just get the best of both worlds: the NBN without some religious nutjob contrived filter.

Also regardless of what less informed people would say the need for higher internet speeds is necessary and no current technology I'm connected to is capable of more than 100mbit, in fact I can only get about 16mbit due to my distance from the exchange, only fiber can fix these speed issues.
mad1k5
Aug 22, 2010 10:45 PM
DazzaJ

Rubbish, alot of Companies moving from 1 technology type for wireless, to another, Fixed Line Networks is more stable technology - Copper or Fibre.

Now companies are moving to LTE, and LTE we can't have in Australia just yet until the Spectrum is available.

Starmazzola - NBN can supply Wireless providers with Backhaul and links closer than Telco/ISP's in the current system.

To those disbelievers, the NBN isn't just about $43 Billion it's about the following:

- Ubiquitous
- Removing Monopoly that plagued the sector.
- Removing inefficiencies in current software and hardware.

Coalitions plan is to give Private Companies MONEY, you know how well that worked in the past, we will get your wireless, but it will be WiMax, when the world is moving into LTE territory!

Private Industry can do Wireless but cannot replace fixed line broadband. Those predicting that Fixed Line will disappear is nonsense.
Ace
Aug 23, 2010 2:30 AM
Going by the poll on the right, @DazzaJ's opinion is deservedly a minority opinion among IT folk. And rightly so. (for prosperity, it reads Coalition wireless:20%, ALPs NBN:61% and neither (not a voting factor): 19%)

And @HubertC, I'm pretty sure it won't be long before 'elections like this one' will be something you'll never want to see again. Whoever governs is going to struggle just to get a budget through let alone make any decisions that will advance Australia fair. We're looking at 3 years of stagnation at this point.
HubertCumberdale
Aug 23, 2010 2:45 AM
Ace wrote:
And @HubertC, I'm pretty sure it won't be long before 'elections like this one' will be something you'll never want to see again. Whoever governs is going to struggle just to get a budget through let alone make any decisions that will advance Australia fair.


Well you are entitlement to your opinion no matter how horribly wrong you are, besides I want to see this sort of thing happen every election, the more disruption from minor parties the better, I want to see them get physical too just like some other countries, it would be worth watching question time then.


Ace wrote:
We're looking at 3 years of stagnation at this point.


as opposed to the last 30 years of stagnation?
Spookytooth
Aug 23, 2010 8:35 AM
To spend or not to spend 43 Billion? we all lost our minds can the 43 Billion not be spend on more relevant issues and let the private sector build the platform for growth as is done in other countries. I cannot believe so much effort is being spent on the fact that we should or should not spend yet our health and hospitals are labouring under strain come on Australia wake up.
MerariSchroeder
Aug 23, 2010 9:13 AM
Why the conclusion that the independents will favour the NBN? If they do want faster internet in their region, won't both parties deliver that? Didn't the ALP scrap the $1bn OPEL plan, which would have been delivering by now?

Besides would the independents risk siding with the ALP, when their seat is conservative?
btone
Aug 23, 2010 9:49 AM
At @ 20 to 25 billion, the real figure, over almost 10 years the spend on the NBN is a piddle in the rain tank of the national expenditure. Amazing that so many are conned by the Santamaria boy and his trogs and the modern 'balanced budget' BS. Its infrastructure investment not a Mac bank conjob.
advocate
Aug 23, 2010 9:51 AM
It is interesting that with a hung Parliament after Saturdays election how the so called only communications policy worth voting for the Labor NBN build according to all the tech forum comment both industry and user is not the high profile policy issue that everyone claimed it was, otherwise Labor would have won the election.

Prior to the last election Labor when into the election with the FTTN tender on their election platform, Rudd won, then Rudd and Conroy scrapped it and the NBN was born, this is the first election where the voters have had a chance to mandate the NBN build.

The outcome from Saturday indicates Labor has no such mandate, it just as much a mandate for the Coalition policy, perhaps even more so if you factor in the anti-Labor swing.

Edited by advocate: 23/8/2010 09:53:41 AM

Edited by advocate: 23/8/2010 09:55:48 AM
BrettWinterford
Aug 23, 2010 10:37 AM
@merariscroeder - I would say it would play into the ALP's plans because these independents detest the Nats because of its support for the sale of Telstra and are on the record as saying that the Government should build a national network. I'm not saying they will necessarily go with the ALP, but bush broadband will be the winner regardless.
Ace
Aug 23, 2010 11:03 AM
It does seem to be the case that the coalition supporting indies are supporters of the NBN, and are likely to push for a change in Abbotts broadband policy. Interesting few days coming up.

Sorry @HubertC, I momentarily forgot I was responding to a Greens voter.
HubertCumberdale
Aug 23, 2010 11:17 AM
Ace wrote:
Sorry @HubertC, I momentarily forgot I was responding to a Greens voter.


Nice assumption but a totally erroneous one, do you always resort to this sort of thing when you fail to put forward a valid response?
Mike_Sadler
Aug 23, 2010 11:30 AM
DazzaJ, NBN haters one and all,

Given there is never any actual numbers from the "it'll be a white elephant" brigade, lets park all the 'discussion' about the relative merits of each offering and allow me to bore you with this fact.

The NBN, whatever it costs, will have its entire budget returned to the Government, with sufficient interest to offset inflation and a nice bit of public infrastructure as a result; like the Snowy Mountains Scheme, roads, schools, even Harbour Bridges and Opera Houses. If it delivers not one social or economic benefit to the users, it will be cash neutral in the final analysis. The only 'cost' to 'us' is some credit risk at the 'all the eggs are broken but the omelette isn't cooked' stage. The money to seed this project comes from borrowing for the project, not the budget, so not one school, hospital, road or dam is 'bumped down the list' because of NBN.

In contrast, the supposedly fiscally responsible Abbott camp would GIVE $billions of taxpayers' money to 'industry' to do what they've been unwilling/unable to do thus far, so that a few more people can get exactly what most of us have right now anyway. There is no business plan on their part either, no deliverables, but apparently giving away $billions in order to remain where we are is the economically responsible thing to do? They will almost certainly need to compensate Telstra for forcing them to retain, maintain and expand the existing copper CAN until some politically motivated EOL date (as yet unpublished, of course) in the future.

Apart from the despair I feel at the utter waste of public funds in pursuing such a strategy, I have to ask... so what GOES? $5B out of the budget for NBN-Lite gifts, grants and compensation comes from... where exactly? Does anyone know? Does anyone care? I know I care that $5B of services will be cut out of budgets to come, I will only know the full extent of that concern when we are also privy to where the money is coming from.

What a bizarre world you live in DazzaJ and all you Abbott fanbois; where investing in an asset, much like borrowing to buy a house, is 'irresponsible', yet giving away $bilions to achieve very little and more $billions to make aged infrastructure work beyond its realistic life and design parameters, makes one fidurciary prudent. That's MY money!

I can only hope I'm not dragged kicking and screaming into that hell, where one would give taxpayers' money away just to support conservative dogma. Again.
Ace
Aug 23, 2010 12:24 PM
Come now @HubertC, I believe it was you who first 'resorted' to "Well you are entitlement to your opinion no matter how horribly wrong you are...", and the throwaway line "as opposed to the last 30 years of stagnation?" (which is apparently a 'valid response'). I didn't even pull you up on your grammar!

In the mean time, with seats at 73 each, I'd be suprised if the NBN wasn't here to stay (well, at least for a few more years).
HubertCumberdale
Aug 23, 2010 1:15 PM
Ace wrote:
Come now @HubertC, I believe it was you who first 'resorted' to "Well you are entitlement to your opinion no matter how horribly wrong you are...", and the throwaway line "as opposed to the last 30 years of stagnation?" (which is apparently a 'valid response'). I didn't even pull you up on your grammar!

A simple query isn't a valid response? I'm sorry I didn't realise these questions were too hard. I keep forgetting the types of people that now use the internet. Stating facts btw is a totally valid response too but since it sounds like you are new to the internet I'll forgive you.
Ace
Aug 23, 2010 1:51 PM
Oh dear. Never mind @HubertC, onward and upward.
Mordd
Aug 23, 2010 2:39 PM
Greens win the election, and will make sure the NBN goes ahead, and the filter scheme doesn't.
Jovial Monk
Aug 23, 2010 7:07 PM
1 seat? the NBN is Labor’s project. the filter is dead, desperate to try and claim any on this as a Green initiative? LOL
Rondo
Aug 24, 2010 1:33 PM
I am a late comer to this discussion. Anyway, I hope you are still reading this blog and can respond.

I think there is confusion in how people read the NBN issue. I think many people think it is fibre cable versus wireless. Wrong. NBN is an ALP white elephent approach to a simple infrastructure issue. Yes, Australia needs a lot of fibre links to improve its telecommunication infrastructure but I do not believe every house needs a fibre feed.

We already have networks running by the various telcos and utility companies (i.e. Telstra, Optus, Foxtel and others). Why on earth, will these companies throw away their investments and move onto a monopoly NBN? Can anyone explain this?

If the fibre link is delivered to every house it will be under utilized because not all providers will transfer their services to this network and not all customers use the services.

Instead, I would like to see a national fibre network that will enable interested customers and vendors to tap into the network and receive the sertvice they want and at the price they prepare to pay.

I am sure there will be a sizable number of people who will be more than happy with their ADSL1, ADSL2 or wireless for many years to come.

If someone needs more than this, well, they can apply for the super duper fibre feed and pay for it.

I do believe that hospital, universities and coleges, large organisations and others should have a fibre link if they do not already have it.

I understand that the telcos do not see a good commercial outcome in rural areas. In this case, the government needs to step in and contract the work and not do it itself. ALP says it will sell the NBN. If there is no commercial case in rural areas, who is going to buy this white elephant? I do not see why the government needs to become a competitor to a well run telco industry.

Finally, there is no need to panic over the NBN. $43b can take Australia a long way so please do not fall into an ALP spin and believe the NBN in its current model is the only magic solution to a high speed network.
Ace
Aug 24, 2010 2:15 PM
For a glimpse of the Coalitions NBN plan, this makes interesting reading:
http://smh.drive.com.au/motor-news/chinas-nineday-traffic-jam-stretches-100km-20100824-13ix7.html
umbria
Aug 24, 2010 4:23 PM
@Rondo, the tyranny of distance in Australia is our greatest natural disadvantage, not a "simple infrastructure issue".

15 years of expecting commercial providers to deliver broadband to Australia have us where we are today. The 60% who have broadband forget that nearly 40% are still on dialup, and must pay STD or mobile rates for every phone call they make.

The NBN is about investing $200 per head per year for a decade to deliver fibre to 93% of the population, including enough fibre backhaul to supply local wireless services as well.

Once laid this fibre will not need upgrading for half a century, like the copper we laid from the 1950s. It will return savings to households, businesses and the health and education budgets far in excess of the investment, making it an ideal candidate for government funds.
advocate
Aug 25, 2010 8:37 AM
umbria: It is interesting you make the example of dial-up users in your case for NBN on the basis that's all they can get, but many choose it even though they can ADSL or HFC cable.

For many dial-up is fine for the ad-hoc casual use they make of the internet, perhaps twice a week to check for emails, do their banking and then hang up, no ADSL modems, simple but effective.

I am sure the NBN infrastructure will also handle emails and internet banking quite well, but do many residences actually need such a Rolls Royce solution in the first place?
Ace
Aug 25, 2010 12:08 PM
Yes. A lot of these people are primary producers competing on the world market. Weather and land research is critical. Business decisions and planning for the future hinge on monitoring the state of various economies, including our own.
deteego
Aug 25, 2010 2:27 PM
umbria wrote:
15 years of expecting commercial providers to deliver broadband to Australia have us where we are today. The 60% who have broadband forget that nearly 40% are still on dialup, and must pay STD or mobile rates for every phone call they make.

The NBN is about investing $200 per head per year for a decade to deliver fibre to 93% of the population, including enough fibre backhaul to supply local wireless services as well.

Once laid this fibre will not need upgrading for half a century, like the copper we laid from the 1950s. It will return savings to households, businesses and the health and education budgets far in excess of the investment, making it an ideal candidate for government funds.


Many things
1. In regards to corporations, that is half the story. Up until 2000, Telstra had an almost (or full) monopoly and abused it, we really didn't have a proper market place which would have provideded internet in rural areas up until the past 5 years or so
2. Its closer to $2000-5000 a head (depending on who you ask). If it was $200 dollars a head, I don't think anyone would be complaining (and something weird would be going on if you had FTTH for such a cheap price to EVERYONE)
3. And what happens if no one uses the fibre (except for the few home users that can afford it + corporations/hospitals/uni's that already use fibre) because its overkill? Julia Gillard already admitted on the forum that not everyone will use the broadband, only the people that will offer to pay for it (implying that it won't be in the price range for normal internet which is 50-100 a month?)
4. The Co-Alitions plan actually covers more rural areas to bring baseline 12mpbs internet (97% of Australia), NBN is 93%. I think what most rural people wan't is usable internet in the first place (something thats not dialup or unreliable/expensive satellite)
Ace
Aug 25, 2010 4:43 PM
Keep in mind the time frame @deteego. The NBN is targeted for completion in about 7 years. The Coalition is/was targeting about 2016. That's a long time with little or no progress. While we might be proud of our 50th place in the world for broadband speed, would we be as proud of 70th place?

Additionally, wireless is obviously a very second-rate option, and for remote users, the experience is unlikely to be pleasant. While I understand the wish to have city users share the misery of the bush with regard to internet access, would it not be a better idea to try to push higher speeds to the bush? It might seem a little lofty now, but in a few years it won't.
advocate
Aug 28, 2010 10:57 AM
I would take any predictions of 'completion' as being intelligent guesses at best and at worst a roll the dice.

Since when did any Government project especially of this magnitude was ever completed as predicted or on budget.

In the context of either rollout was does 'completion' actually mean in terms of the percentage of the Australian population that will have a choice of a NBN BB or Coalition plan?

Edited by advocate: 28/8/2010 10:59:41 AM

Edited by advocate: 28/8/2010 11:00:51 AM
Comments have been disabled for this article.
 
 
 
Top Stories
Vito Forte: A CIO for tough times
Fortescue Metals CIO talks vendor management and innovation.
 
Telstra shifts BigPond email to Windows Live
All data to be migrated to Microsoft cloud.
 
Vodafone Australia churn nears half a million for 2011
British joint owners 'not pleased'.
 
Sign up to receive iTnews email bulletins
   FOLLOW US...

Latest VideosSee all videos »

Latest Comments
Polls
Would you be concerned about your business' email data being hosted offshore?

   |   View results
Yes
  85%
 
No
  15%
TOTAL VOTES: 230

Vote