Conroy to rejig NBN rollout schedule

By Ry Crozier on Sep 8, 2010 1:38 PM
Filed under Telco/ISP

Priority fibre for regional areas.

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy will meet with NBN Co in coming days to "re-design" its rollout timetable in a way that prioritises regional deployment of fibre.

The Prime Minister and key independents yesterday struck a deal that would see regional areas get priority over metropolitan areas for National Broadband Network (NBN) fibre.

Conroy told the ABC's AM program today that the re-jig was "a question of a timetable about where they'll (re)start" rolling out the network.

He indicated the changes would not come with an increase in the overall cost of building the network.

But he said the changes would "mean that we'll [the Government and NBN Co] be focused more regionally than we otherwise would have been."

NBN Co said yesterday in a brief statement that it would restart spending, tenders and recruitment following the installation of a Labor minority government.

"Everyone at NBN Co is looking forward to working with business, government, the community and our customers to deliver a high-speed broadband future for all Australians," the company stated.

10 comments in this discussion

"I agree that they need a big upgrade in terms of speed and connectivity but also should be rolled out in line with city centre which would make the NBN more commercially viable. Maybe the East ..."

By thor

Tags

conroy, nbnco, nbn, broadband, network, rollout

NBN Co cracks down on future critics

Conroy shortlists next 20 NBN sites

NBN Co opens network operations centre

Vodafone to trial fixed-line broadband service

Breaking Stories

New NZ IT minister accused of 'extraordinary secrecy'

Govt spies early exit from Telstra contract

Suncorp rules out outsourced IT as customers go online

Accenture wins Health data warehouse deal

Comments: 10

RB Sep 8, 2010 3:39 PM	Surely it would be more financially viable to build up those metropolitan areas that don't currently get ADSL2 and to start generating some healthy income before spending on the rural build that will never make a profit! Of course we want our rural Australians to achieve the benefits of the NBN but can Australia really afford to ignore financial responsibility? Instead let's capitalize on the NBNCo-Telstra deal and start migrating complete poorly-serviced suburbs giving maximum benefit to the majority of Australians and at the same time reducing the financial risk (and cost) of the project. While it may not cost any more in capital to build out-to-in it will most certainly affect total cash draw-down and interim interest charges. PS. I don't work for Telstra and I do currently get good ADSL so I'm not suggesting I get it first.
thor Sep 8, 2010 6:31 PM	RB absolutly agree, i am in the metro area but on the outskirts. we can only get base adsl 8 mb speed (if lucky) anybody further out gets nothing but 1.5. What they need to remember is that there is a fair amount of users that want but the telco wont because for them it not viable to roll it out. I hope with the NBN more competition is available.
Bazwalt Sep 8, 2010 9:53 PM	@RB & Thor - As much as I want fibre (who doesn't!) I have to disagree. There are PLENTY of small rural communities that get NOTHING at all and this is good initial income. These are communities that have NEVER had anything. Not to mention, the rural representatives are ultimately the ones that the independents were representing during the hung-parliament so I think we should show them a little courtesy. The time for metro areas will come soon enough :) Be happy that it's on it's way :P
deteego Sep 8, 2010 10:04 PM	Bazwalt wrote: @RB & Thor - As much as I want fibre (who doesn't!) I have to disagree. There are PLENTY of small rural communities that get NOTHING at all and this is good initial income. These are communities that have NEVER had anything. Not to mention, the rural representatives are ultimately the ones that the independents were representing during the hung-parliament so I think we should show them a little courtesy. The time for metro areas will come soon enough :) Be happy that it's on it's way :P Except that its a massive waste of money for almost zero benefit for them (compared to just giving them other forms of internet?). They aren't even going to reach 10 megabit a second (letalone 1 gigabit a second) for standard internet use. The only way they will reach high speeds is if everyone in the country connected to FTTH decides to start doing video calls all the time
thor Sep 9, 2010 11:19 AM	for the average farmer who would only use it for email, wireless at 12 mb would be adequate, you get a country business that needs a couple of pc I would touch wireless at all. the only other way decent enough besides fibre for long distance is microwave, but we all know that is exceedingly expensive.
Bob Sep 9, 2010 11:44 AM	Wasn't the NBN about providing services in the bush? People in cities can get internet at reasonable speeds one way or another, often several ways by several carriers. I used Next G wireless for my business for over a year and it worked fine, better than the ADSL it replaced, only the cap became an issue. I now have ADSL and Next G because I need to be portable and the trend is the same for everyone. The demand for mobile computing will grow much faster than fixed due to iPad etc. Simple, instant solution, subsidise the Next G which already works in most areas and over distances of 150Km out to gas platforms in the ocean. If other carriers offer a service then your choice.
Gavk Sep 9, 2010 8:47 PM	Why do people think the 'average' farmer would only use it for email? I know lots of farmers that use the internet heavily. I do agree it's probably not the best idea to roll it out first in regional reas to get statistics on take up, or even the best financial decision (won't make much revenue) BUT In general they need a upgrade more than most people in the city do, yes - some in the city have dodgy connections but it's far more widespread in rural areas.
anonymous Sep 10, 2010 12:09 PM	@Gavk, exactly right. In some quarters there seems to be a sneering assumption that farm businesses and families do not need good tech as much as the self-describing urban elites. AFAIK, the comms needs of those beyond the cities are exactly the same as in the 'burbs, except perhaps that they are even more dependent on good Net access because of a lack of alternatives.
Maxxi2 Sep 10, 2010 1:31 PM	anonymous, I hope this does not cause you to change position here, but I agree with you 100%... >;)) RB: you are describing exactly the reason why the NBN needs to be a federally driven project and not driven by a private sector that is almost wholly dependant on time limited returns and profitability. If the PMG had been built on that basis we would not even have a phone network nor postal services, as these were quite unprofitable for decades and were taxpayer subsidised. The postal service was then cross-subsidised heavily by the telecoms arm of the PMG for many years. Strong expansion of the whole telecoms sector eventually drove the comms side of the PMG into profitability, but the private sector would have abandoned both in the 50s or 60s, latest the early 70s... A core deliverable though of the PMG, and then Telecom Australia was that (almost...) every Australian would get the same base pricing for service delivery. Private industry will give you the same pricing alright, but per meter, per location, per minute spent getting you connected. That is not a national model with national interests as the driver. That is shareholder value thinking.
thor Sep 10, 2010 3:08 PM	I agree that they need a big upgrade in terms of speed and connectivity but also should be rolled out in line with city centre which would make the NBN more commercially viable. Maybe the East Coast is different to the west but I have service many farmers pc (as a mobile technician) and I can say that many want to simply get emails, buy stock and other items via the web. Maybe the younger farmers do other things (e.g youtube). I agree is the wireless should be more than 12 mb (at least 25mbps) which they would be able to mean they can run whatever they need to. Maxxi2- gotta love your efforts with using historic data, though I see if alittle differently we can learn from past experience and see how to improve it next time :) PS I live in a semi rural area and have cr** internet for years so I can speak from experience. PSS I never said Farmers didnt need good tech, I been realistic from actual working experience with customer who are farmers.