Opinion: Is Brisbane's fibre project really a win for Conroy?

 

Cherry-picking the positives.

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy has come out praising a fibre-to-the-home project in Brisbane that appears to underscore fears in the NBN Implementation Study of private companies "cherry-picking" locations before NBN Co can roll past.

Conroy's statement comes after Brisbane City Council announced the results of months of trials of a secretive project that runs fibre cables through the council's wastewater pipe infrastructure.

A report by the Brisbane Times last week said that council would go ahead with a full-scale fibre-to-the-home deployment in Brisbane in conjunction with i3 Asia Pacific.

Brisbane's Lord Mayor Campbell Newman was quoted as saying that he "was not prepared to wait" for the National Broadband Network (NBN), that the Federal project had "no firm timetable for a rollout across Brisbane and that it had "not put the needs of Brisbane on as high a priority as we would like."

So Brisbane decided to go it alone.

It's not exactly a glowing endorsement for the national broadband network. But Conroy somehow found a positive link to draw between the two projects.

"The Liberal Mayor of Brisbane understands that people want superfast broadband now," he said.

"The National Broadband Network (NBN) will provide a genuine, wholesale-only open access network which will maximise the benefits of competition for consumers.

"The NBN will deliver affordable high speed broadband for all Australians, not just those in metropolitan areas."

The problem for Conroy is that the Brisbane project isn't the NBN. If anything, it's a statement against the NBN - that progress is so slow, councils are taking on the networking of their regions themselves to get the job done and give high-speed broadband to residents.

The project also has the potential to pose far more significant problems for the Federal Government and NBN Co down the track.

The $25 million NBN implementation study prepared by McKinsey & Co and KPMG includes a section raising concerns that "carriers other than NBN Co might construct fixed-line superfast access networks (such as Fibre to the Node, DOCSIS 3.0 or competing FTTP networks) only in high-income and low-cost, high-density areas and then undercut NBN Co's average price due to the lack of any need to subsidise operations in higher-cost areas."
 
"If, as proposed, NBN Co charges a uniform wholesale access price across its fibre footprint, this implies providing an implicit cross subsidy to higher cost-to-serve areas from lower cost-to-serve areas," the study says.

The study authors recommend forcing "cherry-pickers" to provide "open and equivalent access" to their networks or be hit with financial penalties.

iTnews makes no suggestion that the Brisbane network represents a deliberate attempt to cherry-pick or undercut the NBN; only that it raises a question that the Government will need to seek clarity and assurances on when deciding their response to the implementation study's policy recommendations.

New rules

It appears that Brisbane Council, i3 and others may soon be contending with new laws that prevent them from competing with NBN Co.

When contacted by iTnews, a spokesman for the Minister said the Government "will shortly introduce legislation regarding any new or upgraded fibre networks."

Arguably, this is far more important than the couple of ancillary goals Conroy tries to score publicly by turning Brisbane into a political football.

Conroy makes points in his statement that the Brisbane plan is a "recognition that fibre-to-the-home was the ultimate future proof technology for Australians"; that the Mayor "clearly disputes [Opposition Communications spokesman] Malcolm Turnbull's claims that people living in cities already have adequate broadband."

NBN Co is due to hand its three-year rollout plan to the Government within weeks. One can only wonder whether the market is already forcing amendments to be made to it.

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


Opinion: Is Brisbane's fibre project really a win for Conroy?
"Good points Ry... The crucual aspect of the i3 / BCC announcement is that a Liberal govt (BCC) has endorsed and confirmed the need for 100Mbps fibre based infrastructure now and for their ..."
By Maxxi2
 
 
 
Comments: 13
Tailgator
Oct 18, 2010 8:43 AM
"iTnews makes no suggestion that the Brisbane network represents a deliberate attempt to cherry-pick or undercut the NBN;"

Why not?? That is the intention.

And if it does happen then the govt/taxpayer will be forced to pick up all the unprofitable regional and rural areas, in effect a massive and ongoing subsidy and loss. Either that or a two tiered pricing system.

Regional and rural residents should be very concerned. And while those in the city may think they're getting cheaper comminications access, they will be paying for the cost of the rural infrastructure one way or the other.
The only difference is that private enterprise gets in and takes their slice of pie. Anyone considering supporting such a situation should take a long hard look at the implications before doing so.

Just as journalists should be taking a long hard look at the details of the BCC/i3 agreement and of i3 itself.

djzort
Oct 18, 2010 9:51 AM
"The only difference is that private enterprise gets in and takes their slice of pie. Anyone considering supporting such a situation should take a long hard look at the implications before doing so."

NBNco is a private company anyway. Its slated to be sold when (if) the government gets its money back.

Surely function, not form should be the most important factor? Do you really care how the 100mbps gets to your house, or that you have 100mbps to your house?
MerariSchroeder
Oct 18, 2010 10:26 AM
[Conroy] "The Liberal Mayor of Brisbane understands that people want superfast broadband now"

No Mr. Conroy. Judging by their innovative deployment methods, they're likely to simply achieve an *affordable* solution.

Affordability comes first.
singo79
Oct 18, 2010 10:32 AM
@Tailgator "...And while those in the city may think they're getting cheaper communications access, they will be paying for the cost of the rural infrastructure one way or the other."

You mean a bit like how rural Australia paid for all of the infrastructure in the cities! After all the main industries that earned, and continue to earn export revenue, for this country are in rural areas. Without mines and farms this country would have nothing, they would export bugga all and would hardly bring in any external revenue to this country.

So it is about time that the cities started to subsidise the rural areas, for if no one wanted to live and work in rural areas then the city folk wouldn't have access to the infrastructure and services they have today.

I've said it many times, but how about everyone from rural areas pack up their lives and move to the cities. Let's all put extra load on all public infrastructure and services such as hospitals, roads and rail in this cities. More traffic congestion, higher housing prices due to the increased demand. Now that no one is living or working in rural Australia we longer are mining and exporting minerals, therefore there is no external income coming in to this country. We no longer have farmers producing livestock and fresh fruit and vegetables to consume, therefore we must import everything, of course at an inflated price as there isn't any local competition anymore.

I could go on, but I think I have made my point. City folk may think that they are subsidising rural Australia, but realistically speaking it is the other way around. The NBN is still going to be offering cheaper broadband then is already offered to a vast majority of Australians, therefore any savings is still better then nothing.

It is only fair to offer pricing and service parity to all Australians, for we are all taxpayers and we are all entitled to a share of those taxpayer dollars being spent in our communities and infrastructure in those communities.
Francis
Oct 18, 2010 10:52 AM
This is like the Optus Cable Fiasco all over again.
During evidence I gave to the Senate Select Committee on the NBN my two concluding point which were prompted by the by questioning of the previous speaker on Competition Policy and future technologies such as radio making the NBN irrelevant.
1.
Competition Policy. Given the large geographic size of this country and its relatively small population base, there is no room for more than one network as additional networks would only duplicate resources, not be fully utilised and consequently drive up costs.
As evidence of this I cited the Foxtel, Optus situation where the only ones that made any money out of the networks were the content providers in the form of the Hollywood producers who charged a motza for access to their film libraries. This only came to a head when the two companies came to an agreement and confronted the big studios.
2.
In relation to future developments making Fibre obsolete I stated that;
A.
There were speed, capacity as well as spectrum constraints on wireless which would affect its viability. which was one of the reasons TV broadcasts were moved from supplying an analogue signal to a digital one. (To free up Spectrum.)
B.
Outside the Laboratory you could not transmit a signal faster than light, and that advances in fibre were constantly being made in (For example) it being able to carry more than the 256 primary colours (Signals) to multiples of this original number.

Finally on the issue of running the cable down storm water drains or sewage mains, this is not a new Idea, it was actually floated during the Optus Cable Fiasco.
The problems with this approach are many, beginning with the problem of whether the pipes follow an optimum route, to maintenance.
Large volumes of water can whip around the cable, resulting to damage to it. Then there are problems with maintenance to the pipe, such as running a sanisnake up the pipe to clear a blockage and also lining the pipe when it is cracked or the seals deteriorate. this is done by either lining it with a Fibre Glass liner or sending a Pipe Burster down the pipe to burst and expand it while pulling a HDPE liner in behind it.
Tony Windsor said "Do it once, do it fibre" what he left off was that there are no short cuts.
realitybites
Oct 18, 2010 11:56 AM
@ singo79
Well said mate!! +1

I'm getting sick of these people who post comments about regional and rural Aust that obviously don't live there and have no idea about the cost of living there.

There's another thread on this forum that's a perfect example of what I'm talking about.
realitybites
Oct 18, 2010 12:20 PM
@Francis - "Outside the Laboratory you could not transmit a signal faster than light"

Have they actually demonstrated this inside a lab yet? I assume you're referring to entanglement?

Your comments about using pipes is quite true, up here the council has many issues with tree roots getting into the sewerage system.
block
Oct 18, 2010 12:21 PM
singo79 - I think that's a bit of a croc. While I do agree rural Australia does a lot, I hardly think you are giving credit to the rest of Australia. We all work hard for ourselves and the country. Those living in rural Australia often do so for the lifestyle choice, the same reason I live in the city.

I know the work I do benefits both the city and the bush. I am also assuming you are from a rural area and are therefore supporting both.
singo79
Oct 18, 2010 5:07 PM
@block - I stand for fast affordable broadband for ALL Australians, but I see a very important need for rural areas to be looked after just like our city counterparts have for many decades.

Though I did tend to dramatise the situation a little, I am also spot on the money when it comes to our history and where our money came from. Mining and farming in this country was, and to some extent still is the backbone of our economy. However, introduce something like the NBN to all Australians and all of a sudden it becomes an exciting place to live.

After reading many articles on the net it would appear that Australia could become a target for foreign IT investment and data centres. Everyone (93% at least) would have access to extremely fast internet and would enable rural business to be able to compete directly with metro business with similar services.

I certainly don't doubt that city residents work hard for their money and help our economy, however I do believe that many have forgotten where the exports (and Australia's income) comes from.

To look after the bush ensures that we don't all just pack our bags and move to the city. Yes it is a lifestyle choice for some and for others it is a job. I was happily living in the city until my wife's family got pretty sick and it subsequently caused us to move back to the country. So why should I and the other rural residents be any less entitled to extremely fast and cheap broadband then those people that live in the city?

I'm happy to pay for two services in terms of connectivity. By that I mean, I'm definitely after a FTTH connection for my home use, but when I'm out I like the ability to have a wireless connection just for email, internet banking and small stuff like that.

The Coalition plan to offer wireless to rural residents is a croc! It is based on fixed technologies in order to deliver the speeds they have quoted and not true mobility like the current 3G wireless technology delivers.
Tom Brown
Oct 18, 2010 6:46 PM

I am surprised at how narrow a view many comments have.

It is funny MerariSchroeder how you argue against the NBN because of the waste and its unnecessary and fibre not the best solution and people don't need it, in one forum then another you are arguing that the "Liberal" Lord mayor has a better solution (Fibre up the sewers) and it will cost less (lets see the CBA). So barefaced narrow minded support for something the Libs propose and ridicule the Labour proposal.

The NBN is not some corporate money making venture, it is a nation building and development venture. also it should be for everyone and except where it is unrealistic. The NBN should be available just like your phone.

It is the NBN that makes cherry picking viable.

The Brisbane Councils leaders (Liberals again) secret plan (not open like the NBN) and its release timing reveals how dependant it is on the NBN going ahead because as a government authority they would have had an obligation to give everyone in Brisbane coverage. With the NBN again on the go they can relax the requirement and tell Brisbaners who they don't want to service to talk and complain to the NBN, I daresay they will blame the NBN on any and all such issues. I also suggest the Lord Mayor will be a huge critic as Labour proposes legislation to require open infrastructure.

And why not charge companies who cherry pick a levy, or just like radio spectrum, have an auction and if there is a value it may realised, I am sure a company in the same position would. Or pass laws to require such to provide a service level guarantee.

When the PMG was commissioned to give Australia a phone network they were given a high degree of exclusivity. This is translated into Telstra's ownership of underground and overhead cabling areas. At the same time Telstra is required to provision according to the service level guarantee so why shouldn't other providers.



Tom Brown
Oct 19, 2010 12:10 PM
Hi Ry, thanks for putting forward your thoughts on this announcement by the BCC (Brisbane City Council).

I find several issues on your thoughts.

Is it as you say a "private company" who is cherry picking or is it the BCC's lord mayor getting political points. Even though the Federal coalition is still deploying their smokescreen that the NBN is not needed it appears Liberals at all other levels of government are keen to be seen as proactively for fibre infrastructure as they see it as a vote winner.

Also will BCC's plan be able to provide full coverage, there are still large areas without wastewater so will the BCC expect the NBN to pick up those areas? and I wonder if the BCC will institute an opt out policy.

I am unsure how you see it as "It's not exactly a glowing endorsement for the national broadband network", it shows the recognition of the need for Fibre infrastructure and it shows that the Senator is not cutting out other players. The senator just wants to ensure the result is consistent across the country.

And you comments about how slow progress has been and that councils are taking it into their own hands. Well if Labour had not won the election would the NBN have been scrapped as the coalition promised, then would Councils would be so keen to go it alone, from the timing it appears not otherwise why keep it secret! It would have been kept secret to keep publicity away from the importance Brisbane sees in Fibre infrastructure and how fake the coalitions suggested plan was. and so that the Lord Mayor could back out if it turned sour. By the way I think the Council will not provide Fibre to the home with this plan as I see a costly difficulty getting from the sewers to the backbone let alone the issue over time with sewers getting blocked with debris entangling in the cables.

And I wonder if the BCC would want to potentially compete with the NBN, If the NBN decided to cover the same areas as the BCC and undercut the BCC (as private enterprise would using profits from other areas in fact just like Telstra does now).

Rather than threaten to compete all the Senator has said is there should be a level playing field and that is as per the implementation study.
rycrozier
Oct 19, 2010 3:46 PM
@ Tom:

1. i3 is a private company. They are the wholesale operator of the network, not the council.

2. BCC has been quoted elsewhere saying it's opt in, not opt out. They haven't released much detail about the project. Even when we were asking questions about it months ago, it was almost impossible to get details of where they had trialled the technology.

3. You're confusing endorsements. It's not an endorsement of the NBN when the council says they are going out on their own because they can't wait for a project that has no timeline for their capital city. It is, however, an endorsement of fibre (over, say, wireless). But did you really need that?

4. BCC was trialling this before the election. It doesn't appear related to federal policy in any way, shape or form, apart from that it could have impacts on federal policy that the Government has moved to deal with.

5. NBN Co will have a uniform wholesale price, therefore no ability to undercut. Read the cherry-picking part of McKinsey. It will answer your questions.
Maxxi2
Oct 21, 2010 4:35 PM
Good points Ry...

The crucual aspect of the i3 / BCC announcement is that a Liberal govt (BCC) has endorsed and confirmed the need for 100Mbps fibre based infrastructure now and for their jurisdiction.

They do not wish to wait for the NBN timelines they say, although I am bemused by their own 4 year timeline...

I advocate all holders of carrier infrastructure license holders having the same committments and financial loadings as the PMG once had and now the NBN will have to support and fund national infrastructure requirements when they are permitted to cable up any specific area.

This would mean co-funding the USO (Universal Service Obligation), which was another broken Telstra committment that was a cornerstone to privatisation and the permission to purchase the national infrastructure / copper networks.

That would amount to a levy applied to all infrastructure operators. The PMG, Telecom Australia and Tesltra (well Telstra kicking and screaming after a while) were subject to this additional cost, the NBn will be subject to this additional cost, and any private operators should also be subject to this USO cost basis.

And to clarify one point clearly:

The i3 / BCC proposal is a blatant cherry-picking exercise if ever one has been tabled. Harness i3 with the same responsibility to fibre up 10 rural centres and country regions with uniform wholesale pricing, aka the same terms as the NBN, and maybe i3 and the visionary BCC would be backing off faster than Hockey from a real elections costings audit... >;))

That would be what we call a "level playing field..."
Comments have been disabled for this article.
 
 
 
Top Stories
Australian miners send drones to work
In-depth: Unmanned aerial vehicles in the resources sector.
 
The New Zealand telco problem
Opinion: Could Telstra save Kiwi telcos?
 
IT price probe to 'name and shame' gougers
Industry ducking the issue, committee claims.
 
Sign up to receive iTnews email bulletins
   FOLLOW US...

Latest VideosSee all videos »

Latest Comments
Polls
Should the Government enact new legislation to protect copyright holders in the digital age?

   |   View results
Yes
  19%
 
No
  81%
TOTAL VOTES: 493

Vote