Coalition "outrage" at Greens NBN deal

By Ry Crozier on Nov 22, 2010 1:03 PM
Filed under Telco/ISP

Productivity Commission caught in middle.

The Coalition has expressed "outrage" that the Federal Government will allow the Productivity Commission to examine the NBN only after the multi-billion dollar network is completed.

The Government struck a deal with the Greens overnight that would require a parliamentary vote and an independent study by the Productivity Commission before the NBN could be privatised, according to a report by The Australian.

In return, the Greens would support the Government's ‘Telstra split' bill being debated in the Senate today.

The agreement over a Productivity Commission study outraged the Coalition, which had repeatedly sought a cost-benefit analysis of the NBN to be conducted by the Commission.

It lost a motion in the lower house seeking to force the Government to submit to a Productivity Commission study before the network was built.

South Australian Liberal Senator Simon Birmingham told the Senate today that it was the "irony of all ironies that the Government is willing to accept a Productivity Commission assessment of the NBN once it's finished building it to determine if it can be privatised."

"The fact is they have agreed on a dodgy deal with the Greens which is, of course, an outrage and something the Government needs to look hard at," Birmingham said.

He said the Coalition would seek amendments to the Telstra split bill today; however he noted that "most of these have been covered and countenanced in the House of Representatives already".

13 comments in this discussion

"You jusy gotta love the folks that can only imagine that the NBN has costs, and these grow by $billions per day it appears, and have blithely assumed/prognosticate no earnings, revenues, useful ..."

By Maxxi2

Tags

coalition, outrage, greens, nbn, deal, national broadband network

Coalition takes NBN back to the drawing board

Missing data in Turnbull's second-best NBN

Future NBN Co tasked with meeting Coalition's speed pledge

Turnbull may build more FTTP

Breaking Stories

NBN Co buys TransACT fibre network

Myer automates online order management

Google technology advocate sends NBN safety message

ACMA shops 'freephone' charge changes

Vodafone still losing Australian customers

Comments: 13

mtsports Nov 22, 2010 2:26 PM	Are the Greens a bunch of hypocrites? Recently a new wind farm was brought on line in the UK which will provide power for an estimated 240,000 homes. The cost of the wind farm was quoted at AUS $1 billion. On that cost basis, an expenditure of AUS $43 billion would provide clean power for just over 10 million homes. According to current ABS figures that is more than every home in Australia. So the question has to be asked, do we really care about the environment? The Labor Party is hell bent on spending $43 billion on making the internet go faster, when for the same expenditure we could have clean power provided to every home in Australia. And with a guaranteed return on investment. Where is the logic? And where is the Greens in bringing the Labor Government to account on this absurd expenditure on the internet. People voted for the Greens to bring some common sense to the Government, and support the environment. Yet again they are siding with the Labor Party, to gain some cheap political win. The $43 billion figure just rolls off the tongue, but it is an extraordinary amount of money and it should be used to fund the future of our planet, not some short term political gain.
singo79 Nov 22, 2010 3:00 PM	The Coalition couldn't form Government and couldn't manage to put acceptable terms on the table for the independents to side with them, now all they do is whinge and whine! $43 billion is used over and over again, despite industry professionals and the NBNCo. CEO all stating that it will NOT cost that much. Only people siding with the Coalition choose to quote this $43 billion figure, when it is quite well known that the actual Government investment is closer to $24 billion. If we went down the track of the Coalition policy then the network would end up costing us closer to $70 billion in the long run. Telstra are on board, they don't want to maintain the copper network that the Coalition are so fond of praising. Telstra knows that the copper network is degrading faster then they would like and they will be more then happy to dump it quicker than a hot potato. The NBN will benefit all Australians, but for those who don't want it, simply don't get it. Go and subscribe to a wireless provider and put up with the high latency, low data limits and unreliable service. Meanwhile the rest of us will be sitting back enjoying our 100Mbit service working from home and saving thousands of dollars a year on petrol to work and specialists appointments. The NBN is here to stay, it offers hope and relief to tens, if not hundreds of thousands of people stranded by Telstra's pathetic copper network, or lack there of in some instances. The day the NBN rolls past my place is the day I'll dump my pathetic 4Mbit ADSL2+ connection with Telstra and get onto the most advanced network in the developed world.
midspace Nov 22, 2010 3:10 PM	@mtsports Only half of that $43 billion is coming from the government. Try not to confuse the issue with wind farms that won't make enough money back, and that will drive up our electricity costs for decades. Yes I agree that the environment is an important issue I'd rather the government cancel the F35s in the defence budget, which is $21 billion annually BTW. That project is behind schedule and over budget. 5 of these aircraft could conceivably pay for a $1B wind farm.
Sams Nov 22, 2010 3:43 PM	mtsports: "Are the Greens a bunch of hypocrites? Recently a new wind farm was brought on line in the UK " .. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma "The logical fallacy of false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy) involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are other options."
Francis Nov 23, 2010 12:55 AM	I am totally in favour of the NBN but I am aghast at the secrecy of the detail and the manner in which it is being thrust down our throats by a power mad Minister. While I loath the way the bitter and negative opposition are behaving (A legacy of John Winston Howard) I just pray that enough of the NBN is built before the next election that it can not be reversed and then I will vote for the other mob in the hope that they have enough talent to lift the veil of secrecy and build it properly. I have no faith in Conboy or his heavy handed approach and will be glad to see the end of him.
Francis Nov 23, 2010 1:14 AM	Further to my earlier comment, It deeply concerns me that this network will be built in a rush for political ideology as opposed to rational common-sense. I have no faith in all the secrecy and ask myself why. I am further concerned that due to the haste and and manner in which it is built, that we will inherit a poorly planned and built network which will cost us a motza to repair and maintain. These costs may well make the $43 Billion look like chicken feed. Any study of the Senate Select Committee by anyone who has any knowledge of the repair and maintenance of overhead networks will tell you that this is an accident waiting to happen.
Ace Nov 23, 2010 1:46 AM	@Francis, you must be a public servant? In the commercial world, and even for home users, 8 or 9 years is an age, particularly when it comes to internet access and access speed. Now I realise this is less than Howards term in office which seemed all to short for some die-hards, and I realise this is lightening speed in politics, but not all of us live life or do business at the speed of politics. We have children growing up who will never know the world without integrated electronic communication as part of their every-day/every-minute lives. We have learned over and over that you can never build enough bandwidth. If you wait, it will only get harder to catch up.
umbria Nov 23, 2010 10:28 AM	Senator Conroy is to be admired for sticking to his guns once the ideal technology was identified (i.e. ubiquitous uncongested high-speed competitive wireless, underpinned by near-ubiquitous fibre to take the heaviest data load). OPEL and NBN Mark I had been serious attempts to deliver broadband to those Australians whom the free market had ignored or over-charged, but ADSL (including FTTN) and wireless-without-fibre were both proven to be inadequate without massive increases in their respective price tags. But the government has been appalling in not educating the lay electorate in the technology, nor enunciating the benefits in cost and time savings to every household, offsetting most of the $30 per month income tax burden for taxpaying households, and enabling pensioners to make unlimited phone and video calls without watching their STD bill. Just as the coalition lost the election (which the ALP tried so hard to lose) ultimately because they banned FTTH and Telstra's structural separation from their broadband offering, so the government has dropped the winning ball by not publishing everything it can on the NBN. Now, Mike Quigley is employing some media people, which is no bad thing. We have a right to know the facts, and only Mike has given us any to date.
Francis Nov 23, 2010 1:45 PM	@ ACE You could not be further wrong. Except for a short stint in the Department of Defence I have never been a Public Servant. But I have spent plenty of time fixing up others stuff ups, all the way up to CEO level. I have a background in engineering and business.(The tone of your attack makes me wonder at your technical competence or if you are a Labor Party plant.) My point is, why the secrecy if there is nothing to hide if it was open and transparent we would not be having a lot of these conversations. My second point is a nuts and bolts issue as to how the network is built. Is Conboy and his mob really fair din-cum in burying his cable to increase reliability and reduce maintenance costs or is he just out to build it quick and cheaply and then worry about the consequences later. Go back to my original statement which I will expand for you. I AM IN FAVOUR OF THE NBN, I WANT IT AND I WANT IT NOW, BUT I AM CONCERNED AT THE SECRECY AND WONDER WHAT THERE IS TO HIDE AND I AM PREPARED TO WAIT A BIT LONGER FOR A PROPERLY CONSTRUCTED NETWORK. All evidence to date would seem to contradict these concerns.
advocate Nov 24, 2010 9:28 AM	singo79 wrote: Only people siding with the Coalition choose to quote this $43 billion figure, when it is quite well known that the actual Government investment is closer to $24 billion. Rubbish, all Government projects blow their budgets, by the 2018 time frame when all of this is supposed to be completed $43 billion will look like a bargain. If we went down the track of the Coalition policy then the network would end up costing us closer to $70 billion in the long run. You know this how? Telstra are on board, they don't want to maintain the copper network that the Coalition are so fond of praising. Telstra knows that the copper network is degrading faster then they would like and they will be more then happy to dump it quicker than a hot potato. Telstra are not on board they are still negotiating with the Government on the NBN deal, the proposal if finalised before Christmas will be put to Telstra shareholders around mid 2011, that's your idea of being 'on board' is it? The NBN will benefit all Australians, For the millions who don't use it it won't. but for those who don't want it, simply don't get it. But pay for it anyway with your tax dollars. Go and subscribe to a wireless provider Millions do today as increasingly more and more households drop their fixed line service (14% and rising), and they have the choice of multiple ADSL2+ ISP suppliers and HFC cable, but they still opt for wireless. Meanwhile the rest of us will be sitting back enjoying our 100Mbit service working from home and saving thousands of dollars a year on petrol to work and specialists appointments. More spin based on nothing but conjecture in the extreme and fanciful rubbish like 'specialist appointments and 'saving thousands of dollars on petrol' LOL at that those, how do they work? the NBN can take blood and urine samples and send it down the fibre and with each NBN plan you get a petrol discount voucher? Edited by advocate: 24/11/2010 09:42:12 AM
midspace Nov 25, 2010 9:38 AM	"Telstra are not on board..." The shareholders do not run Telstra. The NBN will benefit all Australians, "For the millions who don't use it it won't." But will still continue to benefit from secondary effects. Go and subscribe to a wireless provider "Millions do today as increasingly more and more households drop their fixed line service (14% and rising), and they have the choice of multiple ADSL2+ ISP suppliers and HFC cable, but they still opt for wireless." I had a friend who just signed up to Telstra wireless service to provide fast internet in a metro area. 8 days later he returned it, as the recorded usage was way more than he expected, and this was for regular browsing (for 2 people), a few videos and photo sites with a couple of online game sessions. The metering of download and uploads still costs too much from these services. Average consumers will only get ripped off as they don't understand how they are charged. Trying to say it'll all be solved by wireless, is like saying transport will all be solved by privately owned cars. It's an expensive option, that not everyone (who needs internet) can use or afford (for their needs). Case in point will be the continued demand for internet access for school students (primary, secondary as well as tertiary). Parents have enough to worry about already in costs for their child, rather than watching their child rack up huge wireless bills, especially when low income earners cannot afford it as it is.
KarL Nov 25, 2010 2:33 PM	Well, the water is now murkier. NBN turning wireless. Suck in. http://www.itnews.com.au/News/239650,nbn-co-to-build-wireless-network-from-late-2011.aspx
Maxxi2 Dec 2, 2010 9:52 AM	You jusy gotta love the folks that can only imagine that the NBN has costs, and these grow by $billions per day it appears, and have blithely assumed/prognosticate no earnings, revenues, useful services delivery, competitive positioning enhancements, technological advantages and benefits, economics of scale etc ad infinitum. No mention at all of those aspects. Zero, zilch, null, bone dead consideration... Just a litany of "oh crap it has costs! Oh crap it has costs! Oh crap it is Conroy!" lol Like any good seesaw experience, a debate requires acceptance that there are two sides required and a balance must be found and exercised in order for it to function. Rattling on about all your pet hates, subjective dislikes and opinions, one sided arguments and a refusal to engage in a balanced debate is just like sitting alone on a seesaw... And save us all the quirky comments about there being no "other" side to the debate: it is 2010 and the world has long ago moved on from the Telstra dominatrix model, from long term national copper networks, from FTTN, from JWH, from Rudd, from the filter and from folks who refuse to accept that increasing degrees of many professional services can and will be delivered via audio/visual comms mediums... Medical groups, as an example, have been continually increasing their usage of internet and network based services and functionality for years already, and continue to do so. If you cannot imagine how, why and what they do here, then go and do some objective research with those professionals that do use these systems and you may learn something... Edited by maxxi2: 2/12/2010 10:00:53 AM