Residents renew fight against mobile towers

 
Page 2 of 2 | Single page

Back to Sydney

Residents fighting a proposed Telstra tower in Quakers Hill also have local political support on their side.

Telstra plans to build a 28.5 metre tower in the carpark of the Aldi supermarket at Quakers Hill.

Initially given "only 10 days' notice" to file objections to the tower proposal to council, residents received an extra fortnight to submit written objections after the intervention of local councillor Allan Green.

"Without him, [the number of objections] wouldn't have happened," Janssens told iTnews. "We had to act very fast."

The campaign has also received support from the area's Federal Labor MP Michelle Rowland.

It may be a different carrier and the fight is still young but residents have reported an almost identical set of problems to those in Ballina.

Janssens said that many residents had received a response letter from Telstra to their objections that was "almost" condescending.

"We've made an educated objection but the response was almost child-like, like they were talking to people who don't know [anything]," Janssens said.

"They just keep repeating the same thing. At this stage it feels like they didn't hear anything we had to say.

"We have [almost] 1,200 signatures and letters and they [Telstra] still insist [on going ahead]. I don't understand that kind of arrogant mentality."

Janssens said it was "irrelevant" whether residents were "right or wrong" in their concerns about the tower.

"We don't want it," she said. "We are very determined to stop this project going ahead and will do whatever it takes. People are very proactive in this area."

As in Ballina, Janssens raised concerns that if the tower – called a monopole in industry parlance – was built, it would soon grow to carry other telco's antennas.

And she was similarly unswayed by commercial arguments made by Telstra.

"It doesn't matter that they [Telstra] need to expand [their network]," Janssens said.

"It's very frustrating when you get replies that they need to expand [because] it's not in line with our concerns."

Similarly, she noted apparent assertions from Telstra that the Aldi carpark was the pick of five sites it had scoped.

"They say they have considered another four sites but this is the best one for them. But just because the other four aren't right, this [site] is," Janssens said.

"If they've considered five sites and none of them are right then they have to move on."

Janssens, however, does not discount the possibility that it's residents that might have to think about moving if they don't want to bring up their children in the tower's immediate vicinity.

"It's very scary," she said. "I don't want to move – we bought a house. We can't afford to.

"But what choice do you have when you know what you know?"

Do you have any issue living in the vicinity of a mobile telecommunications structure? Have your say below.

This is the first in a multi-part iTnews' investigation of a resurgence in mobile phone antenna disputes. Stay tuned for more.

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


Residents renew fight against mobile towers
"If You think Teltra and Optus towers are bad, have a look at the Towers Energy Australia or Ausgrid are building even bigger towers to control their substations and eventually to read and control ..."
By Francis
 
 
 
Comments: 32
FLashy
Jun 14, 2011 8:11 AM
Just living next to a scary tower is not an argument.
I personally wouldn't want to live next to a church.
It would attract lots of scary people.
Much the same for a police station, all those scary people might want to rape me burn me kill me.
Dr. Wom Bhatt
Jun 14, 2011 9:12 AM
In reading the mainstream media it is easy to conclude that the presence of mobile towers is a "given". Thanks for the comprehensive list of communities who have successfully opposed, or are in the process of opposing, installation of mobile towers within their midst. One which has been omitted is the Elanora Ridge Qld community which was able to successfully halt a Telstra proposal for the installation of a 25 metre tower in 2009. Central to their opposing argument was the proclamation of a need to follow a "precautionary approach" to the use of such technology in close proximity to sites of human occupation. Such need was premised on the Russian standards ( 100 times less than ARPANSA's ) which were developed on the basis of observed biological effects of chronic EM exposures which included non-thermal effects. The ARPANSA standards do not consider such effects. Its standards are based on American standards since adopted by the WHO. Contributors to the committee which set up the American standards included representatives of Telcos and Power Generation Utilities.
btone
Jun 14, 2011 10:01 AM
Is it just me or does there appear to be a difference in the analytical quality of the above posts? Maybe one poster has lived too long a couple of metres from a mobile tower thus possibly explaining the anomoly, which one is open to reader interpretation! ;)
jjcoolaus
Jun 14, 2011 10:21 AM
Another one omitted is the Optus tower at Aberfoyle Park in South Australia - see: http://hills-and-valley-messenger.whereilive.com.au/news/story/protests-on-phone-tower-site/

9 News in Adelaide did a TV report at the same site a week or two ago commenting how Optus had already started work building the tower, even though council approval was not final yet. Optus responded with a statement to say the tower won't/can't go live until council approval is given. (haven't got a link for that one though)
phonetic
Jun 14, 2011 10:34 AM
I trust the same people complaining with 3G data and mobiles, wont complain when get drop outs and slow data speeds, becouse a tower is too far away!
anonymous
Jun 14, 2011 11:25 AM

It seems that the kind of people who lie awake crying all night at the thought of one mobile tower need to talk to the NBN naysayers who want to largely supplant the planned fibre network with - thousands of wireless towers.
ozz
Jun 14, 2011 12:00 PM
Just turn off all the mobile towers in their area and see if they are happy to have no mobile reception.
Damian
Jun 14, 2011 2:38 PM
ozz - I would happily do that if given the choice. Unfortunately we don't have a choice.

"Possibly carcinogenic" electromagnetic radiation 24/7 in my home or mobile reception. Hmm tough one.
Trasvi
Jun 14, 2011 4:34 PM
Why are they crying? Is it because the towers are ugly (in which case, get over it) or is it because they actually believe that radio waves are carcinogenic (in which case, they're not, get over it)? WHO said 'possibly carcinogenic', because they have no evidence for it but need to cover their asses. You're more likely to get cancer from reading the computer screen.
zag
Jun 14, 2011 4:55 PM
Where do these people come from?

Bardon in Brisbane is about 10 to 15klm away from a hill that has all the TV/Radio stations sitting on it, and everything else that needs a booster or pass over tower to get over the hill.

To stop a mobile tower on that hills means half of Brisbane doesn't get a mobile signal simple as that.

Also I don't see how a tower will be 6 meters from a bedroom window when it's in a water resvare and the fence line will be at least 30 meters away and you can't live next to one either as it might effect the water it has.

Ballina will need a mobile tower as holidaying people aren't going to hang around a town that doesn't have what these people will consider basic services.

So if this single mother wants to make money from her business will need that tower around to help keep people around.
davmel
Jun 14, 2011 5:35 PM
Sigh, it's sad that so many vocal retards haven't come to grips with the fact that their mobile and cordless phones generate far greater EMR levels onto your body than any mobile cell tower ever will. Signal levels from a transmitter drop off at an inverse square basis.
A nearby tower will actually reduce your total EMR exposure since your mobile will transmit at a lower power level.
Pete Matt
Jun 14, 2011 6:02 PM
They are not "crying" because the towers are "ugly" - although they are (this is why they try to hide them). They are "crying" because the effects of these towers are unproven and they are worried about their and their children's health. Why don't you look around your neighbourhood and see if there is a tower nearby. Then remember that you are living with elevated rf eme levels 24/7. Now do a little Google search and you'll find that nobody knows the effects of such condition for sure. Maybe there are none, but who wants to take the risk? Perhaps davmel with the incredible intelligent comment not being able to differentiate between occasional eme level elevation (which by the way now is proven to be causing brain cancer) & living with slightly elevated eme levels 24/7. (By the way the maximum beam of intensity can be a 100 metres from the tower). You can choose not to use your mobile or cordless however being submitted to the effects of a mobile tower is totally involuntary AND chronic. You live with one in your backyard if you are so comfortable and let the ones who recognise that there might be biological effects of sitting in a low level microwave oven for the rest of your life make a stance without being criticized by ignorant people being jolly over great mobile reception.

Edited by Pete Matt: 14/6/2011 06:11:42 PM
davmel
Jun 14, 2011 7:15 PM
Pete Matt wrote:
Perhaps davmel with the incredible intelligent comment not being able to differentiate between occasional eme level elevation (which by the way now is proven to be causing brain cancer) & living with slightly elevated eme levels 24/7.


Clearly you still can't work out that even when you compare the 24/7 exposure of a tower hundreds of metres away with the ~20min daily use of a mobile 1cm from your head that the total EMR exposure from the mobile phone is far far greater.
It's hilarious that people complaining about mobile phone towers are completely ignorant of all the EMR radiation coming from their home electrical wiring and all the appliances they have active in their home 24/7.
There isn't a single health study that has shown that a mobile phone tower in close proximity causes any adverse health effects. So that leaves all these NIMBY whingers as nothing but crazed delusional nutters.
If you want to be a crazed delusional nutter conspiracy theory believer then don't be a hypocrit by living in a home already saturated with EMR in the suburbs and move to a rural country shack that isn't connected to the power grid.
Pete Matt
Jun 14, 2011 7:31 PM
Wrong person! I use no wireless technology and no mobile phone.
Oh I can work that out, but I can also choose not to expose myself to such radiation - what you can not work out is that you can not switch a tower off!
On the contrarily there are many health studies, from the top of my head: http://no-celltower.com/German%20RF%20Research%20Article.pdf and www.tetrawatch.net/papers/hyland_2005.pdf, but there are many-many more. But these were not founded by telcos. You can also try this one for an eye opener: www.iegmp.org.uk/report/text.htm
FLashy
Jun 14, 2011 7:41 PM
Consider the RF field from an antenna Bay on one tower, it uses 35 Watts, but the signal strength where you are is very small.
Then consider your mobile phone at 0.6 of a Watt next to your head, the RF field is 1,000 times as much.
What is the solution?
Electromagnetic radiation from your TV set or Microwave oven is much stronger than from a Cellular base station kilometres away.
How about the radiation from an electric blanket pressed against your body all night.
We live in a world full of electromagnetic radiation.
FLashy
Jun 14, 2011 7:49 PM
Perhaps the word "Radiation" is associated with nuclear radiation, alpha particles, x-rays and gamma waves.
Which are present is our environment in varying degrees.
Granite decomposes with the presence of Radon gas, a good alpha partical emitter, power supplies in old TVs generate x-rays let alone cosmic rays which make it to the ground.
Then we have smoke detectors that use Americium 146, an excellent producer of alpha particles........
David Klasens
Jun 14, 2011 7:54 PM
I honestly never get this. They now get to enjoy congested 3G speeds, and potentially sub-par reception. Mobile phones emit far more radiation than some standing near a Tower, because of a phones focus. Towers are omni-directional and perfectly safe, unless you are silly enough to climb up there and sit next to an array.

/rant
Tempis Fugit
Jun 14, 2011 9:25 PM
You whingers. You are the same people that would call your telco and go. Why cant my wireless device connect. or my call dropped out, blah blah blah, company x has better coverage than your company.

You all expect the coverage but think that this coverage comes without towers. Bite your tongue when you next cant make a mobile call or look at that site on your device.
Pete Matt
Jun 15, 2011 2:21 AM
Nobody said NO to having mobile towers. They objecting to having them next to their schools and backyards. There are national and international guidelines in this regards which are currently being ignored by Australian telcos.This is because mostly they get away with it - mostly, but luckily not always. Guidelines state that community sensitive locations should be respected - to avoid situations as written in this article.
umbria
Jun 15, 2011 12:52 PM
Fibre to premises will solve this for good. As wireless towers progressively move to more efficient LTE protocols over the next few years, our replacement mobile phones are already increasingly seeking out and using domestic Wi-Fi whenever possible, lightening the congestion of the airwaves and reducing the proliferation of mobile phone towers.
Pete Matt
Jun 15, 2011 1:11 PM
Agreed - only better technology will solve this problem. Until then, let's be on a preventative side.
anonymous
Jun 15, 2011 1:36 PM

If we spent our lives determined to do nothing that might, possibly, perhaps, have some small but unproven degree of risk, we would spend our lives doing nothing at all.

Everything we do has some element of risk, albeit very small in most cases. About as small as the possible effect of a mobile phone tower in fact, as others have pointed out here and elsewhere.

It might be possible to take Pete Matt more seriously if (a) his sole source of information was not cited as the Net, where people who sound just like him love to post their opinions; and (b) if he hadn't signed up for itnews just yesterday. Funny thing that.
Ace
Jun 15, 2011 2:01 PM
I do feel a bit sorry for people like Kathi. Her fear is real, and is inspired completely from watching ACA and Today Tonight like television programmes. It's a real shame that such media organisations have sought to sensationalise these kinds of things, often by associating EM radiation with the likes of nuclear radiation. Ironically, it's probably the tele and the transmitter tower radiation that people are soaking in when they watch these 'news' shows.
Mordd
Jun 15, 2011 4:48 PM
@ Anon - just want to say you are spot on with your first comment m8 and I think it needs to be repeated here:

All the anti-NBN co. want to put up THOUSANDS of new wireless towers all over australia instead of laying out fibre for the NBN, yet it is very apparent that across Australia the majority of people do not want towers near their homes, work, schools, shops, well anywhere near them it seems.

Yet I do have to wonder wether these same ppl complain about bad reception coverage and drop out areas and then also complain when the carrier tries to improve the coverage by putting up a new tower.

Reminds me of that saying: "you can please some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time but you can't please all of the people all of the time" (yes I know thats a modified version of Lincoln's original quote about fools before you troll me) :P
wathend
Jun 16, 2011 4:09 PM
mmmm, has anyone considered the data of cancer in the regions immediately around the current TV towers? No big increases no issues and no complaints yet these towers transmit many TV and radio signals in an omnidirectional manner at many 10's of megawatts and at 600+MHz spectrum. There is evidence about cancer and mobile towers so why the hoo haa?
BrissyBoy
Jun 17, 2011 8:32 AM
Wow, @Mordd - "All the anti-NBN co. want to put up THOUSANDS of new wireless towers all over australia instead of laying out fibre for the NBN, yet it is very apparent that across Australia the majority of people do not want towers near their homes, work, schools, shops, well anywhere near them it seems."

Your use of sweeping generalisations is as bad as Juliar's. "All the anti-NBN co. want to put up THOUSANDS of new wireless towers all over australia" no all the Anti-NBN Co folk aren't pushing a technology wheelbarrow, we don't believe that tax payers should fund the roll-out. When Governments pick winners it leads to in-efficiencies in the market-place. Remember Telstra started life as an arm of the Post Master Generals Department and look what we got -do we think the NBN Co will be any different.

"yet it is very apparent that across Australia the majority of people do not want towers near their homes, work, schools, shops, well anywhere near them it seems."

How do you figure the "majority of people", that would indicate greater than 50% of the population - more than 10 Million people, unless of course you have a narrow view of what consititutes a "person" to be those who support this nonsene about Mobile Towers,pershaps the "people" in Willoughby, Gore Hill and Artarmon in Sydney should be more concerned about their proximity to the Television and Radio transmitters in their neighbourhood transmitting kilowatts of EMR for the last 60 years. I would suspect that a minority of Australians would be more accurate. The majority of people would be ambivalent to interested but not bothered.

I think NIMBY is to kind, WOWSER (We Only Want Social Evils Remedied) would be be more appropriate. There is a nice little opinon piece in The Australian today (17 June 2011) by Greg Melleuish worth a read and a good chuckle..

/Vent
FLashy
Jun 17, 2011 9:13 PM
I actually talk with the techs who put up the antenna bays and commission the base stations, none of them are in any way worried about near field effects of the Mobile phone site they work in.
An active antenna array is never worked on, the riggers are safe in that regard.
I also believe NBN radio broadband will not meet the same objections from the community in outer metropolitan areas.
More Australians want high speed Internet just like their inner city cousins on fibre.
It will be fun no doubt, when to object to a NBN internet tower might even be considered un-Australian.
Pilotyoda
Jun 19, 2011 10:53 AM
@BrissyBoy. So you think the taxpayer shouldn't fund national infrastructure? Who then - just wealthy individuals, or maybe those ordinary citizens (80% of the working population) who struggle to make ends meet.
If that were the case, why do the taxpayers pay for road infrastructure? My old beat-up car only needs a bit of thin tar over the substrate to get me to work. Let those who own Porsches pay for the superhighways they want.

Answer: because you pay one way or another. A small piece of the taxes everyone pays can build a replacement for the copper wires (or roads, hospitals, schools, etc) or leave it to profit makers (who wont do anything that doesn't improve their bottom line, no matter how much benefit the country as a whole needs it) or the very wealthy to do it alone. And the "Taxpayer" pays anyway out of after-tax earnings.

By the way, when we had the old PMG it was in public hands, funded out of taxes. As such it was able to provide coverage to the majority of the population in most parts of Australia and their aim was to make the system as fast, efficient and technologically as up-to-date and compatible as possible. Which they did until privatised. then all innovation and maintenance almost stopped cold.

Without taxpayer funding we wouldn't have national highways, the Harbour Bridge, no Indian-Pacific railway, no reticulated water, sewerage and power, tertiary hospitals or public schools

Cant see a few rich people building a tertiary hospital for themselves,or a super highway for their sports cars or a fibre network either. (No good having a private fibre network when might only connect to a slow speed system elsewhere.)
Ace
Jun 19, 2011 6:04 PM
@Pilotyoda, there is very little to be gained from using common sense to explain something to someone who can actually be bothered to type Juliar. Oddly he attributes a quote to Ms Gillard that she has (obviously) never uttered. In fact, the only thing I could find that had Julia Gillard mentioning wireless broadband was this: "These are complementary technologies and I believe people can understand that from their own daily lives," Ms Gillard said yesterday. "There are times when we want to be on the move and have the technology with us. There are times when we're in our own homes where the quality and speed of downloads is pivotal.". One begins to suspect @BrissyBoy is making things up to suit his own political ideologies - in an IT forum! Well I never....
BrissyBoy
Jun 20, 2011 10:11 AM
@Ace, Let's notbe confused here, I did not attribute any statements regarding technology to the Prime Minister, I compared her use of sweeping generalisations to that of Mordd only. I agree with you that in her public utterances of she mentions complementary technolgies to Fixed Line.

You ignore my point that the Government in a market based economy should not pick winners, as government picked winners end up with market inefficiences and high monopolistic rent seekers as opposed to price tension as was seen in the halcyon days of the PMG and Telecom/Telstra - there was no competition so we lagged the world in price flexibility because there was no competition.

@Pilotyoda - the politics of envy so easily gushes in your words. Gee Whiz, I thought the Motor Vehicle Registration and Fuel Taxes I pay funded the road infratructure, how could I be so foolish. I recall a famous man once saying "pay to Caesar what is Caesar's" Last I looked I paid income tax, GST and other necessary taxes to fund the Public Health and Education Systems, the NBN is being funded by Loans sourced in the international debt markets notby taxpayers yet. As a taxpayer I do not want my future taxes and the benefits to the Public Health, Education and Welfare Systems mortgaged to pay for the NBN. The PMG's network builds were funded by Bonds issued by the PMG and backed by the Government. As a Telstra Shareholder I have seen this and the previous government (Lib/Nats) action/inaction destroy my asset value.

I believe the NBN should build out outer Urban and Regional Area's with FTTH where Telstra and the other Carriers deliver less than ideal Internet Access, while we allow Market forces to delivr the same to us city dwellers to alleviate the stress on the public purse.

@Ace if these political ideologies in an IT forum are bad then so be it.

Let's focus back on the ills or otherwise of Mobile Phone towers and their proximity to Humans.
BrissyBoy
Jun 20, 2011 10:16 AM
Apologies to all my Grammar in the above post is woeful - must be due to my public school education, I did not have the joy of private schooling.
Francis
Jun 20, 2011 3:18 PM
If You think Teltra and Optus towers are bad, have a look at the Towers Energy Australia or Ausgrid are building even bigger towers to control their substations and eventually to read and control your Smart Electricity Meter. Meanwhile in Queensland I am informed that the network operators are doing the same job with the aid of a fibre optic cable which is strung up amongst the electricity wire. This makes a lot of sense as it can not be hacked into as readily as the radio network can.
Our Governments and the Public Authorities are there to serve us the Public. Isn't it about time they began to show a bit of respect for the hand that feeds them and began acting that way?
Comments have been disabled for this article.
 
 
Top Stories
ATO commits to complexity
Greater demand, fewer apps.
 
Photos: AusCERT 2013 day two
The second day of the Queensland security conference.
 
The illusion of cognitive computing
Opinion: IBM's Watson is a marketing success.
 
 
Sign up to receive iTnews email bulletins
   FOLLOW US...

Latest VideosSee all videos »

Bankwest builds continuous delivery capability
Bankwest builds continuous delivery capability
To automatically deploy test/dev sandboxes by mid-year.
Veterans' Affairs sets sights on modernisation
Veterans' Affairs sets sights on modernisation
Data safe with Human Services, CIO says.
Citi Australia drops platform customisations
Citi Australia drops platform customisations
Technology chief shifts focus from building to leveraging systems.
VicRoads restructures IT team
VicRoads restructures IT team
Department moves to align with industry benchmarks.
Zurich Australia extends IT team offshore
Zurich Australia extends IT team offshore
Malaysian staff served from Australian data centres.
Leigh Berrell - Utilities CIO of the Year
Leigh Berrell - Utilities CIO of the Year
Yarra Valley Water CIO Leigh Berrell accepts his Benchmark Award for Utilities CIO of the Year.
Wayne McMahon - Retail CIO of the Year
Wayne McMahon - Retail CIO of the Year
Domino's Pizza CIO Wayne McMahon accepts his Benchmark Award for Retail CIO of the Year.
Inside Perpetual's ongoing IT transformation
Inside Perpetual's ongoing IT transformation
CIO Jenny Levy discusses how outsourcing will help the firm "simplify, refocus and grow".
Managing Complexity - Defence's Daniel McCabe
Managing Complexity - Defence's Daniel McCabe
Daniel McCabe, Assistant Secretary of Australia's Department of Defence, provides the audience at the iTnews Data Centre Strategy Summit with a deep dive into the organisation's data centre consolidation program.
How Facebook designed the data centre from scratch - Marco Magarelli
How Facebook designed the data centre from scratch - Marco Magarelli
The full keynote by Facebook data centre architect Marco Magarelli at the Australian Data Centre Strategy Summit. Magarelli details the design considerations behind the social network's Prineville, Oregon; North Carolina and Luleå, Sweden data centres.
Modernising Legacy Data Centres - Telstra's Jon Curry
Modernising Legacy Data Centres - Telstra's Jon Curry
Telstra general manager of managed data centres Jon Curry guides the audience at the iTnews Australian Data Centre Summit through the build of the telco's Clayton, Victoria data centre.
NSW Government launches NABERS data centre rating tools
NSW Government launches NABERS data centre rating tools
Matthew Clark from the NSW Department of Environment guides facilties managers through the details of the new NABERS data centre energy rating tool at the Australian Data Centre Strategy Summit.
NABERS launch panel: Australian Data Centre Strategy Summit
NABERS launch panel: Australian Data Centre Strategy Summit
Matthew Clark (NSW Dept of Environment), Greg Boorer (Canberra Data Centres), Glenn Allan (National Australia Bank), Mike Andrea (Strategic Directions) and Bob Sharon (Green Global Consulting) discuss the impact of the NABERS data centre rating.
Judges notes: Fortescue Metals [The Benchmark Awards]
Judges notes: Fortescue Metals [The Benchmark Awards]
iTnews' panel of judges discuss Fortescue Metals 'New World of Work" project, one of three shortlisted finalists for the Industrials category of the CIO Benchmark Awards.
Judges notes: Retail [The Benchmark Awards]
Judges notes: Retail [The Benchmark Awards]
iTnews' panel of judges discuss the shortlisted finalists for the Retail category of the CIO Benchmark Awards.
Judges notes: Pacific Aluminium [The Benchmark Awards]
Judges notes: Pacific Aluminium [The Benchmark Awards]
iTnews' panel of judges discuss Pacific Aluminium's lightning fast service desk refresh, one of three shortlisted finalists for the Industrials category of the CIO Benchmark Awards.
Judges notes: Domino's Pizza [The Benchmark Awards]
Judges notes: Domino's Pizza [The Benchmark Awards]
iTnews' panel of judges discuss Domino's Pizza's shift to hosted services, one of three shortlisted finalists for the Retail category of the CIO Benchmark Awards.
Judges notes: McDonald's Australia [The Benchmark Awards]
Judges notes: McDonald's Australia [The Benchmark Awards]
iTnews' panel of judges discuss McDonald's Australia's new self-service portal for employees, one of three shortlisted finalists for the Retail category of the CIO Benchmark Awards.
Judges notes: ING Direct [The Benchmark Awards]
Judges notes: ING Direct [The Benchmark Awards]
iTnews' panel of judges discuss ING Direct's 'Bank in a Box', one of three shortlisted finalists for the banking and finance category of the CIO Benchmark Awards.
Judges notes: Yarra Valley Water [The Benchmark Awards]
Judges notes: Yarra Valley Water [The Benchmark Awards]
iTnews' panel of judges discuss Yarra Valley Water's insourcing project, one of three shortlisted finalists for the Utilities category of the CIO Benchmark Awards.
Latest Comments
Polls
Do you prefer the Coalition's NBN policy?

   |   View results
Yes
  19%
 
No
  81%
TOTAL VOTES: 1742

Vote