Coalition NBN will prioritise poorly served areas.
One of the most important functions of the political system is to get the balance right between competing demands for resources. There are always more legitimate or worthwhile calls on resources than there are resources available.
This is – or should be – just as true of the National Broadband Network in its early stages as any other program.
If the NBN has a mission it is presumably to ensure that all Australians have access to very fast broadband. We agree with that objective but not with how Labor has instructed NBN Co to carry it out. Our criticism has always been that it will cost far too much, take too long and as a consequence be significantly less affordable than basic broadband ought to be. We have also criticised the way in which the NBN is being established as a government monopoly with any competition either bought out or effectively prohibited by regulation.
Our alternative is to complete the NBN in less time, for less money and as a consequence more affordably for taxpayers and consumers.
A key element in our approach is that areas with poor broadband services should be prioritised. Targeting these places is faster and easier with our mixed-technology NBN than Labor’s religious determination that only fibre to the premises will be used.
In contrast far from allocating its not-so-scarce resources to the neediest areas, the NBN Co is currently in the process of overbuilding urban suburbs with very good broadband (via HFC or fibre to the premises). Areas with very bad fixed broadband may wait many years for an upgrade.
My observation on Lateline last night therefore was to say no more than that we would not prioritise areas covered by Telstra’s HFC if elected, simply because premises connected to the HFC network can obtain some of the fastest broadband speeds available in Australia at the present time.
I did not say we would never overbuild the Telstra HFC areas and our plans assume that in due course the NBN would be extended into them.
I said that any other arrangements concerning the HFC (such as making it available as an open wholesale service operating as a second wholesale carrier in competition with the NBN) would require negotiation with Telstra as it has already agreed to accept billions of dollars from the Government in return for not using its HFC for broadband or voice once it is overbuilt by the NBN.
The competitive carriers are keen for the Telstra HFC to be switched off and replaced by a government owned wholesale carrier. While that is a reasonable goal, they have never shown any concern about how many billions of taxpayers’ dollars are spent to achieve this – their only objective is to eliminate Telstra as a wireline infrastructure operator so that they can compete on what they believe will be a level playing field.
The consequence of the Government’s NBN policy, egged on by the competitive carriers, is that there will be one government owned monopoly broadband wireline provider, the NBN, which will be able to charge higher and higher prices as it seeks to get a return on its overcapitalised investment. The competitive carriers might also reflect that while in an NBN world Telstra will have to compete on a “level playing field” it will do so fortified by the many billions of taxpayers’ dollars it has received as the price for it agreeing to Labor’s NBN.
74 Responses to “Coalition NBN will prioritise poorly served areas.”
Turnbull’s must be in bed with Telstra. As usual the Coalition wants to some how support Telstra. make an even bigger monopoly out of them. The whole reason for the NBN was to level the playing field.
And why dont they support an investment that is guaranteed a return and will actually generate income for the government once all the debt has been paid off?
Why wont any one consider how much the NBN will add to the GDP alone?
And isnt now the best time to borrow with interest rates at their lowest point?
If the coalition was so keen on Providing fast high speed broadband why was nothing done during the 11 years they were in power other than them creating the biggest private monopoly Telstra and didnt bother to separate the retail and infrastructure ?
And we all know how Telstra has been anti-competitive with ADSL by preventing competitors.
And now the coalition expect us to leave our future to Telstra. God save us.
Coalition NBN wont be better for the country than the current Labor NBN it will be much much much worse. Please spare us the lies the contempt and arrogance. Please resign.
This is ridiculous, docsis 3 cable cannot support the extra numbers of people you’re talking about using it!
Even FTTN would be better than cable, which is severely limited for uploads. & slows to a crawl in the evenings. And then 5 years later you’d have to strand all the new FTTN node equipment again & do the job you should have done before & lay fibre to the home as bandwidth, crosstalk etc kill FTTN.
The only thing that is stopping me from voting for the coalition right now is their terrible NBN policy. Leave the NBN the way it is and you’ll be guaranteed my vote.
Malcom, Malcolm you are really digging a bigger hole for youself with your statements. So many people I speak to want labour and the crazy greens out but because of your “NBN” policy and the complete joke that it has been they are going to vote Labour
I would of thought someone who is apparently technically minded such as yourself would see that the NBN is needed, fibre is the way of the future, I dont want a FTTN setup, I want fibre at my house and to have the opportunity to do what is going to be required in the future.
wake up or lose the election IMO
I agree with prioritising the poorly served areas, but then continuing to all. I’m sure I’d disagree at how they classify that though, as many people on here are arguing.
I regard myself a conservative voter. I would vote conservative if there was a conservative party that would:
1. Not repeatedly contradict it’s self, use miss information and scaremongering to get its point across (the public is not that stupid).
3. Could actually do maths (very handy if you want to run a country)
4. Had leaders that actually understood the fundamentals of Broadband Technology.
The current NBN is not perfect but then again it is not “A white elephant”. What you guys propose however so far, is an incompetent joke that will only retard our country’s telecommunication infrastructure.
When the conservative parties in this country start thinking long term and want to invest in our country’s future (maths is required for this!). And are lead by people who actually think before they open their mouths. You will find the current intelligent and embarrassed conservative voter will return in droves.
The Coalition’s disgraceful NBN alternative is THE wedge issue that will turn many conservative voters away from them this next election.
Congratulations.
There’s 5 voters at my house. Leave the NBN the way it is. ( maybe speed it up ) and they’ll get our vote. But no way at this stage…Keep FTTP. No way we’ll vote for FTTN. Power hungry street cabinets. Shame.
FttN is the definition of a White Elephant.
You want to install massive amounts of large Node cabinets which have no useful purpose in any future FttH network not only that but Node boxes force an in-efficient and more expensive roll-out of FttH when it happens. Simply because your Dogma is any technology except for fiber to the home.
Maybe if you did some research on costs of FttN in THIS country instead of countries with 2-3 times the population density we could take you seriously but you don’t because you are not interested in facts only your Dogma NO FTTH NO FTTH NO FTTH.
Where is Turnbull’s CBA? This guys says he’s been ready to govern for 2 and half years at a moments notice. With fully costed policy (the policy that keeps changing daily, is he doing daily upgrades on costs?).
When is this guy actually going to fully articulate his policy?
Is Telstra gong to be given the job since they own the terminating cables?
What are the deals that will have to be made with Telstra?
Is the NBN structure and staff going to be maintained with new objectives?
Is the Liberal NBN (if there is one) going to be cheaper to the consumer than the NBN if so what will be the costs for the plans?
Are Turnbull’s hot air bubbles (they aren’t thought bubbles) going to be cheaper for the Australian population or just cheaper for the 3 year Liberal government?
Is Turnbull suggesting that fibre to the home will never exist in Australia? It’s obvious the whole program is going to be more expensive if FTTH has to be refitted at a later date with the sunk cost of the cabinets having to be written off and another project started up.
Explain to me Turnbull why a much poorer nation (New Zealand) can afford FTTH and we can’t?
Explain to me why Japan and Korea with advanced high tech economies have installed FTTH if it can be done cheaper and faster with your hot air scheme?
Are we going to let our economy go down the drain with Great Britain style DSL?
Why are you Malcolm Turnbull investing in FTTH companies and not companies like BT or Pakistan Telecom?
Is Australia a first world nation with first world telecommunications or are we a third world nation?
A world leader or just mediocre?