Govt introduces legislation to starve Labor broadband plan to death

Dan Warne
21 June 2007, 3:20 AM


The Government has ratcheted up its attempt to neutralise Labor's popular broadband policy, with a bill to be introduced into parliament today designed to starve Labor of the funds it needs for its plan.


The Government has ratcheted up its attempt to neutralise Labor's popular broadband policy, with a bill to be introduced into parliament today designed to starve Labor of the funds it needs for its plan.

Legislation to block Labor from spending the $2 billion Communication Fund on building a broadband network will be introduced into parliament today, Communications Minister Senator Helen Coonan said.

The bill will be called "The Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Protecting Services for Rural and Regional Australia into the Future)" and the government says it will ensure that regional Australia’s perpetual $2 billion Communications Fund cannot be "pillaged."

The legal limit on withdrawals by future governments will be $400 million per three-year period, which is the interest earned on the $2 billion, ensuring that the principal savings can't be touched.

“Labor has committed to drain the entire $2 billion from the Communications Fund, rob the bush of its ongoing funding, and squander it on a commercially viable network estimated to reach around 75 per cent of the population," said Coonan.

“And not content with pillaging the Communications Fund, Labor has also promised to grab a further $2.7 billion from the Future Fund, for a total of $4.7 billion to waste on a broadband network that the industry says it will fund itself,” Senator Coonan said.

Labor's shadow minister for Finance, Lindsay Tanner, said he hadn't yet seen the bill so couldn't comment on its specific contents, but pointed out that "Parliament can change any law at any time", so a law instituted by the Government probably wouldn't hinder Labor if elected.

Senator Coonan called on the Labor Party to "come clean with full and proper detail on their broadband plan."

“It has been 90 days since the Labor Party put out their proposal and still no detail has been provided."

“I repeat my clear challenge to Mr Rudd and the Labor Party to provide the costings, coverage maps and technical information about their broadband proposal for the full scrutiny of the Australian public.

“All details of the Government’s new national broadband network are in the public domain but we’ve heard nothing but rhetoric from the Labor Party since their media announcement months ago.

“It’s clear Labor don’t have a genuine broadband strategy for Australians beyond our major capital cities. Their plan has no detail, no technical backing and no plan for the 25 per cent of the population that Labor will leave stranded without a service.”

Labor's Shadow Minister for Communications, Senator Conroy, told APC, "Despite the Minister's desperate histrionics over the cost of Labor's National Broadband Network, Labor's costings are consistent with the only previous industry modelling of the cost of a national fibre to the node network covering 98% of Australian homes and businesses.
 
"Unlike the Howard government, Labor is proposing a nation-building National Broadband Network roll out and as such has not produced cynical electorate by electorate maps of the network's coverage. Labor has a vision for a national broadband roll out, not a cheap political focus on the next election."


Post your comment



Comments

RSS feed Email alert

Tony:

It would be better to bring in legislation to force Telstra into a demerger, i.e. a retail unit and an infrastructure unit.

As a routine investor I know well that shareholders benefit from a demerger.

Were Telstra to demerge, than everybody would have access to using the services of the infrastructure unit.

The severe myopia at a political level would be amusing were it not that the broadband issue is so important to Australia's future. The Liberal politicians are clearly ignorant buffoons on this subject.

29 February 2008, 8:31 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anonymous1:

How on earth is Government-funded broadband critical to Australia's future? Why should the taxpayer foot the bill for this service when it could easily be addressed by private business?

29 February 2008, 8:44 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tony:

If Telstra was forced to demerge then government funding wouldn't be required and any business could get access to the infrastructure unit's network.

The sensitivity for the Liberals is because they've dropped the ball on Broadband, big time.

Faster, broadband is not only critical for Australia's future, it is also desirable on the home front too. For example, 1 in 4 Australians is born overseas and has overseas relatives. Video phone calls become viable with better broadband.

The best broadband today is cable at 17Mbps download but a paltry 256kbps upload. Telecommuters etc need good download and good upload.

Ramping up broadband in the bush etc can assist employment in the bush e.g. working from home. It also makes it more viable e.g. via the Optus/Elders WiMax deal to do things like using wireless Internet to open and close gates for sheep in ranches and the like.

So, yes, faster and more pervasive broadband is critical. Who funds it? I don't care. It just needs to happen instead of politicans with no technical acumen at all messing with this.

29 February 2008, 8:44 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

lewis:

Tony, you say " The best broadband today is cable at 17Mbps download but a paltry 256kbps upload"

Please explain to me how I can Download at 22 Mbps and upload at 2.43 Mbps.
I am on a simple ADSL2+ connection to a local exchange.







29 February 2008, 8:44 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tony:


You would have to be virtually next door to the exchange to get that kind of speed. Most people aren't

Try out the "Detailed Summary" link on http://adsl2exchanges.com.au/.

Here are my results:

Line of Sight: 2171 m
Estimated Cable: 2931 m
Estimated Attenuation: 41
Estimated Maximum Speed: 7666

So, do I sacrifice cable 17Mbps download for 7666 download, but possibly improve my upload from 256kbps to, "maybe", 512kbps?

Anyway, on cable we're all using DOCSIS 2 cable modems but with speeds mothing like at present. I'm almost certain that if Telstra loses the FTTN story it will beef up the cable network.

29 February 2008, 8:44 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

McBanjo:

Do you wanna pay lots of money for internet, or little money? I'm not into paying hundreds of dollars a month for the next 50 years, on high-speed internet.

Telstra sucks, this is a fact. I've just had to pay $100 to get some Telstra blocker lifted from my line. That is why private business' should NOT own the network.

This is finally something that would really make a difference to Australia's economy.

The internet boost has many advantages for the economy. Just look at countries with high-speed internet like Japan or China.

So my question is, why should the consumer feed the pockets of millionares in big suits, when internet is something that is a granted in this 21st century.

29 February 2008, 8:44 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

raindog:

We have a solution for the bush, I'd like to hope the Libs have the fortitude to stand up to Telstra and provide the same 12Mb security to the city, within days

The Telstra bluff and bluster has backfired once, let's see the same for metro Internet!

We don't want spineless pollies we want someone who can make a decision, and making decisions without robbing the larder just adds bonus points!!

29 February 2008, 8:31 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

c0n:

The current govt has no problems raiding taxpayer funds for military transport aircraft (4 x $500million each), warships (5 x $2billion each) or stopgap fighter aircraft (more billions).

29 February 2008, 8:31 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anonymous1:

So spending money on National Security constitutes raiding the coffers?

29 February 2008, 8:44 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anonymous1:

The outline of Labours plan sound much better than what the Libs have on offer. Labours plans are about encouraging business's to move or keep their operations in Australia where they can access to the high speed internet they need for communication. Whats the bet they are going to setup shop where 75% of Australians are. In regional areas the largest office building are your council offices which would hold about 100-200 people. You can easily run these offices off a single 2mb SHDSL or even 2 if you really wanted something fast for that many users. Labours plan isn't about helping the public download porn or tv series faster its all about business.

29 February 2008, 8:31 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tony:


VDSL is a lot faster...

29 February 2008, 8:44 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

john:

Who would be surprised??? We are back to the 50's and the divine right of kings nes't pas? It would be nice if we could just play well together.

29 February 2008, 8:31 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

anonymous user Anonymous user