Unless a Royal Commission is likely to produce useful outcomes, there is no point. What benefit could a Royal Commission into the NBN deliver, except perhaps some heads on platters? Even that seems highly unlikely to me - those who benefited from the downgrading of the NBN are not silly enough to sully their hands directly.
As for a Royal Commission into Privatisation, that makes a lot more sense. It should be asked to look at the long term costs and (cough) benefits of the sale or outsourcing of public goods and services, as well as how these decisions have been made and whether taxpayers have received value for money. It might also consider the operations of the âProductivityâ Commission, and tying of Commonwealth payments to state/territory asset divestments.
Maybe a Royal Commission into Smaller Government could also be formed, looking again at long term costs and (cough) benefits to the taxpayer. A Royal Commission into the Regionalisation of the Commonwealth Government, looking in particular to the move of the APVMA into its ministerâs electorate?
The current government was keen to institute inquiries into behaviour of unions on construction sites, but ignored the behaviour of builders and approvers - thatâs worth looking into.
The real question with all of these potential royal commissions is whether any government has the will to dig into the sins of the past - which include their own.
It appears we may all now have the answer to that question?
Given both my future NBN options have zero reliance for speed of the NBN on any in house wiring, it seems a rather hollow offer?
There are obviously few votes for labour in the regional areas, where the Fixed Wireless and Satellite customers of the NBN are mostly concentrated. Apologies to those unlucky near city customers who have been backfilled with wireless or worse!
Looks like the Greens are closer to what Australia needs than either of the majors.
âThe party is committed to keeping the NBN as a public asset.â
Given the lead-times though, perhaps they should be planning for a 22nd century network.
Interesting commentary that the ALP is also committed to selling the NBN?
Politics aside the options of upgrading FTTN at least on a trial basis are in the previously linked ALP policy release.
I wonder how many Australians would prefer irrespective of the makeup of the next Federal Government an independent and thorough review of the state of the NBN before it is sold?
And if we would all demand the opportunity to vote on that decision with full knowledge of the legacy?
Sale of the NBN is already buried in the policy of the departing Government. It is also written into the NBNâs future deliverables?
It also appears likely that the sale will exclude all opportunity for average Australians to purchase a share of the NBN. Although most lemons tend to leave a sour taste in the mouth. Telstra T2 anyone?
It looks to me like too much of NBN connectivity has already been left to the private sector. The problems seem to stem from trying to shoehorn competition in where it doesnât work.
Perhaps not really on-topic, but I donât consider it worth a new thread. For those who donât know, Paul Budde is one of the most credible voices in Australian telecommunications.
Is there any genuine community support for the future sale of the NBN? It appears there is not much of an argument to do so.
Commentary such as that by Budde serves to demonstrate the extent of the failure of the NBN project to deliver equitably and fairly.
To date there are few independent sources outside the NBN Co itself that are able to support any argument for the future sale of the NBN?
The ACCC and Telstra may be noted exceptions! Although they may have different objectives to the community in general.
There is an article written amazingly for The Australian - Business Spectator, by Mark Gregory - January 11, 2016. It explores many of the issues facing the NBN and the potential way forward. One closing prediction is still very topical:
âIn 2020 the NBN debate will have moved on from discussion about the second-rate fixed access network that now exists in Australia to one of how to sell off the NBN so that we can try yet again to fix the telecommunications market.
Unfortunately, based on the current track record of successive governments, the one that exists in 2020 is unlikely to have the determination to unravel the legislative and regulatory nightmare that will exist.â
The crystal ball more than three years on is very accurate in nearly all respects except one. The extinction of a Turnbull lead government.
I have heard no actual argument for the NBNâs sale from anyone, anywhere. None. Nothing. It appears that our politicians think itâs a done deal, and nothing we say or do can change that (much like the sell-off of all our other assets without our consultation).
Selling a monopoly will simply put us back twenty years to Telstraâs almost total control of telephony.
Because the ALP was forever afraid of budget deficits, the NBN was set up to be eventually sold at a profit. As such it could be deemed an investment and spending on it was âoff-budgetâ.
The governmentâs objective for the national broadband network was not to give Australians a world-class internet with speeds and prices equivalent or better than the rest of the world, which in turn would provide the country with infrastructure that would set us up for the next 100 years.
As the NBNâs own corporate plan puts it, ânbnâs key objective is to ensure all Australians have access to fast broadband as soon as possible, at affordable prices, and at least costâ.
But what is fast? Well, senator Fifield made it clear that it was 25Mps, as that was the speed recommended to download Netflix. He said âeveryone will have access to speeds of at least 25Mbpsâ and âtwo-thirds of premises will have access to 100Mbpsâ.
When your objective is only to provide everyone with an internet that allows them to download Netflix, then that is what you deliver.
But in the end it still comes back to policy objectives.
If your objective is an internet that is good enough to download Netflix in 2018, you can ignore what the requirements will be in 10, 20 or 50 yearsâ time, and you can also overlook the crucial issues of upload speeds that are vital for businesses.
If your objective is also to somehow make a profit from it all, then you try to do it as cheaply as possible by using sub-par technology such as FTTN rather than FTTH or FTTC (to the curb), , and under a structure that has people being either unable to afford plans with faster speeds or to access them.
And then to justify your objective, you claim that being unable to afford something is a matter of âchoiceâ and proof that faster speeds are not needed.
Itâs a historical piece from 2016 prior to even the last Federal Election. It is still incredible that it got through the paperâs system back then. More so that it is searchable on line and appears under the banner of the same paper. The author as I read it has captured the scope of the key issues with any sale of the NBN and presented them very directly. It says why it should not be sold and why the NBN not being sold is an unlikely outcome.
Mainly because the NBN is no longer near the top of the agenda for either of the two major parties.
It may suffice to suggest privatisation of the NBN which also holds the future of communications and media distribution nationally is no more sustainable than a 100% privatisation of national health care and all public hospital services.
Anything more I could say becomes overtly partisan, with cynical overtones.
I would normally try to pick some good and/or bad points out of a linked article. I am somewhat disappointed by the lack of vision on the part of most of the views held by people quoted or referenced in this one though. I can only suggest you read it and perhaps weep (intellectually) at the lack of vision many have around what the nbn⢠should be.
The next one is from Telstraâs Chief on what our Telecommunications needs to be doing to get us into the future. We have all said it here that currently the nbn⢠is a lack of effort, the MTM NBN a lack of any will to do it right. 5G may punish the profitability of the nbn⢠network. Certainly nbn⢠needs to modernise to cope with future demands to improve our nation. Telstra has an interest in this as they are the oneâs who most likely want the NBN Co once it is privatised. Anyway enjoy the read:
I think we all have to remember that anything the Telstra chief might say, is going to be from the perspective of one looking to make the company more profitable. NBNCo reducing costs will benefit any future purchaser. Telstra, for example. 5G is an unknown at this stage.
As I also noted that Telstra are the most likely to buy the NBN Co and have certainly made moves to allow that to happen. Reducing the cost and hopefully increasing performance are still things worth pursuing for nbn⢠users, just we need to keep in mind not all changes may be done because they are for our benefit. With my cynical view about it all we are just a product that produces the revenue and never are the beneficiary.
Thats exactly my thinking. TElstra (if it ends up purchasing) will not keep costs to the consumer or resellers lower, they are more likely to raise them: I base that comment on Telstraâs past behaviour. Never mind that âthe taxpayerâ has already footed the bill to the tune of $51Bn. I dunno, its such a mess. But, I think there ought to be a low cost 12/1 level available to everyone, not just as a way to keep the âlandlineâ which isnt.
I am not sure if it will be Telstra. To raise say $50B+ to buy in effect a technology company would be an enormous risk to not only Telstra, but their financial backers. There are many reports that it may not ever make a decent financial return which would not be good for a public company (it would be a massive albatross around their neck).
The only way for Telstra to buy, is if there were massive write downs and it was bought for next to nothing. I am not sure that the ALP/LNP would be keen to almost give the NBN awayâŚas there could be budgetary and political consequences.
My view it is more likely to either be bought by an international telecoms consortium (partnership with several international companies to spread risk)âŚbut this may never be approved by the Commonwealth on the basis of national security.
Alternatively, some of the (industry?) super funds may wish to enter a consortium to purchase the network and add it to the non-listed infrastructure assets they have to protect themselves against market volatility in other investment sectors. In such case, a high return is not the primary aim.
Owning a monopoly on communications infrastructure wouldnât make a decent financial return?
I do agree with writing it down, but not for sale purposes. It is currently a taxpayer funded albatross, and should use the write-down to fix some of the mess (i.e. reinvest).
Wait a couple of years and letâs see. A fair proportion of Telstra went for a song.
Many appear to share the same view on the write down, but few propose the second. Although it would appear their opinions might lead to not selling as one logical end point.
The ABC has released effectively what is an opinion piece that summarises the history of the NBN in a simple non tech way.
It pivots off an S&P Credit assessment of the financial future for the NBN.
Notably the S&P report is now a year old (released 25 July 2018). All the mainstream media commented on the report at that time. The impact of and need for a write down prior to sale of the NBN assets and business was fundamental to the report. Additionally S&P has some definite views on the competitive position of the NBN as a going concern.
The ABC review from July last year.
S&P
âIn our opinion, there appears to be ample justification for additional financial support on the grounds that the NBN generates social and economic benefits that cannot be captured by a commercial return on investment.â
And, assuming there is a sale,
âSo, potentially over the longer term, if there is market consolidation and NBN Co isnât viable, we might see less competition and higher prices.â
Iâd say the NBN is a monument to the pitfalls of privatisation - particularly privatisation of natural monopolies. The rot set in when John Howard privatised the telecommunications infrastructure, along with Telstra. The $20 billion write-down is only the beginning. Weâll be lucky to get away with ten times that. A permanent fix involves re-nationalising the infrastructure. What that will cost, I have no idea.
So Telstraâs InfraCo could be merged with NBN Co, under public ownership. That still leaves mobile infrastructure in the private sector, but itâs a start.
âbuilt and fully operationalâ Built would imply finished. Is national infrastructure like this ever really finished? Iâll leave pondering fully operational to the reader.
All those issues and the rest - and not only for the short term.
Donât understand why people are questioning if it will be sold
Extract from a press release by Wayne Swan in April 2009( The Government will make an initial investment in this company but intends to sell down its interest in the company within 5 years after the network is built and fully operational, consistent with market conditions, and national and identity security considerations.) it was always Labors intention to sell it off
You might regard Labor as infallible, but to me theyâre just another bunch of politicians.
Plans can change. In this case, they should. Privatising the infrastructure along with Telstra has proved to be a monumental blunder. Thatâs not a mistake that we should repeat with the NBN. Quite the opposite, in fact.
