NBN Rollout Scrapped

[Knobby22]

I was having a holiday recently on Hamilton Island and all I could get was the Australian or the Courier mail. Bought the Australian every day.

It really has got less in it these days from what I remember and plenty of bias and hearsay. It may as well call itself the Courier Mail. I bet many people in Queensland don't buy papers if that is the best there is to offer.

Another fact you won't find in the Australian, most people support the NBN project.

 

[NBNMyths]

1. Its always good to have a surplus for a rainy day. Which was used by Labor when storm clouds where looming (how effectively is another matter).

Yes, but not at the cost of running down infrastructure. There's no point having a few billion dollars in the bank if the roads are in gridlock, the schools are falling apart, hospital waiting lists are blowing out and businesses in Sydney are stuck on satellite internet.

2. this government does not have a good record in spending money.

In some cases that's quite true. But the same can be said of any Government. I might also point out that if you don't invest in any projects, then there's no opportunity to spend too much on them!

3. although an ideal to aspire to (fast internet for everyone) perhaps not the best way to go about it:-
Wireless or other technologies improving before NBN is completed.
Govt. money instead of free enterprise (always dangerous for taxpayers)

The technology decisions of the NBN are those recommended by technology experts as the best solutions. There are no tech experts predicting wireless will ever eclipse the capability of fibre, that argument is strictly one of technological incompetents like Andrew Bolt and Alan Jones. Seriously, go and find a SINGLE telecommunications company that thinks/says wireless can replace fixed networks in urban areas. There simply isn't one. There are no other technologies with a prospect either.

Yes, it's true that there is a risk to "taxpayer's" money. But the same could be said of any Government spending. We could spend money on roads, only to have teleportation invented in the next decade. But, there aren't any physicists saying that's likely, just as there aren;t any telecommunication engineers saying fibre will be obsolete anytime soon.

4. Probable blow out of cost to implement.

So because the cost of something may "blow out" that's a reason to just do nothing? Should we apply that reason to everything we do, or just to Government projects? Or just to the NBN? If not, what makes it different to everything else?

5. There are other projects which would make us more prosperous.
New infrastructure for mining industry and opening up WA
Better roads and possibly rail.
Better funding of hospitals etc

We've been through this several times. The NBN provides a return. It doesn't effect our ability to invest in other projects. You can't simply "redirect" the NBN money unless....

a) Whatever you redirect it to also provides a return (eg: a toll road); OR
b) You find the money in the budget.

Either way though, whether the NBN is built or not makes not one iota of difference.

I'd also like to point out that even if the NBN provided zero return, and every cent of the $27bn Govt investment was on-budget. That is still less than 3% of the money Australian Governments will spend on public healthcare over the 10 year build of the NBN. What would we have to show for it if we increased the public health budget by 3% over 10 years do you think?

 

[drsmith]

So because the cost of something may "blow out" that's a reason to just do nothing? Should we apply that reason to everything we do, or just to Government projects? Or just to the NBN? If not, what makes it different to everything else?

We've been through this several times. The NBN provides a return. It doesn't effect our ability to invest in other projects. You can't simply "redirect" the NBN money unless....

a) Whatever you redirect it to also provides a return (eg: a toll road); OR
b) You find the money in the budget.

Either way though, whether the NBN is built or not makes not one iota of difference.

I'd also like to point out that even if the NBN provided zero return, and every cent of the $27bn Govt investment was on-budget. That is still less than 3% of the money Australian Governments will spend on public healthcare over the 10 year build of the NBN. What would we have to show for it if we increased the public health budget by 3% over 10 years do you think?

The problem with the above economic analysis is that it is not, in any way, rigorous.

 

[NBNMyths]

The problem with the above economic analysis is that it is not, in any way, rigorous.

It's not for me to be rigorous. I'm merely pointing out that the NBN funding is apparently misunderstood with the constant comments that the funding should be redirected. Redirection is neither possible (without satisfying one of the two provisos), nor required in order to achieve one of the "alternatives".

The project itself was assessed by KPMG-McKinsey who found it achievable for $42.8bn, and the NBN Co Business Plan was subsequently assessed by Greenhill-Caliburn, who found the assumptions therein to be reasonable.

 

[sails]

I was having a holiday recently on Hamilton Island and all I could get was the Australian or the Courier mail. Bought the Australian every day.

It really has got less in it these days from what I remember and plenty of bias and hearsay. It may as well call itself the Courier Mail. I bet many people in Queensland don't buy papers if that is the best there is to offer.

Another fact you won't find in the Australian, most people support the NBN project.

Haha Knobby. People choose what they read. Smart media will give people the news they want to read. Labor is on the nose in Qld so that might explain why the Courier mail seems biased. I don't think they caused it, I think they swing with the opinion polls. It's a supply and demand business. I wonder if Fairfax realise why many prefer to read Murdoch papers than Fairfax...

Perhaps less people than you think support the NBN...

 

[NBNMyths]

Haha Knobby. People choose what they read. Smart media will give people the news they want to read. Labor is on the nose in Qld so that might explain why the Courier mail seems biased. I don't think they caused it, I think they swing with the opinion polls. It's a supply and demand business. I wonder if Fairfax realise why many prefer to read Murdoch papers than Fairfax...

Perhaps less people than you think support the NBN...

I think it goes both ways. Yes, people choose the paper that best represents their world view, which I think leads that paper to move further towards that view in order to appease their readership.

Either way, the newspaper is a dying form of delivery. Paper sales are in freefall and have been for a decade. My guess is that in 20 years there won't be an Australian, or a Courier-Mail. At least not in their current form. The problem for the papers is that their costs remain constant, while their readership (and therefore advertising revenue) continue to fall. At some stage it will have to reach the point of being unviable.

As for public support of the NBN.... There hasn't been a single survey published by a recognised research agency that has shown more opposition than support for the NBN. The most recent NBN poll by Essential Media gave the NBN 54% approval to 28% opposed. Since 2010 in favour is up by 6%, opposed is down by 3%. That's a pretty big margin by any standard.

 

[drsmith]

It's not for me to be rigorous. I'm merely pointing out that the NBN funding is apparently misunderstood with the constant comments that the funding should be redirected. Redirection is neither possible (without satisfying one of the two provisos), nor required in order to achieve one of the "alternatives".

It needs to be regorous however, to ensure that scarce financial resources are best allocated.

The project itself was assessed by KPMG-McKinsey who found it achievable for $42.8bn, and the NBN Co Business Plan was subsequently assessed by Greenhill-Caliburn, who found the assumptions therein to be reasonable.

Anything is achievable with enough money.

The extent to which it is worthwhile relative to other priorities is quiet another matter.

 

[So_Cynical]

It needs to be regorous however, to ensure that scarce financial resources are best allocated.


Anything is achievable with enough money.

The extent to which it is worthwhile relative to other priorities is quiet another matter.

And that's why only Labor Governments get anything done...if it was up the the conservatives we would still be using wind up telephones.

Rigorous was the opera house financially rigorous buying Blue Poles the Trans-Australian Railway....your a dinosaur Doc, get with the system!

 

[drsmith]

....your a dinosaur Doc, get with the system!

This too is not a substantive economic or even social argument.

 

[Julia]

I was having a holiday recently on Hamilton Island and all I could get was the Australian or the Courier mail. Bought the Australian every day.

It really has got less in it these days from what I remember and plenty of bias and hearsay. It may as well call itself the Courier Mail.

You can't be serious! Since the Courier Mail went tabloid, its content has become that of all the other rubbish tabloids. "The Australian" has some thoughtful comment, though probably is too willing to expose the government's foolishness for your taste.

 

[drsmith]

A darkening cloud on the horizon over cost/benefit ?

Compared to the NBN Co Corporate Plan, a lower than expected capital expenditure (capex) and higher than expected operating expenditure (opex) result, will be watched closely by the committee. This could be an early warning that it is costing more to do less, when compared to the expected results in the NBN Co Corporate Plan, even though the committee has at this stage accepted the argument from NBN Co that other reasons are behind this. The committee will watch this capex/opex combination closely, as value for money to taxpayers is the critical key performance indicator in turning this good concept into an even better reality for all.

http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/jcnbn/report2/fullreport.pdf

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

I was having a holiday recently on Hamilton Island and all I could get was the Australian or the Courier mail. Bought the Australian every day.

It really has got less in it these days from what I remember and plenty of bias and hearsay. It may as well call itself the Courier Mail. I bet many people in Queensland don't buy papers if that is the best there is to offer.

Another fact you won't find in the Australian, most people support the NBN project.

Mate, I was forced to have some work done on the Arnage recently in Melbourne, and had to suffer a populace divorced from the reality of Australian life, fed on a diet of The Age, 7 and 9 TV and a number of bogan Radio Rogans.

Give me the Australian any day.

btw Most Australians also support free love, getting pissed and making decisions without consequence, but that should not drive government decisions.

gg

 

[sptrawler]

Drsmith, NBNmyths will give you a serve if you keep up with this negative sentiment. Actually I wonder if he isn't Tim.

 

[NBNMyths]

A darkening cloud on the horizon over cost/benefit ?

http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/jcnbn/report2/fullreport.pdf

Drsmith, NBNmyths will give you a serve if you keep up with this negative sentiment. Actually I wonder if he isn't Tim.

That's fine, I have no issue with that. The whole purpose of the committee is to assess the progress of the NBN rollout, and that's exactly what they should be doing, including noting any potential problems.

As they said though, they have accepted NBN Co's reasoning for the differences to their forecasts and it doesn't take a brain surgeon to do so. The delay in signing the Telstra deal in particular caused considerable well-documented problems, costs and delays. Now that it's finally done, and fibre rollout contracts (on budget, I might add) have been signed for every state and territory, the project should be able to settle down as the volume rollout commences.

 

[drsmith]

The delay in signing the Telstra deal in particular caused considerable well-documented problems, costs and delays. Now that it's finally done, and fibre rollout contracts (on budget, I might add) have been signed for every state and territory, the project should be able to settle down as the volume rollout commences.

The proof of the pudding will obvously be in the easting, but saying that "a capital expenditure (capex) and higher than expected operating expenditure (opex) result, will be watched closely by the committee" is a guarded comment by the committee.

It's clearly concerned, as many have a right to be given Labor's general budgetry outcomes when compared to original prediction.

 

[sptrawler]

Well trainspotter, Conroy will have something to say to the ACCC about this, he will be spitting chips. Someone will get a spray. LOL

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-wireless-battle/story-e6frgaif-1226218587235

Telstra shareholders should take a bit of joy from that.
It is going to be interesting to see how Thodey has positioned Telstra, at the moment he seems to be ticking the right boxes.

 

[Smurf1976]

The project itself was assessed by KPMG-McKinsey...

If there's one thing I learnt about government through working in the public service it was about consultants.

Government tells the consultant the required outcome and hands them the money. And hey presto! Back comes a report which just happens to recommend doing exactly what the government wants to do.

Been there, seen that game and I resent the spending of even one cent of my taxes on any form of management consultants for this very reason.

 

[Smurf1976]

and fibre rollout contracts (on budget, I might add) have been signed for every state and territory

How does the cost of these contracts compared to that of NBN Co simply building the network itself?

I'd just like to know how much of my taxes will be building the actual NBN versus how much will be consumed in unnecessary overheads etc which are inherent in the outsourced system.

For a project of this size, I would have thought that a substantial in-house work crew supplemented by contractors would have been a cheaper option than using contractors for the majority of the work. It would also save a fortune through avoiding the inadequate compaction and poorly executed drill shots which always seem to happen when total control is given to contractors rolling out a power / gas / comms network.

 

[sptrawler]

How does the cost of these contracts compared to that of NBN Co simply building the network itself?

I'd just like to know how much of my taxes will be building the actual NBN versus how much will be consumed in unnecessary overheads etc which are inherent in the outsourced system.

For a project of this size, I would have thought that a substantial in-house work crew supplemented by contractors would have been a cheaper option than using contractors for the majority of the work. It would also save a fortune through avoiding the inadequate compaction and poorly executed drill shots which always seem to happen when total control is given to contractors rolling out a power / gas / comms network.

Well smurph, that's why the first tender fell on its @#$e, the government wanted fixed price, got stupid quotes, rejected them all and re tendered.
Second time around went with the tried and proven tendering process of cost +.
That would be the cost plus whatever you can scam us for. LOL
NBN can't build it themselves, they are just a government dept shopfront, designed to stuff Telstra, the outcome will be very interesting.
IMO they would have been better off buying Telstra back(at half the price they sold it for)then seperated it and re floated it.
Instead they have taken the high risk ,high cost option and are left holding the can.

 

[NBNMyths]

Well trainspotter, Conroy will have something to say to the ACCC about this, he will be spitting chips. Someone will get a spray. LOL

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-wireless-battle/story-e6frgaif-1226218587235

Telstra shareholders should take a bit of joy from that.
It is going to be interesting to see how Thodey has positioned Telstra, at the moment he seems to be ticking the right boxes.

That won't bother the NBN, because the alternative "Telstra can't mislead consumers" is what they really needed from the deal anyway.

Just look at Telstra's 4G pricing.....15GB at (maybe) 10Mbps for $100 per month. On the NBN, that $100 would get you 1000GB at 100Mbps. 67x the data and 10x the speed for the same price. Clearly it would be impossible for Telstra to claim the two are comparable without being misleading.