NBN two years on: On a precipice

On the second anniversary of the network's announcement, Computerworld reflects on what changes - if any - it has had

“Today we are here to make an historic announcement about broadband, jobs and the future of the Australian economy,” booms the ever-serious and authoritative voice of (then) Prime Minister Kevin Rudd.

“Just as railway tracks laid out the future of the 19th century, and electricity grids the future of the 20th century, so broadband represents the core infrastructure of the 21st century.”

The Rudd Government's newly-announced initiative would involve spending $43 billion to build a nationwide fibre-to-the-home network over eight years covering 90 per cent of Australian premises, with ambitious fixed wireless and satellite-based technology covering the remainder of the population.

The infrastructure-based dichotomy established by the Labor Government on 7 April, 2009 would haunt the National Broadband Network (NBN) over the next two years, as critics and fans alike argued over what exactly the national network announced that day constituted: A profitable government investment, a re-entrenchment of telecommunications or a vital piece of infrastructure, whatever the cost?

Nor was the project free of the spectre of previous failed government broadband initiatives. According to Labor, the previous Coalition Government was responsible for some 18 failed attempts to revitalise broadband in Australia, including the famously scrapped OPEL project.

But the press conference also signalled the official scrapping of the Rudd Government’s own initiative: An extensive private sector tender process carried out the year before, in which many tried but failed to convince the government of what was needed to push Australian broadband into the 21st century. As a result, the budget increased tenfold and the stakes became much higher.

It would be fair to say the announcement of the NBN caught many - including those in the industry - by surprise. But, two years on, there’s still little doubt the announcement and subsequent efforts to set up a wholesale-only, open-access government enterprise in NBN Co had one specific purpose: Deconstructing Telstra.

“There was no interest from Telstra to cooperate with the government,” says telecommunications analyst, Paul Budde. “In that sort of situation, it was a unified sigh of relief that the government did stick to its guns - that we have to have a structural separation, a national infrastructure, and NBN Mark II in place.”

Those guns were aimed squarely at the incumbent monopoly telco, according to Telsyte analyst Chris Coughlan. The timing of the NBN announcement - Telstra head honcho, Sol Trujillo, had only announced his departure from the company a month earlier - was fortuitous: It provided the government with the ammunition it needed to restructure Australian telecommunications.

The $11 billion financial heads of agreement signed last year by Telstra, NBN Co and the Federal Government solidified that goal. Rather than the government having to enact legislation that forced a Telstra separation, the previously reticent company was now willing to play ball.

“In my discussions with David Thodey, it became clear to me that he definitely was a person of the new age rather than the old age,” Budde says, attributing the decision - yet to be finalised - to the customer-focused CEO who replaced Trujillo. “But there was always that doubt: Can one person, like David Thodey, pull it through?”

The on-flows of the initial announcement have rarely been predictable, and, with the dust settled, there has been no shortage of those eager to share their thoughts on the issue. From constant demands of a cost-benefit analysis for such a massive project to the microscopic surgery conducted on every single decision made by those surrounding the project, it is little surprise when those suffering from a lack of proper broadband access call for the government to simply get the job done.

Coughlan and Budde agree that the NBN has been sidetracked to a degree by debate surrounding the project. “Having to front up to Senate committees, and answer the perennial question ‘Why don’t you do this with wireless?’ — any technologist will tell you that’s a silly question,” Coughlan says.

But with the network now set in stone - a fact even the opposition has reluctantly begun to admit - the conversation has slowly turned from whether or not the project should go ahead, to how the project should be rolled out and what an NBN world actually looks like.

For Telsyte’s Coughlan, the major issues going forward revolve around how a future telecommunications sector will work. It’s a murky issue, made more complex given recent arguments from Internode’s Simon Hackett that NBN Co’s pricing structure squeezes small ISPs out of the equation. Should they want to participate, they’ll likely be pushed onto a wholesale aggregation service operated by either Telstra or Optus - an eerily familiar story.

“I think there’ll be consolidation, but I don’t think it will actually improve unless new entrants come into the market,” Coughlan says. The pricing structure itself is likely to push bundling, he says, “to maximise the revenues they make from the service”.

While Budde acknowledges this is an issue, those internal industry concerns fade in comparison to the prospect of involvement from industries other than the traditional telecommunications players.

“At the moment I think the whole situation is still very much telco-centric - it’s all about Telstra, all about Optus, AAPT and god knows whoever,” he says. “The real issue is what is this going to do for our economy, for our society? We will see that increasingly these other sectors are going to be demanding, that they want to be looked after the same way Telstra and Optus are looked after.”

Budde’s prediction may be justified, based on recent rumours the NBN could become a project governed by multiple departments within the Federal Government. It’s hard to believe, given the project has become Conroy’s pet in many ways.

But with much of the legislation now in place and the NBN's rollout likely to be in full swing by the end of the year, it has grown from the squalling baby opening its eyes in the bright world of politics, to a toddler taking its first steps and gaining a voice amid the confusion.

Where the NBN heads next is anyone’s guess. It’s clear there are major steps that need to be taken: That many of the same debates continue to circulate among the wider Australian populace signifies a need for education, while recent tender issues indicate that it is not free from the risk of becoming another government-funded financial wreck.

What is clear is that the network has become much more than a niche, geeky issue - the outcome of last year’s federal election exemplified the need to embrace all Australians in the major decisions yet to be made, rather than a select few.

But the current ambivalent attitude from many toward the project - “it’s good, but it could be better” - may not yield the high short-term take-up NBN Co hopes will justify the $43 billion spend.

Follow James Hutchinson on Twitter: @j_hutch

Follow Computerworld Australia on Twitter: @ComputerworldAU

More about: AAPT, AAPT, APT, etwork, Federal Government, Internode, Optus, Telstra, Telsyte
References show all

Comments

1

j

Thu 07/04/2011 - 09:52

All good and well to have separated Telstra after it was sold by the Government What about the 6 figure sum I lost in my Super Fund??? the most immoral act a goverment has ever done to their people.

JP

2

Lisa

Thu 07/04/2011 - 10:01

NBN is farce. Something you would do in a depression for make work if no other alternative existed. And who can wait 10 years ?
LIke everything Labor does it has bloated out and become unnatural and useless.
All spin, delay and failure to deliver, hidden behind secrecy and massive changes in the laws to protect it.
What Australia now gets is a bigger uglier more stupid duplication and monopoly than ever before. And world rated as useless and last in time to benefit or value.
People, communities, business have simply disengaged wating for it to die. Batts, Boats, BER, Carbon Tax, Health, NBN,, whatever, this goverment is simply useless.

3

Tony

Thu 07/04/2011 - 10:23

This is a joke. OK the Government announced NBN 2.0 because Testra wouldn't play ball, and they wanted to both bypass Telstra's network and, in their words, have competition in the wholesale sector.
However they woke up to the fact that without Telstra as a major customer, they network was not viable.
Now that Telstra is onside, why not revisit fibre to the node (curb, cabinet, whatever) ? We can still get around 100 Mb / second speeds, it will cost half as much, and will probably be done alot more quickly (currently it won't be completed to 2020. I mean, really?). And then it can be upgraded to Fibre to the premises in the future, and anyone who wants it now can pay for it. Why not, at the same time, turn the node into a wireless hot spot?

4

Mike ELLIOTT

Thu 07/04/2011 - 10:46

Thankfully there is still a chance for Telstra shareholders to refuse to accept being blackmailed by the Labor government.
The NBN looks like a big waste of tax payers money. Without Telstra it will waste even more. But Telstra can then get on with their plan "B" and build fiber in the cities. This would give people a much quicker high speed network. The NBN can continue to slowly fill the gaps.

5

Gary Khol

Thu 07/04/2011 - 11:07

@3 Tony I completly agree, excellent reply.

@4 Mike if the shareholders do that it would be a self inflicted gunshot wound to the share price head long term, sad fact is Telstra needs the $11 billion as much as the government needs Telstra to bloat the numbers for the NBN to look more cost effective over the near to medium term.

Telstra cant even do its much shouted about 4G network without that go ahead, Telstra would continue to bleed itself to death, and some would say it would be entirely justified if they did, as this is a situation mostly of their own making while under Sol.
As for the most touted lines of government blackmail, I strongly disagree with that a more accurate term would be government payback, not blackmail.

6

Bill

Thu 07/04/2011 - 13:50

Now we see that the construction costs to build this government monopolised white elephant are all about to blow out to the tune of billions of doallars of tax payer's money, based on grossly underestimated labour costs. I wonder if the public is now supportive of pouring their money down this ever widening black hole and they still haven't even started to seriously build the thing yet! Conroy's ducking for cover, no commenting and blaming it on NBN Co., just as Garrett did for home insulation scheme. Amongst that scheme, green loans, BER etc. the NBN is just looking to be yet another great Labor stuff up. Which is of course why they need the Carbon tax, tax on energy, to bail them out. It's nothing to do with a committment to addressing climate change and "putting a price on carbon" as Juliar Gillard was more than willing to cancel the whole ETS concept to suit her own political expediance in her caucus showdown with Kevin Rudd. What a scam.

7

lantana

Thu 07/04/2011 - 17:36


Well, well, what do we have here? Numbers 1-6 above sound like a joint meeting of the Telstra shareholders fan club and the NoNBN political movement. What a pity that their spelling ability seems to be about on a par with their understanding of the industry.

And did anyone mention the national interest? No, but that should get a run, because it is one of the best reasons for installing a world class national network.

8

Alstoq

Thu 07/04/2011 - 20:37

The NBN is outdated. The new standard is wireless broadband. Lightsquared, a company in the US, already has the technology. Billions of dollars to be wasted in Australia...again.

9

Jeff

Thu 07/04/2011 - 22:19

God I am so glad I am not in Australia anymore. You are such a country of whingers and knockers. You guys couldnt build anything even if your country's future depended on it LOL!

10

Corsair

Thu 07/04/2011 - 22:52

I'm all for an NBN. I just want to be properly implemented and managed.

What scares me at the moment is this particular quote from the article:

" NBN Co’s pricing structure squeezes small ISPs out of the equation. Should they want to participate, they’ll likely be pushed onto a wholesale aggregation service operated by either Telstra or Optus - an eerily familiar story. "

That, and the raft of other technical issues that come up with decommissioning the copper network (e.g. back-to-base alarms, people with Foxtel IQ(HD) boxes, etc.) which need to be addressed.

11

reality

Thu 07/04/2011 - 22:58

@8 Alstoq - Don't believe the spin. Take a reality check at http://gigaom.com/broadband/for-lightsquared-no-network-is-no-problem/. Lightsquared, great idea, a wholesaler, heard that before. Currently no substance and has to contend with heavyweights like AT&T and Verizon.
Another wireless/satelite system that won't deliver the capaciy or performance that fibre does.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Users posting comments agree to the Computerworld comments policy.
Login or register to link comments to your user profile, or you may also post a comment without being logged in.
Related Coverage
Related Whitepapers
Latest Stories
Community Comments
Tags: broadband, internet, National Broadband Network (NBN), NBN, nbn co, networking, telcos, telecommunications, Telstra
Whitepapers
All whitepapers
Sign up now to get free exclusive access to reports, research and invitation only events.
Featured Download

Computerworld newsletter

Join the most dedicated community for IT managers, leaders and professionals in Australia