Sounds about right...

Please accept my apologies: I was wrong about Malcolm Turnbull

hey everyone,

hope you’re well and winding down towards Christmas!

Long-term readers of Delimiter will be aware that I have long tried to hold all sides of politics to account on an equal basis when it comes to technology policy and implementation. Whether it’s Labor, the Coalition or the Greens, I have tried sincerely to praise the merits of each, as well as criticising each where criticism is due. I have tried to seek truth and to be objective. This is standard journalistic practice and it was how I was trained.

This has, at times, led me into conflict with many readers. Many in Australia’s technology community have long believed that the Coalition has not sincerely had intentions of pursuing Labor’s National Broadband Project to fruition. When Malcolm Turnbull was first appointed as Shadow Communications Minister three years ago, back in 2010, then-Opposition Leader Tony Abbott reportedly ordered Turnbull to “demolish” the NBN, and many readers have long believed that has been the secret intention of the Coalition when it comes to this most high-profile of Labor projects.

In that past three years, I have attempted to treat all statements by all sides of politics on their merits. I have treated the Coalition’s statements on the NBN seriously, and I have treated Labor’s statements on the NBN seriously. I have treated the Greens’ statements on the NBN seriously.

Many readers have argued with me about this approach. They have pointed out that Turnbull, and others within the Coalition, have very often taken an inconsistent approach to the NBN, stating one thing and then doing another. There are examples littered throughout the past three years; I need not bring them all up individually.

This inconsistent approach — where Turnbull and other senior Coalition figures have protested their support for the NBN in public but often taken actions which have seemed inimical to that support in practice — has led many readers to develop a complete lack of faith in the Coalition when it comes to the NBN project. Many have reverted to Abbott’s 2010 request that Turnbull “demolish” the NBN, and will believe very little of what the Member for Wentworth says when it comes to the project.

In this context, my approach of trying to listen to all sides has rubbed many the wrong way. Many readers believe I have been trying to achieve “balance for balance’s sake” instead of trying to get to the truth of the matter. I haven’t been doing that: I’ve honestly been trying to get to the truth of the matter. Because of this, I’ve argued long and hard with many of you about this issue.

Well, I am here today to formally apologise. I was wrong to have faith in Malcolm Turnbull and the Coalition on this issue. You were all right, and I was wrong. Turnbull does indeed appear to be attempting to “demolish” the NBN.

I sat in a press conference at NBN Co headquarters this morning and listened for two hours while Turnbull and a series of his NBN appointees explained how they would construct less of the NBN even than the Coalition promised in April. Those areas currently “served” (as laughable as that term is to many who live there) by the HFC cable footprint, it now appears, will get no upgrade at all. Many will doubtless still be on ADSL2+ when the Coalition’s “NBN” is completed.

Turnbull’s cost projection promises, his rollout speed promises, his technology choice promises; even his promises that the NBN Co Strategic Review would not be run by consultants; virtually all of his promises about the NBN were this morning flagrantly broken, and there were no answers to so many of the questions which the non-subservient elements of the media (those of us that are left) have about the NBN.

We cannot call this a “National Broadband Network” any more. That term is fundamentally redundant, when around 28 percent of Australian premises will not receive the infrastructure, and most of the rest will receive a watered down version highly dependent on Telstra’s copper network, which, as NBN Co’s internal reports show, has a plethora of issues. To do so would be farcical, as this morning’s entire press conference was farcical.

[continued ...]

Last line of defence against being put on FTTN which no longer gives a guaranteed 25mbps (as I have argued it cannot using lousy, corroded and too–narrow Telstra copper, now fully vindicated) is your local council.

If you think back to the Optus/Telstra rollout of HFC  you might remember local councils were in the vanguard of resistance to these thick cables being run out overhead. Councils couldn’t do anything then but they can prohibit erection of big, ugly cabinets on their footpaths. These cabinets will be magnets for graffiti that councils will have to clean up at ratepayers’ expense. They will also be vandalised for the valuable batteries they contain.

No FTTN crap will be run out before 2018 in my estimation (after extended negotiations with Telstra leading to a payment of $30Bn in addition to the $11Bn for remediation of pits and ducts, studies into the state of the wiring (corrosion and wire thickness) and a study into what wire goes exactly where and which premises are on pair gain. Then the (extensive and expensive) remediation of the copper can be costed and work finally begin.

So, if you are in a council within the old FTTH area that is not “served” by HFC I suggest you send a letter to your council/Shire along the lines of:

Quote:


I have sent such an email to my local council.

I reckon I've figured it out; the government is getting its advice on the NBN from longweekend58. 

Delimiter publishes internal NBN Co FTTN analysis

Delimiter has today published the full text of NBN Co’s internal analysis casting doubt on the viability of the Coalition’s Fibre to the Node-based National Broadband Network policy. The 46MB document can be downloaded in full online here in PDF format.

In a series of articles published late last week and early this week through the Sydney Morning Herald and ZDNet Australia, freelance journalist David Braue detailed the contents of an internal document produced by NBN Co for the Department of Communications during the Caretaker Period immediately prior to the Federal Election in September.

The document, first published today by Shadow Communications Minister Jason Clare, analyses the Coalition’s NBN policy in detail and raises significant concerns about its viability in a number of areas, highlighting numerous legislative, construction and technical challenges which NBN Co believes are likely to blow out the Coalition’s 2016 and 2019 delivery deadlines.

The NBN Co analysis details NBN Co’s belief that the Fibre to the Node technology preferred by the Coalition will require a significantly higher degree of skills to deploy than Labor’s preferred Fibre to the Premises model, that the associated IT systems are considered “high risk”, that NBN Co cannot guarantee FTTN can deliver the Coalition’s planned 50Mbps minimum speeds, amid other concerns.

However, until now, the actual document has not been published online. Today, Delimiter can provide readers with the opportunity to read the document in full. The 46MB document can be downloaded in full online here in PDF format.

The publication of the document (available online in PDF format) comes as the Coalition has this morning appeared to significantly water down its NBN policy, as a consequence of the publication of NBN Co’s Strategic Review in its future operations.

The review has found that it will not be possible to deliver the Coalition’s stated policy goal of delivering broadband speeds of 25Mbps to all Australians by the end of 2016 or at the projected cost, and has recommended that up to a third of Australian premises theoretically already covered by HFC cable networks effectively receive no upgrade at all under a drastically revised deployment scheme.

NBN Co’s new executive chairman Ziggy Switkowski claimed in a statement that the approach that NBN Co had recommended to the Government would delivery “very fast broadband to homes more quickly and at less cost”. However, it does not appear as though NBN Co’s new ‘Optimised MTM mix’ is currently possible to deliver, based on the company’s current commercial relationships and the state of Australia’s technology sector.

The news has created instant uproar from commentators and ordinary Australians alike, with many concerned the Coalition’s likely new policy will result in little to no change to broadband speeds and availability in major metropolitan areas.

“It is a depressing state of affairs that four and a half years after Kevin Rudd and Stephen Conroy ripped up their previous plans to announce the creation of NBN Co and a national broadband network that we are left debating which side of politics’ approach has been the most clueless,” wrote Financial Review IT editor Paul Smith this afternoon, in a fiery article taking both sides of politics to task for their inept delivery of telecommunications policy.

In a statement, Shadow Communications Minister Jason Clare described NBN Co’s secret FTTN evaluation as “the real Strategic Review of the Coalition’s second-rate NBN plan.

[continued ...]

Fudged Numbers Abound In Review

Sortius 16/12/2013

When reading Big Mal’s “Strategic Review”, one cannot help but be struck by two things:

One, the amount of redaction of figures to do with HFC, as I covered yesterday, and two, the amount of information that doesn’t match up with NBN Co’s 2013-2016 Corporate Plan.

The latter is concerning, as the review’s supporting “Independent Assessment” found:

So essentially an independent assessment is stating that NBN Co’s books were fine, so why ignore the 2013-2016 Corporate Plan in favour of the 2012-2015 plan?

Simple, to fudge the numbers.

If we look at the 2012-2015 premises passed prediction for FY2013, it’s over 200 000 premises more than that of the 2013-2016 Corporate Plan (CP). We understand there were delays, this is a given, but to make up figures like this is crazy. The 2013-16 CP was only missed by 22%, NOT the 55% that the Strategic Review states.

Not only this, the review rewrites history by stating that only 66 000 and 82 000 total premises had been passed by June 30 2011 & 2012, even though BOTH NBN Co Corporate Plans (2012-15 and 2013-16) show that in 2011 183 000 premises had been passed in total. The 2013-16 Corporate Plan shows that 213 premises had been passed as of June 30 2012.

This is where much of the assumptions of a 2024 finish for an FTTP NBN come from. The worst part is that they don’t even try to hide the fact they are removing premises already passed from the figures, to the tune of 120 000 and 130 000 respectively.

It’s easy to make a nice convincing graph if you are fudging numbers.

The next thing fudged is the take-up rates. This would drastically affect any predictions on revenue, and we can clearly see that Turnbull’s flying monkeys have done him proud here.

Not only did they fudge the total take up rates, but also the speed tiers. Claiming that 19% of people in an area serviced by FTTP were taking up the service (overall, this is closer to 37%, and over 60% in some areas), and revising down figures for the higher plans.

With figures like this, we can see that both the ARPU will be lower (less people on faster plans) and the total revenue predictions will be lower. This only covers some of the dodgy accounting that’s been done to show costs will be far above what it will really cost.

The explanations are as weak as Turnbull’s original plan; with the review claiming the cost per premises (CPP) of the Local Neighbourhood Distribution Network (LNDN) will increase 78% to $1997 AND a 50% increase in CPP for connections to $2100. These two alone are farcical, with nothing at all to back up these claims. Just some nice numbers that Rousselot has directed his minions to stick in there.

If we look at the table used to support the per premises increases we can see that the supporting evidence… doesn’t exist:

Yes, even the graph to support this table is a joke:

For anyone to submit such a redacted & incomplete “Strategic Review” is laughable, especially in light of NBN Co’s 2013-16 CP showing the cost per premises is DROPPING, not increasing.
Quote:

Without any justification this review doubles all costs associated with the rollout. Essentially there’s $13.7b in totally unjustified & unreasoned costs. That only got them half way to the $28.5b lie. The rest is made up by halving revenues, revising interest repayments up while revising interest on funds up. Yes, that ludicrous!

Essentially this review is an exercise in fraud. Yes, I’m not going to tone down this claim, because that’s what it is. If you attempted to pass this document off in the business world you would be fired at the very least. With knowledge that most of the executive team are ex-Telstra, that Turnbull has strong personal connections with many of these people (he co-owns a boat with Rousselot, as a tweeter said “partners in brine”), and there is a serious amount of money for Telstra to make from this deal. We’re talking in the 10′s of billions of dollars. This is verging on the level of insider trading and securities fraud, yet somehow we are supposed to believe this.

It’s like asking a murderer or rapist to sentence themselves.

This is all moot anyway, with Henry Ergas being appointed to head up the Cost/Benefit Analysis. Why? This is the same Henry Ergas who claimed we’d all have to pay $215 a month to get returns that NBN Co predicted and that any costs over $17b was unacceptable for the NBN.

[continued ...]

St George of the Garden wrote on Dec 15^th, 2013 at 9:07am:


it is actually NOT council land as a court case proved.  it is CROWN land.  and anyhow, if a council was able to forbid it what do you think would be the outcome?  NOTHING AT ALL.  Just ADSL and nothing else.

idiot.

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 4:14pm:
Still neither honest enough to ask how the need will be met, nor decent enough to be concerned about the costs of failure, longweekend58? The universe really would be a better place without you, wouldn't it?