Despite Labor woes, Turnbull mum on costs
Summary: As Kevin Rudd prepares to challenge Prime Minister Julia Gillard for the Labor leadership on Monday, the Coalition is calling for an election as soon as possible, but Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull is still holding out on releasing costings for the alternative broadband plan he would take to the election.
As Kevin Rudd prepares to challenge Prime Minister Julia Gillard for the Labor leadership on Monday, the Coalition is calling for an election as soon as possible, but Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull is still holding out on releasing costings for the alternative broadband plan he would take to the election.
(Credit: Office of Malcolm Turnbull)
The Federal Labor caucus will hold a ballot at 10am on Monday to determine the leadership of the Labor party.
A number of ministers have lined up to support the Prime Minister in her bid to keep the top job, including Communications Minister Stephen Conroy and Attorney-General Nicola Roxon.
Meanwhile, at the Broadcasting 2012 summit in Sydney today, Turnbull devoted a good portion of his speech to mocking the leadership spectacle between Rudd and Gillard, joking that the most pressing matter for the Australian Communications and Media Authority was to determine whether the leadership battle would be classified as "Australian drama content".
Turnbull shrugged off suggestions from Independent MP Rob Oakeshott this morning that Turnbull should have another run at the Liberal party leadership — instead saying that voters wanted another election. Yet, he would not say whether the Coalition had a broadband policy costed and ready for a pending election.
"I'm not going to be trapped into picking a particular figure like that. We would not have gone about this in the way they have done, but ... we have got to make the best of the mess they have left us with."
However, Turnbull was ready to provide an estimate that will scale back the fibre deployment in brownfields areas to fibre to the cabinet 500 metres or a kilometre from the home, which would save about a third of the costs of the NBN roll-out.
"If you can reduce the civil works through not overbuilding infrastructure that is capable of providing effective high-speed broadband and using legacy infrastructure where you can, particularly in the last kilometre or 500 metres or so, in a way that does not compromise your broadband objective, you can dramatically reduce costs," he told journalists at a press conference after the speech.
"It depends on the geography, but the best ballpark figure I can give you is overall, in terms of averages, a fibre-to-the-cabinet approach in brownfield areas is about a third of the cost of fibre to the premises."
Turnbull again promised to deliver fast broadband quicker than the NBN, and at a more affordable price for consumers, but he said that, should the Coalition get into power, as communications minister he wouldn't "rip up the NBN" or bring an end to NBN Co.
"We can't turn the clock back," he said. "We're stuck with NBN Co and we're stuck with the NBN."
Depending on the outcome of Monday's ballot, Conroy's future as the communications minister is unclear. Should Rudd regain leadership, given Conroy's strong public comments against his former leader yesterday, it is unlikely he would remain in the Cabinet.
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
As for Turnbull what a pıssweak joke. His plan is to "deliver fast broadband quicker" that's great. As I said on Delimiter I'll be expecting MY connection regardless of medium used to achieve at least 101/41mbps in 2016. So he thinks a cabinet 500 -1000 meters from my house can manage that? That's their promise if they don’t deliver it will be considered a failure... and yes since Turnbull was deliberately vague and neglected to define "fast" and "quicker" I'll define them by what I, NBNco and the rest of the world consider fast.
Just as we all pour scorn of the fellow who said to the effect very few computers will be needed, I hesitate to say the end all is fibre, quite simply we don't know. I did read whilst in Hong Kong last week about significant advances in wireless technology. looking around me I saw many young people with some type of smart phone. I just wonder if these people will drive technology.
So explain your solution if we "don't know", are we to twiddle our thumbs all day long waiting for the unknown or get on with the job with a proven technology we have.
"I did read whilst in Hong Kong last week about significant advances in wireless technology."
If those advances in wireless technology can keep up with advances in optical fibre technology then you may have a point.
"looking around me I saw many young people with some type of smart phone."
That must have been very disconcerting for you...
"I just wonder if these people will drive technology."
We'll it's certainly not going to be Tony Abbott and his zoo crew chums.
Let's not forget the genesis of this broadband, it was the back of envelope stuff, but hey it could be the solution, albeit rather expensive.
One day pragmatically saying the NBN is what is needed let's just get on with it and the next, back slapping, those of the white elephant, socialist monopolist persuasion.
But then what do they say about women and their prerogatives?
Perhaps you could consider your views especially about women. I don't think your last sentence was particually appropriate!
Especially considering NZ has abandoned their FTTN (with all that money into nodes wasted) and is moving to FTTH.
An old saying, only a rich man can afford cheap shoes. Why? Because by the time you replace your cheap thing a few times, you've wasted far more than you'd have spend buying quality straight up.
I'm guessing you have no understanding of how fibre works then.
To upgrade fibre, you replace the bits of equipment on each end (a very easy and cheap upgrade), the fibre in the ground remains exactly the same. And putting the fibre in the ground is the single most expensive part of the project, thanks to labor costs mainly.
Check out this link to discover the reality of the situation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6a2ne1WKxek&feature=related
"It is still early days for fiber technology."
Fibre has been used for communications at least 40 years. Hardly early days.
As I have said before what we have is a PSTN (you do know what the T stands for?) and it has been ok (I even used the word interim, thanks for taking notes).
But now copper is well and truly obsolete, time to move. It's not really that hard to understand eh?