Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Hansard source

I will respond to some of the stream that came from the shadow minister, the member for Dunkley, who raised countless issues, it must be said. I think it was a cry for relevance from the shadow minister, and I will take it that way. It has been suggested that it is unclear what the government plans to do with the Communications Fund. Nothing is further from the truth. On budget night we announced the Communications Fund balance will be transferred to the Building Australia Fund. The Building Australia Fund has been established by the government as a financing source for future investment in critical economic infrastructure, including broadband. It is for that reason that the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Communications Fund) Bill 2008 is no longer required and has been withdrawn.

The shadow minister has speculated that the telecommunications needs of rural, regional and remote Australia might not be met. I can assure the honourable member they will be. The Building Australia Fund will be used to provide the government’s contribution of up to $4.7 billion for the national broadband network, which is expected to cover 98 per cent of Australian homes and businesses, including the vast majority of people in rural and regional Australia. In addition, $400 million will also be available from the BAF for regional telecommunications, subject to the government’s consideration of the Glasson review. This is in stark contrast to the previous government, which would have provided only around $400 million every three years to spend on improving telecommunications in rural and regional Australia. Under the approach of the previous government, regional Australians would be waiting 35 long years to reach the same level of investment that the Rudd government is prepared to do right away. The government is demonstrating its commitment to regional Australians by establishing the BAF.

I was also asked about OPEL and the government’s decision and announcement on 2 April that the OPEL broadband network will not proceed. This was not a political decision. The government had committed to honouring the funding agreement entered into by the previous government according to its terms. A condition precedent of the contract stated that OPEL would provide coverage reasonably equivalent to 90 per cent of underserved premises identified by the then Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts. The Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy performed an analysis of the detailed testing and mapping undertaken by OPEL.

The department determined that the OPEL network would cover only 72 per cent of identified underserved premises within its agreed coverage area. On the basis of the department’s assessment, the government determined that OPEL’s implementation plan did not meet the required service coverage and therefore the funding agreement was terminated. Predictably, many opposition MPs, including the shadow minister, have criticised this decision—and he has done it again today. But the fact is that many rural members of parliament, who understand the communications needs of their constituents, supported the government’s decision. The former senior National and former Howard government minister Mr Bruce Scott stated that the decision to terminate the OPEL contract was ‘quite sensible’.

See this speech in context