David Bradbury (Lindsay, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

They want to object and they want to stand in the way. They want to delay and block our plan, but they had 11½ years to deliver their plans. In fact, they had 18 failed broadband plans, and they still failed to deliver broadband at the level and the speed that Australians expect.

The broadband record that we inherited is very poor. It is a record that this government is determined to improve upon. If we look at some of the OECD statistics, we see that Australia is in the bottom half of OECD countries in terms of broadband take-up—16th out of 30 countries. Australians pay more for their broadband than most OECD countries. On that measure, we are 20th out of 29 countries. In terms of average monthly subscriptions, Australia is the fourth most expensive when it comes to low-speed connections and the fifth most expensive for medium-speed connections. That is the state of affairs in broadband that this government inherited. It is not good enough. We are determined to make good on our pre-election commitments to roll out a national broadband network. We will do that.

If it was not already clear to people before we went through the process of consulting in relation to regulatory reform in the telecommunications industry, it is now crystal clear that the current arrangements need to be reformed. It is not as if the government is without support on these matters. I find it somewhat amusing, but I think it also demonstrates a little bit of honesty, that Senator Joyce has come out and reaffirmed that it is the National Party’s position that they support structural separation. The Herald Sun reported on 16 September:

Senator Joyce said the Nationals would discuss their position in the coming days but added that the party had always supported the structural separation of Telstra.

“We have no problem with a company in the marketplace that is too powerful being broken into two to assist competition,” he said.

That sounds pretty clear to me. It seems a bit inconsistent with some of the offerings from those opposite in this debate. As recently as this morning in the Australian Senator Joyce again reaffirmed his position. He said in relation to the coalition’s dogged, and very frustrating, determination to delay this process:

“I’ve got no real problem with delay” …

“But I’m not convinced we’ll listen closely to the argument that structural separation is not a good idea. I strongly believe it’s something that we should have done.”

I think, at the end of the day, that will be the conclusion that most members who have a good look at the current regulatory arrangements will arrive at. The current arrangements are broken, and not just in the eyes of Telstra’s competitors, consumers and businesses. We do not have to go back all that far to see that many people who were associated with Telstra shared that view.

It is interesting that the big argument that is being put forward by those opposite is that they have become the great defenders of shareholder value when it comes to Telstra shares. Forget about your obligation to all of those constituents that you represent, including consumers and small businesses, who are trying to access the services.

See this speech in context