Alannah Mactiernan (Perth, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

A number of my comments are going to be very similar to those of the member for Parramatta because I too was very interested to read the history lesson we were given by the minister on the submarine cables that join Australia with the rest of the world. I remember when coaxial cables came in. I can remember, as a kid, listening to the cricket and that swishing sound which I used to think was the sound of the waves over the cable. I now understand that that is not the case and that it was in fact in-cable amplifiers which caused that noise. As the member for Parramatta said, the minister rightly spoke of the importance of the new technology of fibre optic cable that came into being in the 1980s. Even though that was at a time well before the internet, it was felt to be very important to use the latest technology. Our economy was growing and we were growing numerically, with an increasing amount of data to transmit.

But I think we are seeing some irony here. The minister went on to pontificate about his decision. While we are going to have first-class connections to the international community, once the cables hit Australia the data is going to be zooming around on 20th-century technology. I found it interesting that the minister would not be the slightest bit embarrassed by that juxtaposition and that he would indeed use his second reading speech to promote the benefits of fibre to the node.

I am going to talk about some of the reasons I think the minister is going to find it extremely difficult to meet his commitments. We all know about the inadequacy of us being confined to download speeds of 25 megabits per second, but I think the minister faces a very profound difficulty in implementing even that vision. That difficulty is the status of the copper wire network. The government has estimated that they might have to replace something of the order of seven per cent to 10 per cent of the copper network after the node point. But that appears to be a calculation with no substance behind it. It is literally a back-of-the-envelope calculation and it does not stand up against my experience of the situation in my electorate.

When the government says, 'We can deliver the NBN more cheaply,' that whole claim rests on the idea that in 90 to 93 per cent of cases it will be possible to use the copper network to go from the node to the premises. But that is, as I said, based on a calculation that has no support. No matter where you look to see where that calculation came from, there is absolutely no support for it. Where is the documentation? Where are the figures? Where is the support for that estimate? No matter where you look, you cannot find it. In reality, there is grave uncertainty about whether that copper network is fit for purpose.

In 2004 Telstra themselves were prepared to acknowledge the state of their copper network. At the Senate committee inquiry into broadband competition, Dr Tony Warren, then the group manager of regulatory strategy, said:

I think it is right to suggest that ADSL is an interim technology. It is probably the last sweating, if you like, of the old copper network assets. In copper years, if you like, we are at a sort of transition—we are at five minutes to midnight.

Telstra went on to explain that they thought, at that stage, that the copper network had perhaps another 10 years of life in it. That was 2004. Next year we come to the end of that 10-year period, yet we are now about to embark on a re-visioning of our national broadband network which relies on that copper network, a network which, in the words of its owners, is on its way out. In the words of its owners, it is reaching the very last of its life.

The experience from my electorate confirms just that. I will focus on the suburb of Bedford, a suburb about seven or eight kilometres from the CBD that was principally built in the 1930s and 1940s. In Bedford, even for telephony the copper network is incapable, in many instances, of providing a reliable service. Breakdown of lines and the discontinuation of landline services happens with great regularity. In the vast majority of that suburb, it is not possible to even get ADSL2. You cannot subscribe to ADSL2. Resident after resident with very slow ADSL has reported that even that regularly drops out. It drops out as often as every half-hour, making it virtually impossible to work from home.

We have had many technicians from the area come in and explain the problem with the network to us—that there is simply no redundancy left in the system. Pretty much all of the pairs have been consumed. It is just not possible to give any upgrades in speed, because there is not enough capacity on the network. This is compounded by very poor maintenance. The lines in this area—and, on the evidence, I am sure this is the case right across Perth—have been very poorly maintained.

It is extraordinary that the minister was talking today about how he is actually going to be prioritising those areas. He is going to be doing some work on assessing the capacity of the network across Australia and prioritising for a future rollout. But there does not seem to be any information available from Telstra on exactly what the condition of the network is. I find it extraordinary that a company that has had such an asset seems to have no data on the condition of that network and is unable to identify what the capacity of that network is. The prioritisation is going to have to be based on information from retailers, carriers and mobile services which cover that area.

But one of the themes coming through from all the people who are contacting us about the very poor level of service is that, to some extent, the companies have just given up—and, as a result, those people have given up too. Complaints go completely and utterly unattended and people have, unfortunately, just learned to live with it. They have been told by their service providers: 'Look, do not worry us. We are waiting for the NBN rollout. When the NBN rollout comes, we will be able to do something, but in the interim there is nothing we can do.'

If you have a plan that is based on using a copper network that is simply not capable of supporting in any reliable way even an eight megahertz transmission of data, how can you support 25 or 29 or whatever it is that the Minister for Communications is promising? It is simply not going to be capable of that. The cost of attempting to remediate the system is going to end up totally changing the cost differential. The minister has made so much of the fact that his project is much less costly, but it is only much less costly if you have a copper network that is capable of sustaining what he believes it can. All of the evidence that we have had to date tells us that that is extremely unlikely and that we have a five-minutes-to-midnight network.

There is also going to be a considerable problem in timing—in designing this new system, in designing the location of the nodes. This is not something that can be done overnight. This, one would imagine, would be at least an 18-month or two-year task. There is simply no way that this system is going to be in place in 2016, as promised. It is physically not going to be possible to do the comprehensive redesign of that whole system and at the same time get it built. The promises we have been made are that it is going to be cheaper and they can get it out faster. We are going to get a second-rate product, we are going to get a 20th century product, but don't worry, it is like fast food—like going to Kentucky Fried rather than waiting around for a nice, well-cooked meal. Go and get your Kentucky Fried and be happy about that. I think we will see that even the KFC of broadband is not going to be deliverable. It is a second-class product.

See this speech in context