Daniel Mulino (Fraser, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to echo the sentiments of the shadow minister for communications and the member for Chifley, who spoke earlier and very eloquently on the Telecommunications Amendment (Infrastructure in New Developments) Bill 2020. As they've indicated, this bill does put forward provisions that are, in a sense, a sensible step forward. But in another sense there's a profound irony to this bill, a profound irony that even nonexperts in telecommunications, engineering or economics would very quickly grasp. This bill is basically making the point that, if there is a new development, it would make sense to install pit and pipe at the point of construction for a cost of around $600 to $800 rather than failing to do that and going in and rebuilding the construction at a significantly higher cost of, on average, as I understand it, $2,100.

Any of us who have undertaken any kind of minor repairs around the house or a renovation or built anything from scratch understand, at a very basic level, that, if you're going to do something, do it right the first time. It always costs more to come in after the fact and re-engineer something. So, at this very basic, household level, I think any of us understand this very basic concept. It is scary that those opposite don't understand the profound irony in bringing to this place a bill which reflects that very basic concept, when we have seen on a national scale the politicisation of a project which had broad support across telecommunications experts, across engineers and across the economists who looked at the business case of this project. We have failed to do at the national level what makes so much sense at the household level. At the national level we didn't do what makes common sense and build the thing correctly from the start. At the national level we've had a government in power for a scarily long period of time—they are well into their third term—that, time and time again, has grasped for any way to differentiate from what was a very sensible path forward. We have seen the government grasp for any way to undermine the project that they inherited, to change direction even when it flew in the face of expert advice.

I won't go off into the many other areas of policy where this government has flown in the face of expert advice—that is something we've talked about at considerable length already this week and will continue to. But in this area it is absolutely tragic that, because of this government's pig-headedness and its politicisation of this project, we as a nation have done exactly the opposite of what is such common sense at the household level. So yes, when it comes to a new household development we support doing the low-cost solution—building it right the first time. We implore the government, even after their many botched attempts to change direction for political reasons, to take the advice from this point forward and invest in the NBN for the benefit of the nation in the least cost and highest output way.

I understand that, as the shadow minister for communications, the member for Greenway, mentioned earlier, around 3,000 to 6,000 homes are built in Australia every year without pit and pipe. That is unacceptable. We support regulatory measures that will reduce that number, of course we do. As I said, there is some irony in this government's bringing this bill to this place and pontificating about the need to do things right the first time.

In supporting this bill, we will also continue holding the government to account for its many macro failings when it comes to the NBN over the past decade. It has spent tens and tens of billions of dollars more than was necessary on what is in practice today a far, far less effective telecommunications network then it ought to have been. Let's go back to the vision of the NBN. The NBN was about Australia embracing the digital future. The NBN was about Australia taking advantage of all the productivity benefits of the digital opportunity for the benefit of today's and future generations. What were the values, the guiding principles that underpinned our response to that? One was access for all, one was opportunity for all, and one was improving quality of life. Those guiding principles were for access to telecommunications, for access to all of the productivity benefits for the opportunity for business growth and for quality-of-life improvements to be shared across the country, no matter geography, income level or background. Those were the underpinning principles. This bill reinforces some of the key failings of this government's approach, because it is exactly the kinds of people who are most adversely affected by these kinds of situations—those people in outer suburbs and in regional communities—who are failing to get their house built correctly the first time. These are exactly the kinds of people who would have benefited from a stronger adherence to those guiding principles of access, opportunity and improvements in quality of life for all. It is exactly the people in these new communities—outer suburban communities, regional communities—who are missing out because of this government's implementation of the NBN.

There were long-term trends underway in our economy and our society that boosted the case for the NBN: the fact that our economy was becoming more digital, the fact that telecommunications between people and between businesses was becoming more important, the fact that sharing huge amounts of data was becoming important and that video was becoming so important. These trends were underway long before the NBN was commissioned by the Rudd and Gillard governments and were a key rationale for it, and that was the opportunity we wanted to take advantage of.

Of course, what we've seen in this COVID era is an acceleration of a lot of those trends, and that is what we often see during times of economic disruption. In the case of health we've seen the move towards telehealth. In the case of education we've seen an acceleration of the trend towards remote education. This has reinforced the importance of the NBN but it has also, tragically, reinforced the failings of the government's approach. Connection between businesses has never been more important, and the NBN, as a fundamental utility in our society, is akin to the payment system and its relationship to the financial system. It is absolutely imperative that we get it right. So many businesses in Australia need to connect remotely, not just to consumers within Australia but globally. COVID has shown the importance of those connections. It has also shown the remarkable opportunities there are, and this NBN, as botched by this government, is not giving our businesses the opportunities they deserve.

There's of course the absolute need for communication access for social purposes, for people to be able to communicate with family and other loved ones and friends around the country and the globe. It's needed for telehealth, as I mentioned earlier, for remote education and for so many other services. The NBN is going to underpin access to so many services for so many people. But, again, this bill highlights how the government has botched it for so many people: people in the outer suburbs, people in regional communities—people who aren't getting access. These are often people who are the most isolated to start with. And of course there's working from home. It is again something that was already happening in our society, and the COVID pandemic has accelerated that trend. This government's botched implementation of the NBN has reduced the opportunities for many, particularly those who were already the most disadvantaged, particularly for those who were already the most isolated.

We know that too many Australians have been left digitally isolated by this government's approach to the NBN. Before the pandemic struck, the ABS estimated there were up to 1.3 million Australian households not accessing broadband at home. That's not a random scattering of households across the country, it's not just 1.3 million households here and there; that's 1.3 million households that would be disproportionately from low-income areas, outer suburbs and regional areas. These are the people who needed the NBN the most. This government's botched implementation has left them isolated. There are many households not using ADSL, many not using the NBN and many not using wireless broadband.

We can go back to the very start of this government. I quote the Prime Minister at the time, Tony Abbott: 'The government is going to invest $43 billion worth of hard-earned money in what I believe is going to turn out to be a white elephant on a massive scale.' So he was a climate denier and also a digital denier at the time. That really underscored the approach that the government have taken throughout. They never embraced this project with any enthusiasm. To the extent that they have implemented this project, it has always been with an eye to the politics. It has always been with an eye to differentiating it from the project they inherited, but without any rationale on the basis of economics, engineering or telecommunications expertise. That's why, time and time again, they've botched it. That's why this project is running tens of billions of dollars over budget yet is underperforming for so many Australians who are most in need.

I don't have time to run through the many technical aspects that the shadow minister ran through so well in her contribution—as indeed did the member for Chifley—but, as they both alluded to, never before have copper traders had it so good. It's an interesting point of contrast with the 18th century Royal Navy, which pioneered the use of copper sheathing to protect the underwater hulls of ships from salt water and biofouling. What we have when it comes to case studies of the use of copper is the 18th-century Royal Navy, in the 1700s, trying to improve ships and protect them from salt, and the Morrison government in 2021. I'll leave you to guess which of those was at the cutting edge of technology and which of those was not at the cutting edge of technology.

It is an embarrassment that we are world-leading purchasers of copper wire. The solution was clear almost a decade before this government came to power. They changed direction not for any good policy reason but for politics alone. The shadow minister talked at length about the HFC disaster and the multiple backflips we've seen by multiple ministers in that space. And of course there are modems and lightning surges, and the list goes on and on. We can run through all of those technical deficiencies, but, without surprise, we end up with a cost blow-out of tens of billions of dollars and many hundreds of thousands of Australians who don't have access. There are many hundreds of thousands of Australians who can't get the minimum speeds this government promised. Many hundreds of thousands of Australians who are already isolated are missing out on the opportunities this government should have realised and should have given them.

It's a shame this government can't see the profound irony of this bill. This bill is trying to remedy the situation at the household level. Of course it makes sense if it costs $800 to build a connection at the point of construction to do it when you're building a new house and not a year later when it costs $2,100. It's a profound irony and a profound tragedy for our country that this government can't see that the same argument applies nationally. If you're going to build the NBN nationally, do it right the first time. Don't spend a decade grasping for political changes for the benefit of the minister's media releases in a way that's going to cost tens of billions of dollars extra and reduce the functionality.

This is a classic case of what applies at the household level applies to the bigger picture. At the household level if you do it right the first time you avoid, on average, an extra $1,300 in costs. Unfortunately, at the national level the additional costs, both in terms of lost opportunity and extra expenditure, have been far more than $1,300.

See this speech in context