Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm pleased to speak on the National Broadband Network Companies Amendment (Commitment to Public Ownership) Bill 2024. The National Broadband Network was first dreamt up as a policy by former Labor senator Stephen Conroy in the lead up to the 2007 election. It was an ill-thought-through, careless and lazy piece of policy. I was so frustrated by it that I wrote a book, Wired Brown Land?, about the broadband battles in Australia. The book came out in 2009, and I'm often asked, 'How did it sell?' Well, for a book about telecommunication economics, extremely well!

My central point was that the policy that then Senator Conroy devised dismally failed because it sought to get Telstra to do something that it did not want to do—namely, to build a national fibre-to-the-node network for $4.7 billion and give its competitors access to that network. An even more ill conceived policy was then dreamt up by Stephen Conroy and Kevin Rudd. Notoriously, the details were sketched out on the back of a beer coaster on a flight on a government jet. Under that policy, the commitment was to spend what was supposed to be $43 billion on a fibre-to-the-premises network. If you go back and look at what was promised in the 2009 media release and press conference by Kevin Rudd, Stephen Conroy, Wayne Swan and Lindsay Tanner, just about every aspect of what they promised has been a manifest failure. As a result of this policy, some $30 billion of taxpayers' money has been spent, and the value for money taxpayers have received has been absolutely appalling, in stark contrast to the frugal Kiwis, who managed to get a national fibre network for a total taxpayer commitment of NZ$1.5 billion.

In the nearly 15 years I've been in the parliament, and having taken quite an interest in this issue, I've spoken many times on stupid pieces of legislation associated with Labor's National Broadband Network, yet the bill before the parliament today achieves an unenviable distinction. It is the most stupid, pointless, empty, nakedly political, entirely useless piece of cynical performative-gesture politics that Labor has managed to serve up in its nearly two decades of deeply undistinguished policymaking on the National Broadband Network.

In the time available to me I'd like to make three points: (1) Labor's record on the NBN is hopeless, (2) the policy framework on future ownership of the NBN was established by the Rudd government under Stephen Conroy as minister—and, indeed, it was his then representative in the House, the now Prime Minister, who explained what that policy framework would be, and (3) the bill before the House today which proposes to change that policy framework—which, for some 15 years, Labor has thought was absolutely fine—is a naked, meaningless, cynical and empty political stunt, and the coalition will be voting against it.

Let me start with the proposition that Labor's record on the NBN is hopeless. As I've already indicated, the plan they announced in 2007 completely failed because Telstra's then management team refused to cooperate. So they announced another plan in 2009. Kevin Rudd promised that his government would build a National Broadband Network that would serve 90 per cent of homes with access speeds of up to 100 megabits per second, take eight years to complete and cost $43 billion. None of this was achieved.

Let's judge what Labor delivered by the time it left office in 2013 against what had been promised in NBN's 2012 corporate plan. Labor promised 286,000 premises passed by June 2013. NBN Co fell a full 100,000 premises, or almost 40 per cent, short of its target, and, of the premises it claimed, many were designated as so-called service class 0 or service class 1, meaning they could not actually provide a service at all.

Labor was systematically dishonest about what the NBN was delivering. And the man who was communications minister at the time is Australia's current Prime Minister, the man who just loves being upgraded to seat 1A. Let me remind you what happened. In August 2013, during the election campaign, the then Minister for Communications, the member for Grayndler, stood in front of a big red button and announced that broadband was now available to 5,400 homes and businesses in Sydney's western suburbs: 'It's fantastic to see that the NBN fibre network is now available,' he said. What he didn't say is that close to 1,000 of these were service class 0, and 98.6 per cent of these homes had no fibre connection to them. By the time of the 2013 federal election, NBN Co said it had passed 209,000 premises, but close to 80 per cent of these had no fibre going into the home. It was not fibre to the premises; it was fibre to the press release.

When the coalition took over responsibility for the NBN we set about fixing the problem in a methodical way. Our 2013 strategic review recommended using a combination of rollout technologies—the multitechnology mix. Had we continued with Labor 's model it would have taken up to five years longer to complete the rollout and would have cost billions of dollars more. If we'd stuck to Labor 's plan then, when the pandemic hit and millions of Australians moved overnight to working and studying from home, Australia would have been in a dreadful mess. But, thanks to the coalition's work, the NBN was ready for the challenge, with 98 per cent of premises around the country—over 11 million—able to connect in early 2020.

I've said it before and I'm very pleased to say it again: as the communications minister when the pandemic hit Australia, I am enormously proud of the efforts made across Australia's telecommunications sector. NBN Co, Optus, Telstra, TPG, Vodafone, Aussie Broadband and a whole range of other companies came together to keep the network operating when Australians desperately needed it, and that was critical to the way our nation was able to get through the pandemic.

Let me turn now to Labor 's policy framework on NBN ownership. This is the framework developed by Labor and legislated in 2011. It carefully sets out the steps that, in the judgement of the Labor Party, would need to happen before the NBN could be sold by the government to private owners. Let me quote from the minister's second reading speech in this place on the National Broadband Network Companies Act 2011:

The first bill in the package, the NBN companies bill, obligates NBN Co. Ltd to limit its operations to, and focus them on, wholesale-only telecommunications. It also sets out arrangements for the eventual sale of the Commonwealth's stake in the company once the NBN rollout is complete, including provisions for independent and parliamentary reviews prior to any privatisation, and for the parliament to have the final say on the sale. The bill also creates a power for the Governor-General to make regulations concerning future private ownership and control of NBN Co. Ltd, and establishes other relevant reporting, governance and enforcement mechanisms.

As such, the bill deals with arrangements for both today and into the future.

I remind the House that these are not my words; I'm quoting the words of the then minister, the member for Grayndler, now the Prime Minister. He went on to say:

Taking into account the recommendations of the implementation study on the NBN, the Commonwealth will retain full ownership of NBN Co. Ltd until the rollout of the NBN is complete.

He then went on to say:

After the communications minister has declared that the rollout is complete, the productivity minister may direct the Productivity Commission to undertake a 12-month inquiry into a number of matters. These may include the regulatory framework for the NBN, and the impacts of a sale of NBN Co. Ltd on the Commonwealth budget, consumer outcomes and competition. Within 15 sitting days of the Productivity Commission inquiry report being tabled, a parliamentary joint committee on the ownership of NBN Co. Ltd is to be established, according to the practice of parliament, to examine the report of the Productivity Commission inquiry. This joint committee will report to both houses of parliament within 180 days of its appointment. After it reports, the finance minister may, by disallowable instrument, advise that conditions are suitable for an NBN Co. Ltd sale scheme.

As is clear from this extensively quoted material, the minister of the day laid out a clear framework which needed to apply before the National Broadband Network could be sold. He did not say the NBN could never be sold. Instead, he set out a comprehensive series of steps which would need to occur before the parliament was given the opportunity to consider an instrument, prepared by the finance minister, advising that conditions were suitable for an NBN sale scheme.

Of course what this means is that under the existing legislation, unless both houses of parliament agree, no sale can occur. As I have informed the House, the minister who explained these required stages to the House so carefully and thoroughly in his second reading speech is, of course, the member for Grayndler, the current Prime Minister, enthusiastic recipient of air-travel upgrades and keen real estate investor.

Let us be clear: there is a comprehensive framework in the legislation, developed and passed by the Australian Labor Party, setting out all the things that would have to happen before the NBN could be sold. Critically, one of those steps involves the tabling of a disallowable instrument—that is, an instrument which can be disallowed by a majority vote of parliamentarians in either house. No privatisation could occur unless there was majority support for it in the parliament. That has been the policy setting since 2011—the policy settings devised and implemented by the Australian Labor Party.

Given the realities I have just explained, any reasonable observer would ask: what is the possible point of the bill which is before the House now? Given that privatisation of the NBN could not occur unless a majority in both houses of parliament agreed to it, what possible additional work does the bill before the House do today? The answer is clear. It does no substantive or real work at all. That is why I say this bill is the most stupid, pointless, empty, nakedly political, entirely useless piece of cynical, performative gesture politics that Labor has managed to serve up in its nearly two decades of deeply undistinguished policymaking on the NBN. That is why the coalition will be voting against it.

This is not the first time the current Prime Minister and his communications minister have tried on this particular stunt. Similarly, in the lead up to the 2022 election, they tried to bring on a big political fight about whether there was some difference between the parties about the future of the NBN. On 17 November 2021, this dynamic duo issued a media release containing this ringing commitment: 'Labor will also keep the NBN in public hands.' It attracted virtually no attention then and it's not attracting much attention now.

This is a non-issue. The existing legislative framework, introduced in a rich irony by the current Prime Minister in 2011, sets out very clearly what has to happen before the National Broadband Network could ever pass out of public ownership. It cannot happen unless there is majority support for it in both houses of parliament.

If the member for Grayndler and the member for Greenway had any capacity for shame left, if they had any self-knowledge at all, they would be curled up on the floor in writhing agonies of embarrassment at having brought forward this ludicrous bill. I say, for the third time, this bill is the most stupid, pointless, empty, nakedly political, entirely useless piece of cynical, performative gesture politics that Labor has managed to serve up in its nearly two decades of deeply undistinguished policymaking on the NBN.

I say to anybody who is listening tonight, you should be very cross that the Prime Minister and the minister have wasted the time of the national parliament on this ludicrous joke of a bill. I am very pleased to say the coalition will be having nothing to do with this useless bill.

Jenny Ware (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Not in Bundeena.

Jenny Ware (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm going back to my electorate and saying that the Minister for Communications will not give them the NBN in Bundeena.

Julian Hill (Bruce, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Deputy Speaker, this is getting ridiculous. You need to deal with it. She's got a problem; if she can't stop talking, she should leave the chamber.

Ian Goodenough (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order!

Julian Hill (Bruce, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They just love privatisation.

Zoe McKenzie (Flinders, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have seen some weird things in this place in my short time here but this desperate move by the Albanese government is right up there, taking a podium place in the super weird and unnecessary category of legislation coming before the Australian parliament this term.

Last sitting period the government, literally apropos of nothing, ran into the chamber at 9.01 on 9 October to present this bill, the National Broadband Network Companies Amendment (Commitment to Public Ownership) Bill 2024.

There followed the strangest of second reading speeches, first from the Minister of Communications and then from the Prime Minister himself—with a hitherto unrecognised passion for telecommunications policy—in which he lauded the NBN and its importance to the Australian community like he'd just discovered the internet. There followed a question time in which almost every question from the government to itself went to the ownership of the NBN and the desperate, urgent need to safeguard the future of the NBN. What? Where on earth did this come from? Has there been a raging debate about the public or private nature of the NBN? No. Is the NBN about to go broke, and it needs a public bailout? No. Is there a secret plan on either side to sell the NBN? No. Is there a problem of any sort to solve with the NBN being in public or private ownership? No, there is not.

I can tell you what the problem is that this Albanese Labor government is trying to solve for. It's the truly terrible political freefall situation in which the Prime Minister finds himself as we head into an election year. It has been a truly terrible few weeks for the Prime Minister—in fact a terrible few months, in fact a truly terrible end to 2024 and, let's be honest, an entirely terrible term of parliament.

In his speech on this bill, the Prime Minister talked about all the things the NBN is able to do to help this country get ahead and achieve. And I agree, having served on the board of the NBN from July 2018 until I resigned to seek preselection to stand in the 2022 federal election. I agree with the Prime Minister wholeheartedly. The NBN has greatly facilitated banking, health and education. But for the coalition government changing to a multitechnology mix back in 2013, the NBN would never have been finalised in time to get this country through the COVID-19 pandemic.

The PM didn't mention the difference the NBN has made to entertainment, with all the high-quality streaming into our homes and the exceptional Australian content we are now able to see on our hand-held screens—except that's not what it did.

As an aside, you see—I note the irony—on the morning that the Prime Minister rushed in here to present this supposedly urgent legislation, I was meeting with Screen Producers Australia, representatives of Hoodlum Entertainment, Archipelago Productions, the Film Television and Radio School, Fremantle Australia, Ludo Studio, Media Stockade, New Town Films, the National Institute of Dramatic Art and Roadshow—great, great Australians who have contributed over decades to our best Australian content, like Bluey, Neighbours, Wentworth, HeartbreakHigh, Grand DesignsI love that show—and RedDog, Happy Feet, Muriel's Wedding, Mao's Last Dancer and The Castle. They explained to me the crisis confronting their industry. Two years ago they were promised a local content quota for the streaming corporations, which was going to take effect on 1 July 2024. Here we are, two years since that promise was made, and the sector has heard precisely nothing from the Albanese government—no action, no support for our local screen industry and, frankly, no sign of support between now and the next election. Yet somehow—somehow—saving the NBN is the most vital thing to the Australian economy. It can be pulled from the blue—urgent, urgent, urgent—and drafted overnight. The NBN must be saved! Why, you may ask.

The minister and Prime Minister have been keen to tell us this legislation will ensure NBN prices are more affordable for consumers. What? I'm sorry, you just couldn't make this stuff up. NBN prices since this government was elected have gone up. Back in October 2023, NBN announced significant changes to its pricing. Lighter use packages got cheaper, and prices for NBN 25 and NBN 100 got cheaper—excellent—but prices for the much more popular NBN 50 package went up. So now some six million Australian households are paying up to 14 per cent more for their NBN packages with one of the retailers. Did these changes result from careful pricing, planning and direction from the Albanese government? No. They happened because the NBN finally settled its special access undertaking with the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission.

Earlier this year, on 1 May, the NBN said in a press release:

Like many other businesses in Australia and worldwide, nbn has been impacted by higher input costs of materials from suppliers. The wholesale prices that nbn charges to retailers in FY25 will increase by approximately 4.1 per cent, on average, across nbn's range of wholesale services. This reflects the annual percentage change in the Consumer Price Index … over the twelve months to the December 2023 quarter.

The NBN's prices road map is influenced by the CPI, and we all know this government's record on the CPI. Under this government, monthly CPI reached a peak at over eight per cent in December 2022, and almost two years later we are finally seeing an inflation rate with a two in front of it, consistent with the Reserve Bank of Australia's inflation target of two to three per cent, but core inflation, the figure that matters most and on which the RBA makes its decisions regarding interest rates, remains at 3.5 per cent, higher than all of our major trading partners—higher than the US, the UK and Canada—and the IMF predicts it will remain at 3.6 per cent in 2025, higher than its forecast for Germany at 2.1, the UK at two, Canada and the USA 1.9 and France, Italy and Japan at 1.8. The rest of the world is already seeing interest rate relief—but not here. Therefore, it should be no surprise that a record number of small businesses are failing.

On the same morning as the Prime Minister and minister for communications rushed in here with their urgent bill, the Australian had an article which read as follows: 'Company insolvencies have hit record highs, with more than 6,600 firms faltering in the six months to September, fuelling warnings small businesses are struggling to stay afloat amid high inflation and interest, increasingly complex regulations and cyberattacks.' Australian insolvency statistics revealed by ASIC reveal company insolvencies capturing firms entering external administration for the first time hit 11,053 in 2023-24, swelling overall insolvencies since the 2022 election to 22,800.

Well, I've got some good news for those 22,800 companies that have gone broke since this Albanese government was elected: the NBN is going to stay in public hands. I'm sorry to break the news, but the NBN is in public hands and it has been since the legislation was passed to create the NBN in 2011. This government has done nothing—literally nothing—to bring NBN prices down either between 2011 and 13, when they lost power, or since their return to the Treasury benches in 2022. Nor—news flash—could it, lest it want to risk being found to be a shadow director of the NBN board.

If anyone today is wondering why the Albanese government is doing this—is it something clearly thought through, carefully planned? Did they have a long-term goal to remove the otherwise even-longer-term possibility of maybe one day privatising the NBN, the process for which is set out in the Labor government's own act of 2011 in part 3 of division 2, called 'Ownership and control of the NBN Co'? That part provides for the NBN to be privatised if and when:

(a) the Communications Minister has declared that, in his or her opinion, the national broadband network should be treated as built and fully operational;

(b) the Productivity Minister—

And, by the way, this government doesn't have one, which is just as well given it's the weakest productivity level in six decades.

… has caused to be tabled in both Houses of Parliament a report of an inquiry by the Productivity Commission;

(c) the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Ownership of NBN Co—

News flash: that doesn't exist either.

… has examined the Productivity Commission's report;

(d) the Finance Minister has declared that, in his or her opinion, conditions are suitable for the entering into and carrying out of an NBN Co sale scheme …

Again, news flash for the Albanese government: while condition (a) has been completed, none of (b), (c) or (d) are either underway or even in contemplation by either side of government. There was no imminence to a sale. This is pure posturing—and mightily convenient financial posturing, if I may say so myself. You see, three months ago the NBN repaid the last tranche of public loan to the Commonwealth on 30 June. In its financial report of 13 August this year, the NBN announced:

The company refinanced the remaining balance of $5.5 billion relating to the $19.5 billion Commonwealth Government loan in full by 30 June 2024. NBN Co's capital strategy remains focused on funding network investments and maintaining a strong liquidity position.

So riddle me this: the Albanese government lets the company fully repay that loan to the Commonwealth, which it did by seeking more advantageous loan terms on the private market at the time, and in doing so the Albanese government boosts its budget coffers, reinforcing its ever-so-persistent, Liberal-light, 'we're so responsible with the budget' rhetoric, and then, money in the bank, declares the NBN will always be in public ownership.

Thanks, NBN, for repaying the debt, but if you don't mind, we'll just keep the title deeds. What an absurd, indulgent, 'Look, an eagle,' tactic from this lot.

I knew these guys were in trouble politically, but this desperate move shows you just how deep that trouble is. At 8.59 am on 9 October, when the minister ran into introduce this bill, no-one was talking about privatisation at the NBN. It has been a long-standing option—an eventual plan—one for which the NBN had been carefully, diligently and responsibly managed to keep that option open, ensuring it was run efficiently and effectively with the best of private sector know-how in its leadership and board ranks to ensure the best use of this public investment in a dynamic and constantly changing telecommunications market.

This was a Labor Party plan and, in 2010, the then Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Senator Stephen Conroy, issued a press release which said:

Senator Conroy said the Gillard Government remained firmly committed to selling its stake in NBN Co after the network was fully built and operational, subject to market conditions and security considerations.

Labor then put the sale provisions into the 2011 act.

When the Labor Party dreamt up the NBN back in the 2000s, it was a one-size-fits-all fibre to the node to each and every Australian home—no matter the distance, no matter the need and no matter the use case. When the Abbott government was elected in 2013, the NBN was a shambles, with less than 50,000 homes connected to the grid.

Today the NBN, thanks to coalition policy, provides a plethora of internet solutions to the best the places where they are suited. The multitechnology mix sees Australian homes and businesses served by fibre to the home or premises, fibre to the building, HFC, fibre to the curb, fibre to the node, fixed wireless, Sky Muster satellite, and shortly, LEO satellites.

As a result of coalition government policy, the NBN is largely complete, providing fast internet across this enormous nation—a territory larger than the USA and larger than the European Union landmass. Labor's record in the NBN is truly appalling and needs some exploration here. You might remember the original plan from that side of politics was for rolled-gold fibre to every single home, paid for by you, the Australian taxpayer. When the Abbott government was elected, there were barely 50,000 homes connected to this Rolls-Royce version of the NBN. Labor's plan was indulgent, expensive and illusory. When a full review was undertaken, after Labor lost the 2013 election, it was found their decadent plan was going to cost the Australian taxpayer $73 billion—back in 2013 figures.

The coalition government's review of the planned rollout was summed up beautifully by an AFR editorial in 2013:

Who would have thought? It turns out that a massive government-run telecommunications monopoly that was built from scratch and which aims to push other competitors out of the market is very expensive. As things stand, the grand monument dreamt up by the Rudd government's telecommunications minister Stephen Conroy will leave Australia with close to the highest broadband prices in the developed world.

That was the model we inherited. By the time the Albanese government was elected in May 2022, the build had been finished for two years, and more than eight million Australian homes were connected to the NBN.

On 9 October, the Prime Minister came into this chamber—breaking with all common practice—to give a speech about this bill. In it he said:

Prime Minister Gough Whitlam once said that his definition of equality was every child in Australia having a quiet room in which to study and a desk with a lamp to read by. That was in the 1970s. In 2024, every Australian child needs to be sitting at their desk with access to the NBN.

Gough Whitlam turned this country into an economic basket case. It seems the Prime Minister is determined to do the same.

Alicia Payne (Canberra, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The National Broadband Network Companies Amendment (Commitment to Public Ownership) Bill 2024 is a really important bill, which reaffirms this government's commitment to the public ownership of what is one of Australia's most critical infrastructure assets, the NBN. I just don't know where to begin with some of what I've heard from those opposite while I've been sitting here waiting to speak.

The member for Flinders has just said that there's something wrong with the Prime Minister saying that, in this day and age, every Australian child should have a place to study with access to the NBN. I think that is an excellent thing for us to aspire to. But what we've heard from those opposite is that they just don't get vision. They don't get nation-building. They don't want people to have things that they don't pay for, if they can't afford them. That's what this is really about—the idea that every Australian would have had access to fibre-to-the-premises broadband as was originally proposed by the absolutely visionary plan under the Rudd government that was the NBN, and that those opposite absolutely trashed in 10 years in government, among other things that they've trashed—because they just don't get it.

They're not vision people. They don't want to see Australia leading the world.

Part of the point of the NBN when it was initially proposed was the ubiquitous nature of fast broadband and that the fact that it was to be ubiquitous—that everyone was to have access to it, that everyone would have this very fast broadband—would revolutionise the way we delivered services and provided access to things like education and health care for people in regional and remote areas, the people that those opposite always claim to be representing. But, anyway, here we are.

This bill is an important bill that makes clear that keeping the NBN preserved in public ownership is an explicit requirement. It removes the current conditions for terminating government ownership by repealing most of part 3 of the NBN act, because Labor is the party of the NBN.

As I said, the NBN was a visionary idea under the Rudd government. It was established and began to be rolled out with the goal of a fully connected Australia. The original vision for a fibre-to-the-premises connected Australia was trashed by those opposite when they came to government, and it has been left to the Albanese Labor government to clean up their mess—as it has been with so many policy areas. But make no mistake: those opposite would jump at the first opportunity to sell this important asset if given the chance.

The speeches that I've heard in the short time I've been here make it very clear that they don't understand the NBN and would take the first opportunity to trash it. Just like they did with Telstra, just like they did with Medibank and just like they did with the Australian Public Service, the coalition are addicted to privatisation and outsourcing, with the Australian public always paying the price. What we're doing today is ensuring the NBN's future. Commitment to public ownership is vital for the NBN to deliver the services Australians rightly expect.

Let's look back at the history of the NBN under those opposite. The Liberal Party's handling of the NBN stands as a stark reminder of how critical it is to approach significant national infrastructure with vision and with commitment to the public interest—vision and commitment to the public interest. I know that's difficult for those opposite.

Under the negligence of the coalition, the initial vision for a world-class fibre based NBN was undermined. Instead, they opted for a multitechnology mix that left Australia lagging behind our global peers in both speed and reliability. This was an approach that resulted in increased costs, blown-out timeframes and outcomes that fell well short of what Australians were promised and what we deserved. Despite claiming that their strategy would save money and accelerate the rollout, the reality was an NBN fraught with issues—delays, unexpected costs and widespread dissatisfaction among users.

The Liberal Party's poor decision-making left the network underresourced and underperforming, impacting businesses and households alike. What should have been an enabler for economic growth and digital participation became a source of frustration for millions of Australians. Their governance also demonstrated a willingness to prioritise privatisation over public benefit. This is what they always do.

In 2020 they declared the network built and fully operational, a move that set the stage for its eventual sale. They even supported NBN Co's push to raise wholesale prices by CPI plus three per cent, a policy that would have hit Australians hard, undermining affordability in favour of profit-driven motives. It took the intervention of Labor and the ACCC to protect consumers from these proposed price hikes.

The coalition's legacy is marked by missed opportunities and the weakening of what could have been an unparalleled national asset. That is what's so sad about this: the inability of the coalition to embrace a vision for Australia to lead the world, which is what we were trying to do with the NBN, and for all Australians to share in that—for everyone to have a chance to have the fastest possible broadband that would revolutionise the way we did things. Instead they prioritised short-term gains and ideological commitments over long-term strategic investment, and the Liberal Party left Australia playing catch-up on connectivity and digital capability. Our government is committed to reversing this legacy and ensuring that such missteps are not repeated.

We stand by the principle that the NBN must remain in public hands, fostering upgrades, innovation and affordability for all. It's not just about restoring what was compromised; it's about moving towards a vision for a more connected, just and secure future for Australia. This stance is driven by the need for continuous upgrades to the network, regulatory oversight of wholesale pricing and, most importantly, the delivery of affordable broadband for all Australians.

We're delivering on the NBN's promise of equity and access to the digital economy. In 2022 the Albanese Labor government underscored this commitment through the updated statement of expectations for NBN Co. Our directive was clear: public ownership is the cornerstone that will enable us to extend more fibre throughout the fixed-line network, lay the groundwork for a transition into next-generation satellite technology and modernise our universal service obligations. These steps are essential for a more connected and inclusive Australia—one that leaves no community behind, whether they be in the heart of our cities of the vast expanses of our rural and regional areas.

Improvements to the network are ongoing. Just last week I was pleased to hear that further upgrades will begin shortly in my electorate of Canberra—and this is something Canberrans have speaking to me about. When we were in opposition last term, people were disgusted with the access they had to the NBN and how far it fell short of what was promised. I'm proud that we are fixing that, including here in my electorate.

The fibre upgrade program has been bolstered by the government's $2.4 billion commitment over four years to provide an additional 1.5 million fibre-to-the-node premises with access to full fibre. As a result, 90 per cent of premises in the NBN fixed-line footprint can place an order for gigabit capable services by the end of next year. In our recent announcement, 37 ACT suburbs have been announced for inclusion in the fibre upgrade program. These include Ainslie, Braddon, Bruce, Cook, Dickson, Garran, Griffith, Hawker, Kaleen, Lyneham, Macquarie, Narrabundah, Reid, Turner and Yarralumla here in my electorate of Canberra.

Providing faster speeds for Canberrans is part of the publicly owned National Broadband Network. I think a lot of people in this place don't understand that Canberra is a real community with real needs as well. I know a lot of those opposite love to trash Canberra because public servants live here, and they hate them too. But it's really good that we are getting improved access to the NBN because we don't have it either, because what those opposite, in government, did to the NBN—10 years of neglect and trying to destroy it—affected us here in the nation's capital as well. I am pleased that we are addressing that and that those suburbs are getting what they should have got a long time ago thanks to the Albanese Labor government. The NBN is a Labor legacy worth protecting.

It is crucial to remember that the NBN isn't just an infrastructure project; it's a strategic asset intertwined with our national security and cybersecurity needs. Ongoing government ownership ensures the NBN's operations align with national interests, protecting Australia from the significant risks foreign ownership could pose. To sell off the NBN would be to jeopardise this oversight and expose Australia to serious sovereignty and security concerns. In this bill before the House, we reaffirm that the NBN is not just a commodity to be sold; it's a vital public service that underpins our economy, social fabric and national security.

The reaction to this bill by those opposite is very telling. It demonstrates yet again their ideological obsession with privatisation. I remind the House again, because it bears repeating, that the former coalition government, under the member for Bradfield, initiated measures in 2020 to prepare the NBN for sale, declaring it 'built and fully operational'. Having been here for the member for Bradfield's contribution to this debate, just a few speakers before, it is obvious that these are people that would destroy the NBN if they ever got back into government. They have a complete disdain for it because, as I said, it was a visionary nation-building project and was about universal access for all Australians—and these are things that don't sit comfortably with their ideology.

Their readiness for privatisation included supporting a proposal from NBN Co to raise wholesale prices by CPI plus three per cent, a move aimed at boosting revenue streams before a sale. This would have had significant repercussions for consumers, especially in terms of affordability. Labor, alongside the ACCC, firmly rejected this proposal in order to safeguard Australians from unnecessary price hikes. That would have been a disaster. We need only look at history to see the consequence of privatising public telecommunications infrastructure. The Howard government's sale of Telstra service is a cautionary tale. Promises were made about maintaining service quality at affordable prices, but those promises were never met. On top of that, the sale left the government without the leverage to spearhead the rollout of fibre broadband, necessitating the Rudd government's launch of the NBN project.

This bill did not appear out of thin air. Our ongoing consultations with communities across rural and regional Australia have sent a clear and consistent message. People want the NBN to remain under government ownership. They recognise that only with public oversight can the network continue to deliver modern, accessible and affordable communications services. Keeping the NBN in public hands is not just a strategic decision; it is a commitment to prosperity and connectivity for every Australian. It is about ensuring that the digital divide narrows and that no-one is left in the dark, disconnected from the opportunities that the modern world offers. Yes, to the member for Flinders, we do believe that in an updated version of Gough Whitlam's vision every child should have a place to study with a lamp on. We do believe that every Australian student should have the NBN—they should have access to reliable, fast broadband—because, if they don't have it, how will they ever keep up with their peers? How will they ever have the same opportunities if they don't have access to these things? And how will we ever deliver those things if we don't keep it in public hands, if it's not about building our nation or about a strategic asset to benefit all Australians that we regularly update and improve?

The Albanese Labor government will always stand firm when it comes to public ownership of the NBN. We will continue to safeguard the NBN from those who would seek to sell it off. The NBN is an essential tool for Australia's economic resilience, social equity and national security. Labor will not repeat the liberal mistakes of the past when it comes to privatisation. Instead, we will build on the promise of a connected, secure and inclusive future for all, because that is what Labor governments to. When we come into government, we bring vision. We bring the hopes of Australians, who rely on governments to ensure that they have the best chance, that every Australian has a chance at a happy, healthy, fulfilled life. Public education, universal health care, decent wages—these are things that you can thank Labor governments for. While we're talking about Gough Whitlam, I just came from a forum where we celebrated 50 years since Gough Whitlam protected the Great Barrier Reef. But those opposite say he left Australia an economic basket case. Well, where would we be without the vision of Labor governments? A place I don't want to see.

David Smith (Bean, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm also pleased to be speaking in favour of the National Broadband Network Companies Amendment (Commitment to Public Ownership) Bill 2024 and support any move to keep the National Broadband Network in public ownership. Last night, when I thought I might be speaking on this bill, I listened to the member for Fadden liken this debate to a Seinfeld episode. The truth is that the previous government did want to sell off the NBN and that those opposite have form when they eye off critical public infrastructure. The truth is that the whole Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison government's approach to broadband was like a decade-long episode of Utopia or The Thick of It. But it's Australians who have paid the price for their negligence over the last 10 years.

As a government, we are determined not to make the same mistakes as former coalition governments, who have mismanaged communications policy in Australia for decades.

It comes from that starting point of not actually caring—thinking that these debates are about nothing when they are actually critical to the Australia not just of the now but of the decades to come. As much as they protest and try to airbrush history, the Liberals have shown a pathological desire to sell off critical assets. We know that the former coalition government had taken the initial legislative steps to prepare their NBN for sale, including declaring the network built and fully operational in 2020.

I wholeheartedly support this bill and the goal of providing a solid foundation for communication policy in this nation long into the future. When John Howard was swept from office in 2007, he left Australia as a broadband backwater. For those that remember, the privatisation of Telstra was a terrible policy outcome driven by ideological zealotry. Crucially, the sale also deprived the government of strategic levers to drive the investment necessary for Australians to fully access reliable high-speed broadband and the productivity and digital inclusion benefits that delivers. Of course, that was a government that had no understanding that this wasn't just to be an entertainment vehicle. This was to be a vehicle that was to transform workplaces and the way we deliver services. It's understandable that, when governments lack vision, they don't understand why you need to invest in the future.

Of course, Labor's decision in 2008 to deploy a government owned national broadband network rightly took a long-term view of the needs of Australian consumers and taxpayers in a changing world. The NBN was built by Australians for Australians. It belongs to all Australians, and it belongs in public hands. The NBN is an essential piece of national utility infrastructure, helping people connect regardless of where they live or work. It doesn't care for what postcode they might be under or what region or state of the country that they live in. This was initiated by Labor with a positive vision for the future, delivering equity, access and opportunity combined with sound, long-term economics. It meant that Australians would enjoy world-class connectivity, carrying the digital economy for decades to come.

What happened next? Enter the neoliberal wrecking ball of the Liberals, who attacked public ownership and any policy idea associated with it. Just as they sold out Australia on the privatisation of Telstra, the coalition sold out Australia again. They abandoned fibre and instead deployed an almost absurd copper alternative for $29 billion. By May 2022, when the Albanese government was elected, the coalition's second-rate NBN was $28 billion over budget—nearly double the cost—was four years behind schedule and backflipping to fibre. As I said before, the former coalition government had taken the initial legislative steps to prepare their NBN for sale. This was their game plan. They also supported an NBN submission to increase wholesale prices on their products by CPI plus three per cent to bolster their income streams in preparation for the sale. It was Telstra all over again. Fortunately this was rejected by Labor and the ACCC.

For those members that genuinely seek to represent regional Australia, they should be cognisant that, in government consultation on regional telecommunication services, there has been strong and clear feedback from communities in rural and regional areas that the National Broadband Network should stay under government ownership. We've had quite a number of speakers who've gotten up and, whilst it's connected, have talked about challenges around mobile coverage and about dealing with black spots. There are challenges across the country. There are significant parts of my electorate where we're still working through those issues. It beggars belief that the same people who are effectively making these arguments don't support the NBN remaining in public hands.

Keeping the NBN in public ownership is essential to continue to provide modern, accessible and affordable communications services in Australia. The Albanese government understands this, and it's delivering its vision for a world-class, high-speed broadband network. Over $3 billion in NBN fibre and fixed wireless upgrades are being delivered on time and on budget. More than 70,000 kilometres of new fibre has been rolled out and over 2,300 fixed wireless towers have been upgraded.

Whilst today's debate about this bill is about our vision to secure the long-term policy settings of the nation, I would like to flag that I will continue to work with the NBN to better outcomes for households and businesses in my electorate of Bean. Much has been achieved, but there is still more to do, and I will not rest until we get the results that Bean deserves. It is good to see that suburbs like Gordon, Banks and Conder in the southernmost parts of the electorate of Bean are amongst the suburbs that can now access these higher upgrades that are happening right around the country.

The rollout of the NBN has correlated with downward pressure on the cost of communications in Australia, with an overall nine per cent decrease in communications prices from 2017 to 2024 compared to a 22 per cent CPI growth over that time. It is only by keeping the NBN in public ownership that that vision can continue to be delivered, and only the Labor government has committed to this vision.

But it's not just the government that supports this policy; consumers support it, and not just the regional consumers I talked about before. The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network CEO, Carol Bennett, is on the record as supporting it. Workers support it. Shane Murphy, the Communication Workers Union national president, has publicly backed this move. These are the workers who work with this infrastructure every day. The industry representatives support it. For example, Optus interim CEO Michael Venter has said his company supports this initiative.

The Albanese government's position on the NBN is clear. In 2021, we made an election commitment to retain the NBN in public ownership, to keep broadband affordable and to complete building a world-class fibre network. In 2022, we formalised this commitment in a new statement of expectations for the NBN, and we have now introduced legislation to enshrine this position in law.

Labor understands the NBN is not just something that earns a rate of return; it's a critical piece of social and economic infrastructure. Under Labor, the NBN will be affordable, it will be reliable, it will be fast and it will be safe in public hands. I support this bill and the important goals behind it. It will be of great benefit for the nation and the electorate of Bean, which I represent.

To make this clear again, on this side of the House we strongly believe that the NBN needs to stay in full government ownership to support the ongoing upgrades of the network and to ensure ongoing regulatory oversight of NBN wholesale pricing, keeping broadband affordable for Australians. We know what happens when you privatise assets like this. As I said, the government made this commitment clear in the updated statement of expectations issued to the NBN Co in 2022.

Government ownership is essential to delivering the strategy for a more connected Australia, no matter what postcode you live in, including rolling out more fibre in the fixed line network; planning for the transition to next-generation satellites, which, of course, are going to be critical for parts of my electorate, like Norfolk Island; and modernising universal service obligations.

The NBN is crucial national infrastructure for cybersecurity and national security imperatives, requiring strong government oversight. This is best delivered through certain, ongoing government ownership. Any future sale of the NBN would likely involve foreign ownership, raising potentially serious national sovereignty and security risks.

As I mentioned before, the former coalition government had taken the initial legislative steps to prepare the NBN for sale, including declaring the network built and fully operational in 2020—one of the great works of fiction of our times. So when the member for Fadden talked about this debate as being a Seinfeld episode, a debate about nothing, it's not true. We know what their intent is. We know what would occur if they had the capacity to have control over the fate of the NBN again.

The sale of Telstra under the Howard government was a prime example of the coalition making promises on prices and services for telecommunications that were never delivered. The sale of Telstra also deprived the government of leverage to roll out fibre broadband in Australia, necessitating the Rudd government's establishment of the NBN in 2008.

Keeping the NBN in public ownership is essential for continuing to provide modern, accessible and affordable communication services for all Australians. This is a message that I get time and time again from constituents across the electorate of Bean, whether they be in the deep south, in the suburbs of Conder and Banks, in the Molonglo Valley, in the new suburbs out near Stromlo, or on Norfolk Island. My constituents are clear, and in accordance with their wishes I support this bill and I support the important goals behind it, which will be of great benefit to the nation.

I'm so proud to be a member of a government with a minister for communications as strong and as effective as the minister we have, a minister who is delivering to everyone right across our country, including all of my constituents in the electorate of Bean.

Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I speak in support of this bill, the National Broadband Network Companies Amendment (Commitment to Public Ownership) Bill 2024. I'll keep my remarks relatively brief because I appreciate the lateness of the hour and because all of my colleagues have effectively made the points that I would otherwise have made. I commend the member for Bean, who has just spoken, for outlining much of the history of the NBN and for again putting forward the very strong case for why it should remain in public hands. But let me just make a few observations about government or public assets and their privatisation more broadly.

Firstly, I can recall, from day one, when the NBN was mooted as an important piece of national infrastructure to be rolled out, that the opposition at the time never had their heart in it. They were opposed to it from day one, and quite frankly when they came into government they made that absolutely clear by rolling out a second-rate NBN using the copper wires et cetera that we've spoken about time and time again. They did that I think for two reasons—and it's not just because they wanted to save money.

Firstly, they wanted to get it finished off as quickly as possible so that they could then sell it off and get some money back into the coffers. Secondly, I genuinely believe that many members of the opposition did not really understand the significance of the NBN for the future of our country and future generations. It is not just another piece of government property; it's actually an essential national asset, just like our highways, which connect people from one city to another. The NBN has done even more than that, because it has become crucial to the way we operate as a society today.

As I get around the community, one of the things that come back to me time and time again, particularly in the midst of cost-of-living debates, is: 'Why can't the government put a cap on these prices, and why can't the government control this other price? In fact, why were those assets ever sold off in the first place, because they are so important to everyday living?' Indeed, there is a growing sentiment that I'm detecting out there in the community that essential services should always be owned by the government and remain as government assets.

In fact, years ago there was some survey done—I'm talking probably 20 or 30 years ago—where we went through a period not only here in Australia but across the world where public assets were being sold off by governments to private entities. That proved in the end to not have been a very smart decision—again, it happened across the world—and there was a trend, particularly in Western countries, to buy back those assets. I'm sensing the same mood right now.

The reality is that the sale of public assets in the past may have provided some instant cash for the government of the day—and I hold governments of both persuasions to account with respect to that; I'm not pointing the finger at anyone in particular, but I'm talking about past governments—but in the long-term the public has paid dearly for it, because, firstly, the price of the services provided by those public assets has ultimately gone through the roof, and, secondly, in very few cases have they been properly maintained, and in reality, when they are not properly maintained, it always comes back to the taxpayer or the government of the day to pick up the cost of that unfunded infrastructure, which ultimately builds up over time. The argument that the private sector can provide services at lower cost than publicly owned entities is also a fallacy. It never truly eventuates. Quite frankly, if there is a problem with the government's management of a particular entity, the answer is not to sell the entity off but rather to look at what the problem is and get management to perhaps change its direction or whatever the case is. What we have seen—I will use two or three examples—is that over the years those assets that were sold off ultimately ended up charging prices that were unrealistic.

The first example I want to use is the Commonwealth Bank. The Commonwealth Bank was sold—I think it was in 1996 that the last part of the sale went through—for about the same amount of money that the Commonwealth Bank now makes in profit each and every year. But, even worse than that, the other three big banks are making similar massive profits. Last year, the four major banks together made just under $30 billion of profit. The benefit of having the Commonwealth Bank at the time wasn't just because of the services it was providing; it also acted as a regulator for the other banks in terms of the interest rates and the fees that were being charged. It set a standard that the other banks had to compete with, and in order to do so they had to maintain the same level of charges and fees that the Commonwealth Bank did, so everybody benefited, and that's why the massive profits were not made.

The other matter with respect to the sell-off of those assets is that, where they are sold off, more often than not it is foreign investors who come in and buy them. Many of our energy suppliers today have foreign owners, so, if there is a profit to be made, the profit is not spent here in Australia; it is usually shipped off to an overseas country, where it is used to benefit that country and the owner of those assets. So it is not even as if we're selling them off and ensuring that the profits made are then respent in our own country.

The reality is that the same applies to Telstra. Telstra made $1.8 billion in profit last year. Yes, if it were government owned, perhaps the profit would have been lower, but the fees and charges would also have been lower, so again, in the midst of a cost-of-living crisis, people would have been able to cope a lot better. Importantly it would also enable the government of the day to ensure that the fees being charged were affordable for the broader public, whereas now, whenever someone says, 'Energy prices are too high,' or, 'Telstra prices are too high'—or whatever other private asset—the response is, 'Well, that's the free market in operation, and governments really can't do very much about it.'

I've listened to some of the debate from members opposite, and I do not understand what their problem is with the government retaining ownership of the NBN. Because it is such a crucial piece of infrastructure and it is a monopoly service, it is important that, firstly, it's a reliable piece of infrastructure that the Australian people can have confidence in. It must be secure because if it's not it can totally disrupt the whole operations of this country. It must be affordable because everybody needs it. It's no longer a luxury or a commodity that people can choose to have or not have. The reality is that we cannot operate today without it, so it must be affordable. And it must be secure, and the only way we can best guarantee its security is if it remains in government hands, where the government can have oversight over exactly what is happening to it, who has got access to it and what needs to be done to ensure all that security continues.

I will finish on this: I thank the minister, who is sitting at the table, for this legislation. From day one, when the sale of it once it was complete was talked about—or that a sale might happen—it was something that did not sit comfortably with me. When the Albanese government made the decision that the NBN would remain in public hands, I thought, 'That is a decision that makes a lot of sense and provides confidence and security to the Australian people.' It is a decision that I would have thought the Australian people would get behind, including—but it seems this is not the case—members of the opposition. This is a decision that will be supported by the Australian people very broadly. This is a decision I believe they will be calling for. The last thing they would want to see is such an important piece of infrastructure sold off to a private investor, possibly a foreign owner. With those comments, I support this legislation.

Michelle Rowland (Greenway, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Communications) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The National Broadband Network Companies Amendment (Commitment to Public Ownership) Bill 2024 reaffirms the government's commitment to ongoing public ownership of the National Broadband Network and to remove existing conditions that create a pathway to privatisation of this vital national infrastructure. The bill commits to keeping the NBN wholly owned by the Australian people, including a new section, 43A, to make clear parliament's intention that NBN Co will remain wholly owned by the Commonwealth. The bill removes current conditions that, once satisfied, would enable a future government to privatise the company.

The Albanese government's position on the NBN has been clear for more than three years. We took to the last election a commitment to keep the NBN in public ownership, to keep broadband affordable in Australia and to complete building a world-class fibre network. In 2022 we formalised this commitment in a statement of expectations for the NBN, and through this bill we are enshrining this commitment in law.

The government's position has broad support in the community across consumer groups, regional representatives and the telco sector. The shadow minister admitted in his speech on this bill that the opposition has been on notice since at least 2021 that the government was committed to keeping the NBN in public ownership—so they have had at least three years to come up with a position.

I'm happy to stand corrected, but we heard over 20,000 words spoken by the opposition on this bill but not the seven words that Australians want to hear: 'We support keeping NBN in public ownership.' The member for Bradfield, the person who declared the NBN was 'built and fully operational' in 2020—the first step in a sale process—finally admitted what we suspected all along: the opposition are not supporting this bill because they don't support keeping the NBN in public ownership. Only a Labor government will keep the NBN owned by the Australian people to continue to deliver affordable, accessible world-class broadband for Australia.

I thank all members for their participation in the debate on this legislation.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the bill be now read a second time. There being more than one voice calling for a division, in accordance with standing order 133 the division is deferred until the first opportunity the next sitting day.

Debate adjourned.

House adjourned at 21:25