Guy Barnett (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I stand today to speak on the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Competition and Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2010 and to make some observations with respect to the government’s processes and also with respect to the rollout of the National Broadband Network in Tasmania and the refusal by this government to release its business plan. It has also refused a cost-benefit analysis. What we now know about the rollout in Tasmania is that the joint venture with the Tasmanian government and Aurora Energy to roll out the National Broadband Network has collapsed.

Before I talk about the collapse and the implications and consequences of that collapse, I would like to place on record my astonishment that the government would refuse to release the business case for this $43 billion, the biggest infrastructure development project ever undertaken by a government in Australian history, and would refuse to undertake a cost-benefit analysis. It is a disgrace. The fact that they are hell-bent on pushing this legislation through without revealing that information and making it available to members of the Senate in this place and, indeed, to the public is, frankly, a national disgrace. They have obviously offered the Independents and senators on the crossbench a sneak preview of the business plan, and they initially offered it on the basis of a secrecy commitment—a confidentiality agreement—that would last for seven years. How absurd is that? Senators and members in this parliament are meant to be representing members of the community—members of the public—and acting in the best interests of their communities and of this great country, Australia, and they are to be bound by this government with a confidentiality agreement which was to be for seven years. How absurd! How disgraceful! It shows how out of touch the government are. They are just not connected. I hope that their heads hang in shame for that and that they stand up and reveal the fact that they are ashamed. They should apologise.

With respect to the National Broadband Network, yes, I have been quite vocal in Tasmania on behalf of the constituents down there about the waste and mismanagement that have been a feature of the rollout in Tasmania. For example, the broadband project has been run back to front. Firstly, the government announced in a media release on 7 April last year that the cost of the program would be $43 billion, but the planning had not been done; they did it on the back of an envelope. This is the concern that I have and that I know others have as well. How did they know the cost? What went into the cost? What was it made up of? That is a staggering amount of money.

Let me just tell you what the $43 billion equates to in broad terms. It is about the market value of Telstra at the time—of course, Telstra has now diminished in value as a result of this government’s efforts and actions—it is twice the annual defence budget and it is almost as much as the federal government spent on health just last year. So there is the equivalence for a $43 billion spend. It is big money, such as we have not seen before in this country. It is over $4,000 per household—closer to $5,000 per household—in your taxes, in your money. That is how much you are putting in, members of the Australian public, to make up that $43 billion. So it is not coming free. If you make international comparisons with other countries around the world, it is up to 100 times what they are paying in other countries around the world. There are the examples of Singapore, the USA, the UK and various European countries. So it is a great shame that the government have gone hell-bent down this path without proper analysis, without a cost-benefit analysis and without a proper review.

Of course the devil is in the detail, and we have been standing up on behalf of our constituents saying, ‘No, we want to know which way you’re taking us, where you’re going to spend the money and why.’ What business would spend its future earnings without thinking about the return on investment? The government commissioned the McKinsey-KPMG report for $25 million—which is not a bad consultancy, is it? You would want to get a good return for your funds invested there. Nevertheless, let us hope the report was well appreciated, because we know that that report says that they need a take-up or sign-up rate of between 80 and 90 per cent. That is very significant indeed. What we know and what the minister, with Mr Quigley, has revealed in Senate estimates under extreme pressure from the opposition and indeed others—I was there asking these questions—is that in Tasmania the sign-up rate is one in 10 to date, or 10 per cent. That Senate estimates meeting was on 19 October, and those were apparently the figures to 30 September, so we would hope they have improved; the government would want them to have improved. But clearly the government is expecting a sign-up rate of between 80 and 90 per cent.

I am happy to comment further on that. Clearly, the mismanagement and maladministration of the process to date has been something shocking. We do know that there will be significant challenges to be faced with the rollout in Tasmania. Let’s have a look at Tasmania and the rollout of the NBN in Tasmania. We know that the current sign-up rate, based on the latest information, is 10 per cent.