Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit. I agree with the minister, in what he said, that Telstra was an 800-pound gorilla. The way that Telstra was privatised did not lend itself to competition. In fact, we have a vertically integrated monopoly that internationally was acknow­ledged as being bad for competition and bad for consumers. That is why I genuinely commend the minister for the work that he did to structurally separate Telstra. The principle of it was a good one. But we do not want to replace the 800-pound gorilla with another gorilla—maybe not 800 pounds, but maybe 400 or 500 pounds in the form of NBN. That is my concern.

My question to the minister in respect of the amendment moved by Senator Birmingham is this: is it the case that under the current bill the NBN will effectively become the provider of first resort because the installation of fibre at greenfield sites will be done by NBN at no cost to the developer but there will be a cost to the taxpayer? The opposition's amendment, as I understand it, and I invite Senator Birmingham to disabuse me this if I am wrong, is that it will provide for some competitive tension in relation to the deployment of fibre at those greenfield sites. The minister knows where I stand on this. He did the right thing to structurally separate Telstra. It was a mess. It was not privatised in a way that lent itself to proper com­petition, to a lower price for consumers or to technological development that ensured we had the telecommunications system that Australians deserve. My concern is that this particular amendment might go some way to deal with what, on the face of it, appears to be a problem: that NBN will, in effect, be a provider of first resort at these greenfield sites. That is a legitimate question. The minister knows that I am not asking this from a hostile point of view but am genuinely concerned about the small businesses that could be affected by this.