George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is directed to the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Senator Conroy. Why does the minister continue to treat the Senate with contempt by refusing to comply with the resolution requiring him to lay on the table by yesterday the National Broadband Network business plan and the government’s response to the McKinsey and Co. and KPMG implementation study?

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The argument around the NBN business case is very simple. This is a very detailed and complex document. It is 400 pages long. There is nothing unreasonable about the cabinet wanting to be briefed on this before it is released publicly—absolutely nothing wrong. There are some who keep trying to say that the NBN business case must have something to hide, that there must be a problem.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Brandis interjecting—

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want some of what you’re smoking, George.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Conroy, address your comments to the chair.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was unadvisedly responding to the interjections, Mr President. There are some who are trying to say that there must be a problem. These are the same people who tried to tell us that I had sent the McKinsey report back to be redone, that I was spending $2 million to have it reworked so it would be more appropriate, that there were huge problems. Every single one of those assertions is wrong, just as they are dead wrong about the NBN business case. There is nothing unreasonable about wanting the cabinet to have a chance to review this important document.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern and Remote Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Why?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Brandis interjecting—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Conroy, ignore the interjections. The interjections should cease. Senator Conroy is entitled to be heard. If this is to be debated, there is time at the end of question time and there is also time in general business this afternoon.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Those opposite are determined to ignore the NBN implementation study. They fail to understand the growing importance of high-speed broadband and the inevitable growth in bandwidth over the coming years. (Time expired)

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Why does the minister continue to treat the Australian people with contempt by concealing from public and parliamentary scrutiny the business plan and implementation study underlying the expenditure of $43 billion of taxpayers’ money?

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yet again we see those opposite build a question based on a false premise—$43 billion of government money. This is just wrong. The implementation study and Mike Quigley have both said that the actual taxpayers’ injection is $26 billion to $27 billion. Just for the record, the whole premise of the question is flawed and incorrect, but those opposite seek to destroy and demolish the NBN. Senator Macdonald or Senator Brandis should go out there and hold a town hall meeting in Townsville, where we are rolling out the NBN, and tell those people who are desperate for high-speed broadband why they cannot have it. Those opposite who are senators from South Australia should go to Willunga and tell those people why they cannot have it. (Time expired)

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. How can the Australian people have any confidence in a minister who will stop at nothing to hide from scrutiny the business case for the largest infrastructure project in Australian history? Is this another example of a government long on cunning and short on courage, or is the minister simply out of his depth?

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The whole question, again, is based on a false premise. We have said that, subject to commercial-in-confidence issues, we will release the key information from the National Broadband Network business case. That National Broadband Network business case reinforces the findings of the McKinsey report. The findings of the McKinsey report were that the NBN is viable and will deliver—

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Conroy, resume your seat. When there is silence, we will proceed.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The NBN business case reinforces what the McKinsey report showed: that the NBN is financially viable, will deliver a return to the taxpayers and will deliver cheap and affordable broadband to all Australians. (Time expired)