John Madigan (Victoria, Democratic Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Senator Conroy. Can the minister advise why fixed wireless towers for the delivery of NBN services are being erected in residential areas such as Buninyong in Victoria, which is approximately one hour from Melbourne, despite considerable community rejection, when the government's own media release yesterday stated that the same download speeds can be achieved from high-capacity satellites it will be using to provide NBN services to remote areas?

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

I thank Senator Madigan for his ongoing interest in the National Broadband Network. The senator asks a very legitimate question. I indicate that when we announced the network we committed to connect 90 per cent of premises by fibre and to guarantee a 12-megabit download and a one-megabit upload by advanced wireless and satellite. We commissioned an implementation study from McKinsey's and KPMG, not engineers. That study advised that the most cost-effective deployment of the network to fulfil our commitments was to extend the fibre coverage from 90 to 93 per cent of premises. It further advised that four per cent of premises could cost-effectively be connected by wireless and three per cent by satellite. In short, we did exactly what those opposite assert we have not done. We commissioned independent experts to compare fibre, wireless and satellite to determine the most cost-effective way of meeting the goal of delivering the government's commitment.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for the Murray Darling Basin) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's a bit of an exaggeration.

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

Sorry—McKinsey's know a bit more about it than you, Senator Birmingham. My apologies for accepting that interjection. On your question of why the satellite service—

Senator Birmingham interjecting—

I apologise that you cannot hear, Senator Madigan. On the issue of why people should take a wireless service rather than a satellite service, once the satellite is in the sky it is very hard to improve the service. You can tweak it a little bit and you can get software improvements, but it basically stays where it is at from the point of view of technology when it goes up, and it is up for 15 years. The wireless network will be able to be easily upgraded to greater speeds as the next generation of boxes that go on the towers are developed. For residents to say 'I'd rather stick to satellite' would be to deny themselves the future upgrades of the wireless path. (Time expired)

John Madigan (Victoria, Democratic Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Would the minister accept that local communities should be given the option of accepting either a fixed wireless service or the current operational satellite service until the high-capacity satellites become available in 2015?

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

(—) (): That is a very genuine question, Senator Madigan. This is an issue that, as I think you know, we tossed up on a number of occasions. The fundamental principle of both satellite and wireless is that the more people who use it at the same time the slower the overall experience is regarding service delivery and speeds for every user. So, to add users reduces the overall capacity and speed for the existing users. When both satellite and wireless were designed, they had been configured for a set number of users. If we were to allow everybody around Buninyong or Ballarat who did not get access to either fibre or wireless in the short term to opt to use the satellite, then it would actually collapse the service. You would not get the speeds that are being promised. It is the same for wireless. If everybody jumped on wireless because they do not want to wait for the satellite or they do not want to wait till fibre is installed, it would destroy the service for the existing users. (Time expired)