Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I inform the Senate that the President has received the following letter from Senator Moore:

Dear Mr President

Pursuant to standing order 75, I move "That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:

"The need for the Government to honour its election commitment to rollout fibre-to-the-premises broadband to no less than 200,000 premises in Tasmania."

Is the proposal supported?

More than the number of senators required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

I understand that informal arrangements have been made to allocate specific times to each of the speakers in today’s debate. With the concurrence of the Senate, I shall ask the clerks to set the clock accordingly.

Anne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:

"The need for the Government to honour its election commitment to rollout fibre-to-the-premises broadband to no less than 200,000 premises in Tasmania."

Those opposite come in here and talk about mandates. They yell and scream and huff and puff about their mandate to do this and their mandate to do that; yet, on one clear infrastructure project that they do have a mandate on, they perform an almighty backflip and get completely tangled in the wires. There was a clear commitment to rollout fibre-to-the-premises broadband to no fewer than 200,000 premises in Tasmania. The people of Tasmania have been deceived once by the Liberal Party. They deserve to know the Liberal Party's true intentions today.

The challenge for those on the other side, if they are able to keep their election commitment, will be not only to speak to the urgency motion and to quietly allow this motion to pass later this afternoon but to outline their party's path to ensuring the fibre-to-the-premises rollout is completed in Tasmania. It is simply not good enough to say that the aerial rollout trial has been announced, because such a trial was announced almost three weeks ago by the minister. It is a trial that Dr Switkowski seemed totally disinterested in at Senate estimates last week, a trial without locations, a trial without a start date and a trial without a purpose, because the work has already been done.

Tasmania has been on the path to fibre to the home since the state Labor government first completed an aerial fibre-to-the-home trial in 2008. The trial of over 1,200 premises was found by an independent review to be successful, and the learnings were incorporated into the federal government's National Broadband Network. Most of stage 1 of the NBN rollout in Tasmania incorporated an aerial fibre-to-the-premises rollout. Stage 2 of the rollout, currently underway, utilises above-ground infrastructure. With many thousands of Tasmanians connected to the NBN with above-ground fibre, it is no wonder that NBN Co has not released any details about a trial.

They know, like we all do, that the time for trials is over. Now it is time to complete the fibre-to-the-premises rollout that was contracted for by NBN Co in March 2012—the rollout that the Liberals opposed, then supported, then opposed and then supported before the election, have since supported and then opposed and now say they will support again but only if a further trial meets undisclosed hurdles.

The Liberals in opposition relied on precise technicalities of their commitment to appear bipartisan on this issue. There was never unqualified support for the fibre-to-the-premises rollout. They understood how much Tasmanians wanted this rollout, how Tasmanians saw high-speed broadband as a way of connecting their island to the world and how Tasmanian businesses are delivering their products to customers quicker with the NBN and enabling them to compete in the global market and live in the most beautiful place on earth.

Let me just take the Senate through the great entanglement the Liberal Party has got itself into on this issue. As we know, the contracts were signed by NBN Co and Visionstream in March 2012. The media release from NBN Co at the time remarked that the construction contract would see Tasmania be the first state in Australia with the NBN. The whole entanglement stems from Mr Turnbull's desire to only ever commit to anything based on existing contracts. The coalition released its broadband policy around a year ago, amongst much fanfare and complete with holograms. Crucially, this policy failed to mention the special case of the fibre-to-the-premises NBN rollout in Tasmania. There was no mention of Tasmania in the whole document. Two months later Mr Turnbull sought to clarify the concerns of Tasmanians with the now infamous line 'that the coalition intended to honour existing contracts'.

At the start of the election campaign Mr Turnbull repeated his assurance on ABC radio. However, when Mr Abbott launched the coalition's economic growth plan for Tasmania, the commitment had been watered down to honouring only contracts that were underway. In response to concerns raised by Labor, Mr Turnbull again told Tasmanians on 16 August that he would honour all contracts. It was clear that Mr Turnbull's intention was for Tasmanians to believe that this meant full fibre to the premises. Of course, buried inside the coalition policy document of March last year is their out-clause:

The Coalition reserves the right to review and seek to vary any of those contracts in light of the Coalition’s broadband policy …

If genuine about their commitment to the fibre-to-the-premises rollout in Tasmania, Mr Turnbull or one of his federal Tasmanian colleagues would have corrected the reports of August 2013 that did not mention this crucial fact. If genuine, they would have included this line in media releases, in promotional material and in letters to the editor. But the spin was working too well. At least twice that week Senator Bushby backed up his shadow minister with public comments. The first was:

In opposition, we're not fully au fait with what those contracts are, but we understand that those contracts are in place to roll out right across the state, and if that is the case, we will honour that.

Five days later Senator Bushby again sought to make sure Tasmanians believed that there was a unity ticket. He said:

… Malcolm Turnbull has made a crystal clear commitment that the Coalition will honour all contracts in place for the rollout of the NBN in Tasmania. If contracts are in place for the full fibre rollout, there will be no difference in who gets fibre to their home in Tasmania under Labor or Liberal.

The Tasmanian IT industry group released a statement welcoming Mr Turnbull's announcement of the commitment to complete the fibre-to-the-home rollout in Tasmania. Of course Mr Turnbull and Senator Bushby did nothing to correct the record. In trade practices law this is known as misleading and deceptive conduct by inaction.

Of course, Mr Turnbull, Senator Bushby and the Liberal Party were quite happy with the misinformation they had created. In fact, it continued right through until February this year. In October there was the 'what is construction' debacle when new Tasmanian Liberal MP Brett Whiteley sought to justify the sudden change in the rollout maps by dismissing the work of planners, engineers and estimators, despite Mr Turnbull participating on the Joint Committee on the National Broadband Network, which included vital design stages and consultation work on the definition of 'construction'. In December Dr Switkowski confirmed to Senator Thorp at a Senate committee hearing that NBN Co is still releasing work for all fibre rollouts. He said:

The release of work happens in smaller quantities, and the next significant quantity, which is an all-fibre rollout, is being currently negotiated.

This is a matter of urgency because Tasmanians need to hear about where the Liberals went so wrong. Liberal senators need to justify their election commitment that there would be no difference under Labor or Liberal, because there never was a unity ticket. NBN Co. boss Ziggy Switkowski confirmed the great fears of many Tasmanians last month. On ABC radio in Tasmania, Dr Switkowski confirmed that the contracts had been renegotiated and that many thousands of Tasmanians would actually get the multi-technology mix—a fancy way of saying substandard copper.

Tasmanian Premier Lara Giddings was straight onto Mr Turnbull and Dr Switkowski to offer an alternative. Tasmanian Labor offered NBN Co. the use of Aurora Energy power poles for distribution of fibre to the premises across the state. Tasmanian Labor's plan would see a faster rollout of fibre to the home. The plan would see the rollout completed at one-sixth of the cost of building underground. The plan presents a way for the federal Liberal government to meet its commitment to the Tasmanian people.

So great was this Labor initiative that Tasmanian Liberal leader Will Hodgman used a pre-existing trip to Sydney to meet with Mr Turnbull to seek federal support for the aerial rollout. In his press conference after the meeting, Mr Turnbull said that Mr Hodgman had 'definitely drunk the fibre-to-the-premises Kool Aid.' Instead of accepting this good proposal, Mr Turnbull would only commit to a trial. It is a trial that we all know is unnecessary; a trial that Dr Switkowski could not confirm any details about; a trial that many Tasmanians view as a nice smokescreen to get Mr Hodgman through the state election next week; a trial that will no doubt face extraordinarily—even impossibly—high hurdles; a trial that will no doubt be designed to fail; a trial that is just another Liberal con, because anyone who recognises the benefits of fibre to the premises has drunk the Kool Aid, in the words of Minister Turnbull

This urgency motion aims to ensure that Mr Turnbull keeps just one promise. That promise is to build fibre to the premises in Tasmania as originally planned by Labor. Liberal senators must outline their path to delivering fibre to the premises. (Time expired)

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I know that a Tasmanian state election is only about 10 days away, but it is still no excuse or justification for Senator Urquhart to misrepresent what Senator Bushby said before the election in relation to the NBN in Tasmania. I will leave it to Senator Bushby to do a forensic dissection of Senator Urquhart's misrepresentation. I very much look forward to listening to Senator Bushby when he has the opportunity to set the record straight as a result of the misrepresentations by those opposite.

I will start at more of a macro level, to put the NBN as a national venture into a bit of context. When it comes to the NBN nationwide, it would be fair to say that never before has so much been spent on so few for so little. Minister Turnbull has likened the scope and scale of Labor's mismanagement of the NBN to that of the state bank debacles in Victoria and South Australia. I think that, when it has been tallied, in the fullness of time, the cost of the NBN and Labor's mismanagement of it will be shown to have been greater than those financial disasters. It is very difficult to underestimate just how badly it was mismanaged and what the cost to the Australian people will be. I stand in great admiration of Minister Turnbull and his efforts to bring the NBN back onto a sustainable footing and to put the NBN in a position where it will be able to start seriously rolling out a National Broadband Network to the Australian people.

The great lie that has been perpetrated by those opposite is that Labor is for the National Broadband Network and the coalition is against the National Broadband Network. That has never been true. We are for a National Broadband Network. Everyone in Australia is for a National Broadband Network. The question is: how do you deliver a National Broadband Network quickly, at lowest cost to the taxpayer and in a way that delivers for consumers a product that is within their reach? That is all this debate in relation to the National Broadband Network has ever been about. We are for the National Broadband Network.

It is important to note that Labor's plan would have cost $29 billion more than they had let on before the election and would have increased monthly internet bills by up to 80 per cent, or $43, a month. It is very important that I make the point that everyone in Tasmania will still receive the National Broadband Network. The job of those of us in the government is to do that sooner than would have happened under the Australian Labor Party and to do it at a lower cost to the taxpayer than would have been the case under the Australian Labor Party. We are going to incorporate into the NBN technologies that can be readily upgraded and that are already delivering high-speed broadband to families in other countries. We will be able to do just that. We are on course to deliver more NBN connections to Tasmanian homes and businesses this calendar year than over the entire five years since the rollout began.

Premier Giddings in Tasmania is attempting to distract attention. You can understand that. They have been in government for 16 years. They have been in an alliance with the Greens—something those opposite know very well. You cannot be critical of Premier Giddings for wanting to distract from the fact that they have been there for 16 years or for wanting to distract from the fact that they had been in an alliance with the Greens before they performed one of those quickie faux-divorces that those opposite have done with the federal Greens. However, we know that the Greens and Labor are secretly still cohabiting. They are trying to pretend that they have gone their separate ways and that they do not know each other, but when it comes to the political night they are together under the same roof, where they feel most at home.

From the middle of July 2013, just before the last election, virtually no houses in the state were passed with optical fibre. There were reasons for this—there will always be reasons for everything. There were delays due to asbestos and there were ongoing issues with the contractor Visionstream. It is a matter of public record that Visionstream asked for more money in Tasmania. They were the ones who said they could not complete the job under the terms of the contract that they had already signed. As a result, NBN Co signed an amending agreement for 16 fibre serving area modules to get the rollout back on track in December. There were good reasons for doing this. The objective was to get that provider and that rollout back on track. I am very happy to report that by the end of year about a third of the premises in the state will be passed by fibre. We are on course to deliver more NBN connections to Tasmanian homes and businesses this calendar year than over the entire five years since the rollout began.

The clearest sign that the coalition will honour the contract already signed, contrary to everything those opposite say, is that after many months of delay and inaction under the previous government NBN Co have agreed with Visionstream to remobilise their workforce before Christmas. We are honouring the contracts, but contracts do require both sides to perform. It would only be an irresponsible government—we all know what an irresponsible government looks like—that would agree to honour contracts at any cost. We need to be clear that the coalition never promised to deliver fibre to the premises at any cost, as that would be reckless and irresponsible. We are getting on with the job of putting the rollout back on track. We are ensuring that there are workers out in the field undertaking this important endeavour. I am sure that Senator Bushby will further touch on issues like the overhead wiring proposals and the work with Aurora on that proposed trial.

Coming back to where I started, we always have to remember that these are taxpayer dollars. Government has no source of funds other than taxpayers. Government always has to make sure that every dollar it expends—that it has received from the taxpayers and that it expends on behalf of the taxpayers—goes to the most productive and beneficial use possible. The previous government were not doing that. There is an opportunity cost for every single dollar that government spends—it is a dollar that cannot be spent on something else. It cannot be spent on schools, cannot be spent on hospitals and cannot be spent on roads. So you have to make sure that you make every dollar count. Not only were the previous government wasting dollars; they were borrowing massively which means that we now have a massive interest bill. The opportunity cost of the money spent on servicing the interest bill is even greater, because those are dollars which are going towards precisely nothing other than repaying debt.

On this side of the chamber, we make absolutely no apology for wanting to make sure that the taxpayer exposure to the NBN is lessened. We want to make sure that the NBN is rolled out quicker—it would not be hard to roll out an NBN quicker than the guys on the other side did—and we want to make sure that the final product is affordable for consumers. To the people of Tasmania and the people of Australia more generally: you will get the NBN sooner under this government, you will get it at lower taxpayer cost, you will get it cheaper than would have previously been the case, and you will receive the quality and level of service that you need.

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very pleased to be able to talk about this matter of urgency tonight in the short 10 minutes that I have. I certainly support the full rollout of NBN—not just fibre to the node but fibre to the home. I would like to pay tribute to Senator Ludlam, who I am sure would also like to be here tonight speaking on this topic, because he has done an incredible amount of work with Labor over the years by participating in committees and pushing this policy agenda.

Technology moves on exponentially. I reviewed a plan that the Greens had put in 20 years ago for building a tech industry in Tasmania. Back then, a printer cost nearly $4,000. They talked about businesses sending faxes to each other to share information. In that period, we have gone from some people having really basic PCs to suddenly everyone carrying an iPhone. When I look at my house, what used to be just one internet connection on the PC is now six and counting—four handheld devices, one gaming console and an Apple. Most average households have a lot more than that. They have up to 10 devices that rely on wireless and rely on broadband. It makes a lot of sense that if you are going to put in nation-building infrastructure with a capacity to provide broadband for homes and businesses—this is not just about consumers; it is also about business—do it all up front and do it well. What is the point of going through this half-cocked by putting through fibre to the node and then copper to the home, when in 10 years' time demand is going to have at least quadrupled, if not more, for broadband bandwidth and we will have to do it then?

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Like New Zealand did.

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, exactly. Why not do it properly now? Senator Fifield talked about taxpayers' funds. He would understand that this type of infrastructure is securitised against future cash flows and rents that you are going to get from the broadband network. If I am a consumer or a business, I am going to have to pay to access the network when it is rolled out. If my gumption is right about how quickly technology is moving—and let us not forget that it is very likely that wireless will be turning on your toaster and changing the temperature of your fridge—wireless is going to be used for all sorts of things in our households in the future, and we are going to need the bandwidth. So, if this is taxpayer funds, I am pretty confident that we are going to get a good return on our investment in the future.

If governments have any role to play, even the Liberals must understand that they have a role to play in providing essential infrastructure. In this case, I have no doubt at all that they are going to get a good return on their investments. We have also seen a lot of chief economists around the country saying that now is the time to do this. While interest rates are so low in this country and globally, now is the time to lock in 20/30-year bonds against infrastructure, and that is exactly what would suit this type of project.

This really is not just about consumers. The big issue with fibre to the node and then copper to the home is upload speeds, not download speeds. Quite frankly, I could not give a damn about how quickly my kids download their home movies. I am more interested in the advantages to business. While I am very excited about the prospect of broadband in Tasmania, I am disappointed that, as a state who has had first-mover advantage in this area, we have capitalised enough on it. We have not developed a business around how we are going to use the broadband, but it is coming.

I looked at a submission to the recent NBN inquiry from an ICT company in Singapore who said that when the Singapore government outlaid their infrastructure—fibre-optic cable—they set a whole series of KPIs that the government needed to achieve, including, for example, doubling their ICT exports and doubling their employment in the IT industry. This is exactly what Tasmania is now embarking on. It is no secret that we are an island on the bottom of the world. It might not be the arse end of the world, but you can see it from there with a good telescope! We need to do things that we have a competitive advantage in. We need to be able to facilitate and enable people to work from home and from businesses where they can be as competitive as anyone else the world.

We have some of the best creative industries in this country. In Hobart, we have two big proposals underway, including the creative industry hubs under construction. One of them is a joint-venture between MONA—which has been a stunning international success and a hugely important contributor to the Tasmanian economy—Theatre Royal and the University of Tasmania. We have another private hub being developed around digital media and content creation and delivery, which requires broadband. These are the types of jobs that our kids in Tassie want to stay for if you go ask them, 'What sort of jobs would you want to come back to Tassie for?' These are the areas that kids are interested in: high-tech information communications technology.

The University of Tasmania is another example. We have no doubt that in the next 10 to 20 years a lot of universities are going to be virtual. You will do your courses online. We already do much of our content delivery online. I have taught online courses and I know how difficult it is for students. With broadband it is suddenly so much easier for me to do live streaming of lectures and content into places like Shanghai, Indonesia and the Philippines. The University of Tasmania in my state already has a competitive advantage in delivering online courses. This sort of thing would be a huge boom. The University of Tasmania is already the second biggest employer in my state. This is the type of infrastructure that we need to get another leg up and to drive the future innovation that will create employment in Tasmania, retain our youth and make them want to come back.

If we do not get the full rollout to the home, the Tasmanian Greens have said that they will put together a business unit to help finance this at a state level. I was in the Senate inquiry when rolling out fibre-optic cable on overhead lines was talked about. I am yet to make a decision as to whether I think that is the right way to go. Disruptions are certainly going to be a serious issue. There were 70 power poles down in the last storm in Tasmania. That would cause a disruption to the network. Nevertheless, we are happy to consider it if it is going to deliver some effectiveness. But it is an election stunt for Will Hodgman to say that he is going to deliver broadband to the home, not from the node, by rolling it out under a trial. It has already been trialled. Aurora Energy has already trialled overhead network technology with fibre-optic cable. It is already there if you want to use it. If you have the conviction, then come out and say it. To not go for some half-cocked plan about a trial.

I would like to take the opportunity tonight to say that I have also been very focused on this area around broadband in Launceston, the little town that I come from, where my office is and where my family live. Last year, I and the Greens delivered $3 million to build a technology innovation hub in the centre of Launceston. It is called Macquarie House. It is a beautiful old four-storey building that has not been used for 67 years. It is right in the centre of town. We asked the youth what they wanted, and this hub was the answer we got.

I went and visited Brisbane, where they have The Edge, and Sydney, where they have ICE, which are very similar innovative digital hubs used by the community, and they are renting space to businesses. We are setting up a collaborative working space in the centre of town that is going to be cash flow neutral because you have to pay to use it. We are but also hoping that it is going to create energy, which Launceston desperately needs, energy for youth and creativity and be a people space where people will want to go. It already has broadband going past the premise. I can say hand on my heart it is absolutely critical that, if we are going to make business decisions around the use of this infrastructure, these are the types of projects that we as government need to start getting involved with. There is a role for us to play in providing infrastructure for collaboration and in the collaborative economy.

I would say very clearly here tonight, and I know that if Senator Ludlam were here he would also say, 'Let's do it properly. Let's get it done up-front. Yes, it costs money.' It is a massive project, and enormous projects always have hiccups. Why is it that we cannot accept that that is the reality? Because, there is politics involved.

Tonight I say: let us put the politics aside. I would urge the Liberal Party, in Tasmania and federally—as I would certainly urge Labor—to focus on putting the politics aside and getting this done properly so that my state can trade on its competitive advantages, on its creative economy and on the innovation that we are seeing in our youth. We know that we can do things as well as anywhere in the world from Tasmania—from my home, from my university and from my business.

It is already a growing sector for my state. I am very excited about the prospects and I wanted to share that optimism with the Senate tonight.

Helen Polley (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on this urgency motion, to impress upon the Abbott government the need to actually honour its election commitment to roll out fibre-to-the-premises broadband for no less than 200,000 premises across the state.

Holding the government to this commitment has many benefits for my home state, including the fact that it would stop a digital divide from tearing Tasmania apart. Today, I want to focus on one of the particular benefits that fibre-to-the-premises broadband would have for Tasmania and that I believe is of particular urgency.

In comparison to other states and territories, Tasmania has a high percentage of older people. In fact, the state's population is the oldest in the country and ageing faster than any other state or territory. It is actually for this very reason that world-class, fibre-optic-cable-connected broadband is so essential to Tasmania. It is nothing short of urgent, because the state needs this technology.

Late last year I spoke in this chamber about why Labor's broadband model had the potential to assist in transforming the lives of older Australians. I noted that the NBN is not, as the coalition would have you believe, just about providing people with superior video entertainment systems. In fact, some experts have estimated that 30 to 40 per cent of total NBN usage across all areas would be for health applications. That is why we need to pause and consider just how vital a reliable, medical-grade broadband connection is for technologies such as telehealth. Today, medical professionals can engage in face-to-face consultations and examinations via high-definition monitors and cameras. This means that instead of visiting a hospital or being moved into a residential facility older Australians can stay at home, where they feel comfortable. They can communicate with others and in the process help to combat social isolation.

The sky really is the limit. Earlier this year I spoke to an ehealth expert, Kathy Kirby, who has worked diligently for years to update and expand the existing telehealth network in Tasmania. Her message to me was quite clear: the technology to support the expansion of telehealth is available. The opportunities are right there in front of all of us. It is no surprise that the momentum really is gathering behind the conviction that technologies like telehealth can change the lives of older Australians and dramatically enhance the cost-effectiveness of our health and aged care systems.

Several weeks ago I was fortunate enough to join several other shadow ministers in meeting with Age Discrimination Commissioner, Susan Ryan. Ms Ryan is a strong advocate for improvement to internet access for older Australians, and she impressed upon us the great potential of telehealth to assist older people who may otherwise miss the digital revolution. The problem, of course, is that the coalition's NBN infrastructure plans may well not be sufficient to support such innovations fully. We are talking about remote consultation, examinations and diagnosis: the bandwidth requirements in both directions are high, and they are only going to get higher.

The difficulty is this: even if a medical practitioner in, say, Launceston, Devonport or Queenstown can afford to extend the connection from the node to his or her premises, many people will not. There will be insufficient service at the recipient's end in terms of the bandwidth going out of the home. So it is important that this issue is put front and centre in Tasmania and, indeed, across the nation.

It is of course entirely predictable that the strongest proponents of fibre-to-the-premises broadband are often younger, tech-savvy people—people well versed in the language of megabytes, nodes and download speeds. But it is time for this to change. It is time for older Australians and those who care for and support them to stand up and say, 'We need fast, reliable, medical-grade broadband connections right now, across the board.'

I think it is telling that the people of Tasmania have given a clear message to state opposition leader, Will Hodgman. We want our households and businesses connected to world-class broadband. It comes as absolutely no surprise that Mr Hodgman was caught out saying in front of a live ABC microphone that the NBN issue could cost him the upcoming state election. Tasmanians know that they were given a clear promise—all existing NBN contracts would be honoured. Instead, the communications minister went back on his word and is intent on creating a digital divide in Tasmania.

This motion is a matter of urgency for Tasmanians, because we deserve better and we should not be lied to. The coalition's approach is not good enough. It is not good enough for households and businesses and, as I have focused on today, it is certainly not good enough for those older Tasmanians who simply want access to technology— (Time expired)

David Bushby (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This motion of urgency just demonstrates the fact that the Tasmanian Labor-Green government does not have the record to be able to stand up and say that it needs to be re-elected, on the basis of what it has done to Tasmania over the last 16 years.

If you look at the state of the economy, if you look at the state of jobs and if you look at any of the economic or social indicators, Tasmania is at or near the bottom in just about every particular category. The fault for that has to be pointed directly at the fact that we Tasmanians have suffered under 16 years of Labor, and the last four years from Labor in bed with their good friends, the Greens.

And so what are they doing here at the last minute? They are trying to create an issue, because they cannot stand on their record about the NBN.

Helen Polley (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Will Hodgman is concerned that it will cost him the election! You're leaving him out to dry!

Senator Cormann interjecting—

Sue Boyce (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Polley! Senator Cormann!

David Bushby (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As Senator Polley mentioned, the Leader of the Opposition in Tasmania, Will Hodgman, was overheard saying that the NBN could cost him government. That is because Labor are working very hard to try to make this into an issue. The reality is that Tasmanians need to make their decisions based on the record of Labor and the Greens and the appalling state of the economy in Tasmania; the embarrassing fact that Tasmania is at the bottom of so many economic and social indicators. I think Tasmanians are smart enough to see through this. I think Tasmanians will look at the record of Labor and the Greens over the last 16 years and they will make the appropriate decision. I think they will see past this smokescreen that Labor is trying to create, surrounding the NBN issues, and will vote accordingly. I am confident that on 15 March we will see the Liberals do significantly better than the Labor Party, and the Labor Party will get a real lesson—but, of course, because of the Hare-Clark system that does not necessarily mean we are going to win. That is why they are going so hard with this. They are going so hard because a few votes here or there could mean they end up getting a second seat in an electorate, even though they are going to suffer the judgement of the Tasmanian people.

Honourable senators interjecting—

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senators on my left, please stop interjecting.

David Bushby (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Coming to the actual subject of this motion, the only promise that has been broken here is the promise that the Labor Party made to the people of Australia prior to the 2007 election—namely, that they would deliver and build an NBN that would be finished in 2013, for $4.7 billion. We all know that under Labor the timeframe and the cost blew out horribly.

The rollout in Tasmania last year—even when they did get it going, and it was at a much higher cost—ground to a halt in the middle of last year, due to Labor's incompetence. Labor has also peddled the line that the NBN is free. There is nothing free about the NBN. Under Labor's plan taxpayers were on track to foot a $73 billion bill—that is, seventy-three thousand million dollars—and increased monthly internet bills, by up to 80 per cent. That raises the issue of affordability, which if I have time I will touch on later.

Senators opposite appear to live in a world where blank cheques are doled out and money grows on trees. If it is somebody else's money they do not care about spending it. On this side of the chamber we actually take the decision to spend taxpayers' money responsibly, and we want to make sure we get the best possible outcome for the money we spend.

There is also a misconception that under Labor's proposal 100 per cent of premises will get optic fibre, right up to their doors. But of course that is not the case. Senator Polley was talking about e-health and people who might be able to take advantage of that in remote areas. People in remote Tasmania were not getting any fibre to their door. They were getting a mixture of wireless and satellite, and that will continue. We are delivering exactly the same outcome to people in those areas as they would have under Labor's plan. Under Labor they would get wireless and satellite and under us they will get the same, only they will get it a bit quicker. They will get it sooner than they would have under Labor. Tasmanian Labor senators, most of whom seem to be here, did not seem too concerned when they were in government—

Opposition senators interjecting—

You are showing concern now, but when you were in government you did not show concern about the fact that the NBN practically stopped under Labor. In the middle of last year it stopped, and it took a change of government to get it back on track in Tasmania.

I have a couple of general points on our mixed technology plan. Firstly, there seems to be a misapprehension that businesses, education and health will miss out on getting fibre to their premises. That is just not true. Senator Whish-Wilson and Senator Polley both made comments in their contributions about how there would be missed opportunities in business, health and education. Under our plan, every school, every hospital and every business hub will get fibre to the premises. So you are spinning things that just are not true if you suggest anything otherwise.

Further, under our plan approximately one-third of all Tasmanian premises will get fibre to their door. Fibre on demand means that anyone who is running a business from their home will be able to get fibre to their premises for a matter of a few thousand dollars, which, if you are running a business, is usually not the end of the world. But it certainly is available to you to do that. A lot of people will not do that, and I will tell you why in a minute. Where premises do not get fibre to the premises they will get fibre to the node. This is seriously upgraded compared with the broadband we have now. There is, I think, somewhat of an impression out there—and certainly the Labor Party are doing their best to foster it—that under our plan there will be no improvement and there will not be any super-fast broadband being delivered to premises around the country. The reality is that all premises under our plan will get super-fast broadband to their premises. That will come via fibre to the node, and then that will deliver super-fast broadband to houses, the last 400 metres or so using the copper network. In other countries that technology is delivering 100-megabit downloads and 40-megabit uploads. That technology is currently being used in other countries and it is delivering those speeds now. It is hard to conceive how a normal household could possibly use 100-megabit downloads or, alternatively, 40-megabit uploads.

Senator Polley interjecting—

Senator Polley interjects to talk about health. If you are getting 100-megabit downloads and 40-megabit uploads you will be able to do any of the e-health things that Senator Polley is suggesting. That is 10, 12 or 15 times faster than the fastest broadband you can get using the existing copper that is in the ground now. This will increase the speed 10 or 15 times. So it is hard to conceive how a household—

Helen Polley (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise on a point of order. Senator Bushby is misleading the Senate. To have fibre to the home will cost households $5,000 to $6,000, so they will not have that—

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Polley, there is no point of order. Senator Bushby has the call.

David Bushby (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I agree that there was no point of order, but Senator Polley made an interesting point in saying that I was misleading the Senate. I indicated that fibre on demand will cost a few thousand dollars. It may be five or six thousand or it may be two or three thousand—we do not know yet. But what I am talking about is our plan to deliver superfast broadband to the premises using fibre to the node. That technology in other countries is delivering 100-megabit downloads and 40-megabit uploads. The technology is improving all the time and the speed is getting faster all the time. In coming years we can expect to actually see much higher download and upload speeds than we are currently seeing in other countries.

The suggestion that Tasmanians or Australians are going to miss out completely, because they are getting fibre to the node, is just not true. The other thing to remember is that, in Korea, Samsung, I think it is, has recently been trialling wireless superfast broadband that delivers one-gigabit downloads over wireless. That is probably not going to be commercially rolled out for a good five years, but it highlights that technology is developing in a way that may well usurp the benefits of delivering fibre to the premise which Senator Whish-Wilson was talking about.

Labor has managed this project incompetently—there is no doubt about that. Their plan would have cost $29 billion more than they had let on and would have increased monthly internet bills by up to 80 per cent, or $43 a month. Crucially, everybody in Tasmania will receive superfast NBN. Our job is to do that sooner and at less cost to the taxpayer. Incorporating technologies into the NBN that can be readily upgraded and are already delivering high-speed broadband to families in other countries will enable us to do just that. We are on course to deliver more NBN connections to Tasmanian homes and businesses this calendar year than over the entire five years since the rollout began. I make this point: since we got into government, we started rolling out fibre to the premise again. That is what we are doing. We will double the number of homes in Tasmania that have fibre to the premise and we will do it in a year when it took you five years.

Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

When the Prime Minister visited Cadbury in Hobart prior to the election, he said it was unusual for a federal government to co-invest with a profitable company but that Tasmania is a special case. I agree: Tasmania is a special case. It is an island state heavily dependent on exports, and Tasmania has been hit hardest by the global financial crisis and high Australian dollar. But a decade ago, when the Tasmanian Labor government developed the backbone for our optical fibre network, they knew that Tasmania's economic future lay in information and communications technology. The full fibre optic rollout of the National Broadband Network in Tasmania is vital to securing Tasmania's economic future. Tasmanian Labor understands this; federal Labor understands this. The only ones who do not seem to understand it are the Liberal-National coalition, and yet they pretend to care about jobs.

Let me tell those opposite what will create jobs in Tasmania. In Tasmania, a state which is heavily dependent on primary industries, an organisation called Sense-T is developing the world's first economy-wide sensor network. The data being gathered by the Sense-T project is increasing the productivity of farms, oyster growers, wineries and a variety of other businesses across Tasmania, and this is just one example of the economic and jobs potential that is possible with the speeds of Labor's NBN—the real NBN, not the coalition's fraud-band alternative.

Many Tasmanians, especially those engaged in the digital economy, understand the importance of high-speed broadband to create the jobs of the future. They understand Tasmania's potential to be a leader, not just a passive participant in the digital economy. They understand that to be a leader we need fast broadband, and 25 megabits per second just is not going to cut it. They understand that if Mr Abbott is serious about his promise to create a million jobs in five years the full fibre-to-the-premise rollout in Tasmania is a good place to start. But Mr Abbott and his colleagues just do not get it.

When Mr Turnbull was appointed shadow communications minister, the riding orders from his party's leaders were to demolish Labor's NBN. Today, Mr Turnbull has executed those orders with distinction. Knowing that fast broadband is popular in Tasmania, those opposite, including Tasmanian Liberal senators, kept the coalition's real agenda deliberately hidden before the federal election. Every time Senator Bushby or Mr Turnbull or any other Liberal member or senator was asked whether the full fibre rollout in Tasmania will be honoured, they could not give a straight answer. Instead, they said that existing contracts would be honoured. In the words of Senator Bushby: 'If contracts are in place for the full fibre rollout, there will be no difference in who gets fibre to their home in Tasmania under Labor or Liberal.' Those were obviously weasel words—a deception designed to give Tasmanians the impression that a full fibre rollout was a coalition election commitment. They deliberately misled Tasmanians into thinking that those who were in the optic fibre footprint under Labor's NBN would have fibre delivered to their home. Then they had the temerity to accuse us of a scare campaign when we pointed out that 85,000 homes would miss out, and yet now it appears that the actual number will be much higher. What a joke; what a hoax from those on the other side; what a ruthless deception those opposite perpetuated against the Tasmanian people when they dashed one of the best hopes for our state's social and economic future.

Tasmania's opposition leader, Will Hodgman, said that this issue could cost him the election, and it should. State Labor has always offered unqualified support for the NBN. In fact, it was thanks to the work of the state Labor government that Tasmania became the first rollout site, whereas Mr Hodgman's recent conversion to the full fibre rollout in Tasmania absolutely smacks of opportunism and political desperation. I know Mr Hodgman has found the road to Damascus, but I am not quite sure he is going to walk down it. You would want to be very, very careful: Tasmanians will not want to pay and should not have to pay because you made a promise to them before the federal election that they would have fibre to the home. My question to those opposite is: how much is it going to cost Tasmanians to get fibre from the node to the home? It will cost $5,000 or $6,000.

Tasmanian voters were conned and deceived by the coalition prior to last year's federal election. I hope that Tasmanians do not allow themselves to be conned a second time. They should not be conned into thinking that the Abbott government's agreement to run a trial of fibre to the home using aerial wiring is anything but a decoy to get their state colleagues through the next election. (Time expired)

Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the issue of broadband in Tasmania, the perspective of a Western Australia Liberal Party senator can be trusted. Labor is clutching at fibre straws. Let's go to the beginning. Let's go back in time to 2009. You would know it better than me. What did Kevin Rudd and Senator Conroy say?

Sue Boyce (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am sorry, Senator Smith, you need to refer to current members and former members by their correct name and title.

Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a pleasure to call the former member for Griffith and former Prime Minister 'former'. Indeed, if Senator Conroy were proud of his Tasmanian experiment, he would be here. He has left you hanging out. I only have a limited amount of time and I have a lot of material to get through.

Opposition senators interjecting—

Sue Boyce (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Members on my left; Senators!

Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is not a laughing matter and I would like an opportunity to put my case. I have been sitting here diligently—

Sue Boyce (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Just proceed, Senator Smith.

Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

So what did the former Prime Minister say about the National Broadband Network? He said: 'Like the building of the Sydney Harbour Bridge, this is a historic act of nation building.' You should be very grateful that he did not get to complete it. I would like to introduce you to the strategic review document that was released in December. If you have not had a chance to read it, you should. It is a very sorry tale.

Let me jump ahead, because of limited time. If you were genuinely interested in broadband access to Tasmanians you would be talking about the Interim Satellite Service, which is a disgrace. Those Tasmanians living in remote and regional communities have been failed by Labor.

Helen Polley (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You have no credibility at all.

Opposition senators interjecting—

Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Do you know about the interim satellite solution?

Sue Boyce (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Smith, please address you remarks to the chair. Would the senators on the left please allow the senator to speak in silence. As you know, Senator Smith is not allowed to ask you questions, so please do not respond to them.

Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Interim Satellite Service is a very important issue and goes to the people I represent, as a Western Australian senator; they are those electors across regional Australia—not just in Tasmania but also in Western Australia.

Here is a very brief history lesson. In 2011 when the Interim Satellite Service was launched, 165,000 households and businesses were told they were eligible. That probably sounds fair enough, except that the satellite only had capacity for 48,000. So why was the minister for communications, Senator Conroy, not telling the truth? Then again, in early 2013, the former government—of which you were all members—said that the number of eligible households and businesses that could get the Interim Satellite Service would rise to 250,000 off the same satellite that still only had capacity for 48,000.

Opposition senators interjecting —

You should be grateful you live in Tasmania, because I will share with you what happened in Western Australia. If you read the strategic review, you will discover that the National Broadband Network, under your former government, passed just 55 per cent of the almost 846,000 that were detailed in the corporate plan. Do you know what that is? Guess what percentage of the total rollout that is—three. There was just three per cent of the total rollout under your plan. There is much to be embarrassed about.

But let us talk about Western Australia. Of the 335,000 premises passed in this country under the NBN, under your guidance, guess how many were passed in Western Australia—just 16,000. Guess how that compares with Tasmania—30,000. We have something to complain about; you have little to complain about. Of the 16,000 that were actually activated in Western Australia, guess how many were activated at existing premises—guess how many of 16,000— (Time expired)

Lin Thorp (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This has been most entertaining and I thank Senator Smith for his valiant effort to try to justify his government's position on this incredibly important area for Tasmania. I am extremely disappointed, but I cannot say surprised, to notice that there are no Tasmanian government senators in this place. Even Senator Bushby bolted as soon as he possibly could, because he knows what he was saying was complete rubbish.

The announcement that Tasmania was likely to be the first jurisdiction in the country to have the NBN rolled out was some of the best news Tasmania had had for a long time. And as Senator Bilyk noted quite effectively, Tasmania does require special treatment. We are an isolated jurisdiction. We are an island state. We have an ageing population. An incredibly large proportion of our population is in receipt of Commonwealth benefit. We do have special circumstances. The concept of the NBN—the proper NBN; the real NBN—being rolled out in Tasmania was some of the best news that our state had had for a long time. Then Premier David Bartlett celebrated it. As someone who is expert in the IT area, he had the vision to realise what it could do for Tasmania. There has been a lot of talk about contracts and weasel words around contracts. But I have in my hand the press release—

Senator McKenzie interjecting—

Senator McKenzie may chuckle but here it is, in black and white:

NBN Co seals construction contract to complete broadband rollout in Tasmania.

Up to 800 new jobs to be created at peak of rollout.

State Government backs training for school leavers and job seekers.

Very good news for the state, and celebrated at the time. At about the same time, Visionstream—subsidiary of the people to whom the contract was awarded, Leighton contractors—secured the $300 million NBN contract. It is in black and white.

NBN Co confirms it; the successful contractor confirms it. There were contracts let for the full rollout of NBN to Tasmania. Senator Bushby may try to obfuscate, but the reality is we knew that the rollout would involve about 20 per cent of wi-fi and 10 per cent of satellite from day one. This is because of the disparate nature of our population centres and because of our geography. We all knew that. But we knew that 70 per cent of Tasmanians, whether they be businesses or homes, would receive fibre to the-premises.

Of course, the election loomed and there was a bit of nervousness around. So we needed to get some clarification about what was really going to happen. Malcolm Turnbull said:

As we have stated in our policy we intend to honour existing contracts—the alternative would be to breach them and that is a course we would not countenance.

That was in May 2013. Then in August he said:

What we will do is honour the NBNco’s contracts.

The contract that I have just shown here is for a full, complete broadband rollout in Tasmania. You cannot get away from it. Mr Turnbull also said:

We’re not about to tear contracts up or walk away from contracts.

Now, that gave a certain level of confidence to the Tasmanian community, and TASICT Executive Officer, Mr Dean Winter, was comforted, as were many people in Tasmania, that the coalition—the now government—would honour their commitment to Tasmania. He welcomed the statements by now Minister Turnbull to that effect, by saying:

Tasmania is assured now to be the first jurisdiction fully connected to the NBN and may end up being the only jurisdiction to boast the full fibre to the premises rollout.

This is based on the fact that if the coalition's plan took off and our contract was honoured, we would be the only ones. We were not convinced though. We asked time and time again for confirmation of that.

The then Minister Julie Collins wrote letters to the editor—she wrote all over the place to try and get some confirmation—and was accused by Senator Bushby of manufacturing mistruths and distorting the truth as part of a scare campaign. But we were right, because look what has happened. We even had some comfort earlier from comments from Ziggy Switkowski who said that we should be encouraged that things could be fixed. But they are not going to be. Tasmania has been conned. We are going to be conned again.

Sue Boyce (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the need for the government to honour its election commitment to rollout fibre-to-the-premises broadband to no less than 200,000 premises in Tasmania is a matter of urgency.

Question agreed to.