Deborah O'Neill (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Communications, Senator Fifield: This morning the NBN CEO was quoted as saying that he's already considering building a 5G wireless network to bypass the copper NBN because parts of the network are unreliable and corroding. Can the Minister provide an update on what this would cost?

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

As colleagues would be well aware, the NBN has a mandate from the government to conduct the rollout of the NBN, according to what's referred to as a multi-technology mix. That means that NBN can choose the technology that makes sense in a given area to see the NBN rolled out fastest and at lowest cost. That is the reason why the NBN will be completed by 2020—a good six to eight years sooner than would have been the case under those opposite.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator O'Neill, on a point of order.

Deborah O'Neill (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr President. The minister was asked if he could provide an update on what it would cost to replace the unreliable and corroding NBN with 5G. Could I ask you to draw his attention to the detail of the question?

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can't instruct a minister how to answer the question. You have kindly reminded him. Senator Fifield.

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

As I was saying, the multi-technology mix approach is the reason why the NBN will be finished six to eight years sooner than would have been the case under those opposite, and at about $30 billion less cost.

Opposition senators interjecting—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order on my left!

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

I was able to update colleagues yesterday with the half-yearly results of the NBN. I am pleased to report that revenue is up, that we have more than half of the nation available to access the NBN. As a part of announcing the half-yearly results yesterday, Mr Morrow did undertake a number of interviews and in those—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Fifield. Senator O'Neill, on a point of order.

Deborah O'Neill (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I just draw your attention, Mr President, to the fact that 5G wireless has not been mentioned at all, at any point, of his answer. There are 41 seconds remaining. The minister needs to address that vital piece of information.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I take the opportunity to remind the minister of the question asked. I call the minister.

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

As I was saying, Mr President, yesterday, as part of the half-yearly results, Mr Morrow did undertake a number of interviews and in those interviews he did canvas a number of issues, one of which was the issue of 5G and the issue of mobile substitutability for some of the services that the National Broadband Network provides. You would expect that those are the sorts of issues that the NBN CEO would canvass.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator O'Neill, a supplementary question.

Deborah O'Neill (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Why is the minister spending $50 billion on a second-rate NBN that could be redundant by the time it's complete?

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

The NBN, according to its last corporate plan, has a funding range and is on track for repeat funding of $49 billion. I reiterate that that is $30 billion less than would have been the case under the approach of those opposite. I also indicate to colleagues that, if an extra $30 billion had been spent, internet bills for Australian households would, on average, be $500 a year more.

A government senator: How much?

The internet bill for your average Australian household would be $500 a year more if the approach of those opposite, which would have seen the NBN cost $30 billion more, had been continued with.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator O'Neill, a final supplementary question.

Deborah O'Neill (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Given the second-rate copper NBN delivers slow speeds, is less reliable, costs more to maintain, is more exposed to wireless competition and is a financial liability to taxpayers, what was the point of building it?

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

Let me point out the internal contradiction in what Senator O'Neill said. She expresses a concern about mobile competition. If $30 billion more had been spent, as was the plan of those opposite, that would mean that NBN would have to charge higher prices to retailers, which would mean that consumers would be paying $500 a year more on average. Let me let you in on a little secret: if the NBN charged more to retailers, and customers therefore paid more, there would be higher substitution of mobile for the NBN. Labor's business model—their approach, their expenditure—would have led to a much higher substitution of mobile for the NBN. If we're talking about economics adding up, under this side they do; under the approach of the others, no way.