Brett Raguse (Forde, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak in support of the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (National Broadband Network Measures—Network Information) Bill 2009. I note the remarks of the member for Canning. I certainly acknowledge his interest in his community and his electorate. But I think that, to a large degree, many members and a lot of residents are misinformed about what essentially we are as a government attempting to do. It is interesting to talk about major projects—this project is by far one of the largest projects under consideration, and to an extent it is probably one of the largest infrastructure projects this country has ever embarked on. We talk quite often about the Snowy River scheme and the immensity of that project. This far surpasses that not only, probably, in the work involved but also, certainly, in the impact it will have. Of course the important thing—the difference—is that this is something we need to do immediately. The member for Canning certainly made that point. But in terms of the understanding of what we are trying to do, and certainly given the information provided in some of those letters the previous speaker read out, it is clear that people are not quite aware of what we are trying to do.

Labor governments have a long history of and interest in rolling out infrastructure, certainly telecommunications infrastructure. I am going to talk about that a bit later in this debate. It is part of what we did 16 or 17 years ago with the fibre optics that were rolled out, certainly from Melbourne to Cairns; and the introduction and creation of Optus and all of that commercialisation that occurred. It was about looking at the major telecommunications needs of the country.

I will now speak about this bill. The main purpose of the bill is to amend part 27A of the Telecommunications Act 1997 to allow the Commonwealth a higher level of access to telecommunications network information. The federal government requires this additional information for the planning and rollout of the National Broadband Network. The existing telecommunications infrastructure is large and complex, including ducting, conduit, poles and other infrastructure components. In rolling out the National Broadband Network the government will often require information on these infrastructure components from utilities and telecommunications carriers. This information will allow the fast and cost-effective deployment of the network.

The legislation proposed is about having a safety net. While most information will inevitably be provided in a cooperative manner, this legislation acts to ensure that the information needed is not withheld from the Commonwealth. The information that can be requested must be appropriate. The bill therefore limits requests to information that could be used for or in connection with the creation or development of a broadband telecommunications network or the supply of carriage service over this type of network. The amendments to part 27A are to require utilities and carriers to provide information as specified by the minister. Carriers and utilities will have five business days to provide comments. These requests will be enforceable, and failure to comply would contravene existing civil penalty provisions.

The national broadband network implementation study is due to report early in 2010. For this reason the disclosure of and use of protected information for the implementation study has a sunset period of 30 June 2010, or a later date if necessary as specified by the minister. Information for use by the National Broadband Network Company will have a sunset period of 10 years. This reflects the long-term nature of the rollout of the massive broadband infrastructure investment. The member for Canning spoke directly about the 10 years the project will take. The reality is that this is a major rollout and a major piece of infrastructure; and certainly the planning, and the need to have all the information in place and the access to information, is very important.

There is an opposition senator who likes to provide misinformation in my electorate. This particular opposition senator has put out information attacking the government on its broadband proposals. Not only is the information misinformed but it is scaremongering. We hear all the time in this chamber about the worries involved in rolling out such a massive piece of infrastructure. However, everyone is calling for it and we hear the opposition talk about it regularly, yet they are scaremongering. It is opposition for opposition’s sake, which I guess is an important part of the Westminster system, but sometimes it gets very frustrating to hear some of the arguments that are put forward. I welcome the political debate, but we also talk about the three tiers of government working together. Certainly the opposition in Parliament House should consider the important nature of this plan to roll out major infrastructure.

Broadband internet is an issue that matters to a lot of people in my electorate of Forde. My office has fielded well over 100 calls to date on this one subject. The issue regularly arises in public meetings and even appeared as an issue in the recent community cabinet that we held in Beenleigh back in July. Despite what our children may suggest, broadband internet is about a lot more than just games. Not only is it about entertainment but clearly the economic advantages of having good data transmission are very important. Broadband internet is already a critical business tool, and the increasing load on the service means that it will become more and more critical in the day-to-day operation of most businesses. It means reliable transmission of large volumes of data, audioconferencing and videoconferencing. As many of my residents will attest, transmitting large files over slow, unreliable services wastes a lot of valuable time and resources. Many people in Forde run small businesses out of their homes in areas from information technology through to transport. It is not a bad way to live, with the lifestyles that the area has to offer, but it can quickly become unnecessarily problematic with low-speed and unreliable broadband internet services.

I am privileged to represent this diverse area, which includes old suburbs, new suburbs, small towns and semirural and fully rural environments. Interestingly enough, if you want to have a good ADSL broadband internet connection locally at the moment, the trick is to live in an older suburb or a small town that is more than 20 years old. Unfortunately, new areas had the minimal amount of infrastructure put in at the planning stage. So the commitment to providing infrastructure at the development stage is very important. We hear the opposition talk about their plans and their processes in the past, but the problem is that they were and are uncoordinated. There have been hotspots and there have been great rollouts of certain infrastructure in some areas but, because planning has not been consistent in broadband rollout, there are certain issues.

On the other hand, if you want to get good access to the internet right now in the electorate of Forde, you have difficulties choosing a spot. There are areas that are very close to large population areas that have little or no access, and then there are areas out in some of the rural areas of the electorate that get very good coverage. It is an interesting mismatch, and that is why the plan of ours as a government to roll out one single large network is very important. We know that ADSL broadband currently has a limited range and can only be used within small distances from telephone exchanges. Many people in Forde live outside these boundaries in rural as well as semirural environments. The problem is common in areas like Buccan, which, while rural, is still very close to a town centre. In areas of North Maclean, which is on the Mount Lindesay Highway, a major transport corridor, there are still problems. Rural and semirural areas present a particular challenge for the National Broadband Network as it currently exists: where will the line be drawn between areas to be serviced by fibre to the premises and areas to rely wireless and satellite solutions? It is too early for definitive answers, but this is a topic of interest locally.

While the former government had a view and an understanding of the importance of a good telecommunications network, there was a mismatch in the various different options provided. I liken it to people with the old HQ Holden: you can turbocharge it, put on twin exhausts with headers, convert it to gas and put on large tyres, but at some stage it becomes economically unviable. You just cannot keep retrofitting and retrofitting, so you will probably need to throw out the old HQ and buy a modern, more efficient and faster family station wagon. That is the difference in view between the previous government and us. They were very clever in a lot of ways in the solution that was provided at the time, and the copper wire network provided a lot of services that it was never intended to. The Keating government way back in the early nineties made the Creative Nation statement. It said that, if you wanted large volumes of information rolling down the telecommunications network, you had to have fibre and you had to have broadband. That was understood then. The copper wire network provided many different options but it is tired now. The previous government considered maintaining that network and adding a little bit of wireless here and a little bit of satellite there. However, the core and the infrastructure just were not up to the task. So it is about the old Holden and deciding you need to borrow money, invest in the future and upgrade to that new family station wagon. That is probably a good analogy.

As I said, there are issues in Forde in some of the newest estates. I mentioned before how minimal planning has been disastrous for some of the newer areas like Cedar Grove, Ormeau, Eagle Heights and Waterford, which have very poor broadband services. These are new suburbs that have been developed in full knowledge of our needs in terms of access to telecommunications. About 15 years ago, some of the very early developments in South-East Queensland promoted and presented fibre options for those particular estates. I spoke a minute ago about the time of the Keating government and the Creative Nation; there was also the creation of Optus, the broadband rollout and the fibre network from Melbourne to Cairns, which was all about building a spine that could adapt to modern usage. In the electorate of Forde as it currently stands we have no broadband services in some areas at all because of their distance from local telecommunications hubs, but the fibre optic broadband network that runs from Melbourne to Cairns runs right through the electorate, right down that spine. Because of the lack of planning in access to and control over that piece of infrastructure, a lot of changes could not be implemented.

The unfortunate thing, of course, is that when these services inevitably fail in these areas the blame is not placed on the developers, the planners or the telecommunication companies. In fact, as you would know from your electorate office, Mr Deputy Speaker Sidebottom, when there are problems the telecommunications company staff tell people to ring their federal member. The interesting thing is that we were not the cause of this problem but we are dealing with it. Our answers are: ‘Support what we as a government are doing. We will find a way. We will have the solutions, but it’s not going to happen overnight.’

As a government, we must not be drawn into paying big dollars to fix these problems that should not have arisen in the first place. For this reason, today I am talking about this government’s move to ensure that greenfield estates across Australia are built with fibre to the premises, having the infrastructure in place from that first development stage. This is not only about building the fibre-to-the-node or fibre-to-the-home network but about consistently planning at all stages. So all levels of government are involved: the federal government is rolling out the major piece of infrastructure, the state governments through their planning laws are ensuring that certain planning schemes require certain outcomes for development, and then the local council authorities are ensuring with developers that that level of infrastructure is provided at the outset.

As a federal government, we have committed to rolling out broadband. The reality is that we will probably have to go much further than we would otherwise have liked in providing these services in areas that were previously developed, and developed at a time when developers and local authorities knew the demands and the requirements. But I think everyone was lulled into some level of complacency, because there have been plans to use existing networks and there have been plans to provide access in other ways but there was never a real test of what we could actually provide.

People who live in these areas where the current network is at capacity will find that their services are just nonexistent. The frustrating part for most people is not that these services will come, because they eventually will, but the priorities and the rollout. Some of these people will be without services for a long time. I should say that a lot of the telecommunications companies are providing some interim solutions, but it is so important that we as a government gain access to existing infrastructure and have knowledge and understanding of what exists so that we are able to plan and put in place a network that actually works.

Our plan is to connect 90 per cent of homes, schools and workplaces with fibre-to-the-premises broadband of up to 100 megabits per second. The remainder of the premises, we are proposing, will receive wireless or satellite at speeds of at least 12 megabits a second. The essential thing in this is that we will provide total coverage and it will be through a very coordinated system, as opposed to the ad hoc approach we have currently. There are a lot of promises. When I talk to my constituents—and I am sure you have done the same with your own, Mr Deputy Speaker—I hear that they have had certain conversations with their telecommunication providers where the companies make promises that ultimately cannot be kept. Unfortunately, there is just nowhere to go with that.

In the second reading speech, the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government rightly noted:

Access to high-speed broadband services is critical to Australia’s future economic prosperity and social wellbeing.

That certainly goes without saying, and I am sure that members on both sides of the House understand that, but we seem to be at variance in how we roll out this service. I have talked many times in this chamber about the seat of Forde and its infrastructure, whether it is roads, rail or even our access to good freight networks. The reality is that the rollout of a good national broadband network is an absolutely essential part of our communications. We generally talk about transport and communications as a bundle. We cannot have the best ports, the best roads or the best airport facilities unless we have access to good telecommunications through the broadband network.

It is clear from the discussions that we have heard in this House today that there are differences, as I say, but I think we on this side of the House understand our role in rolling out major infrastructure. Way back in the early nineties there was what was then known as Creative Nation, which at that time was about providing an entertainment network. That was part of the rollout of what we understood at the time to be ‘new media’—this thing called the internet which was making its way to houses around Australia. The reality is that, while the internet was originally proposed to be an entertainment service, many providers of content have developed in this country. We need a network that can sustain the load, that can be accessible and that has the speed required not only for these entertainment services but for industry. Industry has progressed through the use of online services, e-commerce. All of that terminology and all of that use of modern technology so dearly depends on having what we on this side of the House understand to be a very effective rollout.

In conclusion, broadband internet services are important to the residents and certainly the businesses of Forde, in my case, because it is such a diverse area. As I said before, there are not only rural areas but some high-density areas. There is so much inconsistency that people who have established businesses in certain areas, expecting to be able to ring up their provider and get adequate services, find that none exist. For companies that make those commitments, invest in an area and find that they are somewhat hamstrung in their ability to access certain pieces of infrastructure, it is really frustrating. It would be like moving onto a main road, to have your business and your signage on the main road, and not having a driveway out of your property. It is essentially the same thing.

We understand it at that level, but when it comes to telecommunications we have developed over the last 18 to 19 years from those early days of Labor’s commitment to communications and a telecommunications network, and the ability at that time to put together an option to commercialise through companies like Optus. All that is ahead of us, but somewhere along the line we have lost 11½ to 12 years of future planning and investment.

While we have always understood the need—and the previous government certainly were aware of the need—the solution provided to them by certain companies at the time seemed to be in order and seemed to be able to provide coverage. But the copper wire network particularly was never going to pass the test of time. The broadband, the fibre optics and the sort of approach that we are taking as a government is absolutely essential. For those reasons, I certainly implore those in opposition to support these amendments, which go towards making us better informed as a government, making us better able to make the decisions that will ultimately roll out that major network which, for all the reasons I have given in my speech today, is so important. I commend this amendment bill to the House.

See this speech in context