David Leyonhjelm (NSW, Liberal Democratic Party) Share this | Hansard source

My question without notice is to the Minister for Communications, Senator Fifield. The Universal Service Obligation is a contract with Telstra to ensure standard telephone services and payphones are accessible to all. It costs almost $300 million a year. The ANAO says it does not reflect value for money and there is little transparency as to whether it is meeting its policy objectives. It said that neither ACMA nor the department verify the accuracy of performance data provided by Telstra. The Productivity Commission said that the USO is 'anachronistic and costly' and should be phased out. The Regional Telecommunications Independent Review Committee said that the NBN will effectively become the new USO infrastructure, but that, by default, the USO supports the maintenance of Telstra's copper. Does the minister disagree with any of these three assessments?