Mary Fisher (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Senator Conroy. Will the minister guarantee Australian broadband users that, under the NBN, they will not be forced to pay more than they currently do for equivalent broadband services?

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

Thank you for that question. As I have stated many times in the chamber, I will not be passing daily commentary on a live process as it is taking place. It would be grossly irresponsible to the Commonwealth negotiating position to respond to questions like that. While those opposite were in government, they would have given exactly the same response. The fact that they have completely tossed away any semblance of credibility on a live process is an indictment on those opposite. But let me be clear: the objectives of the Rudd government are to deliver faster and cheaper broadband to all Australians. Unlike those opposite, when in government, we are not interested in building a fast fibre network for five capital cities only and leaving the rest of Australia with a second-rate failed broadband plan—one of their 18 failed broadband plans.

Nick Minchin (SA, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You cancelled it.

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

We cancelled it because it failed to meet the simplest of tests set in your own contract. It failed to meet those tests set in the contract Senator Coonan wrote. It failed to meet the basic criteria set out in Senator Coonan’s own budget.

Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Coonan interjecting—

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

You keep hankering after it. It is like hankering after Peter Costello. You may want him but he, sure as anything, does not want you lot. And the broadband plan fell over because it failed miserably to meet its own objectives. (Time expired)

Mary Fisher (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. As to the so-called live process, given that the successful tenderer will expect a return on its investment, given the government’s stated objective to achieve a return on its $4.7 billion investment, isn’t it inevitable that broadband prices will rise?

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

Again, these are questions based on entirely false premises and, more importantly, on a lack of understanding of the process which has generated the competitive tension. This is a process that has generated competitive tension and this question is based on an entirely false premise. The government’s objective is to deliver faster and cheaper broadband to all Australians—to 98 per cent through the national broadband network. The remaining two per cent have access to $400 million to deal with the Glasson report. Then there is the new funding of $270 million which those opposite refused to give a commitment to before the last election—$270 million for a four-year extension of the ABG. (Time expired)

Mary Fisher (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Even if the government’s $4.7 billion is provided as a full subsidy, isn’t it inevitable that Australian broadband users will be paying more for an equivalent service under the NBN, and will the government assist those Australians who are forced to pay more for the same or less?

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

Again, there is a string of false premises in your question. They are just wrong. This is a string of assumptions built on assumptions that actually lead to a completely incorrect question, because this is a government that is committed to delivering to all Australians faster and cheaper broadband. Notwithstanding the active attempt to sabotage a live tender process by those opposite, this government will not be diverted. It will not do what those opposite did during their broadband tendering process, which is to shift the goalposts; to offer an extra $200 million or $300 million, 50 per cent extra; to only tell one bidder out of 28, while the other 27 knew nothing about the change in the goalposts; and with the extra money on the table— (Time expired)