CAAANBRA: Fraudband

  While I’ve been beavering away at work this morning, my twitter feed has feasted on the latest thing: the announcement by Tony Abbott and Malcolm Turnbull of the Coalition's broadband policy.  

The policy, released under the new Liberal slogan of Hope Reward Opportunity, is now a reality. Already the wags are using the new slogan more creatively than the Liberals envisaged:

Hope…the damned thing works

Reward…our mates at Foxtel

Opportunity…to look like we care

  Two topics are up for discussion: Firstly, the actual NBN as proposed by the Liberals today. Tech-heads from work, along with most of Twitter, have assured me the Liberal proposal is the equivalent of answering a request for an iPhone 6 by providing a 1988 Motorola Brick – and expecting to be thanked for it. It will utilise some of our existing copper network, which Telstra has been phasing out since the early 1990s because of its age and limited capacity to carry large volumes of data at speed. In fact, Telstra has described the lifespan of the copper network as "five to midnight". 

Kevin Rudd tweeted that it was last century’s technology. Some of it is older than that, dating back to original copper cables which were laid from 1880.

Assuming that the copper cables can cope with the volume of data and deliver the speeds required, the next hurdle is “FTTN” – Fibre to the Node. In laymanspeak, fibre will be used to transmit major distances, ending at a node, where the data is transferred to copper cabling (or wireless) to reach the homes or premises that feed from the node. In populated areas, there’ll be nodes every few hundred metres.

Copper: pretty & antiquated

The Liberal plan supports the patchwork approach, where various suppliers provide bits and pieces – they call this ‘competitive’. The benefit is that they use whatever is already there, regardless of whether its fit for purpose. (It also ensures that Foxtel is protected, but we'll get to that later.) What happens when something goes wrong? Who is responsible? Technical support will be a nightmare for consumers.

When I read the Executive Summary for the policy, it struck me that the biggest consideration in the Coalition plan is not functionality, reliability, or longevity. It’s cost. There're little thought about the future, just a drive to convince us that in this case, cheaper is better.

At $29.5 billion dollars, it’s about $29.5 billion dollars overpriced if it doesn’t work, if it proves to be inadequate, if the copper cables fail, or if it’s obsolete. Technically, all of these options are more likely under the Coalition plan.

And then, Independent Queensland MP Rob Mitchell tweeted at about 1pm that the Liberal NBN page had failed. In fairness, that had nothing to do with broadband and everything to do with the public perception of the Liberal’s ability to understand and manage technology.

Twitter was brutal. Here are a few tweets from the #fraudband hashtag:

@conceravota Lucky Liberals were not in power when government put in pipe; we’d have ended up w/ a tap & dunny at end of every street. #fraudband

@Picketer Please hang up the phone. Turnbull wants to use the interwebs. #NBN #fraudband

@byTonyWilson It must be a turkey. The nerds haven’t been this angry since Star Wars was recut. #fraudband #NBN

@peterjhinton Stop acting like #fraudband is a turning point! The people who will hand #2031election to #abbott think a torrent is heavy rain. #auspol

@geeksrulz LNP FRAUDBAND CAR CRASH. Turnbull has no estimate on how long copper will last. Thorough planning. #NBN #Auspol

  The other issue was the announcement itself. It was a big deal, and now, competing with the death of Baronness Thatcher for column inches. Many of the policy details were known or at least suspected before the press conference. Rumours were circulating that not all media was invited to today’s launch. Freedom of speech is a different issue altogether, but is worth considering in light of three areas of context:

This is the Liberal’s first major policy announcement in this election cycle

Tony Abbott has been avoiding the tough interviews

Malcolm Turnbull has a background in telecommunications
Firstly, the announcement was made in front of a banner with the word Foxtel emblazoned on it. That was a poor choice by the Liberals communications team, as Rupert Murdoch, who owns a slab of Foxtel, stands to benefit from the Liberal proposal, and lose from the current NBN. It looks dodgy.

Secondly, Tony Abbott was there. Well, of course the Leader of the Opposition would be there when the first of his party’s policies is launched…except that last time he was anywhere near a Liberal policy on the broadband, he displayed an embarrassing lack of understanding of the basics and a condescending attitude to those who use technology. Remember this clanger:
 

"For me, broadband basically is about being able to send an email, receive an email," he said. For his daughters "it's about downloading movies, songs, all that kind of thing".

At that time, one of my key responsibilities was to work with rural and remote customers who were trying to use our transactional website, but in many cases, just didn’t have an internet connection to support it. A couple were still on dial-up. Those customers weren’t trying to download the latest Harry Potter movie or Sex and the City 2. They were trying to do business in the bush. That comment helped to ensure that when the situation arose, Rob Oakeshott and Tony Windsor supported the ALP, because the ALP was committed to delivering fast broadband to the bush.

Incidentally, Mr Abbott should be careful of raising the issue of price rises. His policy document claims that the ALP NBN was originally costed at $44.1 billion, but has almost doubled to $94 billion. Almost doubled, eh? In 2010, Mr Abbott priced the Coalition NBN substitute at around $6 billion. The plan unveiled today is estimated at $29.5 billion – almost 5 times as much as the 2010 estimate. Yes Mr Abbott, costs and priorities change over time.

So what’s the outcome?  It’s a cost/benefit judgment. It seems to come down to personal ethos: a bigger spend for a more robust, durable system, or a cheaper alternative for a cheaper result.

I want the one that works, and will keep working into the future. The rest of it, we manage.

Trending Hashtag: Fraudband. © @KRuddMP   Update: 4 hours later, and #fraudband is still a very active hashtag. There are very few tweets in favour of the Liberal plan - but not everyone tweets. Those who have little contact with computers will probably prefer the cheaper option, so be cautious about taking the twitter preference as a sign.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Crystal Balls

Today, many many political brains with far more wisdom than mine are staring at sets of polling data with all the intensity of a gypsy reading her crystal ball. The ALP folk are vacillating between private exaltation and disbelief, while the Coalition team are clinging to statistics of the past two years, discrediting the wavy images in the glass and looking to the left for someone to blame. Psephologists are trying to decipher two sets of polling data released in the dead of night and find something meaningful in it.

The answers is seems,are the same. Labor is gaining momentum, the Coalition is losing ground, but if an election was held last weekend, Tony Abbot would be Prime Minister…and many Australian voters would be unhappy about that.

The Polls – Newspoll and Nielsen – are shockers for Mr Abbott. According to Nielsen, Ms Gillard is starting to edge away in the Preferred PM stakes, as well as having a higher approval score and lower disapproval score. The Better PM measure, according to Newpoll, has Gillard jumping 7 points and Abbott falling 6 points in the last month.

But does it mean anything?

Previous Newspolls are showing a 2PP trend, with the ALP showing a slow, consistent climb. In the two years since the last election, the numbers have been bouncing around a fair bit, but the Coalition has been ahead for most of that time. I’m comfortable calling this steady climb a trend.

Bear in mind that there is still a deep dissatisfaction with both federal leaders, and close to one quarter of voters would shun the two major parties, according to Nielsen…which begs the question of whether a 2PP measure is even relevant anymore.

The psephologists are also stirring the leadership pots by predicting how the results might look if Kevin Rudd was Prime Minister, opposing Tony Abbott – and Labor would win, although Mr Rudd isn’t as popular as he used to be. Then switcheroo Malcolm Turnbull for Tony Abbott, and the pendulum swings back the other way.

But according to Newspoll, and assuming that Nielsen keeps trending the way it is, in another few months, we’ll be in the same place we were in August 2010, when we last tried to elect a federal government. A lot of polling distance has been covered in that time, but just how much has changed?

Move the statistics to one side, and rather a lot has been achieved:

Australia now has a Carbon Tax, and a Mining Tax, a new health system with a 50% increase to hospital funding, a new dental health scheme, a single national school curriculum, the National Broadband Network is rolling out, an increase in trades training, and in training places, and we almost have an National Disability Insurance Scheme. Oh, and Australia survived the Global Financial Crisis better than any other developed economy.

Our Government has also made an absolute hash of our approach to asylum seekers, has ignored one of our own citizens, Julian Assange, has failed to broker an acceptable deal to preserve the Murray Basin and has failed to act on Same Sex Marriage and Poker Machine Reform. It’s endured the Peter Slipper and Craig Thompson fiascos, and maintained the support of Rob Oakeshott, Tony Windsor, Adam Bandt and occasionally, Andrew Wilkie.

The polls might be close to our starting point two years ago, but Australia is looking very different.

I’m sure that right now, the ALP strategists (formerly faceless) are thanking Campbell Newman, Barry O’Farrell and Ted Bailleau for being so united in their mission to annihilate the Public Sectors in their respective states. There’s been talk of the Newman factor, but the three Eastern premiers together are far more effective at demonstrating current Coalition/LNP policy.

The fact that Whyalla has not fallen victim to a Carbon Tax Armageddon might also be a factor in lightening the ALP burden. Tony Abbott’s current problems with his past, and his dreadful performance on 7:30 a couple of weeks ago will be boosting the ALP’s stocks as well.

I can see the next six months’ worth of polling continuing to close the gap, although it won’t always be steady. After that, it’s anyone’s game. Mr Rudd will probably become less of a factor while Mr Turnbull, who has been biding his time, raises the roof.

Bring it on.

Actions Unconscionable

Before you can advocate for a Conscience Vote, you need to have a conscience; a set of beliefs that are stronger than your desire for power.

Conscience votes are rare, and usually involve controversial issues of a moral or ethical nature. Within the context of party politics, a conscience vote is a risk.

In a hung parliament, a conscience vote can be a losing vote. With tissue-thin majorities, parties need certainty. Even with a solid majority, too many conscience votes undermines the party's image and appeal: why support a party that allows its elected representatives to vote against the party line? And to vote against your party when no conscience vote has been granted is to risk being expelled from the party, if you're an ALP member. The penalties for a Liberal crossing the floor are slightly less dramatic, yet still a deterrent.

The reality is that for most politicians, there's no need to decide issues one-by-one. In many cases, there's little need to understand the issues. Just vote the party line, regurgitate the party talking points, and no-one gets hurt. Julie Bishop's ridiculous performance on Ten Breakfast this week in response to the Carbon Tax is a fine example:  

JULIE BISHOP    We can deliver tax cuts by making savings. We’ll ensure that pensioners get a fair go. You don’t have to hit them with a job destroying tax in order to do that. 
 
PAUL HENRY    Will you take the money away that they have been given to compensate them for the carbon tax? 
 
JULIE BISHOP    If there is no carbon tax they won’t need that compensation, but we'll ensure there are tax cuts and that pensioners get a fair go. 
 
PAUL HENRY    But you will take that money away from them?
 
JULIE BISHOP    They won’t need the compensation if they are not hit with a carbon tax. 
 
PAUL HENRY    So you’ll take it away from them? 
 
JULIE BISHOP    But we’ll have tax cuts. Well we won’t need the compensation for a tax that isn’t there. I mean that is just the con isn’t it? To say that you put a tax on and then you give them compensation.
 
PAUL HENRY    And then you’ll take compensation off them. 
 
JULIE BISHOP    There will be tax cuts. 
 
PAUL HENRY    You’ll take the money off them won’t you, that will come away. 
 
JULIE BISHOP    There will be tax cuts but they won’t be paid for by the carbon tax. 
 
PAUL HENRY    I love you Julie, I just do!

What about when your conscience is in conflict with the policies you're required to support, crossing the floor is not an option?

Queensland Premier Campbell Newman is on record as supporting same sax marriage, yet the LNP would not permit a conscience vote on amending or repealing the Civil Partnerships legislation.  Newman is the leader of the Parliamentary LNP in Queensland, and even he is bound by the party machine, lead by Christian conservative Bruce McIver. Did the voters of Ashgrove elect Campbell Newman, or did they elect the LNP?

Malcolm Turnbull, in a curious bout of speech followed by duelling op-eds with Andrew Bolt, has urged his party leader to allow a conscience vote at federal level on the same issue. The answer from Tony Abbott  is, as usual, a flat 'no'. As the Prime Minister has allowed Labor MPs a conscience vote, it's unlikely that the current same sex marriage bills would succeed; the ALP members may cross the floor, and the Liberals may not. Turnbull, and probably others, will be required to vote against their consciences. 

If we had a free vote on the matter and, subject always to the wording of the Bill, I would vote to recognise same sex couples’ unions as a marriage. For reasons I have laid out I find the arguments against it unpersuasive.

Meanwhile, in Lyne and New England and Kennedy and Denison, where the sitting members are Independents, every vote is a conscience vote...or would be, if deals hadn't been done to form the minority ALP Government. In Lyne and New England, Rob Oakeshott and Tony Windsor are struggling. 

Why? Is it because they've lost their genuine independence, or because they sided with the dreaded ALP, and that's a bridge too far for voters in these traditional National Party seats. Perhaps it's just part of the national malaise, the all-pervasive disillusionment with politics and politicians of all flavours.

On marriage equality, Rob Oakeshott will vote to represent his electorate, as will Tony Windsor:

Looming challenges for the self-described socially progressive Mr Oakeshott include the gay marriage vote.He said that his electorate has made it clear it thinks marriage is between a man and a woman, and therefore he would vote against reforms in favour of gay marriage unless lobbyists could somehow change his community's sentiment.

In a traditional parliament, with a majority, a minority and a handful of others, Independents would be free to vote with their consciences, or with the will of their electorate, on every bill. They don't have the luxury of a party machine to "help" them form opinions and provide catchy phrases to use when interviews get tricky, yet they enjoy the freedom to vote independently.

Political parties are part of our system of government. The decision to grant or deny a conscience vote is an indicator of a leader's willingness to risk surrendering power.I wonder if those leaders and party officials who deny their MPs the liberty to vote their conscience have consciences themselves. 



“Congratulations. You have met your conscience. In my experience, the world is divided between those who have one and those who don't. And the ones with one are divided into those who will act on their conscience and those who won't. Those who will are, I'm afraid, the smallest category. They will *jeito*. It's Brazilian Portuguese. It means to find a way to get something done, no matter what the obstacles.”
― Jean Ferris, Twice Upon a Marigold



.