Do you blame the poor NBN on the LNP or the millions of people that voted for them?

Is the fact we have a third world NBN the fault of the LNP or the voters?
Something else?
Maybe the blame should be laid at the feet of the ‘swing’ voters who got the LNP over the line, since the rusted ons (typically old people) won’t ever change

Poll Options

  • 750
    Liberal National Party
  • 105
    Voters for the Liberal National Party
  • 86
    Other (see comments)

Comments

  • +56 votes

    I blame the system which makes everything run grossly overpriced and on top of that over budget, sometimes over tenfold over budget.

    Think desal and myki.

    The NBN we were all promised would have never happened whichever party got voted in.

    • Labor was going to deliver FTP to the vast majority and went to the election promising to do that.
      The problem was that it was massively under quoted budget wise, they would of delivered it but the blow out would of been massive.

      Saying that the LNP delivered the version they did to save us money and ended up costing more than the blown out FTP system would of cost
      AND
      they have set us up to spend more which has already commenced with FTTN now beginning to already be replaced with FTTC
      So we went with one tech that is now already being replaced.

      Thing that annoyed me the most… Turnball was pro FTTP all the way UNTIL his PM told him to be against it.

      • Labor was going to deliver FTP to the vast majority

        Allegedly. How can you tell when a politician is lying? Their lips are moving.

        For full disclosure, I don't vote Labor or liberal directly.

        • I don't vote Labor or liberal directly

          What do you mean by directly?

        • Tell that to the 25% of NBN users who have Fiber to the home before the Liberals came in and changed all the rollout contracts into fiber to the node.. adding a year of delay, cost and re-planing work that had already been carried out ultimately ending up with some people on one side of the street having 100 to 1000mbps NBN speeds and on the other side 10-25mbps "if lucky 85MBPS"

          My fiber to the node connection in Sydney maxes out at 36mbps 5k away people have Fiber to the home.

          • @vid_ghost: I have fibre to the home, it's great, but I think you are kidding yourself if you think any political party was going to actually deliver ftth to everyone.

            • @brendanm: it was always stated from the get go that it was going to be a mix of 95% fiber to the home and the other 5% a mix of other techs mainly fiber to wireless towers. The liberals even changed a few placed to those very same towers that were going to get fixed fiber to the home.

              • @vid_ghost: Ok, I should rephrase. I think you are kidding yourself if you think any political party was going to actually deliver ftth to 95% of premises.

      • +75 votes

        The problem was that it was massively under quoted budget wise, they would of delivered it but the blow out would of been massive.

        Says who? Murdoch news?

        Saying that the LNP delivered the version they did to save us money and ended up costing more than the blown out FTP system would of cost

        So how is it a saving when its a lesser product that cost more?

        We'll never know if FTTP would have blown the budget or not. Either way LNP delivered a turd. Sometimes its not about cost its about value of the service.

        FTTP would have cost more, sure but lets say it cost 20% MORE than what LNP over budget NBN was, do you think this would have been good value to the taxpayers?

        FTTN is already classed as a 3rd world and needing overbuilding.

        • Says who? Murdoch news?

          No i do not read Murdoch anything
          The actual budget figures speak to the costs
          I was not saying the LNP delivered product is good… its not

          Fact remains the budge for the mixed tech has blown out and has ended up costing more than FTTP all the way would of cost

          • @jimbobaus: Did the budget figures show the cost per premise split between fttp green fields and fttp brownfields? Also one step further where brownfields have exiting pit and pipe connectivity and where brownfields don't have existing pit and pipe? How about one more step where a house had existing leadin conduits but is in such bad shape a new cable cannot be run through therefore needing a new trench and pipe run?

            Answer is probably no. In short like JimmyF said we wi never know how much fttp would jave actually costed.

            • @JungliChilli: Actually, there were articles about FTTP costing a little less than $2k per premises just before Abbot stopped it (I believe they were brownfield, unless they're an overall average), and FTTN was only a little bit less than that and that further efficiencies could have had FTTP matched what FTTN would cost. I don't know if FTTN would also cost lower due to efficiences eventually, however, with many articles saying NBN is over budget, we don't know if this is from initial installation costs, the back end maintenance, or the fact that we went with a dying technology and we had to keep patching it up to even get up to scratch,or something else.

              Anywway, there are also articles on how much NZ and UK implementations cost per premises so you can really check if we're getting bang for buck (which we aren't).

          • @jimbobaus: But by the time the government was handed over, NBN was ahead of schedule and fully costed to eventually pay itself off (and in the meantime enrich the nation with better internet).

        • FTTN is already classed as a 3rd world and needing overbuilding.

          $7 billion apparently. Worth it imo

          https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-29/nbn-nears-completion-...

          • +10 votes

            @ozhunter: so a extra $7b after the taxpayer has already spent $51b…..

            And LNP claimed FTTP was a waste of money.

            • @JimmyF: Don't forget the other factor.

              Even if FTTP would of cost more initially, it still would of cost less than FTTN and then upgrading that to FTTP in the future.

              People often forget that FTTP only needs upgrading at the termination points to increase speed and wouldn't require running new cable for a very long time.

              • @Yawhae:

                People often forget that FTTP only needs upgrading at the termination points to increase speed and wouldn't require running new cable for a very long time.

                Correct! Fibre was going to be the new copper can network for the future!

                • @JimmyF: I can just imagine if electricity was treated this way. During peak times you get less voltage thus meaning your cooking times increase. Want to cook that roast in 1 hour, sorry to bad it will take 2 hours because we ran smaller cables to "save" money.

                  • @Yawhae: hahahaha yes…. and some parts of the house are on 110v 60hz, others on 220v 50hz. Then then they all sag to 80v 40hz during the peak!

                    Ahhhhh NBN power!

              • @Yawhae: This, there's no way on earth we would have been better off financially with the LNP NBN, it's another example of political ideology hamstringing the governments ability to make the best decision for the future of this country. It's more important to them to disagree and argue the point than to do the right thing.

                The LNP has been arguing against "wasting money" for decades, while actually wasting taxpayer's money in droves by outsourcing everything (to their mates, who then charge us double for it)

              • @Yawhae: would have**

      • The problem was that it was massively under quoted budget wise, they would of delivered it but the blow out would of been massive.

        until we rip up this stupid muti-technology mix in 15 years and replace it with FTTP. all the speed avances are with fibre and to upgrade it's a simple matter of replacing end equipment.

        as my old man used to say, do it once and do it right

        • Your old man is correct
          FTTP should of just happened they just delayed the costs
          as we literally have outdated tech being used by a huge chunk of the user base

      • The problem was that it was massively under quoted budget wise, they would of delivered it but the blow out would of been massive.

        People need to understand that quality initiatives take time and money. Yeah it was ramping up to cost more, but once they got really rolling they may have found ways to claw back that cost . Plus if you deliver quality infrastructure you can then privatise it. When you try to deliver it as cheaply as possible to undermined you political opponents you end up with a basket case you are stuck with and have to sink more cash into it.

        The Labour party were just a few years ahead of their time. If they could have announced in 4 years later people would have seen that the NBN is something we need because the internet industry would have been in dire straights with its woeful speeds. Back then, most of the people didn't understand "broadband" or really see it as something that was a necessity. Times changed once people discovered netflix.

        • Privatizing infrastructure is always evil. Infrastructure should be owned by the people, not greedy capitalists and share holders intent on maximizing profit. Privatization always means the end users pays more. Giving corporations a monopoly on a form of infrastructure means massive price gouging.

          • @Thaal Sinestro: Labor were ahead of their time with healthcare (free cancer treatment) and education as well.

            Just like they were on top of Medicare to begin with and superannuation for retirement.

            It will now cost the average person five figures if they get cancer due to LNP cuts to healthcare and medical scans etc.

            All so very rich people can have tax breaks and big businesses can have corporate welfare.

      • -15 votes

        Labor was going to deliver FTP to the vast majority and went to the election promising to do that.

        no way in hell was labor ever going to deliver on that, it was simply too far underquoted, they would have had to scale it back too.

        • Ah, I see you read Murdoch's news

          • -11 votes

            @ThithLord: Ah, I see you believe in magical money trees. Labor's design was still born due to financial incompetence, They came up with a good design that was financially unfeasible and did the usual trick of quoting a number that was many fold below the real known costs so they could claim it was affordable. Then this steamer was passed to the LNP which rather than correct it decided to smear it all over the walls.

            The reality is this was screwed by both sides, to look to blame one or the other exclusively is simple ignorance.

            • @gromit: Bahahaha mate. Where the heck do you get your take from? How? Is just saying that Labor under-budgeted it good enough for you? Did you get this from the FinReview or something? I love LNP boot-lickers

              • -14 votes

                @ThithLord: Sad Labor brownnosers like you don't seem to much care for reality so not sure why I bother replying. After the first few years of labors NBN (before LNP took over) it was already massively overbudget and late. somehow blinkered people like you think this situation would have somehow magically self righted had labor stayed in power.

                • @gromit: There is literally no backing whatsoever with the drivel you've just spouted. You're beyond help.

                  • @ThithLord: unlike you I can happily look at facts on both sides and see the mess everyone made. e.g. I can look at the independent review of NBN co in 2013 that stated Labor was already an estimated 29 billion over budget and 3 years behind schedule. That same review also showed LNP's plan was destined to not deliver on their promises either. You however seem to ignore any fact that doesn't support your political bias.

                    • @gromit: Show me where these facts are, mate? Where are these facts?

                      • @ThithLord:

                        @gromit: Show me where these facts are, mate? Where are these facts?

                        And where's yours?

                        Ah, I see you read Murdoch's news

                        Dropping accusations without facts to back it up. It goes both ways.

                        Could have googled for 1 minute to disprove them but instead you drop a shitty opinion.

                        • @Blitzfx: I have to provide facts to counter Gromit's lack of facts? Is that how it works? I have to counter someone else's lack of facts?

                          Read the ENTIRE thread - majority of people realise Labor had a vision and were going to deliver on that vision. Get out of here, dude.

                          • @ThithLord: Nice dodge. Still didn't link anything.

                            majority of people realise-

                            Yeah ok and majority of people once thought the world was flat. Using popular opinion doesn't automatically make something right.

                            Do you have proof they read murdoch's news? Where's your proof on that?

                            • @Blitzfx: I will counter any 'facts' if gromit can even be bothered to link something, bruv. That's how it works - in discourse, someone making bold and grossly incorrect statements have to provide their facts first.

                    • @gromit: can you share that source please? would be interested

                      • @creamandpaper: Being in IT, i think the fact a lot of people dont seem to understand is Mixed Technology WILL ALWAYS be more expensive due to the man hours trying to get them all to work together and figuring out how to get them to work then acquiring the parts and fixing and maintenance etc. As opposed to 1 technology, The expense is not as much on cable itself as it is on the time and man hours spent installing it and getting it to work… So on paper Libs can say whatever they want about FTTP but it was always going to be cheaper than this messed up mixed technology which still doesnt even work in a lot of peoples cases. I know people with HFC mixed who are still having issues. FTTN people having issues. Funnily the people with the least issues would be….you guessed it..FTTP. Go figure.

              • @ThithLord: I don't agree with it, I think they should have done FTTP and got a better value for money outcome, however it was well documented and plainly obvious FTTP cost was more expensive than FTTN/FTTC, and as with all large government projects was under-budgeted and due to the nature of Australian contracting, was blowing out big time.

                They didn't start slashing the technology/scope because it was going well. There was scope creep the other way when it was realised just how much work needed to be done and not enough factors to drive down contractor pricing. There's no denying it was under-budgeted. As for the source, how about a direct quote from the boss of the NBN:
                Some Highlights:

                • NBN chief executive Bill Morrow has no doubt: "This network is not being delivered as a free gift. The more money that NBN spends on building the network then the more expensive the services will be for Australians - it really is that simple."
                • "If we decided tomorrow to upgrade the entire FTTN footprint to FTTP - upgrading nearly five million premises at a cost of $2000 each - then that's another $10 billion we would have to recoup for taxpayers."
                • THE most expensive broadband connection in Australia cost the National Broadband Network $91,196 for a single home. That was the cost of the fibre-to-the-premises (FTTP) link
                  https://www.gladstoneobserver.com.au/news/nbns-eyewatering-c...

                The more important question is what to do when faced with a $10 billion blow out on a $49 billion plan… (or so they thought at the time, turns out it would have been even worse than this)…They should have spent the extra, because of the long-term gain….

                It depends on your definition of project failure. Traditionally, some define it as whether you come in on time and budget… classic example is in the USA they thought at the time building the interstate highway network was a project failure as it was WAY over time and WAY over budget - it turned out to be one of the best value pieces of infrastructure that helped propel USA to an economic powerhouse for decades to come. It was a major success but no one at the time knew it, they were all in trouble for blowing the budget forecasts. 40 years on it was reported:

                "the interstate highway system is an engine that has driven 40 years of unprecedented prosperity and positioned the United States to remain the world's pre-eminent power into the 21st century." - http://www.publicpurpose.com/freeway1.htm

            • @gromit: What cost's more,

              Labour FTTP

              or

              Liberal FTTN (that will be upgraded to FTTP eventually)

              • @Yawhae: That's like asking when they build road why don't they just build two to four lanes roads instead of always expanding it later on.

                • +11 votes

                  @ozhunter: You're exactly right. Roads are the most expensive infrastructure to install and maintain, which is a huge factor in why we don't see 16 lane highways every where. Except there is one difference here.

                  To increase capacity on FTTP you just need to replace the on and off ramps.

                  To increase capacity on FTTN you need to replace the whole highway.

                • @ozhunter: Cash (Flow) is king.
                  However just thought I was note that China does this… many more than 4 lanes in most cases well before needed.

    • “The NBN we were all promised would have never happened whichever party got voted in.”

      Ahh, that’s how you rationalise it. Like ‘all politicians are crooks’ when making a donkey vote
      BTW, we got the crap the LNP promised

      • +17 votes

        I usually agree with tshow, but on this count he is wrong.

        We can be compared to Canada on many fronts. Yet, when it came to the internet we were actually ahead of them, and it was actually cheaper for us to upgrade, and to get better speeds. What ended up happening is that NBN ended up being rolled out much much longer, the performance is much slower, the prices are much higher, and the infrastructure cost to taxpayers is much much higher. To the point where a mobile 4G or 5G connection is more competitive both speed-wise and cost-wise, despite that having huge costs and profit margins for carriers. Contrast that with Canada, which started later, slowly and steadily upgraded to FTP, has overall cost them far less, they have much higher speeds, and it costs the consumers cheaper. Where 5G rollout isn't a concern to them, as they're content with the 4G+ and FTP currently on offer. And other (poorer) countries have even more impressive offerings.

        So something clearly went wrong. The most obvious culprit would be some form of "legalised corruption".

        • Gotta gut the infrastructure to help the poor private offerings that didnt even exist yet.

          Muh 4g.

          Pockets lined
          Power consolidated
          Press corrupt
          Poor poorer
          Rich richer

    • +9 votes

      I blame non-technical people in charge of making decisions for a nation who don't understand the things that they have been advised on (questionable ability of those advisors) and still make poor decisions on technical topics that impact and limit everyone else.
      Especially when there is so much chance to corrupt the path to a lesser product (at a higher price) to give work to your mates or support existing relationships over having the best available or at least having the ability to try future-proof such an investment.

      So that's not tied to any political party (poor argument OP) and the voters can't be blamed as it's not like every one of them was only voting for them for the NBN, many wouldn't even be aware of what the NBN was meant to be.

      • I don't think it was incompetence that ruined the NBN. It was plain old corruption. and there's nothing we can do

    • Who can forget Tony spouting nonsense like "Only gamers and pirates will need internet faster than 20Mbps".

      Their entire boomer attitude towards the NBN lacked foresight and enthusiasm from day dot, only looking at the project as a step child they inherited that they never had any desire to finish to its potential. They were constantly looking at it as as cost and not an investment. It's hard to imagine that awful attitude has not played a role in the mess that is the NBN is today.

      • what else can you expect from a party where coming in to parliament with a lump of coal can eventually bring you to a prime ministership?

      • Don't forget labor argued this was for schools and hospitals (even though the vast majority of schools that didn't have fibre were private) and Stephen Conroy claiming mobile networks will never offer serious options to compete with fixed services… roll screenshots of optus 5G running faster thatn NBN

        • That's a bit rich, and a misdirection - feel free to find a source to back up what you said.Schools and hospitals may have been used as examples in one of many arguments but they were never the primary focus The NBN was always about making Australian internet relevant and competitive where we were embarrassingly free-falling against the rest of the developed and a good potion of the undeveloped world.

          A trained monkey would have had the foresight to know how important the internet was going to be to the world.Granted Tony Abbot does kind of look like a monkey, but he is no where near as smart as a trained one.

          You talk about 5G like its already a viable alternative. Realistically how far away do you think 5G is to being a true replacement to fixed infrastructure at a scale that allows unlimited bandwidth at affordable pricing? 4g where you can get it is better than ADSL yet after almost 8 years it is still too cost prohibitive to act as a real replacement in anything past light bandwidth requirements.

          • @Cunning Linguist: "A trained monkey would have had the foresight to know how important the internet was going to be to the world.Granted Tony Abbot does kind of look like a monkey, but he is no where near as smart as a trained one."

            username. checks. out. !!!

            However I don't think 5G has to be all that far away… however the government plan to flog the NBN off to Infra Co which is owned by Telstra (although they claim it is separate) which will complicate things… again

            If the Telcos just go for broke on rolling it out it will be fairly good fairly quick - I'm using it right now and don't need my sub-par crappy FTTN anymore (although granted, whilst I do a bit, I'm not a big streamer / downloader so aren't that afraid of the data limit).

    • That's complete lies.

      FTTP might have cost more than expected, but it was still FTTP and it works amazingly well

      • Your mate promises you a brand new AMG for $30k.

        He walks out of the showroom with a second hand A200.

        You find out the A200 is a lemon.

        You are now blaming the dealership for giving you a lemon instead of an AMG.

        I am trying to say that the promise was unrealistic. Of course an AMG is better but given their costing, you were never getting that AMG. Not a chance.

        • And you have no evidence of this.

          • @Charmoffensive: The Myki budget was originally $521m including operational cost for a few years. It became $999m very soon after. The most recent count was $1.5b after removal of a whole lot of features meant to be included in the $521m. The cost runs higher but it was later redistributed to hide the over run.

            It is widely accepted that the financial plans for the NBN was underquoted.

            Under Labor, the Myki ran over budget and dumbed down. For some reason, they'll magically complete the NBN within budget and as per original spec?

            The development quote and historical management says no.

            • @tshow: Nearly every project, anywhere, runs over budget. Unless the budget was pumped, running over budget within a margin is expected by most sane people. Myki is also a poor example if you ask me, it's not federal, and it's transport, not communications. The issue here is that with a piece of infrastructure expected to last as long as the NBN, it's unacceptable to deliver a turd regardless of cost. If it runs overbudget so be it, that means someone had issues with the budget, there really is no alternative that is better than rolling out a working system. it's been outlined clearly already so I won't go on

              • @Jackson:

                Nearly every project, anywhere, runs over budget.

                Pretty much every time:
                Negotiation:
                Implementer: “cost is $+$”
                Buyer: “too much, I want $”
                Implementer: “ok”

                Half way through:
                Implementer: “I need $ more”
                Buyer: “ok”

        • We weren't promised luxury, and it wasn't undeliverable. The cost blew out from 2009 to 2013 by 5% after trial rollouts in areas specifically selected to represent expected challenges in a wider rollout.

          It's more like, we were promised a $43k coach that could comfortably fit everyone for a long drive, but after spending some time with the dealership to understand what they were buying they learned that the drive-away price would be $45k.
          Then some people threw a fit and said they heard somewhere that you can get a pretty good bus with enough seats for $29.5k. But when they actually tried to buy one the closest thing on the lot was an old minivan that had been turned into a kebab trailer out front, and they spent $51k buying it off the owner and actually getting it up and running.

          And now we're all standing in the back of it, sweaty and crammed and stinking of old meat, and periodically stopping to let the engine cool down. While watching everyone else drive ahead in their brand new coaches, in plush seats that put them right to sleep.
          While the driver still manages to convince some of the sweatier passengers that the coach was definitely going to be more expensive because the first guys could have never scored such an awesome deal on this rad kebab ride, and that this hypothetical extra cost would have made the ride even more uncomfortable than what they got.

          • @crentist: If that's the extent of the over run, this would be the most well budgeted major government project regardless of party.

            • @tshow: It's just as improbable as your "it would have bankrupt the country" estimate that is pulled out of your arse.

              I think I'll believe the former CEO of NBNCo Mike Quigley rather than a pessimistic rando:

              https://delimiter.com.au/2016/06/22/read-now-mike-quigley-la...

              • @Charmoffensive: I never claimed it would bankrupt the country.

                The problem with single issue voters is that you look at the budget and you look the project. There are a lot of other projects that are awaiting funding.

                I agree, the NBN we got is shit. I wish we got the FTTP promised. I don't like the guy that pulled the pin - Turnbull. That will be his legacy, screwing up our NBN.

                I'm just saying, just because he screwed up the NBN doesn't mean that someone else would have done a great job. Perhaps they wouldn't have made such a mess but to claim that the project would have completed as per planned, on time and on budget… That's just completely ignoring reality and history.

            • @tshow: You do realise that the bulk of the cost is in the physical labour.

              Why pay a Muppet to install copper cable, when you can pay them to install fibre. Installation times of both are roughly the same, and the material cost of fiber is slightly higher.

              • @Yawhae: The amount of copper installed would be much less than the amount of Fibre though. So labour cost for Fibre will be much higher

                • @od810: Actually, fibre is cheaper than copper since it's just glass. And copper was going to be sold to offset some of the costs of the NBN. Also, fibre goes for far longer before it needs a repeater, it doesn't need as much power to function, it won't degrade as fast as copper, it will help recoup costs faster due to speed, etc…. Copper's only advantage was lower capital costs, but the break even point was very short and then it would be fibre all the way due to lower expenses and higher revenue capability. The Lib's NBN was penny wise, pound foolish.

  • +64 votes

    Do you blame the poor NBN on the LNP or the millions of people that voted for them?

    BOTH

    • I don't think we can rationally blame the public.
      They were promised FTP, and maybe optimistically in taxpayer cost and timeframe, but it's not like majority of the voters knew the actual details. And years later they still didn't. It's only the last few years we've realised we have been swindled hard.

      The only place to blame is on Liberals and NBN company, or less likely Labor and Telstra. Or any combination of the above.

      • +19 votes

        I don't think we can rationally blame the public.

        We can blame the ones who voted for LNP, as they had been aware of LNP FTTN master plan instead of FTTP.

        Crabott built his entire campaign on trashing NBN 1.0 for his cheaper, sooner mixed mode product that turned out to be more costly, delayed and slow.

        but it's not like majority of the voters knew the actual details

        They knew what Murdoch news told them. FTTP was bad and costly and we don't need it as it would allow high speed internet and streaming in to most homes around Australia, that would then bring down the Murdoch/foxtel empire. So FTTP must be stopped at all costs.

        The only place to blame is on Liberals and NBN company,

        Votes could have voted for FTTP party if they wanted to.

        Maybe massive projects like NBN shouldn't be left up to the gov body in power that can throw out the baby with the bathwater when we have a change of gov and should be split out as seperate things to vote on like gay marriage was done in australia, and regardless of the gov in power they have to deliver it.

        • They knew

          If you polled a thousand normal, everyday people, I'd expect that you'd be hard pressed to find 5% of those people would know the difference between the acronyms FTTP, FTTN, HFC and a plethora of other acronyms associated with the NBN.

          You may find some will have an idea that the nbn is supposed to give them a better internet connection, but if you were to ask them, what an NBN 50 plan would be better than, do you really think the majority of people would have the foggiest idea to what that is?

          It's easy to say they should know.

          Maybe massive projects like NBN shouldn't be left up to the gov body in power that can throw out the baby with the bathwater when we have a change of gov and should be split out as seperate things to vote on like gay marriage was done in australia, and regardless of the gov in power they have to deliver it.

          I both love and hate this idea at the same time. Wide voting on issues I think is useful to guage how the population is leaning, or at least, how the population feels they should be leaning but in practical terms or steering large projects, it leads me to the old saying, "A donkey is a horse made by a committee.".. Or maybe I misunderstood what you meant?

          • @TheBird:

            If you polled a thousand normal, everyday people, I'd expect that you'd be hard pressed to find 5% of those people would know the difference between the acronyms FTTP, FTTN, HFC and a plethora of other acronyms associated with the NBN.

            So as I said in my quote that was chopped off

            They knew what Murdoch news told them. FTTP was bad and costly and we don't need it as it would allow high speed internet and streaming in to most homes around Australia, that would then bring down the Murdoch/foxtel empire. So FTTP must be stopped at all costs.

            You are correct, most people don't know what the terms mean or care, they just want their internet to work without troubles and be fast.

            But they did know what Murdoch news and crabott was spewing and that was Labours NBN was bad will bankrupt the country.

            In the end Liberals NBN cost $51b which yes is a donkey, that needs another $7b 'upgrades' to the FTTN areas that are not working correctly, think of that as a vet bill for the donkey.

            So yeah we got a $58b donkey at the end of the day when we could have gotten a stallion for $60-70b. I know which one is going to be better value for the tax payer in the long run!

            FTTP install costs on brownfield sites (the costly ones) had come down $2k per house when rolled out at a suburb level, only slightly more than FTTN ended up costing!

            I have HFC, I had to have 5 NBN visits to get my connection stable, two NBN modems (which wasn't the issue but they replaced it anyhow). I'm pretty sure NBN spent more than $2k in getting my existing HFC connection stable/online than it would of cost to have FTTP installed.

            • @JimmyF:

              they just want their internet to work without troubles and be fast.

              Exactly. People want what they went. If that was what made people vote, that's what made them vote. It's hard to blame the general populace for wanting fast internet. It's hard to blame people from expecting fast internet.

              How the world works is complicated. Not one single person is going to know enough to make a completely informed decision. You don't know what you don't know, but voting is compulsory. The political process is in itself imperfect.

              All I'm saying is, with all that in mind, do you really think placing the blame on voters is right?

              I'm not saying the NBN is good, great or fit for use…actually, I'm being forced to switch my internet connection to a worse connection, so I'm pretty pissed with that happening. It's not part of the point I'm trying to make.

          • @TheBird: Just look at some of the posters in this thread. I think its very fair to blame LNP AND these idiots.

            • @ThadtheChad: And News Ltd who fed the voters the BS. I guess ultimately we should blame government legislators from decades ago who didn't have the backbone to protect the country from the effects of News Ltd. Things must have seemed fine when News Ltd was supporting the ALP I suppose. But if you let a news organisation help support your political party, then you also empower them to support your opponents too if they wanted. Ultimately I think we can blame Keith Murdoch and Elisabeth Greene; Rupert Mordoch's parents clearly didn't raise him properly or else News Ltd wouldn't have abused their position of power to destroy the NBN.

              • @AustriaBargain: Yeah fair enough. The narrative pushed back then was so thinly veiled, that most of us in IT were facepalming so hard. And then you had (still have) these incredibly out-of-touch people who have no idea about technology requirements of the modern workforce, regurgitating the talking points of those awful murdoch rags.

                • @ThadtheChad: And what's really funny is that NBN would have been rolled out in all big cities by now. During the covid pandemic people would have been able to make 4K video calls to their doctors without needing to travel in person. Many lives would probably have been saved if we had the proper NBN in the big cities that are facing the pandemic. News Ltd beat a drum all year over some contractors who died indirectly as the result of national policy, yet there's silence from News Ltd about how LNP's NBN is of no help at all for inspecting patients over ultra HD video. The ALP specifically sold one of the benefits of real NBN being video consultations with healthcare professionals.

                  • @AustriaBargain: Don't even need to go as far as "remote medical care".

                    My partner and I, and everyone we know with a job, are all working from home. My job requires everything traverse a VPN (same with my wife) and I can see our link usage hit 50+Mbps from time to time.

                    I really don't see the need to justify having an NBN like infrastructure project to be honest, its bloody obvious eh. We're not deploying some incredibly new cutting edge technology. Most of the developed world already has this capability, and big cities in developing nations like India have service offerings that blow our current botched abortion of an NBN out of the water.

                    Our "private" enterprise has always been very slow to catch up - given the lack of competition on our "rock".

                    Sure, we may not need an NBN or any "21st century tech" if we continue looking towards the mining industry as our key export (which is a fast dwindling sector). Having worked with the IT some big name mining firms, it really makes me laugh looking back, that 90%+ of their actual IT ops and service management were outsourced to Singapore/KL. It wasn;t just largely around the cost saving aspects - I was given to understand it was the high technical maturity, reliable access etc.

            • @ThadtheChad:

              Just look at some of the posters in this thread. I think its very fair to blame LNP AND these idiots.

              I'm sure plenty has the same opinions as the KKK back in the day. Did that make their opinion correct? Do you really think mob mentality is the best way to determine what's right or fair?

              • @TheBird:

                I'm sure plenty has the same opinions as the KKK back in the day. Did that make their opinion correct? Do you really think mob mentality is the best way to determine what's right or fair?

                They persist on being uninformed. I'm sorry, I'm not as charitable as you are. Just like their opinion was wrong back then, it is still incorrect and I hold them responsible for being numpties and derailing what would be the most important infrastructure project in this country.

                • @ThadtheChad:

                  They persist on being uninformed. I'm sorry, I'm not as charitable as you are. Just like their opinion was wrong back then, it is still incorrect and I hold them responsible for being numpties and derailing what would be the most important infrastructure project in this country.

                  It's not a charitable view but I get how you would come to that conclusion. It's the public having simpleton pig headed narrow minded views like the one you have voiced in this case that is part of the cause for these kinds of issues in the first place. I don't blame you for being like this. Blaming you for this doesn't solve anything. It doesn't fix anything. It creates a divide and politicking feeds on this and causes more chaos like what happened to the NBN. I'd prefer you and others weren't like this but the reality is, you and many others are like this.

  • Top