Your letter in the Bayside Bulletin:



THE letter from J. de Viana of Redland Bay ('Misinformation over the NBN', 13 March) contained several errors.
Firstly, it is incorrect to say the government has not considered how telephones will operate in a power outage. We know that unlike a copper line, fibre-optic cable cannot carry electricity to power a telephone - that's why the government instructed NBN Co to install (as an interim solution) mandatory battery backup to all homes and businesses that will be connected to fibre, at no cost to consumers.
The battery will provide backup power so people can make phone calls on their home phone if there is a power outage. The government is also consulting battery backup options with emergency services organisations and other stakeholders. Whatever the longer-term solution is, homes and businesses connected to fibre will be able to get a battery backup if they need one.
Secondly it is simply false to say the Government has not addressed installing fibre-optic cables in subdivisions with underground power. Comprehensive arrangements are in place for the underground installation of optical fibre cabling in new developments. Under the Commonwealth's Fibre in New Developments Policy, developers are required to provide underground pit and pipe that is fibre-ready. This policy is supported by the recently enacted Part 21A of the Telecommunications Act.
These arrangements pave the way for the ready installation of underground optical fibre cabling by NBN Co (and, in fact, any other fibre provider).
Thirdly, it is untrue to say that wireless is an alternative to the NBN. Wireless is an important broadband technology and is well suited to low population areas. Consistently high broadband speeds can be achieved with shared access technologies like fixed wireless, but only for a limited number of users. The more people who connect to the service, the slower broadband speeds become.
Finally, J. De Viana asks about costs. A standard connection to the NBN will be free, and there are already internet service providers out there offering plans on the NBN for under $30 a month - for faster, more reliable broadband that you can get over the old copper wires. Unlike the Opposition, who would stop the NBN in its tracks, the Labor Government understands that we live the 21st century.
The internet is an essential utility, and the National Broadband Network needs to be built, or our businesses, and our children's educations, will fall behind the rest of the world.
I am always happy to answer questions about the NBN so contact me, or my office, for further information at any time.
-- Senator Claire Moore, ALP Senator for Queensland



I don't believe the power issue was considered prior to the announcement of the NBN. If it was, you wouldn't have had to tell NBN Co to install battery backup. It would have been written into the contract. You say it's an interim solution. What other options are available? As you have said the fibre-optic cannot carry electricity. So you will need a battery at both ends of the cable to keep it up during a power outage. Every household that connects to the NBN will have a battery (several million) plus the backup supply at the exchanges, doesn't sound like a very environmentally friendly thing to do. Most UPS's need replacing every 3 years. Millions of these battery backups will be replaced every year. Where will these be dumped? Who is going to pay for all the replacements? You say that the battery backups will not be paid for by the consumer. Isn't all the funds for the NBN coming from tax payers? So in a roundabout way we do actually pay for it. You say in your second paragraph: "homes and businesses connected to fibre will be able to get a battery backup if they need one." Who decides the need? You said " mandatory battery backup to all homes and businesses that will be connected to fibre" in your first paragraph. Which of these statements is correct?



Is every apartment/unit going to have their own fibre termination box?



I keep hearing wireless it's not an option. More and more people are wanting to access the internet while on the move. You may say that they can use wireless within their own homes. That's true, but we also know that a lot of people don't know how to secure their wireless routers from other people. Every home is going to have a wireless router, lots of free internet for many of us I guess. 4G is 2-40Mbps. As you've said it does slow down with more users. However it is just a case of adding additional access points on the tower to increase the amount of users that can use the service. No rewiring needed. Consumers could roam anywhere around Australia with their laptops, tablets, etc. and access the internet.



What do you mean by a standard connection? What is free? I think I'll wait till we see the unsubsidised prices before saying it's cheaper. Remember as I said previously, every tax payer is paying for this at the end of the day, not the government or private enterprise. $43 billion across 7 million homes is around $6000 per house. Still sound cheap?



I'm glad you said the Opposition would stop it in it's tracks rather than the spin your fellow Labor members have used. They would rip it all up.



Are you going to sit there and tell me that the internet is a utility required for life today? Like water, sewerage, electricity. If the water supply fails I think we would have major problems. If the sewerage system failed we would probably see an increase in diseases and illnesses. If the electrical supply failed, we wouldn't be able to keep food cool or cook. What happens if we don't have internet? What makes it "essential"? We pay for utilities even if we don't use them. You pay for the connection just being there and available. Is the NBN going to be the same? There are roughly a million Australian homes without a computer. What use are they going to have for the NBN?



Many schools, hospitals, etc already have fibre connections. Industrial areas would be another section that would benefit from higher quality broadband. No homes.



Labor keeps telling us that Telstra, Liberals didn't do anything for the broadband market. This service should have been run years ago. What technology should they have rolled out? When Windows 95 came out (roughly the time a large number of people got access to the internet), what was the speed of the internet connections? I remember using a 56k modem, on a phone line. That's 17 years ago. We then increased in speeds with ISDN lines, we had a 128k ISDN line. ADSL then came out, followed by ADSL2 and ADSL2+. All these technologies use copper lines. Also remember during this time the Ethernet speeds were increasing within networks. 10Mb/s, then came 100Mb/s, it was and still is the speed of most networks. We now have switches and Ethernet cards which are able to hit 1Gb/s. At what point in the technology cycle should Telstra or the Liberals bitten the bullet and said this is the technology we are going to roll out to every Australian? With Australians and the world in general looking for more mobile communication I think tying people to a desk is a little backwards.



You comment about our kids education falling behind the rest of the world. It already is and it's not because of internet access. It's due to the poor education system. I make spelling mistakes, but not on the grand scale kids do these days. I do a lot of spell checking in the company I work for. The younger generation have no idea how to spell or put a sentence together. How many people in society today can use: their, they're and there in the correct context? It's schooling not technology that will improve the education of kids. Technology like the internet can be used as a tool to source additional knowledge. But it doesn't need to be a 100Mb/s connection.



Teleconferencing with a doctor via the internet. This is an option today, without the NBN. You just need the devices at both ends to allow this. Eg. Cameras, medical equipment.



As above regarding scheduling your dishwasher, air-conditioning, fridge, etc. All of this can be done on existing technology.



There is no need for 100Mb/s. You'll notice I said need. I believe the NBN is a want, not a need. We all want faster connections, but is it worth $43 billion of tax payer money? We can't tell as there is no cost-benefit analyse. You can't prove it's worth the investment. I prefer to deal in facts and figures, not words and spin. Nothing Labor has presented thus far has proved the "need" for a fibre-optic connection at every home. All you've presented is feel good, emotional spin.



Why is the NBN not included in the budget? Doesn't it cost the government (tax payers) money? Shouldn't any and all money incoming and outgoing be included in the budget? Why do you have to hide it? Is there something there that the public would drag you over the coals for? I mean if it was such a good idea and value for money you wouldn't need to hide it would you?





Regards,

Stephen