2gb investigations report nos 2947 and 2960/media/broadcasting... · web viewerror! reference...

Investigations Report 2947 and 2960File No. ACMA2013/114

Licensee Harbour Radio Pty Limited

Station 2GB Sydney

Type of Service Commercial Radio

Name of Program Alan Jones Breakfast Show

Date of Broadcast 29 October 2012

Relevant Code Codes 2.2(a), 2.3(b) and 5.5 of the Commercial Radio Australia Codes of Practice & Guidelines September 2011.

Date Finalised 19 September 2013

Decision No breach of Code 2.2(a) of the Commercial Radio Australia Codes of Practice & Guidelines September 2011;

No breach of Code 2.3(b) of the Commercial Radio Australia Codes of Practice & Guidelines September 2011; and

Breach of Code 5.5 the Commercial Radio Australia Codes of Practice & Guidelines September 2011 in relation to Complaint B.

ACMA Investigations Report 2947 & 2960 – Alan Jones Breakfast Show broadcast by 2GB on 29 October 2012

The complaintsThe Australian Communications and Media Authority (the ACMA) has received two separate complaints about material broadcast during the Alan Jones Breakfast Show by Harbour Radio Pty Limited on 29 October 2012 in relation to the National Broadband Network (NBN).

Complainant A’s complaint is about accuracy in relation to the broadcast and a failure to make efforts to present ‘both sides’ of the ‘argument’.

Complainant B’s complaint is about accuracy of various statements in the broadcast.

Neither complainant received a response to complaints they made to the licensee.1

The complaints have been investigated in relation to Codes 2.2(a) [accuracy in current affairs programs], 2.3(b) [present significant viewpoints] and 5.5 [respond to complaints] of the Commercial Radio Australia Codes of Practice & Guidelines September 2011 (the Codes).

The programThe Alan Jones Breakfast Show is broadcast weekdays on 2GB from 5:30 am to 9:00 am. The program typically comprises news, commentary by Alan Jones (Mr Jones), discussions, interviews and talk-back relating to current events. It is a current affairs program for the purposes of Code 2 of the Codes.

The broadcast dated 29 October 2012 referred to a news story published that morning reporting that negotiations about NBN rollout costs had collapsed between the Federal and NSW State Governments.

The content of the relevant broadcast was as follows:

Mr Jones: Well, this NBN disaster rolls on. The white elephant promotes cable technology when the future is clearly wireless. And it’s hopelessly behind schedule, hopelessly over budget, hopelessly unable to capture the public’s imagination, and will be obsolete before it’s built. But the polls today say it’s 50-50! [chuckle] Ah! How high would they be in the polls if they got something right?

Only about 15% of households have bothered to connect to it where it’s been rolled out; 15%. Some say we’ll eventually fork out 50 billion to build it – it’s not in the budget. And it’s hard not to see why. Consider this, for example: I see the O’Farrell government is fighting a last-ditch battle with the Commonwealth over the cost of rolling out NBN cable onto New South Wales power poles where cable can’t go underground. The Commonwealth claims it’s simply leasing the power poles. But it’s not as simple as that, because the State government is responsible for maintaining the poles. And the Finance Minister in New South Wales, Greg Pearce, says NBN Co – which is the Federal Government – is offering 400 million less than is needed to cover the cost of these responsibilities.

1 Complainant A is also the complainant in separate investigations (2952, 2953, 2954) with respect to 2GB. The licensee’s handling of Complainant A’s complaint is dealt with in those reports.

ACMA Investigations Report 2947 & 2960 – Alan Jones Breakfast Show broadcast by 2GB on 29 October 2012 2

The Federal Government’s now threatening to use draconian laws to overrule New South Wales, a move which the State Government says will force it to increase the cost of electricity to consumers by between five and seven dollars for 20 years. This on top of the price rises caused by the carbon dioxide tax and the renewable energy target. I wonder where else NBN Company is cost-shifting in an attempt to make this thing look cheaper than it is?

AssessmentThis investigation is based on submissions from the complainants and the licensee and copies of the broadcasts provided to the ACMA by the licensee.

Other relevant sources consulted are identified in the report.

‘Ordinary reasonable’ listener testIn assessing content against the Codes, the ACMA considers the meaning conveyed by the relevant material. This is assessed according to the understanding of an ‘ordinary reasonable’ listener.

Australian courts have considered an ‘ordinary, reasonable’ reader (or listener or viewer) to be:

A person of fair average intelligence, who is neither perverse, nor morbid or suspicious of mind, nor avid for scandal. That person does not live in an ivory tower, but can and does read between the lines in the light of that person’s general knowledge and experience of worldly affairs.2

The ACMA asks what the ‘ordinary reasonable’ listener would have understood this program to have conveyed. It considers the natural, ordinary meaning of the language, context, tenor, tone, inferences that may be drawn, and in the case of factual material, relevant omissions (if any).

Once the ACMA has ascertained the meaning conveyed, it then determines whether the Codes have been breached.

Issue 1: Reasonable efforts to ensure factual material is reasonably supportable as being accurate

Relevant ProvisionCode of Practice 2: News and Current Affairs Programs

2.2 In the preparation and presentation of current affairs programs, a licensee must use reasonable efforts to ensure that:

(a) factual material is reasonably supportable as being accurate;

...

A failure to comply with the requirement in Code 2.2(a) to broadcast factual material that is reasonably supportable as being accurate will not be taken to be a breach of the Code if a

2 Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited v Marsden (1998) 43 NSWLR 158 at pp 164–167


correction, which is adequate and appropriate in all the circumstances, is made within 30 business days of the licensee receiving a complaint or a complaint being referred to the ACMA (whichever is later).

The relevant considerations to which the ACMA has regard in assessing whether or not the broadcast material complained about is factual in character are at Attachment 1.

The ACMA notes that the talk-back format is a common feature of current affairs programs providing analysis, commentary and discussion with listeners about current social, economic or political issues.

As such, it frequently approaches matters from a strong viewpoint and the ACMA acknowledges that this is part of the appeal or value of such programs to their listeners and in the broader context of public discourse. In this context, much of what is said in talk-back radio will be in the nature of opinion.

However, care must be taken where factual material forms the basis of the opinion expressed in a current affairs broadcast.

Where a current affairs talk-back program, such as the Alan Jones Breakfast Show, includes factual material, Code 2.2(a) of the Codes requires that the licensee must use reasonable efforts to ensure that it is reasonably supportable as being accurate.

Complainants’ submissionsComplainant A, in his complaint to the licensee, asserted a breach of the Codes in the on-line complaint form, and referred to a statement about wireless being clearly the future technology as being ‘factually incorrect’.

Complainant B, in his complaint to the licensee, asserted factual errors in relation to the following seven matters.

1. The future is clearly wireless.

2. [The NBN project] is hopelessly behind schedule.

3. [The NBN project] is hopelessly over budget.

4. The NBN project] is hopelessly unable to capture the public’s imagination.

5. [The NBN] will be obsolete before it’s built.

6. Comments about the non-inclusion of the NBN project in the Federal budget.

7. Only about 15% of households have bothered to connect to [the NBN] where it’s been rolled out.

Complainant B’s complaint to the licensee is at Attachment 2.

In his complaint to the ACMA, Complainant B added:

This material has not been broadcast as opinion but as fact.

Licensee’s submissionThe licensee’s submission to the ACMA in respect of the accuracy of these statements is at Attachment 3.


FindingThe licensee did not breach Code 2.2(a) of the Codes in respect of each of the statements referred to in the complaints.

ReasonsOpening statements

Code 2.2(a) of the Codes applies to the presentation of factual material in current affairs programs. In assessing broadcast content against the accuracy provisions of the Codes, the ACMA must first determine whether the relevant material amounts to factual material or the expression of an opinion. Considerations to which the ACMA has regard in assessing whether or not broadcast material is factual in character are at Attachment 1.

The segment opened with a strong judgmental remark by Mr Jones which set the tenor and tone of the segment, ‘Well, this NBN disaster rolls on.’ It continued with a number of hyperbolic statements and predictions, including those about which the complaints were made:

The white elephant promotes cable technology when the future is clearly wireless. And it’s hopelessly behind schedule, hopelessly over budget, hopelessly unable to capture the public’s imagination, and will be obsolete before it’s built.

Statements of this kind are inherently subjective and the use of exaggerated and emotive terms such as ‘white elephant’, ‘disaster’ and ‘hopelessly’ will often be indicative of an expression of opinion rather than fact.

The line between fact and opinion is often not clear.

However, in this case, the ACMA is satisfied that the statements ‘the future is clearly wireless’ and that the NBN ‘will be obsolete before it’s built’ were expressions of opinion, as were Mr Jones’ statements concerning the degree of delay and excess in budget in the rollout of the NBN project.

Taken collectively, the statements created an overall impression of rhetorical pronouncements rather than factual material. The delivery was emotional; the language judgmental and hyperbolic; and the statements lacking in specificity. On balance, given the context, language, tenor and tone of the segment, the ordinary reasonable listener would not have understood the relevant statements made by Mr Jones as the presentation of factual material for the purposes of Code 2.2 of the Codes.

Accordingly, the ACMA finds no breach of Code 2.2 of the Codes.

Budget

Complainant B alleged that Mr Jones had stated that the NBN should be included in the Federal budget. The ACMA has reviewed a copy of the broadcast and could not identify the statement alleged by the complainant. The closest material was the following statement by Mr Jones:

Mr Jones: Some say we’ll eventually fork out 50 billion to build it - it’s not in the budget, and it’s hard not to see why.

Immediately following this statement, Mr Jones mentioned the conflict within State and Federal Government arising out of NBN expenses.


The complainant does not dispute that the NBN project is not in the budget. Rather, he appears to consider that Mr Jones was suggesting that it ‘should’ be included in the Federal budget, and notes research by the Parliamentary Library of Australia that the Government’s budget treatment of the project is correct.

This position is not necessarily reflected in Mr Jones’ statement which appears to be a vague criticism.

In the context of the surrounding statements and having regard to the rhetorical nature of the remark and the opening words (‘some say’), the ACMA considers that the ordinary, reasonable listener would be likely to understand the material as a statement of opinion. As such, it is not subject to the accuracy provisions of the Codes, and the licensee did not breach Code 2.2(a) of the Codes.

15% connection

The complainant argues that the 15% take up figure stated by Mr Jones is misleading, because:

In areas where the NBN’s fibre was rolled out first, such as Kiama in NSW, take-up rates have been close to 40 percent and growing. The closure of Telstra’s copper network, and the cable networks operated by Telstra and Optus, is expected to push this figure dramatically higher in all areas over the next few years, as the NBN becomes the sole provider of last-mile fixed broadband infrastructure in Australia.

The licensee does not dispute that Mr Jones’ statement constituted factual material, but has provided an article supporting the accuracy of his figure which refers to average figures.

While a licensee is not required to present all factual material available to it, if the omission of some factual material means that the factual material actually broadcast is not presented accurately, this may amount to a breach of Code 2.2(a).

The ACMA considers that the ordinary, reasonable listener would have understood this statement to mean that an ‘estimated’ or ‘average’ of households that have connected to the NBN amounts to 15 percent. This is because of the inclusion of the term ‘about’ at the commencement, which would indicate the figure is not presented as a definitive figure.

In addition, the ACMA does not consider that the licensee was required to include what ‘is expected’ from NBN over the next few years.

Accordingly, the licensee did not breach Code 2.2(a) of the Codes.


Issue 2: Reasonable efforts made/opportunities given to present significant viewpoints

Relevant ProvisionCode of Practice 2: News and Current Affairs Programs

2.3 In the preparation and presentation of current affairs programs, a licensee must ensure that:

...(b) reasonable efforts are made or reasonable opportunities are given to present

significant viewpoints when dealing with controversial issues of public importance, either within the same program or similar programs, while the issue has immediate relevance to the community;

Complainant’s submissionsIn his complaint to the licensee, Complainant A asserted a breach of the Codes in the on-line complaint form. His complaint included the following:

Mr Jones stated that ‘Wireless is clearly the future technology’ [sic]. This is a highly disputed area, with many experts agreeing that fibre is the best solution and [Alan Jones] made no effort to present both sides of this argument to his listeners.

Licensee’s submissionThe licensee provided the ACMA with the following broadcasts which it submitted presented ‘alternative viewpoints’ on the topic of the NBN project:

1. Ben Fordham (Drive) dated 29 March 2012 – Mr Fordham interviews the CEO of NBN Co, Mike Quigley by telephone (6 minutes and 20 seconds).

2. Ben Fordham (Drive) dated 11 April 2012 – Mr Fordham invites Mr Quigley on the program, during which Mr Quigley responds to questions of callers (20 minutes).

3. Chris Smith (Afternoons) dated 25 February 2013 – Mr Smith reports that Mr Quigley calls for a study of the merits of NBN.

4. Ray Hadley (Mornings) dated 21 March 2013 – Mr Hadley reads an email response from NBN to a previous caller’s query.

Transcripts of these are at Attachment 4.

FindingThe licensee did not breach Code 2.3(b) of the Codes in respect of the statement about the NBN broadcast on 29 October 2012.

ReasonsThe ACMA notes, at the outset, that the requirement in Code 2.3(b) is imposed upon a licensee, not a particular presenter or program. The provision does not contemplate that all viewpoints on an issue must be presented – only significant viewpoints. Nor does it require that equal time or prominence will be given to each of those significant viewpoints. In this


respect, the ACMA recognises that the realities of the live broadcasting environment must always be considered in assessing these matters.3

The ACMA considers that the provision requires that a licensee, in the preparation and presentation of current affairs programs, make reasonable efforts or give reasonable opportunities to present significant viewpoints when dealing with controversial issues of public importance. Such reasonable efforts or opportunities must be provided either within the same program or similar programs, and must be provided while the issue has immediate relevance to the community.4

The first issue is whether the NBN project, including its merits, costs, scheduling and method of delivery, is a controversial issue of public importance. The ACMA considers that it clearly is.

The next issue is whether the licensee ensured that reasonable efforts were made, or reasonable opportunities given, either within the same program or similar programs, to present significant viewpoints in relation to the issue, while it was of immediate relevance to the community.

The ACMA considers that:

a ‘significant viewpoint’ is one capable of materially contributing to listener understanding of the controversial issue and views held about it; and

a ‘similar program’ may include other talk-back programs on that station.

On the merits of the fibre technology for the NBN project, the broadcast of 29 October 2012 presented only one viewpoint, namely Mr Jones’ view that the ‘future is clearly wireless’.

As noted above, the licensee has provided 4 broadcasts in support of its contention that it met its obligations at Code 2.3(b) of the Codes, as detailed at Attachment 4.

The ACMA is satisfied that Broadcasts 1 and 2 amounted to the presentation of significant viewpoints on the controversial issue of public importance while it was of immediate relevance to the community. These included extended presentations of the viewpoint of Mike Quigley, the CEO of NBN Co, concerning positive benefits of the NBN project as an infrastructure project for Australia.

With respect to the specific comment that ‘the future is clearly wireless’, the ACMA notes the following exchange that took place between Ben Fordham and Mr Quigley on 11 April 2012:

BF: Okay, why is America, where the internet was invented, why is America going for a cheaper version more focussed on wireless?

MQ: Ah, well, I can tell you I lived in the US for some ten years, and you could get very good broadband service if you lived in a city. I lived in Dallas. I had lots of options. You moved outside Dallas, you had no options. The fact is that the US has got a quite a large public debt, and they simply can’t afford to have this national infrastructure built. So they’re going for a much less quality, broadband network.

The ACMA also considers that broadcasts 1 and 2 included evidence of the licensee’s ‘reasonable efforts or opportunities’ obligation, noting in particular the following invitation extended to Mr Quigley by Ben Fordham at the end of the 29 March broadcast:

3 Investigation 25404 Investigation 2674 & 2717


BF: Can we get you in the studio here and give half an hour for people to call in and ask questions and we can get them all answered?

MQ: I’d be delighted to do that Ben.

BF: Okay, when can we do that? Do that next week?

MQ: I think we should be able to, yeah, or should do it as soon as we can.

And again, at the end of the 11 April broadcast:

BF: Okay, there are going to be plenty more questions as the NBN keeps rolling out because as you said it is a long term plan here. Can we do this once in a while? Bring you in here? Because as you can see, a lot of people hear all of this stuff, we debate it and we read it in the paper and we hear it on the radio. It would be great to do this again in the future down the track to be able to get you in from time to time and answer people’s questions as these things pop up.

MQ: It would be a pleasure Ben.

BF: Mike Quigley, NBN Co, I appreciate you coming in.

In all of the circumstances, the ACMA is satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to conclude that reasonable efforts were made, or reasonable opportunities were given, by the licensee to present significant viewpoints across similar programs in its schedule in the manner contemplated by Code 2.3(b) of the Codes.

Accordingly, the licensee did not breach Code 2.3(b) of the Codes.

Issue 3: Complaints handling (Complainant B)

Relevant ProvisionCode of Practice 5: Complaints

Advice in Writing

5.5 Written complaints must be conscientiously considered by the licensee and the licensee must use its best endeavours to respond substantively in writing within 30 business days of the receipt of the complaint. If the licensee needs to investigate the complaint or obtain professional advice and a substantive response is not possible within 30 business days, the licensee must, in any event, acknowledge receipt of the complaint within 30 business days and provide a final reply within 45 business days of receiving the complaint.

Complainant’s submission Complainant B has submitted that he sent his complaint to the licensee and did not receive a response.

The complainant has provided the ACMA with a transmission report showing that his complaint, dated 22 November 2012, was sent to 2GB’s fax number, 02 85700219, on 23 November 2012. The report states ‘Document has been sent’ and gives the transmission status as ‘CP – completed’.


Licensee’s submissionThe licensee submitted that it did not receive the complaint, and was therefore not obliged to respond to it.

In further submissions to the ACMA, the licensee indicated that its fax transmission reports do not report on all faxes received and it does not have a procedure for making a separate written record of incoming faxes.

FindingThe licensee breached Code 5.5 of the Codes in relation to Complainant B’s complaint.

ReasonsIn the ACMA’s view, the documentation provided by the complainant is sufficient evidence that the licensee received the complaint.

The ACMA notes that the licensee has no incoming fax transmission report for 23 November 2012 that would demonstrate the contrary; nor does it keep a log of complaints received by fax.

On balance, in the ACMA’s view, the licensee received the complaint and, as such, it was obliged to respond to it. It did not.

Accordingly, the ACMA finds that the licensee breached Code 5.5 of the Codes.


Attachment 1Considerations which the ACMA has regard to in assessing whether broadcast material is fact or opinion The primary consideration is whether, according to the natural and ordinary meaning of

the language used and the substantive nature of the message conveyed, the relevant material is presented as a statement of fact or as an expression of opinion. In that regard, the relevant statement must be evaluated in its context, i.e. contextual

indications from the rest of the broadcast (including tenor and tone) are relevant in assessing the meaning conveyed to the ordinary reasonable listener/viewer.

The use of language such as ‘it seems to me’, ‘we consider/think/believe’ tends to indicate that a statement is presented as an opinion. However, a common sense judgment is required as to how the substantive nature of the statement would be understood by the ordinary reasonable listener/viewer, and the form of words introducing the relevant statement is not conclusive.

Factual material will usually be specific, unequivocal and capable of independent verification.

Inferences of a factual nature made from observed facts are usually still characterised as factual material (subject to context); to qualify as an opinion/viewpoint, an inference reasoned from observed facts would usually have to be presented as an inference of a judgmental or contestable kind.

The identity of the person making the statement would not in and of itself determine whether the statement is factual material or opinion, i.e. it is not possible to conclude that because a statement was made by an interviewee, it was necessarily a statement of opinion rather than factual material.

Statements in the nature of prediction as to future events would nearly always be characterised as statements of opinion.


Attachment 2Complainant B’s complaint to the licenseeThe complainant submitted to the licensee:

I wish to make a complaint about material presented on the Alan Jones show on the morning of 29 October 2012. In broadcasting this material I believe 2GB has breached the Commercial Radio Australia Codes of Practice 2011.

In this program Alan Jones made statements that I believe contained a number of factual errors about the Federal Government’s National Broadband Network project.

In this program Jones stated: ‘Well, this NBN disaster rolls on,’ said Jones. ‘The white elephant promotes cable technology when the future is clearly wireless. And it’s hopelessly behind schedule, hopelessly over budget, hopelessly unable to capture the public’s imagination. And will be obsolete before it’s built, but the polls today say it’s 50-50. How high would they be in the polls if they got something right? Only about 15 percent of households have bothered to connect to it where it’s been rolled out; 15 percent.

‘Some say we’ll eventually fork out 50 billion to build it. It’s not in the budget, and it’s hard not to see why. Consider this, for example: I see the O’Farrell government is fighting a last-ditch battle with the Commonwealth over the cost of rolling out NBN cable onto New South Wales power poles where cable can’t go underground. The Federal Government’s now threatening to use draconian laws to overrule New South Wales, a move which the State Government says will force it to increase the cost of electricity to consumers by between $5 and $7 for 20 years.’

In my view a number of these statements are factually inaccurate.

1 The concept that Australia’s broadband needs could be served in future by wireless technology is counter to the almost universal view of the telecommunications industry that in every country, telecommunications needs into the future will continue to be served by a mix of fixed and wireless infrastructure. For example, people such as Telstra CEO [name] has consistently stated that they expect Australians to buy both mobile and fixed broadband packages in future, as they serve differing needs – fixed broadband to supply homes with powerful connections to facilitate big downloads such as video, and mobile broadband when outside the home, for access to services which typically require lesser capacity. In addition, mobile towers typically also require their own fibre connections to funnel data back from wireless connections to the major fixed-line telecommunications networks.

2 Jones stated that the NBN will be obsolete before it is built. However the fibre technology which will constitute the vast majority of the NBN rollout contains the potential to be upgraded to deliver 1Gbps speeds to premises and potentially higher speeds in future. The deployment of this technology across Australia is expected to place Australia amongst the global leading countries in broadband access and it is expected this technology will be in use for at least between 30 to 50 years.

3 Jones stated that the NBN is ‘hopelessly unable to capture the public’s imagination’. However a series of polls taken over the past several years has shown that the NBN project has continued to enjoy strong levels of popularity since the last federal election – even amongst coalition voters (refer http://delimiter.com.au/2012/02/21/nbn-enjoys-prolonged-popular-support).


http://delimiter.com.au/2012/02/21/nbn-enjoys-prolonged-popular-support

http://delimiter.com.au/2012/02/21/nbn-enjoys-prolonged-popular-support

4 Jones stated that the NBN should be included on the Federal Budget. However the government’s treatment is in accordance with the appropriate accounting standards because it is a capital investment expected to generate (according to its corporate plan) a modest return on investment over the period through to 2030.

According to a research note published last year by the Parliamentary Library of Australia, Labor’s budget treatment of the NBN is correct. ‘Australia has adopted internationally accepted accounting standards, and these are applied in the budget treatment of the NBN,’ the library’s [name], who works in its economics division, wrote in the report. Shadow Communications Minister [name] has acknowledged the accuracy of the NBN’s accounting treatment, although it is still disputed by other Coalition members. Refer http://delimiter.com.au/2012/09/06/backdown-turnbull-accepts-nbn-budget-accounting/).

5 Jones’s statement that only 15 percent of households have bothered to connect to the NBN where it has been rolled out is misleading. In areas where the NBN’s fibre was rolled out first, such as Kiama in NSW, take-up rates have been close to 40 percent and growing. The closure of Telstra’s copper network, and the cable networks operated by Telstra and Optus, is expected to push this figure dramatically higher in all areas over the next few years, as the NBN becomes the sole provider of last-mile fixed broadband infrastructure in Australia.

6 Jones stated that the NBN is behind schedule and hopelessly over budget. The NBN corporate plan released in August [2012] showed that the project was six months behind schedule and that the overall capital cost of the NBN build had increased by 3.9 percent. However Communications Minister Stephen Conroy and Finance Minister Penny Wong, who are jointly responsible for the NBN, said this was offset by the fact that the total capital cost for the NBN was ‘significantly less’ than the $43 billion originally announced by the Government in April 2009. They also stated the delay was less than the nine-month delay expected to have been caused by the lengthy negotiations around the $11 billion deal NBN Co has signed with Telstra to transfer its customers onto the NBN infrastructure and gain access to Telstra’s infrastructure. The 3.9 percent increase in the NBN’s capital costs is very good for a project of this scope (refer http://delimiter.com.au/2012/08/14/blowouts-no-the-nbn-is-very-much-on-track/).

I refer to the recent ACMA ruling regarding carbon dioxide emissions in March 2011. The ACMA ruled that the Alan Jones program would be forced to fact-check certain material before it went to air.5 This is clearly not happening.

Under the Commercial Radio Codes of Practice section 2.2, 2GB is required, in the preparation and presentation of current affairs programs, to use reasonable efforts to ensure that factual material is reasonably supportable as being accurate. It also stated that the material cited as evidence of satisfaction of the obligation should be commensurate with the nature and gravity of the subject matter.6

5 This was among a series of measures which 2GB proposed, and the ACMA accepted, following breaches of clause 2.2(a) of the code in 2011. The ACMA announced the measures on 18 October 2012 (ACMA media release 78/2012, http://archive.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=PC_600141). [ACMA footnote]

6 The code does not state that ‘material cited as evidence of satisfaction of the obligation should be commensurate with the nature and gravity of the subject matter’. This statement was made in ACMA Investigation Report 2597, 2614 & 2636 (page 4), http://archive.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=PC_310230. [ACMA footnote]


http://archive.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=PC_310230

http://archive.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=PC_600141

http://delimiter.com.au/2012/08/14/blowouts-no-the-nbn-is-very-much-on-track/

http://delimiter.com.au/2012/09/06/backdown-turnbull-accepts-nbn-budget-accounting/

http://delimiter.com.au/2012/09/06/backdown-turnbull-accepts-nbn-budget-accounting/

In my view this has not occurred as demonstrated above and so is in contradiction of both the codes as well as the agreed measures in the recent agreement with ACMA in relation to fact checking.

I require this complaint to be treated as a formal complaint in relation to a breach of the code by 2GB.

I acknowledge the use of the following website in the compilation of this complaint http://delimiter.com.au/2012/10/29/nbn-future-clearly-wireless-claims-alan-jones/.


http://delimiter.com.au/2012/10/29/nbn-future-clearly-wireless-claims-alan-jones/

Attachment 3

Licensee’s submission to the ACMA in relation to Complainant B’s complaintThe licensee submitted to the ACMA:

In its Investigation Report 2597, 2614 & 2636, the ACMA has made the following findings concerning Code 2.2(a):

It does not impose a best efforts obligation and does not impose an absolute obligation of accuracy; however, material cited as evidence of satisfaction of the obligation should be commensurate with the nature and gravity of the subject matter. (at page 4)

Enclosed with this letter is an audio recording of the segment that is the subject of the complaint. ...

We have identified that the following factual material is presented in Mr Jones’s commentary during the opening part of the segment.7

Only about 15% of households have bothered to connect to it where it’s been rolled out.

Some say we’ll eventually fork out 50 billion to build it – it’s not in the budget.

The O’Farrell government is fighting a last-ditch battle with the Commonwealth over the cost of rolling out NBN cable onto NSW power poles where cable can’t go underground. The Commonwealth claims it’s simply leasing the power poles. But it’s not as simple as that, because the State Government is responsible for maintaining service delivery from the poles. And the Finance Minister in NSW, Greg Pearce, says NBN Co – which is the Federal Government – is offering 400 million less than is needed to cover the cost of these responsibilities.

The Federal Government’s now threatening to use draconian laws to overrule NSW, a move which the State Government says will force it to increase the cost of electricity by between $5 and $7 for 20 years.

This factual material is sourced from and substantiated by:

1 Media release dated 17 December 2012 issued by Senator the Hon Stephen Conroy Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy;

2 Article NBN Co conceals updated rollout stats written by Renai LeMay on 10 December 2012;

3 Media article published by smh.com.au on 15 August 2012;

4 Information contained on the website published by Malcolm Turnbull MP;

5 Media article published by The Australian on 31 October 2012;

6 Article Backdown: Turnbull accepts NBN budget accounting written by Renai LeMay on 6 September 2012;

7 Media article published by smh.com.au on 29 October 2012; and

8 Media release dated 29 October 2012 issued by Greg Pearce MLC Minister for Finance and Services.8

7 Only the first two of the statements were complained about and accordingly are relevant to the investigation.

8 Items 7 and 8 refer to the power pole dispute between the Commonwealth and NSW Governments. As there was no complaint about this matter, these items are not relevant to the investigation.


Attachment 4Broadcast 1 – Ben Fordham – Drive - 29 March 2012BF: ... Government has announced its master plan for the NBN rollout, outlining where it will be installed in the next 3 years. 3.5 million premises will have the construction of the NBN either commenced or completed by June 2015 we’re told. The rollout is not without controversy as we know, with concerns about the cost and the reach of the scheme. NBN Co CEO Mike Quigley is on the line. G’day Mike.

MQ: G’day Ben.

BF: Ah, very often a difficult man to get hold of, but today I suppose you’ve got a lot to talk about.

MQ: Ah, yes indeed, it was a big day. Ah we really are now in a position to start the scale volume rollout of NBN.

BF: Okay, we’ve heard the debate, I suppose what I want to focus on today is the detail, where, when, how.

MQ: Right, well, on our website, in fact, there’s maps of all the areas that are under construction now, maps of what will be under construction in the next 12 months, and then under construction in the 3 year period until 2015. So, I’d invite your listeners to get onto that website if they want to have a look, they can enter their postcode and find out whether or not their suburb is in the rollout.

BF: Okay, and how detailed is it, in terms of throwing in a postcode, can you work out based on where you live on this street, when you are going to see the NBN?

MQ: You can’t too far ahead, whenever we have done the um, the design of a particular module and we build this network in modules in about 2 and ½ to 3000 premises at a time, as soon as we have that detail at that level we release it onto the website which is kind of concurrently with the start of the construction, and then within 12 months on average that area will be ready for service.

BF: 35.9 billion dollars. Is that the price tag?

MQ: Um, the Government plan is to inject 27 billion in equity into the company and um over a period of time, and I should say, it’s going to be a long period of time, the Government, and hence the tax payer will get a return a few hundred basis points above the bond rate. So, it’s an investment for the Australian taxpayer. And, I want to be clear, a nation building network of this sort would never be built by the private sector.

BF: Okay. I suppose on the cost front, and I appreciate that obviously in your position you are attached to this thing, you are married to this thing and very very passionate about it. When people hear that, and I don’t know whether you’re able to comment on this, but when people hear 35.9 billion dollars and they hear about the NBN, and you know that many people see the NBN as a luxury not a necessity, how do people reconcile that when they, you know, when hospitals are the way they are, and so many other aspects of what we do see as a necessity and just aren’t up to scratch?

MQ: I think the answer to that is fairly straight forward Ben and there’s been a lot of studies now done overseas that the business case we’ve built provides a return to the Government without factoring in any productivity economic benefits or social benefits. And there’s studies done overseas now pointing to those very clearly. There’s potential significant benefits in


health, in remote education and with our ageing population it’s going to be more and more essential to have this type of infrastructure to be able to provide services. And certainly we are speaking to many many different health representatives right around the country and they are very keen to have this network rolled out.

BF: Okay. So, what, everyone’s going to be seeing the doctor by going and sitting down at their computer.

MQ: No, not everybody and it won’t be at the computer. Because what I think we are seeing now is more and more high definition video capability video conferencing, it really does pay in very quickly to have for example an elderly person able to remain in their home rather than have to go into an institution. Provided of course they can be in constant contact with nursing staff.

BF: Okay, I’ve got a question, I’m not going to turn this into a Q & A session, but [listener name] has called in very very keen to ask you a question so I’m going to let him do that.

[Caller name] Good afternoon.

[Caller]: Yeah, could you let us know how many of the 3 and ½ million houses going past are already passed by a broadband network, that don’t simply need it at the moment?

MQ: Um I can’t give you that number [name of caller] off the top of my head and I think what it would be it would be quite variable. There’d be some places that very well have ADSL+ today. There will be some places that have no broadband at all. There’ll be some that are still on dial up. What we’re providing is a nationwide infrastructure that will take us into the next 50 years in the same way as the copper network that was built just after the second World War has served us well for 50 years – but it really does now need to be retired.

BF: Okay, Mike I know you’ve got limited time, as do we, but let me just ask you this one. Because I’ve noticed from my own family just in the last couple of months. I’ve got the iPad. My brother’s got an iPad. But just in the last couple of months, Mum and Dad have both gone, alright, look, because they both work 6 or 7 days a week. Both of them. They’ve both gone look, they need one too. So there’s now iPads left right and centre. There’s no wires involved. There’s no NBN involved. Why do we need it?

MQ: Because if you in fact talk to your parents, and in fact, and your kids and what you’ll find is most of those connections on iPads is on Wi-Fi. They’re not on the 3G or 4G network. They’re on Wi-Fi. That Wi-Fi device is connected to a fixed line. It will be connected to the NBN. Mobile networks, they simply don’t have the capacity to keep up with what is going to be needed. But that’s not just me saying it. The Chief Technology Officer of Telstra has said exactly the same thing. We need both a wireless network, a mobile network, and a fixed line network. And those iPads all around the world, Telco’s are trying to make sure they get the traffic off those iPads, off those mobile networks, on to fixed line networks, via Wi-Fi.

BF: Can we get you in the studio here and give half an hour for people to call in and ask questions and we can get them all answered?

MQ: I’d be delighted to do that Ben.

BF: Okay, when can we do that? Do that next week?

MQ: I think we should be able to, yeah, or should do it as soon as we can.

BF: Good on you Mike. Thank you. Mike Quigley NBN Co.


Broadcast 2 – Ben Fordham – Drive – 11 April 2012BF: Now, the National Broadband, the NBN, Kevin Rudd started all of this off of course. With a big vision to connect the entire country to high speed internet service. The best in the world. We were told we’ll be able to download movies in just a couple of minutes. That doctors will be able to conduct consultations via a computer screen. And there’ll be no more yelling at the computer while the internet moves like a turtle. But the cost. Yes. The cost. 36 billion dollars. Minimum. Some say it’ll end up costing 50 billion dollars. Whose money is it? Well, it’s being borrowed, a lot of it anyway, borrowed from overseas and it’ll have to be paid pack, paid back by you. 36 billion dollars minimum. Now, if you had 36 billion dollars to spend, in Australia what would you spend it on? And if we are marching ahead with an NBN as we are, what do want to know about it? What are you worried about? What do you want explained? This afternoon NBN boss Mike Quigley is with us in the studio taking calls, 131873. If you can keep the questions brief that’d be good. And if possible in some areas we’ll try and allow people follow up questions. Mike Quigley thank you so much for coming in.

MQ: It’s a pleasure Ben.

BF: Appreciate your company. Ah, how much is it gonna cost?

MQ: Um well the number that you said is um correct in terms of the capital cost of the build of the network; 36 billion dollars. The Government will inject 27 billion in equity.

BF: When you say Government, you mean...

MQ: The Federal Government.

BF: Taxpayers.

MQ: Yes, the taxpayers. The Government representing taxpayers will inject 27 billion.

BF: It’s worthwhile saying that though, I know what you’re saying, you’re following the letter of the law but it is worthwhile saying that because it’s not the Government, it’s taxpayers.

MQ: Yes absolutely; it’s taxpayers’ money.

BF: We’re throwing in 27 billion dollars into this.

MQ: Ah, that’s right. It’s an investment which the company will repay that money the Government has injected on behalf of taxpayers, over a long period of time.

BF: Okay, well what is the final bill going to be for the National Broadband Network?

MQ: Well the final bill for the taxpayer will in fact be a return on that investment 27 billion dollars. Over a long period of time, and I should be upfront Ben. No commercial company, private commercial company, would build a network like this. It is being built for all Australians and so it’s a huge infrastructure program, it’s a nation-building program.

BF: What return on the investment can you guarantee?

MQ: The return on investment which we’re aiming for which the Government has asked us to provide is just a small amount above the long term Government bond rate. Which is why no commercial private company would do it because they’d be looking for a much higher return.

BF: In terms of building this thing in the first place, where’s the money coming from?

MQ: The money is coming from, the Government obviously, they’re injecting the equity.

BF: But we’re borrowing it? About 80% of it are we not?


MQ: Um the Government, it comes out of the Government resources that we have, and yes a lot of it of course, the Government borrows money. But what you’ve got to remember is, Australian public debt is relatively low compared to most other countries in the world.

BF: How much will we have borrowed for this by the time it’s complete?

MQ: That’s a question I think for the Federal Government to answer because it’s, as a company, NBN Co, it’s a business enterprise, we get equity injections by the government and they look after all of that finance.

BF: Okay, can we clear just a couple of things up, and I appreciate your short and sharp answers, ah will the NBN go to the street or the home?

MQ: The NBN will go to a premise. So if it is a business, it will go to the business. If it’s a home, it will go to the home.

BF: Okay, who pays to connect from computer to connection point?

MQ: The connection point to the NBN is a box that goes normally inside a home or a premise, and that provides them what’s called the internet port or computer port.

BF: Okay while you’re rolling it out to someone’s home, it goes to the outside of a home?

MQ: It goes to the outside of a home and then when they order a service, we in fact put a box inside the home, and then, from that point on we hand it off to the retail service provider because we’re wholesale only, in other words we don’t interact directly with their users.

BF: Okay, but just in practical terms. I’m trying to imagine a house, you know, someone’s got, I’ve got up on the second story of my house, there’s the computer that’s where I work from. And so, you roll it out from the front door, but who pays for getting it to me?

MQ: Well, in all cases we will provide an interface inside that home to which you can in fact plug in a PC but retail service providers take over from that point. It’s part of the service that users will use.

BF: Okay, how much will it cost you know, Mr and Mrs Blacktown, Mr and Mrs Cronulla, Mr and Mrs Newcastle, what’s it going to cost them, the customer?

MQ: Well we have now some 8000 or more people on the network, the cost to them is no more than the service they’re paying today. They don’t have to pay any upfront cost, and their monthly charges are about the same as what they’re paying today but they get a much better service.

BF: Okay, why is America, where the internet was invented, why is America going for a cheaper version more focussed on wireless?

MQ: Ah, well, I can tell you I lived in the US for some ten years, and you could get very good broadband service if you lived in a city. I lived in Dallas. I had lots of options. You moved outside Dallas, you had no options. The fact is that the US has got a quite a large public debt, and they simply can’t afford to have this national infrastructure built. So they’re going for a much less quality, broadband network.

BF: Ah, 36 billion dollars minimum, a lot of money, how much of the internet is used as business as opposed to pleasure?

MQ: Well increasingly people are using internet for business. We are seeing that now with...

BF: But do we know what the ratio is?

MQ: I don’t, I can’t tell you off the top of my head.


BF: Roughly. I mean, when people are using the internet, how much of it is for business and how much for pleasure?

MQ: Well, I can tell you if we have a look at the people we’re seeing in first release sites that we’ve already built quite a lot of the usage is for business.

BF: Okay, but in terms of internet usage, I mean, this is important for you to know, you are running NBN Co, in terms of the internet use, I mean, I’ve often read studies before they tell you, most popular things that are searched for on computers. You know, I probably don’t need to tell you what it is, but it’s porn, it’s sex, I mean, even if things that are most searched on the internet, how much internet use is dedicated towards business, and how much of it is, pleasure?

MQ: Well, remember, when people, when you talk about business versus entertainment, it’s legitimate for people to use the internet for entertainment, for doing searches, and increasingly we’re seeing usages for both entertainment and also for business. And I have to say, as I’ve said, in the first release sites the 8000 people increasingly we’re hearing about the usage of business whether it’s photographers or animation, in fact it’s unleashing a market that they couldn’t address before.

BF: But that’s a great thing in those areas where you’ve got the NBN rolled out but I think, it’s an important thing isn’t it, because when people think about, you know, if you were handed 36 billion dollars and you said what would you want to do with it in Australia, there’ll be a heap of people saying, hey listen, I want roads, I want rail, I want dams, I want hospitals, so, when we’re saying okay we’re getting a National Broadband Network, there’ll be people saying, okay, what I want to know, you know, how much of that, because we’re talking about competitiveness overseas, how much of the internet use is used for business, and how much for pleasure? I think it’s a fair question. And you should know the answer, shouldn’t you?

MQ: It’s a fair question.

BF: Is it 10 per cent business, is it 20 per cent ...

MQ: No I think it’s considerably higher than, from what we’re seeing, considerably higher than 10 per cent.

BF: Well, what is it?

MQ: And you have to remember, as well, as we move forward into the future, you’re going to see social services, delivered via...

BF: Okay, well you obviously have some figures because you just said it is more than 10 per cent so what do you understand the figure to be?

MQ: I couldn’t tell you Ben off the top of my head I wouldn’t give you a number.

BF: But it’s more than 10 per cent?

MQ: Yes, of course. Most people would know that, it’s more than 10 per cent.

BF: Okay, well let me go to the open line and get some questions. [C1] is online. And we’re talking to Mike Quigley, the boss of the NBN Co. G’day [C1].

C1: [inaudible]

BF: [C1] hang on there we’re going to have to check your line and improve it, if you don’t mind. Sometimes communications aren’t all that good around here Mike [chuckles]. [C2]’s there, G’day [C2].


C2: Yeah, good afternoon. ... Yeah, I’d just like to ask Mike if you don’t mind, we’ve just had a three year rollout plan, announced, which unfortunately I wasn’t on, but what I want to know is, ah, will there be another plan come out every year, so as I can find out whether it is four years away for me, or five years away or six years away for me. Or, do I have to wait until the end of this roll out period before there’s going to be an update?

MQ: Fair question [C2]. Every year we will be updating that 3 year plan, in other words, we’ll be looking ahead for the next three years. So if you wait [C2] for another 12 months we will publish a new plan which will cover the following 12 months.

BF: By the way, in terms of rolling that stuff out, and I’m looking at a map here of where the rollout’s happening, and it’s, you are being accused of, well, I suppose, you slash Government are being accused of major pork barrelling going on and if you have a look at this little map, and I’ll hold it to you, you would have seen it in Queensland, where they show ‘work commences within one year, work commences within three years’, and they highlight who is Liberal, who is Labor, in terms of those seats, there are a lot of Labor seats there in Queensland who are receiving this rollout. Is this directed at helping Labor’s re-election chances Mike?

MQ: No. Frankly that’s a nonsense Ben. You, that map. If you’d have drawn a map with different L shape, if you’d have moved it to the West, or if you’d have moved it to the North, or South, it tells a different story. What’s been left out is Caboolture and South Toowoomba for example.

BF: Okay, has there ever been a discussion at all between you and Government about, okay, these might be areas where we may like to roll things out at a certain time.

MQ: Yes, there has been. The Government gave us directions to say you should get an even distribution across states, across the different states of Australia. A good even distribution between Metro and Regional, and we want you to complete Tasmania by 2015.

BF: No issue ever raised with you or anyone else at NBN Co about where those seats are or who holds those seats.

MQ: No. Frankly, I didn’t find out the distribution of seats until the announcement took place.

BF: Okay, appreciate it. [C3] has called in. Hello [C3].

C3: Hi. Um, I just want to know, what about for the elderly that don’t have computers, like my in-laws, my mum, don’t have mobile phones, what happens with their landline?

MQ: Yep, [C3] good question. Ah, we’ve looked after that in the deal that we’ve done with Telstra. We’ve made sure that we’ve catered for those people that would have a phone only. That’s of course a decreasing percentage of the population now, it’s going down quite rapidly. Ah, but we’ve made sure that we’ve looked after that. They’ll get, when the copper is removed, and the fibre replaces it, they will still retain their phones.

BF: Okay, and if someone’s got the NBN rolled up at their doorstep and they don’t have a computer, and they don’t want to use it, it just sits there?

MQ: Um, the fibre is there, and if they will have a voice call over the fibre.

BF: Okay, Mike Quigley is my guest. NBN Co boss. Ah, your calls in a moment. ...

...

We have Mike Quigley with us, the boss of NBN Co, in the studio answering your questions. Any questions you want to ask, and [C4] is on the line. Hello [C4].


C4: Hi, how are you doing?

BF: You’ve got a question for Mike.

C4: Yeah look ... lives in Western Sydney and generally you’d say they’ve got good broadband access out there, but unfortunately there’s too many users and there’s no availability at the exchanges. Telstra are saying they’re not going to upgrade the exchanges because of the NBN, but, NBN is not coming. Or is that, is that wrong?

MQ: Ah, that is, that is wrong [C4]. NBN will be coming, it may not be, if it’s not in that three year announcement, it means it’s not in the first three years, but every single premise in Australia will be connected to the NBN. And, it is a decade long project. But, every premise will be connected. So, I’m sorry to hear you won’t be in the first three years but you will be connected.

BF: You are way behind though aren’t you, Mike.

MQ: No, not way behind. Um we’re in fact doing reasonably well against the original plan which we published in December 2010. Remember the company only started back in 2009. So, we’re going I think um pretty well so far. We’ve got as I said over 8000 end users now on the Network.

BF: Okay, let me go to [C5]. Hello [C5].

C5: Oh G’day Ben. Yeah, I live on the top floor of a block of home units, 10th floor. And, I’m wondering how they miraculously managed to get the fibre optic into the, get the old copper wire out of the [?] and get the fibre optic cable into it.

MQ: Okay that’s part of the engineering solution we need right around Australia [C5] because we’re going to be doing that in all the underground ducts around the country, to put the fibre in, and ah -

BF: It’s a lot of work isn’t it!

MQ: It is a lot of work. It is a big engineering job.

BF: There’s a lot of digging going on.

MQ: Well, the deal we did with Telstra means that we don’t have to do anywhere near as much digging as we would have had if we didn’t do that deal.

BF: Okay, let me go to [C6]. [C6] hello.

C6: Hi Ben how are you going?

BF: Well, you’ve got a question for Mike?

C6: Yeah a couple of minutes ago you asked how much it would cost to get from the outside to the inside, but you neglected to answer it twice. So I’m asking again, how much does it cost to get from the connection outside to into your house?

MQ: That cost from outside to inside a house varies obviously depending on the premise. It’s different for blocks of units, for, depending on how big the block is so I can’t give you one single answer.

BF: Okay, so you’ve got things running up a wall, you’ve got, you know I suppose, have you got some ideas of what’s the cost, depending on ...

MQ: Yes of course. To do the entire country of 12 million premises.


BF: Hm, let’s focus on one premise. Focus on one premises in terms of, you know, what’s it going to cost if people, what’s it going to cost them?

MQ: It’s not going to cost them anything. They don’t have to pay for that connection cost. All they’ve got to pay is their retail provider a monthly charge as they do today. There’s no upfront costs. No connection costs.

BF: [C6] does that answer your question?

C6: Thank you.

BF: Thank you very much. [C1] good afternoon.

C1: G’day again Ben, sorry it broke up.

BF: That’s alright.

C1: Mate, I’ve got a question for Mr Quigley. I’ve already got broadband at the moment. I just want to know how the NBN broadband is going to be, I suppose, different, better, or faster.

MQ: What type of broadband do you have at the moment [C1]?

C1: I think ADSL.

MQ: Yep, so there’s various types of ADSL. ADSL1, ADSL2+. Um, the ADSL product uses the copper network. It simply is running out of the user capacity now and speeds and usage have been growing at a phenomenal rate over the last 2 and ½ decades. You probably remember the dialup days. Well, what the fibre network now is a replacement of the copper network to take us forward for the next 50 years.

BF: Okay, let me go to [C7]. Hello [C7].

C7: Hey Fordo how are you mate?

BF: All good you’ve got a question for Mike Quigley?

C7: Yeah I just wanted to ask Mike about ah, he said before that it was installed by Australians when a majority of the contractors, maybe 90%, of workers are all Irish, and ah, Irish over here on working Visas. I know this for a fact. Because I’m in the game myself.

MQ: I can’t answer that one. What I can tell you is that we are contracting to the big Australian construction contractors.

BF: Okay, [C7] is telling you, [C7] you’ve got first-hand experience of this? Yes?

C7: Absolute first-hand experience mate you only have to go around town looking at the names on the trucks, ah, you’ll see, they’re all Irish contractors. They’re all Irish workers.

BF: Okay, and the concern is what? That standards won’t be up to scratch?

C8: No concern at all, the standards are great, they’re good contractors, very reputable but, just saying that it’s installed by Australians when they’re all Irish here on working Visas.

MQ: Okay, we’re talking about tens of thousands of people are being employed across the country, over this decade, so I doubt they’ll all be Irish.


BF: Okay, there are going to be plenty more questions as the NBN keeps rolling out because as you said it is a long term plan here. Can we do this once in a while? Bring you in here? Because as you can see, a lot of people hear all of this stuff, we debate it and we read it in the paper and we hear it on the radio. It would be great to do this again in the future down the track to be able to get you in from time to time and answer people’s questions as these things pop up.

MQ: It would be a pleasure Ben.

BF: Mike Quigley, NBN Co, I appreciate you coming in.

Broadcast 3 – Afternoons with Chris Smith - 25 February 2013Well, National Broadband Network update number 730 probably. The NBN is clearly hedging its bets. That if the Coalition takes Government as is expected after September 14, it is ready. That’s my reading of it.

In a further sign that bureaucracies are now fighting for survival, in preparation for the September...], NBN Co Chief Mike Quigley has called for a study on the merits of different superfast broadband technologies, which to me is clearly a change in course. In other words he’s putting the word out, that the NBN is not as rigid as Senator Stephen Conroy would have us all believe. That the NBN can be integrated into other systems, and other technologies. And the rollout can still be changed. Now, I would have thought these are refreshing words from Mike Quigley because what Quigley is saying is what, that NBN doesn’t have to be a white elephant. It can be flexible. The NBN can be adapted, it can be changed, and that is good news. That’s exactly what the opposition communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull has in mind as well. Because the Labor plan will never make it to the mooted 40 billion dollar plan price tag. And, they won’t get the take up rate, if the take up rate thus far is any guide. They’ll be lucky if it comes in at double 40 billion. And they’ll be lucky to get 50% of the 75% take up they need. Because workers, I’m hearing, are also walking away from the project. Being paid 50% of what they’d earn on equivalent corporate projects. Now as a result people are refusing to enter into rolling contracts. They’re keeping their options open, and that’s causing disruptions as new contractors come in to fill up the slack. It sounds like a mess to me. And that’s part of the reason why NBN Co has struggled to pass 290 thousand homes by the middle of the year. And if the NBN does hire second rate staff imagine the service we’re all going to get. Imagine. What the NBN needs is a proper business plan as they needed at the very beginning of all of this. It needs the Chief Quigley to get in there and bring together a plan at half the cost with a proper model for efficiency and cost benefit. And if that means integrating the cable with other technologies including copper, then so be it. It’s a bitter political pill to swallow but surely Mike Quigley has the system in his sights, not politics. And I’ve always made the point that the NBN is not a bad thing. It’s a Lamborghini project. It can’t be a bad thing. But it is when you’re not taking into consideration whether it can make any money for the cost involved. It is the mad ideology that every Tom, Dick and Harry should have this Lamborghini internet access, the same as the Commonwealth Bank or Coca Cola. That is mad. It was never viable. Never workable. And with Mike Quigley’s comments late last week, probably never gonna happen the way Kevin had planned.


Broadcast 4 –The Ray Hadley Morning Show - 21 March 2013Now I took a call earlier this week from [name of caller] who works for a security company. Now, he told me the NBN will cause significant problems for people with back to base security alarms. I guess with both people in business and people at home. Because the connection will be lost due to the copper phone line being decommissioned which is the way it’s going to happen. He told me people with these alarms will need to purchase what’s called a GPRS device. Which is essentially a device accessing an older mobile network to ensure there is a connection with a security company back to the base monitoring. I notice the issue of an alarm system and the NBN has come up with previously. And that’s the story from the Australian last year when they said ‘the Federal Government is talking with emergency organisations to address community concerns that current back to base alarm systems won’t work with the NBN. Communications Minister Stephen Conroy issued a statement saying at Senate Estimates Committee NBN Co was moving to build an IP based alarm capability into its network to address the problem. He said that the alarms could be a problem on the NBN Co analogue voice port and revealed in the near future Digital Internet protocol alarms will be supported on the NBN as well. I mean the problem with all this is it’s a moving feast. Now we asked the NBN Co some questions about this because [caller’s name] made the point during his call on Tuesday that much of the Security industry still didn’t really know what was going on despite the NBN rollout being underway.

They’ve come back to us. Ah, the email says this:

‘Sorry for the delay. NBN Co has developed the fibre network so it can support a range of existing equipment and services that work over the copper network including security alarms. Security alarm companies install their alarms using their telephone network for back to base services. But the telephone service providers may not be aware that these services are in use.’

Hmmm yeah that’d be right like you could have for instance a fax phone like I have and it’s also the designated line for your alarm.

‘Therefore when people transfer from copper to the NBN fibre service, they will need to tell their telephone [and?] their provider that they use back to base alarms so that the connection can be set up correctly. In other words, the fibre can be used to run an analogue system like the older security alarm. But you need to advise your telephone company to ensure they set up the ... connection correctly. The NBN also currently comes with a battery back-up unit for the telephone line. NBN Co has been working with the security industry peak body ASIL to ensure that their members are informed about the switchover to NBN. A large national security company an ASIL member has successfully deployed their back to base alarms on the NBN in Brunswick we are told. Now they tell me there is no need to purchase new equipment to run existing alarms but of course the NBN makes it possible to switch to newer internet based security systems with enhanced features like video monitoring and the like.’

That’s what they’re saying now. Um, my concern is this. Because, the telephone service providers, you’ve got to tell them that your telephone - and your internet provider tell them - that they use a back to base alarm so the connection can be set up correctly, in other words, the fibre can be used to run an analogue system. Like an older security alarm. Is NBN Co sure that all these people installing this stuff will know what I’m talking about? Let’s hope...


2gb investigations report nos 2947 and 2960/media/broadcasting... · web viewerror! reference...

Documents