[AusNOG] CCC and Terria "rage against coalition"

[Ben Grubb]

Some good points raised. I've bolded the point I am confused about.

Another:

September 15

TONY JONES: But in short - just to cut you short there - just to  
finish or see if I can get an actual answer to the question: in the  
end, what you don't want to see is two separate networks.

STEPHEN CONROY: Well we've said we want to build a wholesale-only,  
open access network, and I think if you look at what's transpired over  
the last 15 to 20 years, the competing infrastructure model has failed  
to deliver competition. And what we're looking to do is introduce a  
wholesale-only company. We welcome Telstra, Optus, any of the other  
potential vendors to be part of our network. And if that turns out to  
be a partnership with Telstra, it would see, as we lay the copper -  
the fibre into the homes, we'd be taking the copper out. And we - the  
NBN Co. would become the sole connection from the curb to the home.  
So, yes, that is one of the options that may come from the discussions  
that are taking place at the moment.

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2008/s2687024.htm

Today:

Journalist: Senator, who's going to take responsibility for providing  
phone services to 10 per cent of households who don't get access to  
the fibre optic cables?

Let's be clear. It's unfortunate that Senator Minchin is struggling to  
understand the difference between a broadband service and a phone  
line. No one has suggested that the copper lines in the 10 per cent  
are suddenly going to vanish or that they're going to be cut off or  
that they're going to be pulled out, which is exactly what Nick  
Minchin's suggesting.

There's nothing in this legislation whatsoever that suggests that,  
except we are strengthening the universal service obligation. So the  
universal service obligation is what pays, via a levy today paid to  
Telstra to provide that service. And nothing is changing. And for Nick  
Minchin to not understand the difference between delivering a  
broadband network over wireless and satellite and a copper-based phone  
service is just embarrassing.

-- 
Ben Grubb

On 21/10/2009, at 11:17 PM, Bevan Slattery wrote:

> I have to completely agree.  There are many holes in the legislation  
> and logic.  I think with the appropriate time/consulting/feedback  
> this could be very worthwhile.  But there are some extraordinary  
> inconsistencies with the legislation, public comment by politicians  
> and industry types.  In a doorstop interview today Sen Conroy said:
>
> "Let's be clear. It's unfortunate that Senator Minchin is struggling  
> to understand the difference between a broadband service and a phone  
> line. No-one has suggested that the copper lines in the 10 per cent  
> are suddenly going to vanish or that they're going to be cut off or  
> that they're going to be pulled out, which is exactly what Nick  
> Minchin's suggesting."
>
> I am confused.  So when Telstra are forced to split under the  
> current legislation and handover it's network to NBN Co (or whoever)  
> who is actually responsible for maintaining those exchanges and it's  
> associated copper.  I thought Telstra were not going to operate a  
> fixed line service under the separation model?
>
> Anyone?  Foreman from the CCC?
>
> [b]
>
> From: Grahame Lynch [mailto:grahamelynch at commsdaymail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, 21 October 2009 9:58 PM
> To: Bevan Slattery
> Cc: ausnog at ausnog.net
> Subject: Re: [AusNOG] CCC and Terria "rage against coalition"
>
> I'm intrigued by this idea that you can one hand legislate to compel  
> Telstra to divest any ownership ties to a fixed network and become a  
> pure retailer but on the other hand - in the same bill - you can  
> legislate even greater requirements than today for Telstra to be  
> responsible for fixed network delivery in the bush via the USO.
>
> Seems to me like a fairly irreconcilable twin set of obligations to  
> me. The government line is that it will all be figured out down the  
> track which I guess is fair enough - if you're also prepared to  
> relax the apparently urgent deadline for the legislation itself and  
> the requirement for Telstra to commit to the terms of its separation  
> before it knows the terms of its obligations in terms of USO and so  
> forth.
>
> Somebody in the Department has made a mess of this one.
>
> 2009/10/21 Bevan Slattery <Bevan.Slattery at staff.pipenetworks.com>
> http://www.arnnet.com.au/article/323020/rage_against_coalition_industry_
> lashes_opposition_fights_against_telstra_separation
>
> Bit over the top??  I'd like to see the legislation look at solving  
> the
> real/future problems such as reduce the negotiate/arbitrate process  
> for
> regulated (rather than only declared as proposed in the legislation)
> bottleneck infrastructure such as duct access (NBN) and towers (4G/ 
> LTE)
> rather than mainly focus on the copper world.
>
> I'm trying to think why the violent reaction from CCC and TERRIA?   
> Is it
> no longer 'cool' to ask questions?
>
> [b]
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
>
> -- 
> Grahame Lynch
> Ph/SMS: +668 1701 7664
> Skype: grahame.lynch
> URL: www.commsday.com
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20091021/7eb8ee9a/attachment.html>