It was just another morally corrupt act by Labor to reward its Union paymasters with a monopoly. The old Telecom was a monster that tried to keep Australia in the '50s and the NBN was a real attempt to leap into the past. It's a wonder that they also didn't try to restart the BLF.

Senator Leyonhjelm has misled readers about the NBN in three crucial ways. These relate to the cost and progress, transparency and the fundamental nature of its ownership.

He states that by mid-2015, the national broadband network will have cost taxpayers more than $12 billion, while only serving 12 per cent of premises. The inference is that completion would cost $100 billion.

The NBN deployment consists of six discrete projects – building the four access networks (fixed wireless network, satellite, fibre to new estates and fibre in already developed areas), and building two common elements (the transit network and the IT systems).

NBN Co’s annual results presentation showed that over 45% of capital expenditure has been on common elements, which are now mostly complete for the whole project.

An additional 26% has been on the fixed wireless and satellite access networks that service 7% of the population. As is well known these are the most expensive premises to serve but it will also be completed in 2015-16.

These premises account for almost half of the 1.6 million premises the Minister has identified as being underserved.

The Senator also asserts that “the public sector is not compelled to disclose likely losses (unlike private companies).” This is certainly not the case with NBN Co, which is an incorporated entity obliged to fulfil all the requirements under corporations law.

The company publishes an annual report which is also audited to ensure it applies accounting standards.

Finally, the Senator asserts that the NBN is a case of “applied socialism.” This claim would assert that the colonial governments that established the postal and telegraph services were socialist. Government ownership of essential infrastructure – especially monopoly infrastructure – was the accepted norm until the 1980s.

It was not socialist then, nor is it socialist now.

Moreover the legislation establishing NBN Co explicitly includes provisions for the firm’s privatisation once the construction is complete. That is clearly not a socialist provision.

The NBN is a complex enough policy issue without the contribution of totally misleading claims.

5 years to go.

David; this is clearly an ideological argument and avoids various pertinent comparisons!
i.e., How much has the foreign controlled iron ore industry cost we Australians, the actual owners of the resource?
And lets go right back to when poor old, cap in hand, Lance Hancock failed to get any government support or very modest start up venture capital/loan; so the Australian owned resource, could be developed by Australians; and all the profit, hundreds of billions, could be retained here, rather than repatriated by diverse means and sharp practice!
[Mountains of Iron ore, so rich lumps of it could be welded together!? Ha ho ho he oh my aching ribs, you should have been a politician Lance! (snigger) You forgot the brown paper bag Lance? (snort, snigger) Excuse me Lance, got to go and feed the chooks. Interestingly, the letter of credit from chase Manhattan, that opened up Australasian banks to the new foreign owners, (including it would seem, the govt owned CBA) wasn't worth the paper it was written on!]
And even though the NBN may not be rolling out as rapidly as possible, possibly due to trickled out funding, or same diff govt interference, as as any other cause?
It has reportedly earned more money for ordinary Australians, [Australian small business and ordinary Mums and Dads,] than our hugely wealthy iron ore industry!
And how much of that 12 billion is the extra funding now required to buy Telstra's worn out copper! 11 billion maybe?
The real scandal is just how well this visionary, must have, off budget project, has been politicized; and just for rank political purpose!
Had you been a serving pollie when the Sydney harbor bridge was being built David; I dare say you would have likely been just as scurrilous in your rubbishing of a very worthy; and at the time, very visionary public project; and built with vastly scarcer comparable funding!
Clearly, all the many (conga line) pollies that turned down Lance Hancock, share your "predictable" lack of future vision!
And the patent irony was intended.
Rhrosty.

David Havyatt
“Senator Leyonhjelm has misled readers about the NBN in three crucial ways. These relate to the cost and progress, transparency and the fundamental nature of its ownership. He states that by mid-2015, the national broadband network will have cost taxpayers more than $12 billion, while only serving 12 per cent of premises. The inference is that completion would cost $100 billion.”

You are confusing inference with implication. Leyonhjelm didn’t infer it; and didn’t necessarily imply it. Therefore it wasn’t misleading.

“The company publishes an annual report which is also audited to ensure it applies accounting standards.”

So it bloody well should. However the mere fact that it has to obey the law of the land like everyone else is hardly a shining recommendation, is it? In particular it does nothing to establish that the government should be in the business of supplying internet services. So that’s a fail.

“Finally, the Senator asserts that the NBN is a case of “applied socialism.” This claim would assert that the colonial governments that established the postal and telegraph services were socialist. Government ownership of essential infrastructure – especially monopoly infrastructure – was the accepted norm until the 1980s.”

Whether something was the accepted norm has nothing to do with it. The question is whether government owns or controls the means of production. To the extent that it does, it’s socialist, regardless how many people mistakenly believe in Santa Claus economics.

“Moreover the legislation establishing NBN Co explicitly includes provisions for the firm’s privatisation once the construction is complete. That is clearly not a socialist provision.”

Fascist is the word you’re looking for.

All
The NBN is a lemon, but if it's not, then those who support it can pay for it.

It should be sold off in total immediately, and the losses should be sheeted home to everyone who supports it, including a special tax on everyone who voted Labor. That's the only way they'll stop inflicting these enormous, intractable, selfish, hare-brained schemes on the rest of the population.

David Leyonhjelm
Go you good thing.

<<Contracts entered into by Labor, if valued like other Commonwealth contracts, lock taxpayers into $35 billion worth of spending until 2021.>>

The question is, how much of those $35 billions are still legally binding on the public purse.

Wouldn't it be much cheaper to simply close the whole thing down and walk out, rather than [hair-]splitting that company which shouldn't have existed in the first place?

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the only expense then would be to compensate the employees for their retrenchment, which surely wouldn't cost more than even $1-billion.