Associates of the Internet, compliments for a real good set of Commentaries, keep up the good work.

As a retired Old Cockie with still plenty of bush insight, could say that though Rudd still looks a bit like a learner, could reckon his hearts in the right place.

Personally gave Howard away when he showed his true colours by sidling up to Bush and Co.

OK, now I understand you better Mr Ariel. You are in favour of Internet Connectivity Everywhere, but against the notion that the government has a role to play in establishing it.

In your article, you say "[t]he politician doesn't even consider that if [it] was such a good idea, it would have been picked up by the private sector. Evidently his passion for this... concept, while great, is dwarfed by his lust for populist policies regardless of its financial merits."

If you had even the slightest understanding of the nightmare regulations that (I even hesitate to use the word) "govern" the Telco industry right now, you would know exactly why the private sector has held back. Hey, even Telstra, until Ms Coonan twisted their money-grubbing arm in the wake of Rudd's proposal, had taken their bat and ball and gone home on this one.

The industry is in a mess. The sale of Telstra has been horribly botched, and every politician who has had anything to do with it is running for cover. The opportunity - to separate the infrastructure, which the Australian people have already paid for over many years, from the provision of services across that infrastructure - was wasted, and we are now seeing the results.

No-one is happy with the present setup except the overpaid fat cats who are sitting on the top of a virtual monopoly, held together by government indecisiveness and inaction.

I strongly suspect that by the time it comes for Rudd to deliver on the commitment, the present government will have bent the rules even further in favour of strengthening Telstra's monopoly, out of sheer spite.

But in the meantime it remains a good idea, and one that deserves intelligent discussion. Referring to it as a "monstrosity", and to Rudd's "lust for populist policies regardless of its [sic] financial merits" does not convince me that your approach to the topic is anything more than personal "look-it-me" grandstanding.

Incidentally, perhaps you would like to comment on how this fits into your argument?

http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/coonan-could-set-broadband-pricing/2007/04/03/1175366243738.html

Mr Ariel, you've totally lost me. That was about the strangest broadband metaphor since USA Senator Stevens' famous speech on net neutrality:

"It's not a big truck. It's a series of tubes."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Series_of_tubes

I'm no economist, but isn't the internet more like the roads than the mall? When the roads have fallen into disrepair, and the petrol prices are high, government investment into these problems is quite a normal reaction, isn't it?

(Not that I necessarily think Rudd should be spending quite so much on it)

The writer is spot on. The idea of raiding the Future Fund is irresponsible, whilst the media companies (especially Newscorps) rush to endorse Mr Rudd's broadband policy is obviously opportunistic.

"The investment performance of the Future Fund would be judged independently of its Telstra shares until the Telstra stake could be reduced to a level that did not dominante the fund." Nick Minchin-Finance Minister.

So I repeat The Future Fund is not being raided. The Govt. always intended to sell its Telstra shares. Now because of Costello playing political games it cannot, so 20% of the future fund is in one stock, very poor investment management.

Jonathon you may be able to get ADSL2+ in Darling Point but in regional Qld it is a pipedream. In fact ADSL is a pipedream for many.

With our Govt's handling of telecommunications over the past 10 years we have seen the PSTN network patched up. Even getting a 100 pair cable laid is impossible in some areas. Telstra have used pair gain to save on costs ect ect. ITU G.992.5 should be available to anyone who has a copper wire into their home (barring very remote regions), why is it not?

Governments should be all about building infrastructure, like rail, roads, ports, airports and telecommunications.

Intesting to note that the future fund almost exactly equals the amout Howard and Costello have made from asset sales in the past 10 years, no economic miracles, no real surplus bugets. Just selling the family jewels to merchant banks

Jonathan we drawe the line where it suits us the circumstances of the day - I know some think it is written in stone that governemtns have no business being in business - but I would suggest there has been a lot achieved when they have done so - governments just dont pick the right time often enough to get out of it - and a lot of bad done when they are marginalised in some indutries - ie Health USA style.

There is no line