i wonder if one glassfibre connection is enough. if it is, there's a physical 'monopoly' which calls for commercial monopoly, or the madness described above.

the government is getting out of the roadbuilding business, so this is the wrong time to suggest that the government should build the 'superhighway' infrastructure and rent it out- but that seems to be the logical response to reality.

an independent candidate can say "let's go back to some government ownership", and i wish they would.

Who is this guy? I live in his electorate and have never heard of him. Netherless the arguments (complaints) he provides are simplistic. The points bought forward by him were heard 18 months ago and we have moved on from there. What is the price that Telstra wants for their unbundled loop.? What is the G9 SAU going to reveal. What is Telstra's SAU (special access undertaking) going to consist of?
How much, who will benefit, who will the Government subsidise and what next for the winning and losing consortiums?
None of this was addressed by this nobody, why was this article posted.?
Go to www. whirlpool.net.au if you want more info on this and other broadband issues.

Why the Government should not allow any one telco to control a FTTH/FTTN is quite simply.

Those people who lived in a non-profitable area would simply be left in the dark ages.

There are two choices.
1. The Telcos work together for the betterment of the nation.
or
2. An independent company in partnership with the Government would own and operate FTTH/FTTN. The company would not be permitted to provide telephony or internet services to Business and Residential Customers. The Government would simply be an investor and would protect our rights through the ACCC.

The $64 question. Who would provide a landline service at a reasonable cost to those who are less fortunate. Now I telling you with Moblie Phones and Internet Phone Services, that landline telephony has reached it used by date.

Southerner, you wrote: "Now I telling you with Moblie Phones and Internet Phone Services, that landline telephony has reached it used by date."

I am not quite sure what you mean - aren't Internet Phone services made over landline telephony? I use them a lot, but they ultimately pass through the copper wires from my home to the exchange. I would never use mobile phones because these are unethical - sending harmful electromagnetic radiation through innocent people.

Yuyutsu,

If you have an internet service which you receive by wireless, cable or satellite why would you as a person need to pay for landline telephony. While I may stand corrected, this would also apply to FTTN/FTTH as I understand it. Add mobile phones to the mix, than landlline telephony is certainly dying. Have a close look at landline telephony cost. The telcos will offer you a landline telephony line rental for as little as $19.00 a month, even capped plans which include the line rental.

If you have ADSL coming over a landline for example. Here are some basic cost to you. Landline Telephony $19.00/mth Broadband 9GB $49.00/mth Internet Phone Service $9.95/mth. In my household that would mean a seving of $125.00 per month. Without the Landline Telephony cost that means a savings of $144.00, these savings means you could afford to have paid television.

Right now for example with a mobile phone you can have a phone service, the internet and paid TV. Why would you need Landline Telephony. As far as mobile phones are concerned I find that they intrude on my life.

For these reason I believe in time Landline Telephony will not be required.

When you use a mobile phone, it goes to the nearest tower, then where?

Are you saying that mobile calls do not use the copper network?

Do you realise that the mess we have is because our Govt. could not see the difference between Telstra the retailer and wholesaler of telecommunications and Telstra the owner of telecommunications infrastructure.

The two should have been split, and Costello is to blame.