With the result of the election on November 24, I was sworn in as the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy on 3 December 2007.

It has been an exceptionally busy time as we take briefings from the Department and various agencies, move offices and roll up our sleeves to implement our election policies.

First up is the high speed national broadband network to deliver a minimum of 12 Mbps to 98% of Australians and improved services to all Australians.

Thank you for all your messages of support and congratulations.

We will be working hard to govern in the interests of all Australians.

Federal Labor will provide ISP (Internet Service Provider) filtering for all Australian homes, schools and public computers – under its Cyber-Safety policy announced this week.

This follows the recent high profile case of a 16 year-old student, Tom Wood who was able to bypass the Federal Government's $84 million PC filters in a mere 30 minutes.

Federal Labor supports Government initiatives to combat online threats, and believes that governments must do all they can to protect children from inappropriate material on the internet.

The Howard Government has become complacent and its Internet safety policies are inadequate.

As the online world evolves, government policy must be responsive.

Our children also need to be better equipped to deal with emerging online threats, such as cyber-bullying, invasion of privacy, and computer addiction.

Federal Labor will improve existing government programs in this area by:

Providing a mandatory 'clean feed' internet service for all homes, schools and public computers that are used by Australian children, so that ISPs will filter out content identified as prohibited by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA). The ACMA 'blacklist' will also be made more comprehensive to ensure that children are protected from harmful and inappropriate online material;

Providing children with age-appropriate online cyber-safety resources and making sure teachers are skilled in cyber-safety;

Establishing a Youth Advisory Group (YAG) to ensure that the Government is kept up-to-date with issues that affect children online;

Undertaking further research into cyber-safety issues in Australia to determine where best to target future policy and funding in this area; and

Establishing a permanent Joint Parliamentary Standing Committee to investigate and report on cyber-safety in Australia.

A Rudd Labor Government will transform cyber-safety in Australia by providing Australian children, teachers and parents with a first-class cyber-safety education and by providing new forums in which cyber-safety issues will be raised and addressed.

You can view Labor's complete policy on cyber safety at www.alp.org.au

The Document supporting this blog can be found here http://www.alp.org.au/download/now/a_broadband_future_for_australia.pdf

The OECD has overnight released a damning rejection of the analysis of a report on Australia's broadband performance compiled by a recently formed, minor Australian consulting firm and endorsed earlier this week by the Minister for Communications, Senator Coonan.

Earlier this week, Senator Coonan 'welcomed' a report from 'Market Clarity' as "a new and robust assessment of Australia's broadband performance."

However, just a day later, the OECD has found that the report released earlier this week by 'Market Clarity':

• Contained a series of "serious methodological and factual errors";
• Includes findings that are "highly dubious and are likely the result of computational errors and/or a flawed methodology".
• "omit(ed) current, official data sources"

The OECD went on to say that many of the false assumptions on which the Market Clarity report is based could have easily been cleared up had the firm contacted the OECD about its findings.

The public confusion caused by this utterly discredited report could have been avoided if the Minister (or the media) had bothered to put Market Clarity's criticisms to the OECD. 

The only news story here is the desperation of a government Minister that would blindly trust a report by a recently formed minor Australian analyst company over a long standing, universally respected international organisation.

Over the past month the Minister for Communications has:

• Directed the ACCC to stop collecting data on Australia's broadband performance;
• Launched an advertising propaganda campaign talking up Australia's broadband performance;
• Commenced behind closed doors negotiations for a political broadband quick fix with Telstra; and
• Desperately endorsed a minor analyst's report (without even reading it) over data collected by the Organisation for Economic Development.

Australia needs action from the Howard government on Australia's broadband problems – not the politics of denial.

Labor remains committed to its plan to deliver access to True Broadband of at least 12 mbps to 98% of Australian homes and families in partnership with the private sector.

 

The OECD's response to the Market Clarity Report

The OECD welcomes informed criticism on all the information and communication technology indicators it produces in co-operation with its Member countries. We routinely field inquiries and queries on methodology across all the data we publish to assist policy makers.  The recent report by the consultancy firm Market Clarity, focusing on one of the indicators we publish, does not fall into the category of informed criticism and has serious methodological and factual errors.  Unfortunately, Market Clarity did not contact the OECD or offer us the possibility to comment on their report. We would have been able to clarify many of their misunderstandings as well as correct the factual and computational errors that appear in the report.
 
Market Clarity's omission of current, official data sources and subsequent estimation of broadband totals undermines the statistical validity of the report's findings.  In addition, Market Clarity has chosen to adopt a different methodology for counting broadband (e.g. including 3G) than the OECD but then applies it inconsistently. Finally, Market Clarity is also inconsistent across countries in how it attempts to remove connections slower than 256 kbit/s.
 
The OECD publishes statistics on broadband subscribers every six months. Data on broadband penetration by households are also published. These data are supplied by our experts in Member countries ranging across regulatory authorities, the Ministries responsible for communications policy and official statistical agencies. In Australia, for example, data are sourced from the ACCC and ABS. We also confer with the leading firms in each market in gathering data on prices and the services on offer as well as collecting subscriber data. The OECD broadband data are also reviewed by government officials (Ministry officials, telecommunication regulators, statistical agencies) before their release.
 
The OECD Working Party that produces data on broadband statistics is comprised of national telecommunication regulators and Ministry officials from the 30 OECD countries. This composition provides access to official broadband data sources that can otherwise be difficult to assemble.  Without direct contact with regulators and member governments it is possible for researchers to miss relevant, official data. For example, Market Clarity's analysis for Korea, one of the leading broadband countries in the world, is based on extrapolations from January 2006. However, Korea has arguably the best broadband reporting timetable of any country in the world. The Korean government updates broadband subscriber data monthly via its ISIS statistical portal (http://isis.nic.or.kr). The data is only available in Korean and the OECD is able to tap into its diverse language culture to gather this and other member country data. Market Clarity's report, however, replaces official data with their own estimates and criticizes the OECD data as not being consistent with their own.
 
One of the other striking examples of outdated data in the report is the Czech Republic. The OECD receives official broadband data every three months from the Czech Ministry of Informatics (http://www.micr.cz). Market Clarity's most recent data from the Czech Republic was from 2005, nearly 18 months old and a full year older than the official data that the OECD reported last month for December 2006. There are many countries where the OECD data from official sources is more recent than Market Clarity was able to locate. Market Clarity's use of estimates instead of official data provided to the OECD ensures there will be differences in subscriber totals and the findings of the report in general.
 
Another key discrepancy in the report is the treatment of 3G mobile subscribers which are dealt with as a separate indicator in the OECD methodology. The Market Clarity report includes 3G mobile subscribers in the United States for June 2006 (11 million) and wonders how these could be omitted from the OECD figures. Contacting the OECD would have provided a ready explanation. The OECD and its member countries have agreed not to include these data in this particular indicator. This does not advantage or disadvantage the United States' ranking as these data are similarly excluded for all countries.
 
Indeed, if Market Clarity had been consistent in their treatment of 3G mobile across countries then the additional 3G mobile subscribers for Korea (36 million) and Japan (48 million) would dwarf all other countries and give Korea a combined broadband penetration rate of 103 subscribers per 100 inhabitants – more broadband subscribers than people. 
 
The OECD recognizes the need for a new indicator on mobile broadband but there are significant methodological issues that first need to be carefully examined.
 
A good deal of the report focuses on broadband at speeds lower than 256 kbit/s. The OECD makes every effort to ensure that the data we receive from national regulators adheres to our strict reporting guidelines. By way of background the OECD created the 256 kbit/s benchmark to exclude services such as ISDN (128 kbit/s).  This was an important criteria for data collection, in the early provision of broadband services, but has been made largely irrelevant by developments in the market place.  In France, for example, Market Clarity claim authorities collect data on services down to 64 kbit/s. However, broadband offers slower than 256 kbit/s aren't even available in the market. France Telecom offers DSL services at 512 kbit/s, 2 Mbit/s, 8 Mbit/s and 18 Mbit/s.  Smaller firms in France offer DSL services up to 28 Mbit/s. Notwithstanding this the OECD regularly confers with operators to see if any sub-256 kbit/s offers are available and if they would make a material difference to the reported data.
 
Market Clarity is inconsistent itself with the treatment of these connections. For example, the report creates an indicator limited to 256 kbit/s and above and actually includes sub-256 kbit/s connections for some countries (e.g. using FCC data at 200 kbit/s for the United States) while excluding sub 256 kbit/s connections for others (e.g. Canada, Norway and the United Kingdom).  This breakdown offered by Market Clarity suffers from serious methodological and data consistency problems.
 
Finally, some of the findings of the report are highly dubious and are likely the result of computational errors and/or a flawed methodology. For example, the final table of the report (Table 10, right column) seems to be an attempt to summarize the broadband penetration rate strictly among households (excluding business connections). The results show New Zealand and Turkey as the two leading countries in the OECD in terms of households with broadband subscriptions. Surprisingly, Turkey's reported broadband penetration rate limited to households (62.8%) is almost double that of longtime broadband leader Korea (38.7%).
 
These results are in stark contrast to data on individual, household and business broadband penetration supplied to the OECD from official government sources. Perhaps Market Clarity was unaware that the OECD publishes these usage statistics in addition to subscriber data.
 
Many of these flaws could have been avoided simply by contacting the OECD and talking to us about our methodology and data sources. The result is a report that suffers from data problems and methodological errors, rendering it incomparable with the OECD's published statistics.

Labor welcomes the public release of the terms and conditions of the G9's proposal for the roll out of a FTTN network in Australia.
 
In contrast to the behind closed doors discussions in which the Minister is currently engaged, the public release of the details of the G9's FTTN plans will allow an informed debate about the merits of the proposal.  
 
However, the Minister's claim that the G9's proposal makes Labor's plans for a National Broadband Network unnecessary is simply a desperate attempt to cover for the government's lack of policy.
 
Firstly, the FTTN network proposed by the G9 will only cover five mainland capital cities. Labor's National Broadband Network will reach 98% of Australian homes and businesses.  Telstra and G9 have both stated that for a national plan of this scale government leadership and investment is necessary.

Without Labor's National Broadband Network millions of Australians in rural and regional Australia will be left with a second class service.

Secondly, the G9's proposal relies on significant legislative reforms that the Minister has so far failed to endorse. Until the Minister commits to providing the G9 with regulatory protection from the threatened overbuild of its network by Telstra, the G9 proposal will remain nothing more than words on paper.

What is the Minister's position on the viability of these regulatory reforms? Only weeks ago the Minister told ABC Lateline that these regulatory hurdles were "almost insurmountable". Has the Minister changed her position on telecommunications regulation yet again?

Labor recognises the regulatory impediments to FTTN roll outs in Australia and has committed to examining the G9's requests for regulatory reform, as well as those of other FTTN proposals, through a public competitive process. This road map for regulatory reform outlined by Labor is the responsible way to facilitate the roll out of a national FTTN network in Australia.
 
Unfortunately, the Minister has no such plan for regulatory reform in the telecommunications sector.  In contrast to Labor, Senator Coonan is more interested in engaging in political spin than in undertaking the policy work necessary to facilitate the infrastructure investments needed to continue Australia's economic prosperity over the next decade.

Today's commencement of the National Do Not Call list banning unwanted telemarketing phone calls will be a relief to Australian families who have been forced to wait three years for the out of touch Howard government to act on this issue. 

Labor has been calling for the establishment of a National Do Not Call List since 2004 – but the Howard Government has been more interested in playing politics than taking action for the benefit of everyday Australians.

When Labor adopted its policy for a Do Not Call List in 2004 the Howard government described it as 'populist' and questioned whether such a list was workable, despite the fact that 'Do Not Call' lists were successfully working in the United Kingdom and the United States at the time.

When the Member for Chisholm, Anna Burke gave notice that she would be introducing a private members bill into the House of Representatives in 2005 creating a Do Not Call List the government refused to even allow a vote on the bill. 

After the Member for Chisholm gave notice of her private members bill, the government cynically released a discussion paper on the issue on the day before the bill was scheduled for debate. 

The Howard government needs to explain why it has made Australian families endure years of annoying telemarketing calls for the sole purpose of political points scoring. 

Petty politics like this demonstrates the arrogance of a government who has been in power for too long.

A Labor government would have listened to the people and spared Australian families three years of irritating telemarketing phone calls.

The Howard government's 'Broadband Guarantee' is just the latest broadband bandaid from a Minister under pressure to find some cover for her mismanagement of her portfolio.

This is the Howard government's fourth attempt in three years at fixing Australia's appalling broadband problems*. However, like the programs that went before it, the Broadband Guarantee is doomed to disappoint because it fails to deliver the serious investment desperately needed in the sector.

While Telstra, the G9, the Internet Industry Association, Rupert Murdoch and most independent commentators agree that Australian broadband needs a multi billion dollar investment boost, the Howard government continues to paper over the problems with million dollar stop pork-barrels.

Without this desperately needed multi-billion dollar investment, all the government's 'Broadband Guarantee' guarantees for Australian consumers is more of the same 'fraudband'.

This plan is short term politics of the worst kind. Just months ago, the Minister was claiming that "no one is complaining about broadband speeds in metropolitan Australia" as she desperately tried to defend the indefensible. 

However, today the government is announcing increased funding for metropolitan broadband. This is an impressive back flip made in response to growing public pressure on broadband.

It's about time Australia benefited from some policy vision instead of this short sighted political opportunism. 

Australia needs a nation building investment in broadband infrastructure to sustain Australia's prosperity into the future.

Labor has committed to $2.6 billion in public funding as well as a series of regulatory reforms designed to unlock billions of dollars of private sector investment in a national fibre to the node network. This is the kind of vision and leadership needed to ensure the future prosperity of the Australian economy.

***after Hibis, the Metropolitan Broadband Blackspots Program and Broadband Connect. Labor discovered through the Senate Estimates Process that the Metropolitan Broadband Blackspots program has been an abject failure. More than two years after this $50 million program was announced by the Prime Minister during the 2004 election campaign, government bungling has resulted in $1.3 million being spent on administration costs while only $200,000 has been spent on providing broadband services. 

Communications Minister Helen Coonan has again demonstrated how out of touch the Howard government is by claiming this morning that Australian broadband is 'ok'.

Helen Coonan is so clueless on broadband she probably thinks the Great Wall of China was built to keep the rabbits out.

I have a simple message for the Howard government from Australian families and small businesses – Australian broadband is not 'ok'!

No wonder the Howard government has been so complacent on broadband - it doesn't even understand there's a problem.

When more than 100,000 applications for Broadband are rejected each year – this is not ok.

When Australian children can't access what they need for a modern education – this is not ok. 

When Australian small businesses are forced to compete with second class infrastructure – this is not ok.

In saying that Australia's broadband infrastructure is "ok at the moment, but it won't be in the future", Senator Coonan has admitted that the Howard government has failed to prepare Australia for the future.

However, despite this admission, Senator Coonan could offer no plan to remedy this situation.

Senator Coonan insisted today that the "prospects are reasonable that there will be an opportunity for a provider or a group of providers to roll out a fast fibre network very soon" and that ultimately the provider will "probably will be Telstra".

Senator Coonan must be ignorant of the fact that Telstra have advised the Australian Stock Exchange that it will not be proceeding with the roll out of a fibre to the node network because of the Howard government's regulations of the past. related article

When announcing to the market that Telstra couldn't proceed with this investment, Telstra Regulatory Policy head Phil Burgess stated that "The government needs to get its own policy house in order before there will be progress for all Australia on the FTTN talks."

Similarly, Senator Coonan must be unaware that the Optus led G9 proposal can't proceed without a legislative prohibition on overbuild (a position reiterated on ABC TV this morning by Soul CEO Michael Simmons); a major regulatory reform that the Minister has ruled out considering until at least 2009.

Given the Minister's refusal to even consider the necessary regulatory reforms until 2009, Australia will not see a national fibre to the node network under the Howard government.

Labor has proposed a visionary plan for a National Broadband Network providing $4.7 billion in public equity for the national roll out of a fibre to the node network on a pro-competitive, open access basis.  The only way Australia will see a national fibre to the node broadband network is to elect a Rudd government.

An extraordinary two page long press release issued today by Senator Coonan again shows the pressure the Minister's incompetent handling of her portfolio has put the government under.

As a result of Senator Coonan's bungling of the Communications portfolio:

• Australia is ranked 17th out of 30 countries surveyed by the OECD for take up of to 256kbps broadband. Despite growth off a low base, Australia's relative position has not changed for the previous two years.


• The World Economic Forum ranks Australia 25th in the world in terms of available internet bandwidth and Australia's 'Networked Readiness' at 15th and falling.


• Publishing and Broadcasting Limited chair James Packer has described Australia's broadband position as "embarrassing" and stated that there was a huge consumer demand for online video that is being held back by Australia's antiquated broadband infrastructure.


• The Fairfax has stated that Australian "internet speeds are slower and internet pricing is more expensive, than many other developed countries".


• Rupert Murdoch has stated that ustralian broadband infrastructure is a "disgrace" and commented that "We are being left behind and we will pay for it".

The fact is that telecommunications regulation under the Howard government is not working.  Our telecommunications infrastructure is crumbling, consumer issues are increasing and the industry is bearing the burden of swathes of overlapping, ineffective and unnecessarily duplicative regulation. 

Labor wants to fix this regulation, not just for the benefit of Telstra's long suffering shareholders, but for the benefit of all Australians.

Unlike the government, the Labor Party does not believe in regulation for the sake of regulation.  Labor wants targeted and effective regulation that achieves results for consumers.  The existing consumer regulations that the Minister so dearly loves have done nothing to stop breaches of consumer protection regulation increasing for the past three years. 

Labor will of course consider the views of unions in the telecommunications sector just as it will consider the views of telecommunications providers and consumers.  Unlike Senator Coonan, Labor maintains a healthy working relationship with all parties in the communications sector.