Bullshit over Broadband
Ever since National announced its $1.5 billion fibre to the home policy in May 2008, Labour has told fibs about it. Great big fibs. As National was pledging an amount around 400% more than Labour, they couldn’t do their normal cries of “It isn’t enough”.
So they claimed it would all go to Telecom, and entrench their monopoly status. And they kept repeating the lie.
And then yesterday when National announces further details of its policy, Labour has the cheek to claim that National has shifted its policy, and adopted Labour’s policy.
So get this – you tell lies about what a party’s policy is, and when it is clear the lies will no longer work, you then claim they have done a u-turn.
In the House Labour claimed:
Can the Minister confirm that by shifting from its pre-election policy of a single, regulated, utility model for delivering broadband to one that is regional, open, contestable, and technology-neutral, National has adopted Labour’s broadband investment policy framework; if this is true, why did National not campaign for that rather than the opposite?
Now let us first look at National’s policy:
National will contribute an investment of up to $1.5 billion in Crown capital alongside additional privatesector investment to accelerate the roll-out of ultrafast broadband for New Zealand, subject to five key principles:
Totally consistent with what was announced yesterday.
That this investment does not line the pockets of or give undue advantage to existing broadband network providers.
Again totally consistent with what was outlined yesterday. And totally contradictory to Labour’s claims over the last year that all the money would go to Telecom.
That the network is open-access so that many service providers can compete to provide broadband services over it.
Again totally consistent with yesterday’s announcement.
Nowhere at all does the policy say National will have a “single, regulated, utility model for delivering broadband”. National made it very clear it was open minded on what the model will be, so long as the principles outlined were adhered to.
I’ve praised Labour for their engagement over the copyright issue. And I think the Comms/IT policies pursued by Labour over recent years have generally been very good. The co-operation and mood in the industry is radically different to five years ago, and Labour’s record has been very good as a major contributor to that.
But this is why I’m pissed off by the fibs/lies they told over National’s broadband policy. Most of what Labour did was not opposed by National. I think National realised that this is an area where one shouldn’t be party partisan and at the Internet debates in 2005 and 2008, we got more agreement than disagreement.
But Labour, presumably shocked by the fact National pledged 400% more on broadband investment, has done nothing but spread bullshit over National’s policy, rather than actually say “Hey we support this goal”.
Unlike their admirable forward looking position on s92A, Labour seemed caught in the past trying to say that nothing should change from when they were in power. They foolishly attacked the Government for ceasing funding to the massive loss making Govt Secure Network (that almost no one in Government was using) and they complained about replacing a $340 million level of pledged investment with a $1.5 billion level of investment.
Anyway after months and months of lies about how Telecom had written National’s policy, how Telecom had donated to National, how this policy was a $1.5 billion subsidy to Telecom, how it would give Telecom a perpetual monopoly over our futures, maybe the bullshit will stop. I certainly hope so.
April 1st, 2009 at 9:22 am
Fucklabour, they couldn’t run the country when it was their job and they sure as hell wont being doing it when it isn’t.
They’re just a holding tank for the hasbeens and never will bes.
April 1st, 2009 at 9:31 am
Labour are fools. They scream and yell about anything – rather than taking a focused approach. They have lied to the public for nine years and think that from opposition they can contiue to do so.
April 1st, 2009 at 9:38 am
Another case of National doing where Labour formed some committees and had some cups of tea and chocolate biscuits followed by a minority interest impact assessment.
Ka pai John Key.
April 1st, 2009 at 9:58 am
The Public can actually see through this charade.
Don’t get het up DPF, this is going like clockwork.
They are getting a large share of ‘voice’ on the MSM. Far more than they actually deserve.
However, whilst the Tories were smart enough to keep a low profile, and plan for success.
Labour on the otherhand still think they can use Old Guard tactics. Sure they worked for two terms.became thoroughly discredited in the last three year. And what they havn’t got is the force of personality and faux conviction that was obvious before.
So all that comes across is confusion, bitterness, and pure sour grapes.
Old proverb:
If you have nothing positive to say, then don’t say anything.
April 1st, 2009 at 9:59 am
gee someone has swallowed a bee!
How dare they criticise…. dont you just hate sore losers. shoot them all
April 1st, 2009 at 10:04 am
speaking of losers jacobvanstandard – thats why National are in Government, your team lost because the voters hate them.
HTH’s.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:33 am
This from the ‘policy’- ie can be changed at any time
Communications and Technology Minister Steven Joyce yesterday announced public-private partnerships would be established to deliver ultra-fast broadband to 75 per cent of New Zealanders within 10 years.
That 75 per cent was based in the 25 biggest cities and towns and leaves out the entire West Coast – something Grey District Mayor Tony Kokshoorn said was “just not on”.
THat leaves out Thames, Whakatane, Kaitaia, Queenstown etc
Watch for an about flip ‘ by lunchtime’
April 1st, 2009 at 10:35 am
This the list of the ‘top towns’
Auckland, Christchurch, Wellington, Hamilton, Napier and Hastings, Dunedin, Tauranga, Palmerston North and Fielding, New Plymouth and Hawera, Kapiti and Levin, Nelson, Rotorua, Whangarei, Invercargill, Wanganui, Gisborne, Cambridge and Te Awamutu, Blenheim, Timaru, Taupo, Masterton, Whakatane, Ashburton, Tokoroa, and Oamaru.
Everybody else can ‘eat cake’
[DPF: WHile Labour's policy was fibre to the home to 0% of NZers. I think 75% is a hell of a lot better than 0%. The most rural 25% will get faster broadband but it will be probably satellite and mobile technology as the marginal costs are too prohibitive in less dense areas.]
April 1st, 2009 at 10:39 am
Seems like a good start.
Better than Labour did over the past 10 years.
But I suppose Theresa Gattung was a mate of Huluns.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:46 am
Jacob, you think that the government should be subsidising more to all those small towns? You mean like the Labour policy was to do? Oh, no, that’s right, the Labour policy was to sit on their hands.
You really are a tosser – basically whatever National announce it is too much or too little. I don’t think you’ve ever been on here and said that a single National policy was just right.
April 1st, 2009 at 11:04 am
lol @ Jacob. Best example of straw grasping that I’ve seen in ages!
April 1st, 2009 at 11:15 am
PaulL-word, DPF uses the bullshit word, t and thats the best to describe this watered down election bribe. remember once the huge hue and cry over 25 hours ‘free’ kindergarten hours. The best DPf can say is that its ‘totally consistent’ , which means its his partisan way of saying they have moved the goalposts, changed the rules AND dont anyone dare to oppose us.
I thought the ‘fibre to the home ‘ was a stupid idea anyway, but at least they have walked away from that.
75% of NZ , seems to only mean the top 25 centres, we can now count out any residential users by 2014 as promised as the time frame has been pushed out so far as to be meaningless.
April 1st, 2009 at 11:46 am
Oh so now according to jocob van hartog
Something that virtually nobody has yet is a human right now
Thats the mentallity of the left for you
April 1st, 2009 at 11:47 am
DPF. the Labour caucus is still having trouble with deciding how to deal with this new government.
As you posted a wee while ago, they were having a little trouble deciding a)how to attack JK et al and b) how to be an effective opposition. This proves once again that they still have issues (aside from rampant socialism that is).
In the past, all oppositions did just that: the opposite – sometimes whether they agreed with a policy or not. Now, with JK at the helm and a more open and results (rather than politics) orientated government that is bi-partisan in it’s approach, the traditional rules no longer apply.
As exhibited with Clare Curran’s approach to s92a, there is a glimmer of hope. Unfortunately, you still have A King and P Goff at the helm who authorise these “attacks” because they know nothing else. Thats how they have been taught.
In politics when you resort to blatant untruths, such as we have here, you can tell that the party is failing to get any traction. They tried this in the election campaign (remember Mike Williams’ little side trip) and the strategy didn’t work then and, in the face of a disciplined government, it won’t work now.
This is another great example of where leadership is being tested for Labour and is failing. Bring on the likes of Shane Jones who is far more credible, focused and able to adapt while bring the likes of Jacinda Adern up with him. While not being a Labour supporter, New Zealand still needs a credible opposition for things to function well. I hope Phil Goff can get past his own hubris, see this problem for what it is and act upon it or, god forbid, he may end up having to be moved involuntarily. Make no mistake, Andrew Little, for all his conciliatory words on Q+A two weeks ago about supporting Phil and Annette, is just the bloke to enact change when needed and be prepared to step on toes if he thinks it is in the best interests of his party.
XChequer
http://thenzhomeoffice.blogspot.com/
April 1st, 2009 at 11:57 am
Oh go and blow it out your arse warthog, what a sad deluded individual you are. Your poxy little Liarbore party couldn’t give a fat rats arse for anyone outside the warm glow of the street lights. This was the party that actively destroyed many rural communities by shutting down their schools. Take you fantasy tails somewhere else.
April 1st, 2009 at 12:22 pm
Labour have offered nothing constructive in this debate. I will say it again, they are nothing more than shit-stirring, scaremongering bullshit artists.
April 1st, 2009 at 12:38 pm
Ok, at the risk of asking a dumb question.
I commented on another thread yesterday that i thought that $1.5B or whatever it ends up costing just seems like a lot of money.
What would we get for say 1/3 of that?
Could the spare $1B be used for fixing transport or something that has immediate benefits?
here’s my dumb question.
How much would it cost to give ecveryone a free satellite dish, or get broadband to run thru Sky’s dish as just about everyone has one anyway?
Isn’t that more likely the way of the future insteand of burying something in the ground?
Would that work??
they do say it might take ten years to do this thing; how much have things changed in the last 10 years?
April 1st, 2009 at 12:53 pm
GSN is Government Shared Network not “Govt Secure Network”. Also it did have 7 agencies signed up of which Labour, Education, and MFAT are not exactly very small. The issue was it was very late, over engineered and provide little extra value than could be obtained from existing commercial vendors. Have a chat to Micheal Foley some time and ask what the taxpayer got from $8.2 million of Voco consulting for GSN.
April 1st, 2009 at 1:08 pm
For goodness sake David. Being a faithful soldier is one thing, but do you have to be quite so disingenuous?
Maurice Williamson repeatedly framed the proposal as a version of the NZI’s FibreCo — a monolithic regulated monopoly in which the government would take a half stake. He told Tom Pullar-Strecker of the Dom Post that it would be a single PPP in which mums and dads would be able to invest, and in which the government would guarantee a return and “would forgo any return on its investment if the revenue stream in early years was inadequate to pay the set rate of return”. He said that all telcos would be “possible partners” in the company and might even wish to bring in their own network assets.
He also repeatedly promised (as did other National MPs throughout election year) that National would “ensure” that 75% of NZ homes would be connected to the new “ultra-fast” fibre network by 2014. Now that was bullshit …
I can see some merit in the new proposals, but it’s a stone cold fact that what was on offer last year was something quite different.
April 1st, 2009 at 1:37 pm
I should also note that I put it to Williamson at the NZ Internet Debate, just before the election, that his policy was for a monolithic provider. He seemed to agree.
Even the official policy summary you link to in your post refers quite explicitly to a single PPP.
I really think that this ranting about “lies” is out of order.
[DPF: And Maurice confirmed, when asked, that the method of delivery was not decided, and would be determined once in office - exactly as has happened. And Labour have lied because they started calling it a subsidy to Telecom within minutes of Key's speech, and Key's speech has always made it clear that monopolies not getting further entrenched was a key principle.]
April 1st, 2009 at 1:46 pm
Razork:
Wireless is rubbish. HAving been a consumer of Wireless, DSL and Cable, I can wholeheartedly say that the superior product is cable.
Providing people with wireless would be about as effective as throwing people an ISDN line and then dropping it out every 25 minutes.
April 1st, 2009 at 9:32 pm
Heh heh heh looks like you boys learnt a little something from your old mate Rob. That’s the spirit, use taxpayers’ money on a bet that something built by the government will meet the needs of the people, promise loads of jobs will come from it and squeeze out the private sector in the meantime – after all, government knows what’s best right?
Do tell why my elderly parents and their friends should have to pay taxes so that New Zealand internet consumers (don’t pretend most people benefiting are exporters or the like) can download movies and music faster?
Labour and National are just arguing the detail, and Labour is throwing dirt as would be expected. The truth is that government regulation has directly and indirectly squeezed out future private sector infrastructure led investment by a combination of local loop unbundling (devaluing Telecom’s return on investment and destroying incentives for Telstra Clear to build) and the RMA allowing councils to unnecessarily restrict the installation of overhead cable networks.
The people who want fast broadband are either not willing to pay for it or not in sufficiently large numbers to count – and more importantly, a fast domestic network does not solve the issue of the cost of providing connectivity to the rest of the world.
All the excuses that these are the highways and railways of the 21st century is sleight of hand to justify subsidies – most industries can make some weak argument that they are “special” and deserving of “investment”. The internet is no more special.
April 2nd, 2009 at 6:19 am
LOL! Russell Brown showing his inability to accept that Keys government has improved on an initial flawed policy.
No, we slag a discarded policy.
Russell, go back to you dead end blog.