Lateline - NBN debate: Malcolm Turnbull vs Anthony Albanese - 12/08/2013
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 14 ต.ค. 2024
- The Deputy Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, and the Opposition Communications spokesman, Malcolm Turnbull, debate the government's version of the NBN versus the Coalition's alternative. Moderated by Emma Alberici.
![ILLSLICK - WINTER IS COMING [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dwTMeM1zIhQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Turnbull mentions British Telecom. I quote the then Chief Technology Officer of BT: "Fibre to the [node] cabinet is one of the biggest mistakes humanity has made. It ties a knot in the cable in terms of bandwidth and imposes huge unreliability risks." This was in the UK where there has been maintenance of the copper network, unlike in Australia.
ITS NOW 60 BILLION PLUS
And even more now, as it continues to rise.
For da jeezuhs
This hasn't aged well at all. I'm an Australian living in Canada, I've had 1Gbps for 5 years @ ~$100 a month, not $20K. Malcolm's argument was dishonest and was based on households downloading over 300TB a month
Aged pretty well, I spent thousands to get FTTP at home and now FTTP is almost always slower than my Telstra 5G dongle (which is cheaper) on download speed and only marginally better on upload speed. Thank god the gov didn't throw away billions on a tech that is almost obsolete 10 years later.
@@charleswannan5033If every Australian used 5G as Home Internet the speed would actually likely be slower than even ADSL due to the nature of wireless networks being stressed for capacity
True, but MT was saying that if you want a 1gbps line it will cost the consumer $20k per month. At the end of the day it won't.
"they have been plucked out of a coco pops packet"
- Albanese 2013
3 muppets all talking nonsense Malcolm Turnbull thinks fttn is the future, muppet. Anthony Albanese is building a superior network but is totally incapable of explaining it. And the host has no technical knowledge on the subject and cuts Malcolm of for speaking too technically. Its National Broadband Network its going to be technical. btw 20,000 dollars per month is total BS. those figures are totally misrepresenting any truth. Infrastructure is shared, people will not all be using the network at capacity all of the time. Its like comparing what it would cost a person to leave a lane empty for there personal use during peak hour they could travel anywhere at maximum speed. This is about infrastructure building it for what we will need in 20-30 years since its going to take 10 to complete. Fiber is the best unfortunately we have 3 muppets who all for there own reasons are incapable of informing the public. So now we suffer.
To his credit, Malcolm does know a lot about the technology, which a Communications Minister should; however the fundamental point is that his slightly cheaper policy will be pointless in 5-10 years time; the amount of data we use grows exponentially and quickly. Remember less than 20 years ago we were using 2.5mb FLOPPY DISKS, 10 years ago 700mb CDs for everything, now we're using 2TB Portable Hard drives; the Liberal policy is essentially pointless.
Also, politifact says 90bn claim = false
In 2019 it's still not finished and the cost is over $60b, with average download speeds of only 5-20mbps.
FTTP would have been cheaper.
FTTP rollout is vastly superior in every way. Imagine how much it would be to maintain copper and nodes over those years plus the eventual upgrade to FTTP anyway? Why ruin a great chance to do a giant leap forward, catch up with the world and upgrade? The dodgy copper that is out there is in such poor conditions you will definitly see problems arise. FTTP is for the future and there will definitely be new technologies that will require it for our industries. We need to get rid of copper wires.
History has shown you were absolutely right.
The great leap backwards.
Starting FTTN 10 years ago would have been great. But not starting it now. Unfortunately, the magnitude of the changes we're facing is forcing us to scramble. Starting something now requires that we put in the ground something that lasts. FTTN simply will not. The FTTP standard for 40 gigabits per second to homes has just been ratified. All it takes is the backbone upgrade. That will last and provide value for money. We are already spending $50 billion without it. FTTP was not Labor's idea. It was recommended to Labor by an expert panel set up to find a solution to a major problem.
"Starting FTTN 10 years ago would have been great."
It would not have been great, but it would have been halfway workable.
Thanks Malcolm. I now have fiber to the node and its slower than my ADSL2 connection.
Unfortunately, well all now do.
"you always shut me down just as I'm about to make the most important point"
Yeah Turnbull, as if you weren't continuously doing that to Anthony you pipe loving spud.
Imagine how much more Malcolm Turnbull would have won this debate had he been arguing for the far more superior Broadband plan.
Emma - your performance here was deplorable. I had thought you were better than this.
He is well spoken, but at times in this interview he practically makes up information on the spot. It's like a LNP fairly tale, $20k for a 1Gbps line.
History has shown he (MT) DID in fact make it all up, and outright lied to all Australians.
Content aside, this reporter is completely out of her depth. She keeps cutting off MT when he brings up the revenue assumptions Labor has in their plan because they are talking about the cost.
The awkward moment when the costing is actually inclusive of revenue considerations.
I loved how she said "we need to be comparing apples with apples to have a coherent debate".
MT's face was priceless, looked like he wanted to say "We're trying too but you are too stupid to understand".
what they arent saying is NETWORK BOTTLE NECKS (peak loads) thats when Turnbulls net drops down to nothing and the fibre to the house keeps going.
I've just worked it out ....... Malcolm looks like Andre Rieu with a haircut !!
It's true that the NBN Co. costs will probably blow out. But it's also true that the LNP cost will blow out too. I guess the question is; If FTTH costs too much, does it make sense to spend 2/3 of the cost on a project that will need to be replaced the year it is finished? What's a bigger waste 50, 60bn on a service that will last 6 decades? Or 20, 30, 40bn on a service that is inadequate as soon as it's finished. Turnbull admitted a day or two ago that the uploads speeds will be around 4-6mbps!
In 2019 it's still not finished and the cost is over $60b, with average download speeds of only 5-20mbps, and upload speeds even slower.
Albo was right
Mr Turnbull you should have gone with Labors plan fiber to the node is now obsolete and
will cost Australia dearly and will stifle inovation
another 4 billion!
@@djpain Don't forget the add the money lost by businesses
Poor Malcolm is really trynna explain why his plan deserves the time of day but when he tries to explain it apparently its all too hard and she doesnt want to listen. Isn't that just willing ignorance?
FTTH > FTTN... Australia's existing copper infrastructure is falling apart anyway...
All I can say about this is that Emma is not being fair in this.. I do sympathise with you Malcolm on that but the facts are: YES FTTH/P will have a high cost on the short term and YES people are willing to pay for it now. HOWEVER.... FTTN WILL COST MORE on the LONG TERM.. It won't last. Why should we pay more on long term for a service that WILL NOT provide a good as service as Labor's FTTH/P? Why not pay the maximum price once and enjoy sufficient service that WILL LAST? FTTN=Lower cost short term and higher cost long term. FTTH/P High short term cost, no long term cost. FTTN=Short term second rate dodgy bullcrap. FTTH/P= Long Term efficient benefits.. Get the picture?
***** You know nothing about technology. Please, just shut up.
1gbps will eventually be a necessity. If people thought like you did, we would still be rocking 56kbps and video would be an impossibility. You wouldn't be able to sit there and smugly watch this video while proclaiming "We don't need faster internet herpdy derpdy doo."
The host is an absolute muppet! The overall cost is absolutely offset by revenue, how does she not understand that? For example if it costs you lets say $5 to make but you are earning $3 dollars at the time of construation, the overall cost for the year is $2 dollars, out of the governments pocket. An exaggeration of the revenue stream would greatly underestimate overall cost. Turnbull does his best to explain this to this muppet but she keeps looking at him with this vague look, its infuriating!
Agreed - they're talking two separate languages. Malcolm knows what he's talking about and Emma has failed to understand the concept of peak debt, how revenues are included in that calculation and how differences in assumptions affecting peak debt will impact funding (and the project's overall) costs.
Ftth gives almost infinite capabilities. Where as fttn drops off over distance. Not to mention lag and ping. BECAUSE PING FUCKING MATTERS
He is kind of right on that point though. But his is based on that 1Gbps service being active over that period. All 'pipes' are purchased with the assumption that not every user will be downloading their maximum limit 24/7. (eg a carrier doesn't purchase 100/40mbps for every person accessing their service, and they use data caps to prevent it) Malcolm's means that 1Gbps = 0.125GBps = 10800GB/day = 324TB per month. That will actually cost a carrier a hell of a lot of money to guarantee.
I should have said; the speed that FTTN can provide is good for right now.
You're right, there's no point rolling out a FTTN solution unless it can be done in an instant. Otherwise, by the time it's done it'll be too slow.
In 2019 it's still not finished and the cost is over $60b, with average download speeds of only 5-20mbps.
@@mikeparkes79222024 now and not only is it still garbage, the governments finally trying to upgrade *some* premises to FTTP, also how stupid of the liberals to build out their shit to the node network and backflip on it once it’s almost done, costing the taxpayer billions upon billions more than it would have cost to just have fttp anyways😡😩😩
can't we first do fiber to the nodes, and then expand it to each household?
Obviously this particular video didn't age too well
Finally we have gigabit NBN for FTTP residential users but it is 1000/50 instead of 1000/400.
I would have understood more about the NBN had the reporter allowed them to finish what they are saying.
4. And Labor won't release any costings as to what 1000mbs would actually cost on their version of an NBN.
So naturally you have to take a look at the current market rate at about 20K a month. What'll happen is you'll have a connection capable of 1000mbs but no one will pay for more than 50mbs.
Live 4K video is only about 14mbs if you can find somewhere to stream it from. Most people will be fine with FTTN, and those who aren't can get their own link to their house or move to a new suburb.
Worst decision ever, always seeking short term bandaids instead of actually solving the fundamental problem.
Brilliantly done - If Conroy was fumbling, then Albo should be given an honorary set of red undies.
if only Albanese was a better debater more people would realize how bad abbott's plan is. if only...
In 2019 it's still not finished and the cost is over $60b, with average download speeds of only 5-20mbps.
thanks for the reply, if that's the case then it frustrates me to hear malcom arguing that homes don't need it - just say that business should be the first priority?
He did mention that greenfield developments will have it from the start, and most households won't have to bother with that final link until the copper begins to fail (a long way off yet, most is still performing per factory specs).
Most businesses already have access to those speeds anyway, called T1 to T3 connections. Anyone can buy into one, fibre is strung with the powerlines. Just costs $20K a month, so few takers.
But the difference in cost between FTTH and FTTN is reasonably minimal.
It would be more difficult because Labors plan is much harder to defend.
Anthony Albanese consistently gets shut down... love it!
Sorry Malcolm, we will need a new network by the time yours is completed. So your plan is not cost effective at all.Your network only cost slightly less than Labor's network, and complete only 2 years earlier than Labor's NBN, but you are sacrificing the improvement and scalability over the long term. If you are going to new network, you might as well build one that will last 50-100 years. But you decided instead to spend 30Bn to build one that last perhaps 10years, that's a shame.
In 2019 it's still not finished and the cost is over $60b, with average download speeds of only 5-20mbps.
I don't think the Liberals have released their costing either though.
1080p is 36mbps, 4k is whole lot more than that. 14mbps would be some very nasty 4k video.
People won't be fine with FTTN in two decades time. That's the problem. No one's questioning that FTTN would be good for right now.
thanks for the reply!
Honestly, Just fuckin say.. I dont guarantee when its done but we do it PROPERLY. Stuff all this deadlines, if you get the very best then take your TIME
1, 2 & 3. 100mbs will easily be possible with VDSL within 400m of a node. Most Australian copper is still returning near factory resistance, therefore little degradation. And if a branch starts to degrade, replace it with fiber then (so it's slowly done with existing skilled workforce rather than poorly trained newbies a-la insulation fiasco).
"faster, cheaper more affordable" nah budd more like "slower, more expensive, less affordable" i cannot wait to get 5g and get off this stupid fibre to the node crap 45Mbps for $80 a month come on...
Brilliant debate; its very hard to deny that Albanese did not seem flustered and incoherent. It is such a shame that a man in charge of such a great amount of infrastructure lacks an in-depth understanding of the details set out in the NBN's corporate plan.
Its fair to say that Malcolm dominated Albo in that one, and won the argument convincingly. However, while it was great to see Malcolm argue so well, it is also fair to say Labor clearly has the better policy.
really?
Emma Alberici's performance as moderator was absolutely horrendous!
That's the liberal policy in a nutshell (except new estates which will have FTTH to start with).
1. Nice. Got link? Will 100mbps be possible on much of Australia's copper lines?
2. But still assumptions. Good point though.
3. sortius-is-a-geek
4. Assured yes. But home owners, if they ever want 1Gbps, won't be paying for assured. There will be contention ratios involved. Turnbull was trying to make it sound as though everyone will pay 20k for that connection.
Agreed. Yeah, he's a shady character haha...
Malcolm did well not to leap the desk and throttle the interviewer. Journalists are increasingly priding themselves on being rude, ignorant and combative. Ask a question and then let them both answer it.
1. Vectored VDSL can provide 100mbs at 400m. IEEE confirmed last year.
2. Assumptions based in reality as opposed to threefold increase in fixed telecomms cost in 7 years.
3. Source?
4. Current market rate of assured 1000mbs. Call Telstra if you doubt me too.
Albanese had quips and parroted lines. Turnbull understands the technology and how business really works.
That the moderator wasn't prepared to let him talk technical details (even dumbed down to the level of "pipes") is shameful too.
This moderator is a joke. Hopefully the LNP pulls a Labor on Abbott and puts Turnbull into the PM position.
17:00 to 20:00 ... This three minutes of television is where I lost all respect for Turnbull. Watch how he slips the word "guaranteed" in to turn his blatant lies into political truth. Yes, guaranteed links are expensive. But that's not what anyone was talking about. That wasn't what Albanese (or Alberici) were talking about. And looking at it with the benefit of hindsight I gained a lot of respect for Albanese. Despite being new to the portfolio and not having a technical understanding of contention ratios with respect to product planning, he provided a legitimate response that demonstrated his desire to be honest. What a contrast.
Mr Turnbull moves the goal posts by quoting the cost to a RSP of a uncontended fibre line of $20k per month for a guaranteed one gigabyte service. This is a nonsense argument as the public don’t need their own uncontended 1Gbs line at the moment.
He is quoting the price for a business service!
He then uses this as an argument that fibre infrastructure to each home is extravagant.
But fibre cable down each street is far more reliable backbone than copper and naturally allows for up to 1Gbs speeds should the public require it.
NBN provided fibre infrastructure to an estate of 300 homes for just $450k.
Take-up of fibre is greater as is the revenue it earns as the service is faster and reliable.
Turnbull is fully aware that he is verballing the panel and the public. His interest is to win the debate at any cost, rather than to provide the best solution for the nation.
In answer to Emma’s final question, we need a fibre network down every street, to reliably deliver 100-200Mbs plans.
A 1GB consumer plan does not cost $20k and Mr Turnbull knew it!
Fibre delivers 2.5GB down the street shared between 32 users.
Turnbull then quotes nbn forecast! Ha how are those going Malcom?
Albanese finished strong but really needs to pick up his game to match MT. Turnbull is a smooth talker, that's for sure. Couple of things though;
@3min You will not get 100mbs at a distance of 400m. Not a chance in hell.
@8min At the end of the day those are mostly assumptions.
@12min MT does not mention that most of the existing copper will have to be replaced to meet the LNP promise of a minimum 50mbps by 2019.
@17min $20k. A Blatant lie. Albanese should know this stuff. Contention ratios.
Can't wait for the new business plan to see the day of light and you labor supporters will realise that time is money... and all of these delays are going to cost big time. That is why AA still has it sitting on his desk. Every comany in Australia has posted their annual reports where is the NBNCo.s. ask them to come clean.
Mr Albanese, re your 1,000Mb download speeds, why would I want to download 166 high-def movies simultaneously?
Not much point if the nodes are a massive bottleneck. Which they well could be.
Go VDSL!!! *goes back to using Pentium 2.*
The girl made fools of both of them you got to love her.
As a Network Administrator Fibre to each individual premises is an absolute burden on money and resources. Now before everyone gets on their high horse about that let me explain. I feel that from my research into this particular topic there seems to be no stable evidence from industry professionals. I am sure that there has been; but when Individuals such as Mr. Albanese continue to digress with incorrect information, of course issues are going to arise. There are many copper cable standards of today. But the issue is that when people start to mention the word "Copper". They start to imagine the old Category 3 Multicore cable that Telephone lines/Fax Machines/DSL Modems etc run on. Lets talk about what sort of copper cabling would be used to each individuals house/premises. Over the years installations of copper cabling have included the old Cat3 (category 3) standard. Industry practise has rectified this to new standards such as Cat6 (Category 6). These cables are light years ahead of Cat3 and many different institutions around Australia choose to use this over Fibre Optics. Why you may ask? Well pretty much it can do near the same job. Yes Fibre has the ability to extend towards great leaps and bounds but ultimately where we are right now and into the next half a century we will not be achieving anything close to what it is ultimately capable of. Category 6 cable has the ability to exchange packets of data at a rate of 10 Gb/s (10 gigabits per second = 1250 MB/s = 1.25 GB/s). Now when you compare that to the 100 Megabits per second symmetrical speeds (both upload and download speeds) you can see that it is only delivering roughly 1% of what theoretically that cable can offer. So now you can see that Fibre to each individual premises is ultimately quite a waste of money. Now don't get me wrong Australia needs fibre. Some Single Mode fibre can expand many Km's and in Australia we most certainly need that. So it is the jobs of both NBN Co and the FEDERAL Government (not opposition) to weigh up what is needed and take heed of professional opinion.
+Rider Of OZ Sorry about that, I'm sure you will find the correct spelling of the word now.
Just because you're a Network Administrator doesn't make you an expert as is made pretty clear by your hilarious comments.
Australia needs the NBN and Albanese isn't informed/eloquent enough to sell it.
Don't believe their lies
Yet we did.
Abbott was a fool.
We expected foolish policy from him.
What will be your excuse for burdening the nation with this lemon of a NBN?
We expect more from you Mr Turnbull.
Much,much more.
Turdbul is now blaming labor and calling it a 'labor trainwreck' such a dick turdbull was and is.
this journalist is very rude
Calling her a journalist is a bit of a stretch, unless you mean rank amateur (and rude) journalist.
MT also conducted himself very well as well. It's clear that he knows what he's talking about and that AA had nothing other than insults.
Apparently (over time), it appears that the absolute reverse was true. MT was corrupt, incompetent and outright lied.
Labor's plan WAS the more reliable, smarter and ultimately cheaper way to go for the future, as opposed to being woeful and 15+ years out of date, thanks to MT.
Albanese is owned...
oh Malcolm ... dear, dear me. A spokes-knob for Abbott, who would've guessed?
Malcolm you are only an acting P.M
Every time this woman refuses to listen to information about revenues, it's like a young child putting her fingers in her ears and stamping her feet.
Revenues offset costs. Albanese knows that, and he can't believe his luck that the moderator doesn't.
I feel labour's NBN is only needed for bigger corporations, I fail to see in the future us requiring 1gbs for a household, even 100mbs is more than enough for any household and which is why I support Liberals plan because we have bigger issues than having the capacity of more than we need, such as our growing national debt...
TheSavior lol how do you feel about that now mate. Liberals massively blowing out the debt, even though there was no budget emergency in the first place
In 2019 it's still not finished and the cost is over $60b, with average download speeds of only 5-20mbps.
John, don’t confuse the capacity of the backbone down the street with the typical demand from an individual home. To reliably deliver 50Mbs peak hour to all homes in a street you need a gigabit service running past each home.
get abbott out and this guy in
I think that actually happened