This site is supported by the advertisements on it, please disable your AdBlocker so we can continue to provide you with the quality content you expect.
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

NBN Policy Discussion.

Discussion in 'The NBN' started by UTC, Mar 12, 2017.

  1. Frank Buijk

    Frank Buijk Premium Member Premium

    Articles:
    4
    For reference purposes, my submission to Senate Select Committee on the NBN: "The Technology of the past deployed for the future".

    Note that two submissions 03 & 04 have been accepted but in camera and I cannot publish them under parliamentary privilege. They contain the truth. /s
     

    Attached Files:

    • Like Like x 1
  2. Frank Buijk

    Frank Buijk Premium Member Premium

    Articles:
    4
    As proof I enclosed an attachment that the ACCC is actual part of the problem.

    The ACCC was well aware of these happenings before the iiNet/TPG merger was approved which makes the merger very much disputable.
    Remember Michael Malone when we would meet in Brisbane and you bailed out and met with David Teoh instead?

    "Poor anti-competitive circumstances" were the reason for the sale and what did the ACCC do before the merger: ignored poor consumer behaviour by the buying party.

    Note that I can not speak or write about how my company is obstructed of going to Federal Court by a third party. A few weeks ago I was severly intimated with legal prosecution by a Queensland Government official if I would disclose how evidence is moved under the table by an investigator to the benefit of the third party so our company case could not reach the Courts. Consequently I have decided to forward my investigation report in the obstruction and the conduct to the Crime and Misconduct Commission in Queensland.

    Australia you only know half of what is going on with NBN, it is much worse then you think.

    PS
    No answer received.
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Aug 2, 2017
  3. Frank Buijk

    Frank Buijk Premium Member Premium

    Articles:
    4
    A letter from the ACCC in regards to Nextgen Networks plus a beautiful brochure.

    Wholesalers can promise the world, the ACCC is going on a tea party with the offender and comes to the conclusion that nothing is breached.
    They simply agree that Fastel was informed prior and no breach of the Australian Consumer Law has occurred.
    I call that retrospective adjustment of facts & no proof exists that this was actual the case.

    All this is very odd as passed rulings have stated that conduct is misleading and deceptive if it is incorrect or is capable of leading a receiver into error.
    The onus is on the person making the representation that it was not misleading and deceptive. If they had the intention to mislead is also irrelevant.
    The ACCC stretching the law a bit by "understanding" but not disclosing what they "understood".
    As I stated a tea party to mitigate and regulate a problem from existence.
    The fact that Nextgen was a major supplier of NBN Co had nothing to do with their decision to understand obviously.
     

    Attached Files:

  4. FibreFTW

    FibreFTW Moderator Staff Member Premium

    Articles:
    8
    This comes from Whirlpool (Thank you Tailgater on Twitter for sharing this) and this is the first I've heard of it but even tho I'm not affected by it in any way, it does anger me. It does make sense to go from FTTN - FTTP but not FTTP to FTTN. Especially when you already have FTTP running to your door.

    I'd be going to every media station in the country and screaming from every roof-top if I was that guy.
    NBN & LNP if this is true you have done a fantastic f*cking job here. Another f*ck up by NBN & LNP.

    Also time for the Guy to go to sites like Gizmodo, Itnews, Crikey, Reddit etc on this. Need to spread the message as far as possible if this is true.

     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  5. Zapmaster14

    Zapmaster14 Site Founder Staff Member

    Articles:
    2
  6. Phg

    Phg New Member

    But do we in here or those keeping up with Whirlpool NBN threads know a lot more than half of what it going on with NBN?

    If you've been reading my recent posts if whirlpool
    do you think that what is going on with NBN is much worse than I think?

    Alternatively, when are we likely going to find out the other half?

    Before or after Federal Labor win power again (assuming 2018/19)?
     
  7. UTC

    UTC Active Member

    I agree.. The public only know half the story as to the failure of the mtm. The rest is being held cic and failure to disclose. The dirty story will be told eventually, but it will be too late to fix the failures of the current mess and those who could have told the truth and made a difference will have absconded overseas along with their bonuses.
     
  8. Phg

    Phg New Member

    • Like Like x 1
  9. Ça plane pour moi

    Ça plane pour moi Premium Member Premium

    Actually from my experience this is how LNP staffers, to my amazement, think. Last year I phoned my local member about the NBN issues. I got a staffer to speak to me. I had to hold my tongue. Even though he sounded young he thought that all the technologies were the same. At least that they are as good as each other. I gave up and put the phone down. The sheer ignorance and head up proverbial of certain political cliques is still astonishing.
     
  10. Frank Buijk

    Frank Buijk Premium Member Premium

    Articles:
    4
    I keep following what is going on Whirlpool so yes, I have read post of others including you.
    Simply decided not to post any more on Whirlpool but that is caused entirely by the arrogant and biased moderation.

    I do believe that we only know half. Also on Whirlpool or here on the NBN forum.
    People are so heavily debating the topic that they forget to do proper research.
    For example I put that letter up about the ACCC in Fighting FUD thread, did you notice how much "convenient drafting" is included to protect AAPT so that the merger with TPG/iiNet & Co could go ahead.

    I will point one out so you get the digest, I quote:

    I note that media reports appear to suggest that commercial NBN fixed wireless services did not become available in the relevant areas until early 2014. In any case, I do not consider that AAPT's conduct is likely to be considered misleading and deceptive.

    Neat drafting on behalf of the ACCC. Their decision is based on newspaper suggestions and they judge on these suggestions that AAPT has not breached s18 of the Australian Consumer Law.

    Do you know how many towers were enabled in Queensland only on 6 November 2013?

    53 towers.

    More convenient drafting from the same letter:

    However, AAPT was unable to offer the service until 15 March 2014.

    They were not unable, they were unwilling. Major difference as they never expressed to our company that they were not able.

    Do you know how many active users the major telco's could pick up in Queensland while AAPT kept the smaller and medium RSPs out of the market?

    2279 on 1 March 2014 at 11:35:38.

    Note that this was Queensland only.

    Now we come to the most dirty bit of the ACCC and that is this quote:

    In any case, as this issue related to the negotiation of contractual arrangements between AAPT and Fastel, this matter would be more appropriate addressed through private action.

    The ACCC knew very well that it is for small and medium RSPs impossible financially to start Court litigation. So this suggestion is preposterous. But do you know what?

    It is entirely an invalid argument. I quote from the contractual agreement of AAPT:

    AAPT National Wholesale Broadband (the "service") is a consumer grade wholesale broadband access product. It allows Customers to resell broadband services to End Users using various last mile access technologies including ADSL/ADSL2+ and Ethernet Bitstream with best effort traffic class (as it is rolled out by NBN Co).

    AS IT IS ROLLED OUT BY NBN CO.

    NBN Co ended the trail status on 1 September 2012 and commercialised Fixed Wireless on that date and is rolling out since that date. NBN Fixed Wireless is a Ethernet Bitstream product. So once NBN Co commercialised it was part of the product offering of AAPT.

    But something else happened. I can read contractual agreements and I questioned the account manager twice in writing if NBN Fixed Wireless would be offered.

    First e-mail thread (before signing)
    Do you guys [do] fixed wireless under the NBN?
    And the NBN-trials?

    No[t] yet, we're on the second round which is some stage next quarter.

    Second e-mail thread (before signing)
    Firstly, is AAPT confident to go ahead with fixed-wireless as soon as it is released to all?

    Once NBN commercialise the product rumoured to be September [2012] than AAPT WILL offer.

    The capital WILL is theirs, not mine.

    Conclusive, no there was no negation of contractual arrangements as there was no need to. This is proven by two e-mail threads and also by the fact that AAPT offered it in 2014 under the same unchanged contract.

    What did the ACCC do then in this letter?

    Simple. They held the hand above the head of AAPT as the merger of TPG/iiNet & Co was under way and this evidence would proof beyond reasonable doubt that TPG kept smaller parties out of the market placing the merger at risk.

    In a final attempt I made an appointment with Michael Malone in Brisbane as he was still in doubt on the merger. He decided to cancel and meet David Teoh instead. The rest is history.

    Now since 22 May 2015, I attempt to get this in Federal Court together with evidence that smaller & medium RSPs deliberate forced in overselling bandwidth and I am obstructed by anybody who I engage. The interests and consequences for the Industry can be massive. At the moment I am in the process to forward it to the CCC as I want to know how far this misconduct (or possible corruption) goes.

    But the digest is simple. The ACCC is in this until his neck. They facilitate the Industry with convenient drafting, disappearing or excluding evidence & the declining of complaints. The Legal Services Commission is another party. And another party I cannot mention. They all do exactly the same. All evidence has to be pushed under the table.

    I am not worried as I got advice from several barristers & if necessary I bring it to Federal Court myself. Wrote all legal documents anyway. It is just a small step for mankind. :p

    But my advice, beyond the above, dig, there is much more dirt, misconduct and corruption. Journalists fail at large in regards to NBN on forensic journalism. The consequence is that you have to do it yourself.
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2017
    • Informative Informative x 1
  11. Frank Buijk

    Frank Buijk Premium Member Premium

    Articles:
    4
    I get a lot the question if the situation around NBN will change to the good when Labor would return to power.
    Allow to express my views on it. Note that I am not necessarily right, but in due time please provide me with the privilege to say to you "I told you so".

    By now it is extremely difficult to halt any technology rollout by NBN Co. Most of it is already contracted and that what is not, will soon. If NBN Co does not include other technologies now, it will be near impossible to change that in the future with a change of government. What Labor basically inherits is a government business entity with low value and a high debt in bonds & loans towards the Commonwealth of Australia without any change of a return of investment. The low value originates from the diverse technology portfolio which excludes per definition the future proof FTTP, degraded design rules, high payments to Telstra and technologies that are extremely prone for low reliability and consequently high maintenance.

    Labor inherits that what Mark Gregory states already for many years, a Rolls Royce lemon.

    It is not fixable in terms that it can be upgraded. It requires a complete rebuild at large there were old technologies are implemented starting with FTTN first. A complicated matter is that the near perfect design rules have been compromised by NBN Co. Conclusively, a rebuild is required which will likely cost A$40-A$60b. But will Labor commit to that?

    Everybody following the news around NBN will notice that Labor likes to trash the LNP on their MTM-policy. Fair dinkum, it is well deserved. But the question is what will the Australians get delivered if Labor is capable of capitalising in an election on the subject of NBN or other subjects like energy etc. Not much more what they get under the LNP I am afraid.

    The fact is that a telecommunication infrastructure of this size requires bilateral support for the greater good. Paul Budde correctly called out for that. Only one problem, it will never happen, as at the end of the day, NBN is politics and Labor is not going to give away a "free out of jail card" to the LNP. This week I called out to both Malcolm Turnbull and Bill Shorten on Twitter, if they would support a bilateral agreement in regards to NBN. It remained very quiet and none of them responded until now.

    This proofs sufficiently that both political parties are not interested in what Australians receive on telecom services, if we drop consistently on the internet speed rankings and that we loose our competitive advantage as a nation.

    At the end of the day for political parties, only 1 day in the 4 years is about what Australians feel or do. On all other days during those 4 years, it is about them being busy with themselves. The 20% trust rating of Australians in the political and public system is not something that has just developed without reason.

    If Labor or any other party was sincerely interested in your internet problems, a draft policy or position statement would be already made available. Also on that Paul Budde was right, no policy. I would not even classify the Statement of Expectation a policy. It is more how to draft nothing substantial in the most ambiguous way.

    The political parties are not able to draft a overall innovation/science/ICT policy. They are not able to draft from this sub policies for each department and area. On telecommunication for example, on startups or on the digital transition of government institutions. They are not capable of drafting policies for all Australians. At best they ask due to a lack of knowledge for submissions which is almost the perfect gift for industries to lobby their way into government policy.

    No, I do not think both parties have the guts to make bilateral policy that benefits all Australians. They are mostly busy with themselves or their vested interests. And it shows in quality and outcome. It is disastrous for our economy and our competitive position in the world. Frankly, we are the laughing stock in the world with "our NBN".

    It is time that politicians learn to what the Dutch called "polderen". It means negotiating a solution which benefits all. If none of the major parties will get a majority and the amount of independents will increase dramatically, then this is exactly what the politicians will have to do to form government in the near future. They better start to get some practice, starting with NBN.
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. FibreFTW

    FibreFTW Moderator Staff Member Premium

    Articles:
    8
    Not sure where to post of this but might be NSFW?

    NBN installer pee's in a person's garden while working on the job. All caught on CCTV

    This comes from Whirlpool from the user named Driver

    This brings something into the discussion tho, aren't these guys just contractors? If they are.. are they bound by NBN's T&C's when it comes to installers?

    If the home owner or resident isn't home and your busting to go to the toilet what can you do really? You'd either have to go next door and see if they'll let you use their loo (Sounds weird but it's better than being caught on CCTV doing it) or abandon the job and run off to find a public toilet that might even be locked and still P yourself.

    I don't justify the workers actions in any way but if your busting to go to the loo what can you as a contractor do? Especially if the persons premise your installing equipment on isn't at home?

    According to the terms OP used it sounded like he was out when the equipment was getting installed and there wasn't anyone home so the installer didn't knock or open the door to ask OP if they could borrow he's toilet for a second.

    Another Disaster for NBN, maybe more so for their contractors they employee to do their contract work but this also looks bad on NBN too as people are going to think this is NBN's fault when they first hear about it.


    Sorry if it's the wrong topic, thought I'd share it here too. Let me know what you think.
     
  13. Ça plane pour moi

    Ça plane pour moi Premium Member Premium

    I have no problem with it. After all Fraudband has already flushed Oz internet down the toilet. So why not complete the whole packet dump?

    /s
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  14. UTC

    UTC Active Member

    He was probably pissed of withthe job. If it was mtm being connected to my place,i probably would have joined him.
     
  15. Frank Buijk

    Frank Buijk Premium Member Premium

    Articles:
    4
    Portable toilets are part of health & safety and should be made available by the employer.
    This is the case on all big and small construction sites and the NBN is just another of those construction sites.

    As you state, if you have to go, you have to go and there is not always a public toilet near by.
    It is easy to blame the individually doing this but really the problem lies with his boss, the sub-contractor, the main contractor and yes, NBN Co.

    You must not imagine that a one of those workers has a medical condition as simple as the belly flu or a more serious disabling condition like IBS.

    Absolute not good.
     
  16. FibreFTW

    FibreFTW Moderator Staff Member Premium

    Articles:
    8
    Dodgy Article is dodgy, enough said
    http://www.theage.com.au/comment/dodgy-from-the-start-dont-blame-turnbull-for-labors-flawed-nbn-20170809-gxsa5v.html

    Dodgy words from Ian Martin himself ladies and Gentleman.
     
  17. UTC

    UTC Active Member

    Mtm is a mess.. They realise this and are deliberately looking for a scapegoat to deflect the blame.
     
  18. Zapmaster14

    Zapmaster14 Site Founder Staff Member

    Articles:
    2
  19. Zapmaster14

    Zapmaster14 Site Founder Staff Member

    Articles:
    2
    Slow internet not always our fault: NBN boss

    https://www.sunshinecoastdaily.com.au/news/slow-internet-not-always-our-fault-nbn-boss/3211281/

     
  20. Frank Buijk

    Frank Buijk Premium Member Premium

    Articles:
    4
    This beauty was published by NBN Co's default publisher the Australian:

    https://www.whitsundaytimes.com.au/news/slow-internet-not-always-our-fault-nbn-boss/3211281/

    I concentrate for a moment on the following three paragraphs as I am of the view that they are highly misleading and deceptive towards Australians.

    More recently, one of the more commonly discussed reasons for slow speed is the amount of speed capacity between these last two links as it is dependent on what the service providers purchase from NBN.
    Incorrect as for the amount of speed capacity on Fixed Wireless, it also depends on a fair use policy in NBN Co's Wholesale Broadband Agreement (WBA aka the bible).
    The data volume is 200GB a month on a service which boils down to 0.63Mbps if U would use your internet constantly. Let that sink in for a second.
    Not 50/20Mbps, not 25/5Mbps or 12/1Mbps. 0.63Mbps download speed if NBN Co is not prepared to upgrade the shared network resources independent from the fair use policy.

    Service providers pay two charges to use NBN's portion of the broadband network. One allows their customers to access nbn's network and the other determines the collective amount of data that flows between our two networks at a given point in time.
    Incorrect as the collective amount of data flow is NOT ONLY determined by the CVC, it is also determined by the fair use policy.

    On the latter charge, if the service provider doesn't purchase enough, it can affect every one of their customers in an area, especially in the evenings when many people are accessing the internet at the same time.

    Correct but incomplete as the fair use policy is not mentioned which is just as much capable of causing congestion as the CVC dimensioning by RSPs. Only this congestion is under control from NBN Co and for this reason not mentioned in the article.

    Now the bombshell, the fair use is not applied per user and not even per RSP. It applies per shared network resource so to all users of all RSPs on that one shared network resource. In other words, if a budget RSP (like Telstra o_O) sells heaps of 2TB plans on Fixed Wireless, it could well result in that all the speeds of end users of other RSPs are also affected in that area even if those other RSPs buy plenty of CVC capacity in that area.

    Myth busted that only CVCs are the cause of the congestion on the NBN.

    Conclusive good try, but again the same tactic, misleading Australians on the truth of the problems in the hope they are complete idiots. The heading is correct though. :rolleyes:

    But the RSPs are just as much to blame, as they signed the WBA, they sold willingly 2TB plans knowing that the consumers never could reach that speeds. Major difference with NBN, they are subject to the Australian Consumer Law. NBN not, which raises then the question why NBN Co is selling wholesale plans from which it knows that they are unfit for purpose. 0.63Mbps really?!

    Cheers,
    Frank Buijk
     
    Last edited: Aug 12, 2017

Share This Page