| ACCC's role in evaluating broadband network proposals is indeed 'critical' |
|
| by Stuart Corner | |
| Thursday, 17 April 2008 | |
|
Page 1 of 2   
Featured Whitepaper
5 Best Practices for Smartphone Support
Despite this, Telstra's Phil Burgess continues to insist, as recently as last week when he announced completion of the ADSL2+ rollout, that this protection had been given. When I confronted him with mention of Conroy's letter he simply accused me of not having read it properly! So, it is somewhat disingenuous for the minister to claim, as he did in speech this week that he is "confused after some of the reporting about my role in this [Telstra's decision to roll out ADSL2+]." Given the conflicting messages emanating from the government and Telstra conflicting press reports are inevitable. The real focus of Conroy's complaints about the press was coverage of his National Broadband Network request for proposals, released on 10 April. "If I was to believe newspaper reports and commentary surrounding the request for proposals documentation, I could be led to believe that: our policy commitment is under a cloud because the project was likely to be unviable; unsuccessful proponents will not get their $5 million bond back; the ACCC has no role in this process; and we have ignored open access and structural issues and ensuring that access is provided on equivalent terms to all comers." The issue is not that the ACCC will have no role, but it won't be that of an administrator of the law over access to telecoms infrastructure above being directed by Conroy: the role that he was at pains to stress in the ADSL2+ case. Rather the ACCC's role has been reduced simply to that of an advisor despite Conroy claiming in his speech that it would be "critical" in the evaluation of response to the RFP. CONTINUED |
| < Next story in category | Previous story in the category > |
|---|
