Still lots to oppose in Telstra bill: Turnbull

James Riley
Sunday, 24 October 2010 08:05

IT Policy - Regulation

Despite the Coalition apparently now supporting the separation of Telstra, as well as most of the consumer safeguard measures that Government is proposing in its industry reform bill, Malcolm Turnbull says there is still a lot to oppose in the legislation.

The Opposition communications minister told Ten Network's Meet The Press program that the bill was scheduled for discussion in Shadow Cabinet and the party room next week to decide how it will vote and what amendments it will seek to make.

Mr Turnbull's mixed message of last week held that the structural or functional separation of Telstra was sensible but that the Opposition remained opposed to the "gun to the head" threats to the company that enabled progress on the issue.

That remains the position, but Mr Turnbull said the threat to disallow Telstra from bidding for 4G radio spectrum should be removed. And the competition regulator should be allowed to scrutinise whatever definitive agreement on separation and its transfer of customers to the National Broadband Network that Telstra makes with the NBN Company and Government.

He was scathing on attaching spectrum constraints on Telstra as the punitive measure, because the mobile telephone market is considered a flourishing and hugely competitive market, unrelated to the problems associated with infrastructure investments in the fixed network.

"That's a stand-over technique. We don't agree with the proposition that the deal with Telstra should not be allowed to be scrutinised by the ACCC," Mr Turnbull told Meet The Press.

"James Packer (is being) looked at by the ACCC in terms of the Channel Ten acquisition. Why is the Government able to set up a massive new monopoly without any scrutiny," he said.

"We're going through the whole bill, and we'll talk about it in the shadow cabinet and the party room next week, but these are some of the issues that we have concern with."

Mr Turnbull said governments were not in the best place to pick winners in attempting to foresee which direction technology would take in future, and that a $43 billion bet on fibre was too risky.

"The one thing that is very hard to predict is the direction of technology," he said. "Now what you want to do as policy and as Government is not try to be a technology picker, but set standards that are technology agnostic."

"In other words, (for government to) say our target is to have broadband across Australia, and then put in place the policies and the measures that will ensure that without mandating a particular type of technology."

He said booming demand for mobile wireless services was evidence that there was nothing certain about fixed-line fibre being a safe bet.

"Because you're taking an enormous bet, with other people's money, on the basis if we build it they will come."

"And if they don't come, you'll have created a massive white elephant which our children will be paying off for decades to come."