Telstra v Coonan: no smoke without fire?

Stuart Corner
Sunday, 05 August 2007 12:50

Opinion and Analysis

Telstra's accusations against communications minister, Helen Coonan,   that the process by which Opel secured close to $1 billion of government funding for broadband infrastructure are not new. Inconsistencies between official statements are not reassuring. Nor is the minister's statement denying any wrongdoing.

Rumours that more money than the initial $600m was available were circulating long before the Opel deal was announced. In a Senate Estimates committee hearing on 24 May, shadow communications minister Stephen Conroy asked Simon Bryant general manager of DCITA's Broadband Infrastructure Branch: "I have seen some media reports that extra money will be included. It would be unusual to put extra money into a process that was nearly completed. Would that affect the probity? Would there be probity issues if a program had extra money included in it?

Bryant replied: "That very question was asked of us by a number of the participants. We indicated at the time that the budget was up to $600 million. We indicated that it would always be a matter for government to provide further funds once an assessment stage had been reached and we advised people who wanted some advice on the matter that the best way to approach it would be to put in modular bids...beyond $600 million if they wanted to."

Then, in June with the Opel deal common knowledge in Canberra but not publicly announced, the ALP called for an investigation by the Auditor General , saying "It has been suggested that some participants were advised of the possibility of increased funding under Broadband Connect Infrastructure Program weeks before other participants."

The resulting report, from the Australian National Audit Office, subsequently cleared DCITA of any breach of probity, but details of this, posted on DCITA's website conflict with the responses given by Bryant to Conroy's questioning.