Stuart Corner
Sunday, 05 August 2007 13:50
Opinion and Analysis
Page 2 of 3
According to the ANAO report, "The Department's records and advice indicated that only one applicant had sought information on whether more than $600 million could be available and that the Department had advised that it could not comment."
According to the ANAO report "OPEL Networks' proposal was ranked significantly ahead of the other proposals at the final comparative assessment stage, and...OPEL Networks' additional proposal was negotiated after its selection as the preferred applicant.
Coonan's response to Telstra's accusations was, to say the least, defensive. Her press release opened with a total non sequitur: "The minister...senator the Hon Helen Coonan said today that it has been ten years since the Howard Government took the landmark decision to open up Australia's telecommunications regime to competition."
Then after describing Telstra's action as simply 'sour grapes' she launched into an attack on Next G. "I would be much happier if Telstra put this sort of effort into rectifying the rising level of consumer concerns with the rollout of their new Next G network.
"I have just spent the last six weeks on the road across Australia and based on the level of frustration I heard from people regarding their mobile coverage, this is the issue that needs Telstra's urgent and genuine attention."
Eventually at the end she got around to refuting the allegations. "I completely reject the assertions made by Telstra. The process was fair and consistent with both the guidelines, assessment plan and probity requirements. Consistent with the highest ethical standard of governance, the Government established a competitive assessment process conducted by an independent panel that was backed by expert technical and probity advice. That panel assessed the competing bids, assessed the quality of the technology and made recommendations that were followed to the letter by the Government."
