NBN Pork-barreling Worked

Research by Alizadeh and Farid (2017) found that pork-barreling by Australian politicians over the National Broadband Network (NBN) worked. Voters who received early access to high speed broadband rewarded the party which provided this with their votes:

    "An analysis of the voting behaviour in the 2007 and the 2010 Federal elections shows a pattern in which the ALP held seats were the key beneficiaries of the early NBN rollout. Moreover, the results suggests that the Coalition held safe seats were the least likely to receive the infrastructure. Diverse sub-patterns across the three states of New South Wales, Queensland, and Victoria have been discussed in details. However, the overall findings remain that the selection process for the early NBN rollout was skewed up for potential political gains.

    The paper then moves to the second question on whether the targeted infrastructure provision worked and swung votes for the ALP in the following 2013 Federal election. The analysis of the voting in the NBN early rollout areas versus the rest of the country shows a clear difference. While the ALP experienced an overall heavy negative swing across the nation and lost the election, the negative shift was highly mitigated in the NBN early release sites."

    From Alizadeh and Farid, 2017.

I suggest the lesson from this is: when proposing tech policy, find some aspect which offers short term political gain. Making appeals to the national interest and long term benefit is of little relevance to politicians aiming to win the next election. So how do we make changes we think need to be made to Internet policy appealing to voters in the short term and so therefore appealing to politicians?

Reference

Alizadeh, T., & Farid, R. (2017). Political economy of telecommunication infrastructure: An investigation of the National Broadband Network early rollout and pork barrel politics in Australia. Telecommunications Policy, 41(4), 242-252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2017.02.002

Fostering the Sharing Economy in Australia

Andrew Leigh, the ALP Federal Shadow Minister for Competition, has invited comment on "Sharing the future: Getting policy right in the Age of the App" (Federal Opposition Discussion Paper, 24 March 2015). This gives an overview of the "Sharing Economy", where an on-line service can be used to allow individuals to make use of each others goods and services (for free, in return for the opportunity to borrow others for for a fee). Borrowing something from a neighbor, or renting out a room for a night, is hardly a new idea, but web based services make it possible on a global scale. The ALP paper covers the issues of: Employment and workers’ rights, Public safety and consumer protections, Accessibility, Equity, Taxation, Competition and Federal/state coordination. What is not covered is policy for encouraging Australian sharing economy ventures.

Unfortunately the pro-Australian message of the ALP's paper is somewhat weakened by it being distributed via a non-Australian web service and including only examples of non-Australian companies. The message from this might be that the Sharing Economy will consist of Australian money and jobs being funneled out of Australia to foreign multinational companies located in tax havens. It would be a good idea for the ALP to put the paper on a web server located in Australia and, even better, convert it from PDF into a more readable web page (in accordance with accessibility guidelines).

It should not be too difficult to find some Australian examples of the the Sharing Economy. I regularly attend and judge startup competitions and there are always examples of sharing economy ventures. One place to look would be the Canberra Innovation Network and GriffinAccelerator. Another place is the Telstra Muru-D Start-up Accelerator in Sydney.

Also, it would be worth having something in the policy about encouraging the creation of new sharing economy ventures. There is scope for Australia to provide products and services (including education) to support the sharing economy worldwide. There would likely be markets in China, India and Indonesia for this.

There could also be a role for government in the Sharing Economy. The Australian Digital Transformation Office (DTO) is to look at innovative ways to deliver government services. One way would be for the government to help facilitate Australians to help each other.

FttN+P Implementation for Australia

In "The Lexus and the Broadband Network" I likened the choice between the ALP's  FttP National Broadband Network (NBN) and  FttN Coalition Broadband Policy to be like the choice between a new Lexus and a ten year old Toyota Camry car, with the kids wanting a scooter (wireless broadband). The Coalition won the election and so the Fibre to the Node (FttN) option is the one which is to be implemented, but will have elements of the ALP's NBN Fibre to the Premises (FttP, sometimes called Fibre to the Home FttH) in it. The current fiber which has been installed will not be removed. So perhaps the new approach might be termed FttN+P.

An on-line petition proposes "The Liberal Party of Australia: Reconsider your plan for a 'FTTN' NBN in favour of a superior 'FTTH' NBN". To ask a government, which just won an election, to reverse part of its platform is at best a waste of time and may be counter-productive, reducing the chances of getting FttP.

Even if the government thought FttP a good idea, they couldn't be seen to be admitting their previous policy was wrong. Pressure via a petition for FttP would have the effect of requiring the government to defence its policy and thus limit its ability to provide FttP (even where the Government thought it a good idea).

A better strategy would be suggest the FttN policy be "enhanced", without admitting this is a reversal. Some new term, such as FttN+P could be invented, indicating Fibre to the Node, plus Premises (in some locations). The exact meaning of this would be kept vague, so it could cover both roll-out of just fiber in new green-fields sites and the option of fibre in some FttN installations.

Broadband Choices for Australia

My "The Lexus and the Broadband Network" analogy was picked up by Australian Science Media Centre and is quoted in "Rural areas to lose in Coalition internet plan, says expert" (Toowoomba Chronicle, 4th September 2013). Expecting more queries from the media on this, I thought I had better summarize the main points of the options offered by the parties. The ALP's  National Broadband Network (NBN), is well known, the Coalition Broadband Policy less well.

Both parties propose a model where different retailers can market essentially the same wholesale product. Cable will be used in the city (fibre for ALP and hybrid for Coalition), fixed wireless in rural areas and satellite in remote areas. The NBN is planned to be completed by 2020 at a cost of  $44B, Coalition by 2019 at $30 billion.

The ALP offers 1 Gbps, Coalition 50 Mbps, on twentieth the speed. But this is only on the cabled networks, the wireless networks will be 25 Mbps (realistically 12 Mbps) and satellite 12 Mbps (realistically 1 Mbps). The NBN fiber system has potential for faster speeds, the hybrid network less so.

Charges for the NBN are around $50 to $100 per month. The NBN wholesale access prices start at $24 a month for 12 Mbps. For the Coalition alternative they are likely to be similar. This has little to do with the cost of the network or technology, but more to do with competition.

Both the party's policies assume one network where the only competition is between retailers offering essentially the same product. But in reality these retailers will be competing with the mobile phone companies selling wireless broadband, currently "4G", at up to 100 Mbps (more realistically 1 Mbps).

ps: I wonder what my former tutors at the University of Southern Queensland in Toowoomba make of this.

The Lexus and the Broadband Network

Political commentators in Australia are struggling to explain the difference between ALP and Collation broadband proposals to the voters in nontechnical language. The ALP proposes continued roll-out of Fiber To The Premises (FTTP) for the National Broadband Network (NBN), whereas the Collation wants to use mostly Fiber To The Node (FTTN). My suggested analogy is: Should you buy a new car or fix up the old one, or "The Lexus and the Broadband Network".

The Lexus and the Broadband Network

The ALP FTTP proposal is like the car salesman offering you a new Lexus: sure it is expensive but it will be fast and reliable and last a long time. The Collation's custom auto centre says your ten year old Toyota Camry (copper cable) is mechanically sound, it just needs some new parts (FTTN) and will be much cheaper. Your kids say they don't want an uncool Lexus, or an old Camry, they want a cool Italian Scooter (Wireless Internet). You tell them they will grow out of the scooter in a few years and then want a real car, to which they reply "Whatever". ;-)

ps: In my view, if the government, whoever they are, want to save money, they could prioritize fibre roll-out in greenfield sites and areas with no, or poor broadband.

We have had TFFN in Canberra for just over a decade, with the Transact system. If you have power poles handy, and the citizens don't mind more overhead wires, it is a cost effective system. Also it works okay in new buildings. My apartment building has a fibre optic node in the basement and twisted pair copper to each unit. But if you are going to the trouble of putting new cables underground, then they might as well be fiber-optic, as most of the cost is in digging the trenches.

The areas with copper phone and Pay TV cable could be left for last, where it is working okay. This would be a slight change to the current government's NBN FTTP to achieve cost savings proposed by the opposition. Installing new FTTN should only be done on a limited scale, where the copper cable is new enough to be kept, but so far from the exchange that higher broadband speeds are not possible. The FTTN should be done so it can be upgraded to FTTP later.

Optical Network Architectures

Greetings from the 8th International Conference on Computer Science and Education (ICCSE 2013) in Colombo, Sri Lanka, where Professor Wen-De Zhong is speaking on "Optical Network Architectures". This is a hot topic in Australia, with the national political discussion of the merit of the ALP's National Broadband Network fiber to the home and the rival hybrid fibre to the node from the Liberal Party. The professor pointed out that FTTH was increasing at 25% annually in Asia Pacific, which leads the world in implementation of the technology. He discussed BPON, EPON, and GPON. Hybrid optical/copper systems were not discussed.

Coalition’s Proposed Alternative to the NBN

The Australian opposition have released "Fast. Affordable. Sooner. The Coalition’s Plan for a better NBN". This proposes halting the roll-out of the NBN Fibre to the Home in Australia and using Fibre to the Node instead. We have had TFFN in Canberra for just over a decade, with the Transact system. If you have power poles handy, and the citizens don't mind more overhead wires, it is a cost effective system. Also it works okay in new buildings. My apartment building has a fibre optic node in the basement and twisted pair copper to each unit. But if you are going to the trouble of putting new cables underground, then they might as well be fiber-optic, as most of the cost is in digging the trenches.

If the government, whoever they are, want to save money, they could prioritize fibre roll-out in greenfield sites and areas with no, or poor broadband. The areas with copper phone and Pay TV cable could be left for last, where it is working okay. This would be a slight change to the current government's NBN FTTH to achieve cost savings proposed by the opposition.

Getting the message on NBN online

According to media reports Prime Minister Gillard announced an expansion of the NBN (National Broadband Network) on Friday. The frustration with such reports is finding out exactly what was announced. There were 454 news items about this on Google news. I went to the ALP web site and looked for NBN on the front page. There was a panel on the top of the page which said "National Broadband Network" but before I could click on it, this disappeared and was replaced with an item on health. So I went back to the Google news to see if any of the news items had a link to anything substantial. It is very frustrating that all the news items appear to be written from essentially the same media release, speech text, or press conference transcript, but it is very difficult to find these source documents.

What I did find was a link to "Reverse PR". This is to a media release from Senator Kate Lundy and the other Canberra ALP candidates about the NBN, issued after the PM's speech. What is interesting about this is that the media release is on a specialised media release distributing service, supported by web ads. Anyone can submit a media release to the service and subscribe to receive the releases. There is a very efficient mobile edition and access via RSS feed. Google then aggregates this alongside more traditional news sources.

If the parties were to use this, or similar services, for their major announcements I might then be able to find the details, in amongst the media reports. Of course if they were to design good web pages I might be able to find their polices more directly.

Put the Australian Climate Change Citizens Assembly On-line

On Friday the Australian Prime Minister announced a Citizens Assembly on Climate Change ("Moving forward together on Climate Change") . About 150 people will be selected from the census and electoral rolls to spend a year examining what to do about climate change.

It would be easy to see this as a cynical political trick to put off unpopular decisions until after an election. However, as the the conference "Democratizing Climate Governance Conference" I attended last week at the Australian National University in Canberra detailed, simply stating there is a problem does not necessarily produce the required action. This week the Democrats decided they did not have sufficient votes in the US Senate to introduce a cap-and-trade carbon reduction scheme. Providing more facts on climate science is unlikely to change the situation. As well as taking the advice of climate scientists on global warming, we also need advice from economists, social and political scientists on how to act on that advice. The Prime Minister's proposal may be one way to do that.

There are limitations to the prime minister's proposal: The ALP government has to be re-elected next month for the scheme to be implemented and it does not have the support of the opposition, nor the Greens Party (which is likely to hold the balance of power).

There is no provision for such an assembly in the Australian Constitution. This body will have now formal power, apart from the limited advisory role provided for in specific legislation introduced to create it.

The assembly will be limited to considering the government's market-based approach to carbon emissions, which has already been rejected by Parliament. The assembly will not be permitted to consider alternatives, such as a tax on carbon, or energy saving incentives. An example of such alternatives would be a 5% reduction in emissions through better use of ICT (including use of the National Broadband Network), as I teach in Green ICT.

There is no mention in the proposal of the use of technology for making the assembly more efficient, representative or open to the wider community. It seems likely the assembly will use a similar process to the cumbersome processes used by the Australian Parliament and used for the 2020 Summit held by the former Rudd government. With these the representatives travel to one location (usually Canberra) for a few days of verbal, face-to-face discussions and then leave again. Only one person can talk at a time and less than 200 can be accommodated in one forum. Due to the limited communications only one proposal can be considered at a time.

One option would be to provide Internet based technology to enhance the operation of the assembly. There could still be face to face meetings, but between and during these, online forums could be provided. Many more citizens could then follow and take part in the discussion online. Many more proposals could be considered simultaneously. Rather than having most of the time taken up with set peace speeches, presentations could be pre-recorded and Podcast.

Some of these techniques were used with the "Public Sphere" Internet assisted process. We have learnt a lot about how to run such blended events since I helped run the first Public Sphere at the Australian National University in 2009.

My colleagues at the ANU Engineering 'Hubs and Spokes' Project have been working on technology for teaching in a "blended" mode: this combines podcasts and discussions online, with face to face discussions, which can also be enhanced by using technology such as "clickers" (wireless hand held devices to quickly get audience input). This technology could be applied to a citizens consultation process.

ALP Climate Change Policy Announcement

Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard, made a speech "Moving forward together on Climate Change" on Friday. This proposes a 5% reduction in CO2 emissions,with a CO2 target of 450 ppm, limiting the increase in temprature to 2 degrees, through a cap and trade scheme. However, one year would first be spend consulting the community on the proposal through a "Citizens Assembly". In addition $1 billion would be invested over 10 years in connecting the electricity grid to renewable energy sources and $100m for the Australian Centre for Renewable Energy (ACRE). There is no proposal for the Australian Government curb its own increasing use of energy. Here are some excerpts:

... The science tells us that we need to limit the growth of carbon pollution in our atmosphere to 450 ppm if we are going to have a chance of limiting global temperature growth to two degrees or less.

That in turn helps to explain the commitment that the Australian Government has made, to cut our pollution levels by at least five per
cent by 2020 compared to our pollution levels in 2000. ...

In taking those steps, we must work towards a new model of economic
growth. ...

Our approach to developing an emissions trading scheme to suit the
Australian economy – the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) ...

The CPRS would require firms that need to use carbon in their work to
acquire permits and allow those permits to be traded so that there is an incentive to reduce carbon pollution and so the permits can be used in the most efficient and most productive ways.

Revenue from the scheme – from the sale of permits – was planned to be
used for assistance to help communities, families and firms to make the transition to a low carbon economy. ...

When we brought it to the Parliament, which we did twice last year, it
took up 11 separate Bills. ... the Greens Party and the Liberal Party
voted against the legislation ...

My job now is to explain the approach that a Labor Government will take to this challenge as we learn the lessons of the last year and look forward. ...

But I recognise that there are some lessons to learn.

These are the lessons:

The first lesson is that, if you want to make a big change for our
nation, the political process must be connected with the community. ...

So now I will set out for your consideration the approach that I will
take to this issue if my Government is re-elected. ...

My Government will create an independent, properly credentialed source
of information and expert advice – a Climate Change Commission – to
explain the science of climate change and to report on progress in
international action. ...

And so today I announce that if we are re-elected, I will develop a
dedicated process – a Citizens’ Assembly – to examine over 12 months the evidence on climate change, the case for action and the possible
consequences of introducing a market-based approach to limiting and
reducing carbon emissions. ...

I envisage that those involved would be genuinely representative of the wider Australian public. They would be voluntary participants, but selected through the census/electoral roll by an independent authority.

Their work would be supported with evidence, analysis and access to the views and positions of a wide range of advocates.

At the same time the Citizens’ Assembly is at work, I will work with
State and Local Governments, business and community groups to maximise
information and discussion in the community overall.

The role of this Citizens’ Assembly will not be to become the final
arbiter or judge of consensus, but to provide an indicator to the nation of the progress of community consensus and the issues that will need to be addressed in making the transition I have described today to a successful, lower pollution economy.

Put simply, I believe in the skills, capacity, decency and plain common sense of Australians. I therefore believe that through dedicated discussion a representative group of Australians drawn from all age groups, parts of the country and walks of life, will help us move forward. ...

The second commitment I will give today is that, if we are re-elected, I will use the CPRS as the basis for this Citizens’ Assembly and community consultation on the way forward in reducing pollution through a market mechanism. In doing so, I recommit to the need for a market mechanism.

And I will maintain the Government’s current commitment to review our
progress in 2012, as we approach the end of the current Kyoto commitment period.

But now that review will be informed by the independent public
commentary of the Climate Change Commission on the dimensions of
international action and by the common sense of the Australian people. ...

... I also announce today that, if the Labor Government is re-elected,
we will introduce a policy that rewards businesses who take early action to reduce their pollution.

To give industry certainty about future investment, the Government will ensure that emission baselines for industry assistance will not be increased – they will be as determined under the CPRS. ...

... if we are re-elected, Labor will ensure that all new power stations will have to meet best practice standards for their carbon emissions.

New coal fired power stations would also have to be carbon capture and
storage ready, capable of being retrofitted to capture and store the
pollution caused by burning coal.

The new standards will be determined by Government following a process
of consultation open to all the key stakeholders, including technical
experts, energy market institutions, industry and environmental groups. ...

These new standards will not apply to existing projects or to projects
which have been committed to when the standards come into effect. ...

Today I announce that, if elected, the Australian Government will
contribute up to $1 billion over 10 years to the investment needed to
connect our electricity grid to new sources of renewable energy. ...

We will invest $100m to support market-based projects developing
renewable technologies through ACRE, the Australian Centre for Renewable Energy. ...

From: "Moving forward together on Climate Change", speech, Julia Gillard, Australian Prime Minister, 23 July 2010.