Press conference, Parliament House

MICHELLE ROWLAND, MINISTER FOR COMMUNICATIONS: The message is clear – under an Albanese Government, the NBN is not for sale. The NBN is a vital piece of national infrastructure. It was initiated by Labor in order to ensure equality of opportunity right across our regions, irrespective of where people live and irrespective of what they earn. We know how important the NBN is, in particular for our regions, and that is why the Albanese Government took to the last election a further $2.4 billion investment to fibre up an additional 1.5 million premises around Australia, 660,000 of those being in the region.
 
We know how important the NBN is to drive national productivity, and we know how important it is for the transactions that Australians do every day to access health services, to interact with government and to connect with family and friends. It’s for this reason that we have made this decision. It is not a complex question here. You either want to keep the NBN in public ownership, or you don’t.
 
We took to the last election a statement that we would not privatise the NBN for the foreseeable future because we wanted to ensure that the job was finished. We reflected this in our statement of expectations upon coming to government – that the NBN would be kept in public ownership for the foreseeable future for the same reasons. And now, as we go into the next election, the Albanese Government has made it crystal clear that the NBN is not for sale. We want to ensure continued investments in the NBN, and we know the lived experience of consumers is that when essential services and assets are privatised it results in increased prices and decreases in service quality. We want to ensure the NBN continues to deliver for all Australians.
 
The message is very clear and the question for Peter Dutton is clear – either you want to keep the NBN in public ownership or you don’t. He’s had nearly three years to consider this question. They went into the last election having signed off on the first component of privatising the NBN, in fact in 2020, by declaring mission accomplished and the NBN being completed. And the last thing that they did in government was sign off on a special access undertaking proposal that would have seen price increases on the NBN of up to CPI plus 3 per cent in some instances.
 
The contrast is clear. We know how important the NBN is for all Australians. We wait to see whether the Coalition has a position on this – whether they will back the need to ensure the NBN being kept in public hands. But, our position could not be clearer.
 
KRISTY MCBAIN, MINISTER FOR REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT, LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND TERRITORIES: Thank you, Minister Rowland. And under this Minister, it is clear in our regions that there is an investment in regional connectivity. Over 660,000 premises have been connected to fibre because of the investment we have made under this government – $2.4 billion. And it’s not just fibre to the premises that have increased under this government. It is the fixed wireless network and its unlimited data via satellite.
 
We, literally, have seen what happened in 2013 when the wreckers came to government, what they did 10 minutes over the border in Jerrabomberra where half the suburb was connected to fibre and the other half was left with latent copper drop outs for a decade.
 
It took Labor coming back to government for the rest of the suburb to be completed, and the Minister and I stood with the Jerrabomberra community not long ago to say, finally, mission accomplished – the entire suburb had access to first rate, high speed fibre broadband. This isn’t a question across our regions. We deserve access to high speed connectivity for business, for school to stay connected.
 
If those opposite in the Liberal and National Party think this is a stunt, good luck to them.
 
In the regions they want to see continued access to affordable broadband; they want to see access that remains in government hands; they don’t want to see another sell off and privatisation of Telstra where so many of our regional communities have been left behind. Under this government, our intention is clear – NBN will be in government hands and we will continue connectivity across the regions.
 
JOURNALIST: Minister, I’m just trying to get a sense of the level of temptation for Peter Dutton here – selling this off to get his hand on the dough. What would it be worth, do you think?
 
ROWLAND: Well, my department has estimated the value at just under $20 billion – that’s publicly available information. But the real question here for Peter Dutton is, he’s had close to three years to consider this issue. We even had a debate in the Parliament today where Opposition members had around 40 minutes to make a contribution, and they did not address the substance of the issue once.
 
The question here is for Peter Dutton – where do you stand? Are you going to sell the NBN or do you want to keep it in public hands and back this bill?
 
JOURNALIST: Minister, current Parliament can’t bind future parliaments – you know that, you’re a lawyer and you’ve made this position clear. But I’m just wanting to understand why, given that the Parliament is already chock full of legislation that is not going to get finished before the end of the current parliamentary sitting term anyway, you would need to do this with legislation rather than just a policy position?
 
ROWLAND: Well, there’s three points there. The first is, you’re right, we have taken a policy position on this matter, but we have sought to put this in legislation because we want it to reflect our policy. The second point is the current way in which the act is drafted sets up a number of requirements before the NBN can be privatised. By removing those provisions, it would be up to a future government to have to reinsert that or undo the policy position that is reflected in legislation. The third part is that other comparable government business enterprises like Australia Post do not have such privatisation provisions in them.
 
Again, it is not a complex question. The question is whether you support keeping the NBN in public ownership or not.
 
JOURNALIST: Minister, an academic we’ve spoken to today said the NBN technology is likely to be superseded by 5G. Is part of keeping the NBN in government hands looking at new technologies and how to make sure it keeps up to date with those?
 
 ROWLAND: Well, certainly we know that fibre is the technology that is durable, it is the technology that is capable of delivering increasingly high speeds – all you need to do in this instance is, basically, change the technologies at either end. But we also know that the NBN, being a mix of technologies, is one that best services Australia.
 
By investing half a billion dollars in upgrading the fixed wireless network the government has not only ensured that our regions have comparable speeds compared to metro areas but also, by upgrading satellite services, it means that there can be that transition either off satellite and onto fixed wireless or onto fibre. But, certainly 5G is employed in a number of fixed line networks as part of the transmission mechanisms. 5G is also like any other mobile technology, limited by capacity. And it’s that kind of capacity that only fibre can be delivered.
 
It can deliver and also it just reflects the absolute frivolity of the previous government in overturning the decision to have a primarily fibre based fixed network rollout and, instead, revert to copper only to backflip years later and admit that the wrong decision had been made. And in the meantime, a project which was promised to be delivered for $29 billion went up to $57 billion.
 
The technology that has been employed from the beginning by Labor, being fibre, is the most durable technology available. We have every intention of continuing to explore further investments – we’re doing that right now through our existing investment, and this has been delivered on time and on budget.
 
JOURNALIST: Minister, can I ask on gambling for a second? A couple of months ago, the Prime Minister said that the gambling ad status quo was, quote, unacceptable. Last sitting period he said that it’s not gambling ad’s that’s the problem, it’s gambling. Why the change of heart?
 
ROWLAND: Well, I think there’s two points there. The first is, this government and this Prime Minister does take very seriously the issue of gambling harms and we will have a comprehensive report to the over 30 recommendations that was made by the late Peta Murphy in her committee inquiry. We are working through those.
 
These areas are complex because, in many cases, they involve situations that deal with state and territory as well as Commonwealth powers, so we’re working through that. But the Prime Minister also has made the point, and it is a fact, that it is land based gambling – being pokies and casinos – that make up the vast bulk of gambling losses in Australia. That is not to say that the online wagering sector does not form an important part of that, and certainly it is growing and that’s why we’re seeking to address it.
 
But the second part to that is, of course, this government has taken more action addressing gambling harms than any other government, and certainly more than the previous government – everything from instituting BetStop to a ban on credit cards for online wagering, to new verification procedures, to classification rules for gambling like features in games that children access. We know that all these areas need to come together in a comprehensive response as well, that is what we are working on.
 
But of course, the reality remains that gambling remains a significant issue amongst Australians, we understand that, and that is why – just as the Prime Minister said – the level of advertising of online wagering is unacceptable and it does need to change.

JOURNALIST: Minister, it has been 16 months, Minister, since Peta Murphy’s report was handed down. We are running out of time in this Parliament this year. Will we see the government’s proposal by the end of the year, or at least before the next election?

ROWLAND: We are committed to responding in full to Peta Murphy’s inquiry and to have a comprehensive response in this term.

JOURNALIST: Minister, just on another topic related to technological advancements. Are you concerned about car makers collecting and sharing the data of drivers? And would you consider updating the Privacy Act to include a fair and reasonable test as CHOICE consumer group is asking for?

ROWLAND: Well, obviously, issues of privacy overlap with the Attorney-General’s portfolio, but I do understand the concern here. And it’s not only cars. It is a number of internet-connected devices that are, in fact, collecting a lot of data and a lot of personal information that people might not be aware of. So, it is an area of concern.

My most excellent colleague, the Attorney-General, is looking at this very closely in terms of the Privacy Act. But I think that it’s one in which consumers need to be vigilant as well and to understand what products and what technologies they are using.

JOURNALIST: Minister, you said yourself that the NBN has cost $57 billion. It’s only valued at $20 billion. It’s going to cost even more money to upgrade the technology, and the prices that it can charge are regulated by the government. Who would even want to buy the thing?

ROWLAND: Well, for a start, this government is not interested in seeking potential buyers – I’ll make that first point. But secondly, these assets can be bought by anyone who considers that it may be a going concern of course. I’m not here to give a running commentary on who I think might like to bid on it.

But I will say this: the NBN exists for the public good. It exists because we understand that, in the absence of intervention we had a market failure in Australia where a digital divide leaving Australians behind. It also meant that with the sale of Telstra and the failure to properly structurally separate it, we had a situation where people just either weren’t getting services or they were completely unaffordable.

And you can actually see from the inflation data that since the NBN became operational, the overall costs of broadband have come down. We know that Australians are doing it tough at the moment, which is why it’s so important for the ACCC to continue to have regulatory oversight over wholesale prices that the NBN charges – that will not change under this bill.

JOURNALIST: Just in that question–

JOURNALIST: [Interrupts] Minister, just on motivations again can I just understand, based on the numbers you’ve mentioned today, the original money was borrowed and placed in an off-budget vehicle. Would a sale not result in a $30 billion hit to the bottom line of the budget?

ROWLAND: Well, I’ll make it very clear that this bill does not change the accounting treatment of the NBN. This is an ongoing investment that the Albanese Government is determined to continue making for the public good. We know from the lived experiences of consumers, as I said, that when assets, essential assets and services are privatised you get poorer quality and higher prices. That is what we are determined to avoid.

But let’s also be very clear. The reason why we have had 10’s of billions of dollars of cost blow-outs is because of the economic and technological illiteracy of the former government in investing in a redundant technology in the form of copper, only to back flip years later and admit that they got it wrong.

This government is determined to ensure that in every technology that we invest in, that we are delivering for all Australians, irrespective of where they live or work or what they earn.

JOURNALIST: Just to extend that question from Jacob, so just– can you clarify though, that let’s say that the NBN, the Coalition decided to try and sell it for $20 billion, that that sale would actually result in a negative outcome for the budget bottom line because you would have to write off a lot of that investment? Just that the sale process, is it accurate to say that would result in a fairly significant hit to the budget bottom line because of that accounting treatment?

And just on the question, you said you wanted to respond to the Peta Murphy report in this term of government. I just want to clarify; will you respond with legislation brought into the Parliament in response to the Peta Murphy report this year?

ROWLAND: Well, I’ll take your first question from the start. The issue is here that we are not looking at valuing the NBN for sale – so it’s not an issue that we are considering. We’re making it very clear that, under this government, we will not be privatising the NBN. So, these hypotheticals about what its value may be worth, they may be ones that Peter Dutton is looking at right now when he’s determining how to fund his nuclear power plants.

But in terms of responding to the Peta Murphy report, we’re determined to do three things: firstly, to have a comprehensive response; secondly, to ensure that we have in place mechanisms that go specifically to decreasing gambling-related harms; and thirdly, to ensure that we’ve worked with the states and territories to do this most effectively. We will be taking advice from the department and from the regulator on the best way in which to achieve that but, as I said, we are determined to get this done this term.

JOURNALIST: So, no guarantee of legislation this term?

ROWLAND: We will be taking advice from the department on that, and we are determined to get a comprehensive response and to have this done expeditiously.

JOURNALIST: In terms of– today, there’s a parliamentary inquiry on insurance premiums. They’re going up at a rate higher than inflation and I know the government’s spoken about supermarkets and the airlines. Is there an eye to look to better regulation of insurers to try to keep those premiums down?

ROWLAND: Well, this obviously goes into the area of my most excellent colleague, the Assistant Treasurer, but it is well understood by the government that insurance premiums are an area of high concern. This has not happened overnight either. This has in fact happened in some specific regions, particularly those that have been subject to natural disasters including in Far North Queensland.

We are determined, as a government, to employ every method available for us in the interests of consumers here, that includes ongoing ACCC advice. But I will allow my colleague, the Assistant Treasurer, to give more indication on that. But I will acknowledge that this is an impost on consumers, particularly, I hear from my own communities – I’m sure Kristy does as well – particularly when you’ve had natural disasters, people who’ve opened up their insurance renewals and found very high prices in there as well.

JOURNALIST: A bit of a self-interested one. I think there’s a lot of media companies that are interested to know the latest iteration of the government’s thoughts on the News Media Bargaining Code. Can you give us any update on where that process currently is? And are you considering a broader tech tax as some commentators, experts have suggested?

ROWLAND: No, we’re considering a range of advice at the moment having received the ACCC’s advice on this matter, as well as Treasury. We’re continuing to engage with publishers on the best way forward here. We will do that because we understand the importance of ensuring that the digital platforms pay for the content that they utilise from the publishers. But we continue to have most constructive dialogue about the best way forward here. Treasury officials have put on the record that we are looking at a number of options in this area, and we’re continuing to do that.

JOURNALIST: You went to the last election promising to look at doing something around gambling advertising – that’s why the Peta Murphy Report or inquiry was established. If you fail to get any changes through in this term of Parliament, will you consider that a personal failure on your part as Communications Minister?

ROWLAND: I’m confident we will get changes through. I’m confident that the changes that we have made, including in areas like BetStop and credit card reform, are having real benefits. This is a government that is determined to do everything we can to address gambling harms. We understand the importance that the community places on this and the real world harms, not only in terms of economic costs, but social costs that this has. This government is determined to make a difference.

JOURNALIST: Minister, have you met with the Greens this week to discuss Labor’s proposed misinformation laws? And if so, what’s the outcome [indistinct]?

ROWLAND: We are scheduled to have a number of Crossbench briefings this week.

JOURNALIST: And what are you hoping to get out of that discussion?

ROWLAND:  Well, part of that will be ensuring that all members of the Crossbench understand that over 80 per cent of Australians are concerned about the rise of mis- and disinformation – the fact that it harms democracies, it harms economies, and the fact that action is needed in this area. Doing nothing is not an option.

We have certainly the advice from our top spies, from Defence personnel who say that this is causing real harms to our communities. And again, this goes to the point of what the Albanese Government has been doing in the digital space. There are online harms that harm people socially. There are harms that harm economically, including in the area of scams. And there are also harms that go to our democracy. The Albanese Government has been addressing all of these issues. Nothing happened in the decade prior.