18 Comments
22 April 2008
SPEECH: Achieving a Step Change - Better Broadband for New Zealand

Achieving a Step Change:
Better Broadband for New Zealand
Wellington

I'd like to thank the Wellington Chamber of Commerce for providing this opportunity to speak to you today.

In about six months, New Zealand voters will get a chance to have their say about the future of this country. 

I want Kiwis to choose National as the leaders of that future because I believe we can offer them much more than they are currently getting. 

The sad fact is that right now we're slipping behind the rest of the world.  New Zealanders' wages just aren't keeping up with the cost of living in a new century.

We're number 22 in the developed world for incomes per person – and falling.  We can't seriously compare our standard of living with the UK and Australia any more.  We're better compared with the Czech Republic. 

That means our families typically struggle more than families in other developed countries. They worry more about the grocery bill, they find it harder to save for a holiday, and they find it harder to make the mortgage payment each fortnight.

More than 78,000 New Zealanders are leaving every year to get a better deal somewhere else in the world.  Statistics released this week show that the number of people leaving for Australia rose 19% in the past year, meaning we lost a further 43,419 Kiwis to Australia in the year to March.

Labour has had almost a decade to turn this around.  But all too often they've lost sight of the real race.  While other countries have been getting wealthier than us, Labour has made a large number of poor-quality short-term spending decisions that have done nothing to close the widening gap in average incomes between us and the rest of the world.

More recently, Labour has been distracted by issues like how parents should discipline their children and what sort of food should be served in school tuck shops.  Or, worse still, dreaming up electioneering rorts, which have nothing to do with securing New Zealand's future, and are only about the Labour Party's future.

Michael Cullen said last week that this year's election was "a contest about power in New Zealand".  I have news for him.  It's not.  It's a contest about who can address the important economic issues in front of New Zealand and create a more prosperous future for New Zealanders. 

We need a government that is resolutely focused on strengthening our economy and delivering better wages and living conditions to New Zealanders. 

To deliver those things, we can't simply do what we've always done.  The world is getting more and more competitive every year.  So, just like any other country, New Zealand needs to focus its efforts on the things that will really make a difference to our earning power. 

Tinkering around the edges won't be good enough.  New Zealand needs a step change. 

We need a significant step change to deliver New Zealanders the wages and living conditions they have a right to expect. 

National has an economic plan for delivering that step change.

• We will deliver an ongoing programme of personal tax cuts.
• We will take a disciplined approach to government spending, so that interest rates track down not up.
• We will stop the massive rise in head office bureaucracy that Labour has encouraged, and we will deal with the regulatory and compliance issues that smother New Zealand businesses and families.
• We will have an unwavering focus on improving education standards, and
• We will invest in the infrastructure this country desperately needs to grow.

It's that final point I want to concentrate on today.

I don't need to tell you how vital good infrastructure is to a well-running economy. 

Workers and businesses rely on decent roads, decent public transport, decent communication networks, reliable electricity networks, and reliable water supplies to carry out their day-to-day work.  When that infrastructure doesn't deliver, it means workers have less time to give to the job at hand. 

Over the past few years we've seen many of the signs of a severe infrastructure deficit in New Zealand. Ridiculous traffic jams all over Auckland and in other parts of the country, and yearly concerns about whether the lights will be turned off.

This has had a negative impact on business. Productivity growth has been minimal and inflationary pressures have been huge.

There's no question in my mind that one of the major tasks of an incoming National Government will be to turn this infrastructure deficit around – in double-quick time.

The future prosperity of our economy depends on it.  So, in the coming months you can be sure of hearing more from me about repairing New Zealand's infrastructure deficit.

But in itself, patching up our infrastructure deficit won't be enough.

For a real step change, we need to do more than play catch-up. We need to take a step-up.

We need a government that can anticipate the changing needs of New Zealand's future and provide for those needs. 

I am optimistic about that future and New Zealand's place in it. 

Our booming and ever-wealthier Asian neighbours are reaching out for new services and new products.  People and investors are seeking safe and green havens in an increasingly unstable and dirty world. The Internet is transforming global commerce and eliminating the tyranny of geographic distance.

These trends present massive opportunities for New Zealand. 

But to make the most of these trends New Zealand has to be more ambitious, more outward-looking, and more savvy than ever before. 

We can't just keep recycling history.  We need to look ahead and future-proof our nation.

We need to carefully consider what the infrastructure demands of tomorrow will be and ensure we have a plan for meeting them.

I have thought long and hard about what New Zealand must do to secure our place in the world.  

There is one modern technology that stands out in its terms of its ability to:

• Draw us closer to our trading partners.
• Put Kiwis at the forefront of technological innovation.
• Greatly enhance the way we do business and the way we communicate.

That thing is ultra-fast broadband for all New Zealanders.

I'm not talking about broadband speeds as we know them now.  I'm talking about download and upload speeds many, many times faster than most Kiwis have ever experienced.  

I want New Zealand to be linked by a network of fibre that ensures almost all premises – be they small businesses, schools, or households – can be linked into the main fibre grid with fibre right to their door.  And when Kiwis can't get fibre connected to their home or place of work, I want them to have access to other high-speed  broadband technologies, like those afforded by satellite and mobile.

With a fibre network like the one I aspire to, New Zealanders would be able to download and upload data from the Internet at lightning-fast speeds. Workers would be able to telecommute with ease.  Video-conferencing could happen between seven  people in seven parts of the country at once.

Achieving a "fibre to the home" aspiration of that sort would truly future-proof New Zealand.

Right now, most of us still depend on a copper wire of varying lengths, depending on where we live, to link us up to the main fibre network.  That copper line may have been up to the job a decade ago, but in 2008 it looks like a dirt track when compared to the fibre highways we could be using.  It just can't carry enough data fast enough to service the latest cutting-edge Internet applications. 

Meanwhile, Internet technologies are becoming more and more 'bandwidth' hungry.   In fact, this growth in global demand for bandwidth has been exponential, growing at a rate of between 50% and 100% every year.

New Zealand's slow deployment of fibre has placed a brake on our ability to take up the opportunities the Internet has to offer.  We are missing out on the real promise of this century's leading technology. 

That's the bad news.  And I'm afraid there's not much good news.

Over the next five years, Labour and Telecom's plan is for fibre to be linked up to 'cabinets' in some communities and for that fibre to then be connected to homes and businesses through bits of copper.   Labour has no plans to link fibre to the premises and homes of everyday New Zealanders.

In Labour's words, "the economics for this [fibre-to-the-home] to occur in the short to medium term are simply too challenging".

I don't think Labour's plan is nearly ambitious enough to future-proof New Zealand. 

The volumes of data and the speed a copper kilometre can carry are just not even comparable to fibre to the home.   There's no doubt that the future for broadband must involve replacing that copper with fibre. 

Fibre right to the home promises huge gains in productivity, innovation, and global reach for New Zealand.  Those are the things that will make our economy richer.  Those are the things that will ensure New Zealand families have incomes that keep up with the cost of living in the world of the future.

So it's pretty disappointing that right now no one is planning to invest in a fibre-to-the home and premises broadband network for New Zealand. 

Sure, fibre has been rolled out to the premises of some lucky big businesses and some niche areas.  But beyond that cherry-picking there is no obvious will from the private sector to invest in a wider fibre-to-the-home network.

Private operators have judged that for the foreseeable future, connecting fibre to homes just won't deliver them or their shareholders enough of a return.  They have made this judgment based on their private interests, and that's fair enough. 

But I think that lack of investment represents a significant market failure. 

Private businesses naturally don't take into account the returns that a nationwide fibre-to-the-home network will deliver to the public as a whole.

However, every year private businesses withhold that investment is another year in which Kiwis miss out on access to the technologies and communication capabilities that are defining the modern world.

I think this is a case where a future-thinking Government, with a view to the long-term and an appreciation of the wider public benefits, needs to step in.

But, as with any market intervention, we must be very careful about how that is done. 

In Government, National will have two key tools available for speeding up the roll-out of fibre-to-the-home.  The first is regulation, and the second is capital investment from the Crown Account.  Neither of those tools should be wielded lightly.  Indeed, National has considered very carefully whether a case for these steps exists at all. 

Our judgment is that it is in the best interests of New Zealanders for government to act to ensure our country has the future-proof broadband network needed to secure New Zealand's global competitive advantage.

National's medium and long-term vision is for a fibre connection to almost every home, supported by satellite and mobile solutions where it makes sense to do so. 

Our initial goal is to ensure the accelerated roll-out of fibre right to the home of 75% of New Zealanders. 

In the first six years, priority will be given to business premises, schools, health facilities, and the first tranche of homes. 

In achieving this we also want to significantly enhance broadband access and speeds for those households and premises for which fibre-to-the-home is not immediately feasible.   

Today, I want to lay out the principles that will guide National as we construct a model for ensuring that this vision and these goals are realised.

First, we want to be sure that any taxpayer money we invest in fibre results in a measurable increase in broadband services – and doesn't just line the pockets of incumbents seeking windfall gains.  We want to ensure that the Crown's capital contribution does not lead to any reigning-in of investments already planned, such as Telecom's 'cabinetisation' plan.
 
Secondly, National wants to ensure that any fibre network that the Crown takes a stake in is open-access.  We want to ensure that many service providers can compete to provide services over that fibre network, because we believe this will result in the best and cheapest services for consumers.

Thirdly, we want to get the right balance between on the one hand ensuring any fibre roll-out does not result in excessive duplication that may prevent investment in other parts of the network, and on the other hand ensuring it does not cement-in an undue advantage for existing providers. 

Fourthly, National wants to ensure that the public return from any Crown investment is partly realised in lowering cost barriers that could prevent consumers taking up leading-edge 'triple-play' broadband services.  We want to ensure that our valuable investment in fibre to homes and premises actually results in substantially increased uptake of ultra-fast broadband services.

Finally, National wants to ensure that our investment model captures the innovation and expertise of the private sector.  In doing that, we want to ensure that fibre solutions are rolled out with a view to New Zealand's economic future and not with a view to protecting the legacy assets of New Zealand's economic past.

Delivering on these five principles will require a carefully thought-through and negotiated investment and regulatory model. National will conduct these negotiations in our first year of government.  As Prime Minister, I intend to take a leading role in them.

In doing so, I will be wary of the kind of shadow-boxing that has all too often typified the relationship between government and the telecommunications industry.  I won't put up with game-playing.  If that means knocking some metaphoric heads together, then that is what I will do. 

In conducting these negotiations, National will have some significant cards to play.

Today, I am pleased to announce that, subject to adherence to the principles I have just laid out, the next National Government will contribute an investment of up to $1.5 billion in Crown capital over six years to accelerate the roll-out of a fibre-to-the-home network for New Zealand. 

National will invite interested parties to tender for the opportunity to roll out the fibre in ways that meet our initial goal and long-term fibre-to-the-home vision.  

We will also work with local government to ensure it is doing everything it can to facilitate the roll-out of the fibre network.  We will be clear, for example, that future road construction undertaken by local government will have to take the Government's fibre objectives into account.

National will also take additional steps to accelerate the roll-out of high-speed broadband services to rural and remote areas.

As a first step, we will double the size of the Broadband Challenge Fund, from $24m to $48m, and give it the primary focus of providing fast broadband solutions for remote and rural communities.  Due to the typography of many of these areas, these solutions will have to include a mixture of fibre, satellite, and wireless technologies.

National's fibre plan entails significant Crown investment.  It will be a growth-enhancing investment that will help New Zealand take a major step up. 

There is no doubt in my mind that speeding up the introduction of fibre-to-the-home across New Zealand will provide very positive returns to the economy as a whole, which will in turn benefit all taxpayers.

At the end of the six-year period over which the $1.5 billion investment is made, National will undertake a transparent stock-take to assess the progress towards our fibre-to-the-home vision.  The results of this stock-take will inform any future regulatory or investment intervention in the telecommunications market.

National's fibre-to-the-home goals are an essential part of our vision for a step change in New Zealand.  We believe that ultra high-speed broadband, as afforded by fibre-to-the-home, can deliver dividends for New Zealanders in all walks of life.
 
Fibre to the home and premise will deliver huge economic benefits for our country – in terms of enhanced productivity, improved global connectivity, and enhanced capacity for innovation.  It will help deliver the economic step change that New Zealand needs to significantly lift average incomes over time.

Independent experts estimate those benefits will be worth between $2.7 billion and $4.4 billion per year.

That's no surprise – just think of the productivity gains.  Workers won't have to always fly to meet their counterparts in other cities, they'll have access to video-conferencing facilities instead.  Small business won't have to waste precious dollars on expensive toll calls, they'll make those calls at next to no cost over ultra-fast broadband.

Kiwi entrepreneurs will have the opportunity to be at the forefront of developments of this century's most important technology.  If dial-up could deliver Trade Me, who knows what could be done with fibre-to-the-home?

The ability to 'be' somewhere else without having to get in a car or onto a bus will vastly improve Kiwis' ability to work from home.   Mums and Dads could choose to 'telecommute' – working from home while keeping completely in touch with their colleagues, even attending virtual meetings.  The savings in travel time could, in turn, make it easier to achieve work-life balance.

And, as people are able to do more virtually, we'll see less travelling by car and plane, in turn reducing our individual carbon footprints.  Ultra-fast broadband has the potential to help New Zealand significantly reduce its greenhouse gas emissions.  It can do so in a way that will allow us to enhance, rather than diminish, our lifestyles.

Fibre to schools and children's homes could hugely enhance teaching and learning, while fibre to hospitals and medical centres could improve the productivity of the health sector.

The possibilities are, as they say, endless.   We can't begin to envisage them all today.

What we do know is that fibre technology is more important for New Zealand than it is for just about any other nation. 

Our small size and our distance from other countries make it hard for us to compete with the rest of the world.   Ultra-fast broadband will help us overcome both of those things. 

One hundred and fifty years ago, the government had the vision to build railways and highways to facilitate the movement of goods.  Today, we need government to help lay out the information highways of the future.

New Zealand has already fallen behind our global competitors when it comes to Broadband.  We've delayed the big decisions and put investment off for long enough.  Every year that goes by with us languishing behind other countries is another year of missed opportunities. 

The current government is not ambitious enough for broadband in New Zealand. 

Labour thinks fibre-to-the-home in the short to medium term is "simply too challenging".  National doesn't. 

We will do what it takes to ensure New Zealand has the competitive edge needed to prosper in the world of the future. 

Our country has missed too many opportunities already. National is determined not to miss the ultra-fast broadband opportunity as well.

National is ambitious for New Zealand and ambitious for New Zealanders.  Our fibre-optic broadband vision is a key tool for realising that ambition and it's one I'm very proud to put my leadership behind. 

I hope you'll get behind it too.  Thank-you.  

To download the speech as a PDF document, click here


Trackbacks

No Trackbacks

Comments
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

#1 - John L Mason 2008-04-22 19:28 - (Reply)

Dear John, well done , an inspired, visionary policy release, little wonder Cunnilfe has little enthusism for it. Other policy release to be encourage as a point of difference are: reionstate privy council,knigthoods, ANZUS, US Navy/Air Force contacts and visits(Labour anti US policy has cost us dearly) airforce strike wing.instigate male postate screeenig with equal weighting of breat screening , remove GST from food staples/medical, build hydro and non pollutig coal generation, scrape Kyoto or at least modify in our favour, encourage reaffoorestation ...many others to come....NILS ILLIGETIMA CARBORUNDUM(dont let the uglies from Labour grind you down) Kind Regards John M

#2 - Mick Stracey Clitherow 2008-04-22 19:51 - (Reply)

Excellent. Bring it on. Glad you mentioned triple play. This will mean laying four strands to each subscriber, 3 live and one dark. James Watt at palmerston North is offering for national connectivity 20Mbits/sec symmetrical at NZ$100/month. Telstra Clear on Rosedale Road North Harbour is offering the same bit rate at $800 per month. OK, this included internationasl conductivity, but demonstrates the cosy oligopoly between Terlecom, TelstraClear and Vodafone. Will be ging down I hope to talk to James Watt next week, to understand how he does it, and exactly where this costs lie. Telecom's Next Generation Network is in fact the Previous generation Network. As such, it would be six years late if it was all up and runnung now. PS The Cabinets are monstrous, and block off half the pavement Kind regards, Mick Stracey Clitherow

#3 - Nigel 2008-04-23 06:25 - (Reply)

The policy is great news, FIOS by Verizon in the US is getting alot of attention now, though as a New Zealand based employee for one of the top 10 US corporates working from home ( in small town NZ ), I am very concerned by the 75% number. Rural/semi rural New Zealand faces massive challenges as indeed does any such area globally, the opportunity presented to these areas by high quality broadband and home based employment is massive ( eg. SouthWest airlines phone operators work from home & are spread all around ). So I have a distinct concern that if this policy if it is not careful will actually accelerate the city/rural divide when it has so much potential to do the opposite so instead of a 75% number I would prefer an indication of the size of town that will be serviced & would suggest any town with > 300 population should be part of the new fibre service. Nigel

#4 - Richard K 2008-04-23 09:16 - (Reply)

About time we saw some forward thinking, intelligent and meaningful discussions about the infrastructure in NZ. A couple of quick questions first, Do you see any potential for central government to invest (at least in part) in the cost of upgrading the internal wiring of individual premises? To realize the benefits of FTTH the internal wiring of a users home needs to be at least a star-wired CAT5 standard, currently this is not the case for most house, especially those older than 3-5 years. To upgrade each house is around $500. Also, in area's where the power lines are currently overhead, do you see a requirement for the fibre to be ducted underground? As for Mick Stacey's comment about requiring 3 fibres plus a spare for triple play, this is only required if your delivery system is not intelligent enough to apply robust QOS over a single fibre, there is no real bandwidth improvements in having 3 fibres compared to a well managed single fibre. They all go into the same aggregated backhaul fibre and each customer fibre can handle at least 100Mbs (as fast as most internal networks within NZ homes) and can be modulated to Gbps speeds with different lasers - more than enough to future proof NZ's broadband infrastructure. Anyway, Great to see this policy, I look forward to more forward thinking and intelligent policy from you in the next few months. Regards, Richard

#5 - Mick Stracey Clitherow 2008-04-23 13:55 - (Reply)

Richard's enthusiasm has over-run his technology. Triple play is cable TV via fibre optic (FO), plus an FO uplink and and FO downlink for data (inc VOIP). Live TV using internet protocol only works with a direct path between "Head end" and receiver. Internet traffic gets to you all which ways, and is therefore not synchronous. To multiplex the data channels needs FO transceivers at each end of the fibre, costing $120 each as opposed to $50 each for single channel. FO cabling is now very cheap, less so are the trenches for the necessary conduits. QOS means quality of service, it is not any more technical than that. The worst bottlenecks for domestic internet traffic are the paths from the "cabinets" /exchanges back into the core of the internet. would be happy to talk directly to Richard. Mick SC

#5.1 - Richard K 2008-04-23 14:59 - (Reply)

Hi Mick, I should probably have referred to separate VLANS over the same fiber to separate the triple play data, of which QOS plays an important part. There are many examples around the world of triple play being delivered over a single fibre across an all IP network. It seems you are talking about something quite different, cable tv over fibre is not the same as IPTV triple play. What you are talking about looks alot like a cable tv network over fiber and an IP voice / high speed Internet network delivered over separate but bundled fibers in a single duct. Not really what I would call true triple play. This is getting off topic now, I'm sure the moderators can forward an email on to me if you want to talk to me about this further... Richard

#6 - James W 2008-04-26 18:25 - (Reply)

John, I am glad to see this topic getting the attention it deserves. New Zealand needs this kind of forward-thinking investment. Rather than shoring up the ranks of those demanding handouts with pre-election bribes, we need to re-allocate the budget more intelligently to ensure our long term future. I'm sad to say it, but Labour needs a few terms in the minority to sharpen their agenda and cut the fat from their drunken spending sprees. Keep it up, and you'll find a lot of us die-hard Labour voters finding our way across the fence.

#7 - Michael 2008-04-29 21:34 - (Reply)

Dear Mr Key, I am a student who is glad to see that someone is taking the communications infrastructure seriously. Better still is the idea of properly upgrading the system, rather than a watered down attempt that will later require more upgrades with greater costs. After experiencing high internet speeds from the educational internet service, it seems a shame that the same bandwidth is not yet allowed to homes. The demand for greater bandwidth is high, and yet nobody else is prepared to spend on such a vital resource. This is definately a good way to bring New Zealand to the forefront of the global standard of living.

#8 - Chris Braid 2008-05-23 00:20 - (Reply)

While fibre-to-the-home is a great Idea there are other alternatives that might save a lot of those precious Tax Dollars... I recently spent 3 months on the Big Island of Hawaii and found the less than T1 connection I had wirelessly on the U of N Campus was better than most lines here in NZ including T1 at my Local Polytechnic. Have you considered that maybe if we could get some WiMax Delivery going (http://www.wimaxforum.org/technology/) maybe some smaller Urban area's might be well served? I would personally be very happy to access the Internet Via Wireless Servers about my City as I do my home.. I have a couple of Macs on WiFi and it allows me the freedom of my section with my computer with this connection. A good wireless connection over aa City like Hastings or Napier would minimise the fitting of Fibre to every house and the money saved could help set up Relays so Farms and Regional and National Parks could also be served. Wireless systems have the advantage of saving much Copper and still give good comunity coverage where needed. If you got about in the backblocks like I did as a Meter reader then you;d know that there are still many chosing not to adopt new technology. We need the New technology to be easily accessed and if we want more people to move back into the country to farm and create new productive Niche-Markets we will have to remember our mobility and use solutions that are also Mobile. Telecom needs to drop from the Government Favourite list for their Total Failure in honouring Kiwishare in Spirit and for selling us off to feed overseas profit. WiMax should give us Internet much like we used to get TV and that would be great... Pity we are 10 years behind the bleeding edge...

#8.1 - Sheldon Reddie said:
2008-05-28 10:57 - (Reply)

Hi totally agree with you Chris. The technology that we have in this country is behind the times. However limited our technology is all new laptops coming into the market have wireless technology as a core component. You spoke about Napier and Hastings, Wireless is great in these areas, however if you go 10 minutes out of town to Haumoana and Te Awanga the Wireless is less that 56k. Telecom seems to have a huge monopoly on our market in New Zealand, this is something that frustrates me greatly. Last year I spent 2 months in Africa, and found that there telecommunications networks are far greater than ours, this I find amazing, the stability of their GPS networks is equivelant to our 3G network and there is a range of service providers to choose from. Wireless is the way of the future, and I agree far more cheaper than Fibre right to the front door, as nice as that would be. I am please that Naitonal is proactive about this, as it is an issue that cannot wait, for New Zealand to compete in the global market we need to be able to access the latest technology, but more than that make the best possible use of it.

#9 - John Nixon said:
2008-06-25 19:33 - (Reply)

John, I believe I am one of the most knowledgeable people currently in New Zealand on the subject of Ftth. I designed the truly triple play network at Kensington Park (Orewa) and solved the unique NZ SKY TV challenge of transporting their signal over fibre at native L-band RF frequencies. Telecom have just hired me as a consultant. I'd love to offer my knowledge to your initiatives. I am a successful mature technically competent businessman, now with time to spare for important initiatives. Love to amplify these few lines if given the opportunity, John Nixon Optical Network Engineering 803 / 1 Hobson St Auckland 1010 0800 ONEFIBRE

#9.1 - Charles W 2008-06-25 22:46 - (Reply)

Hi John, Is it true triple play that you are delivering or are you simply muxing the sky signal over fibre from a central point? I would have thought that true triple play would be delivered over the network as IPTV rather than as an RF signal over a seperate fibre? How well would the system you designed scale to a large-scale rollout? A word of advise to Mr Nixon though. A well designed, professional website goes a long way towards people taking your claims seriously. Especially when these include claims such as "I am one of the most knowledgeable people currently in New Zealand on the subject of Ftth" I do believe that NZ would benefit immensly from a future-proofed connectivity roll-out such as fibre to the home. And look forward to all discussions around how best to roll it out.

#10 - John Nixon said:
2008-06-25 23:32 - (Reply)

To the current group: I received a Google search on FTTH which brought up John Key's speech tonight, and I responded immediately out of interest and passion for the subject. Unfortunately I did not realise then that my "post" was public. However, no problems, I stick by what I said. I read through the several posts here and realised that most of the comments and affirmations are not exact. There is a general misunderstanding of what fibre can and can't do, and what role wireless etc can play. For example the comments on one, two and three fibres to each home is simply a question of cost. There are three light wavelengths required for triple play here in New Zealand. Two for data and one for RF TV overlay. There is not, nor will there be for quite some time, general delivery of all TV via IPTV. Because of the massive reduction of cost of fibre, the componentry to pump each wavelength over a separate fibre is the least costly. Put all three on the same fibre, and you must add the cost of WDM (wave division multiplexing) at both ends on the fibre. More cost and more stuff to break down. But less fibre splicing! Please don't jump to simplistic conclusions. The outcome of the next elections may well be very important for the speed of progress with broadband in this country. But many wise decisions must be made by either party concerning topology, standards, provision and cost of backhaul etc. Whoever wins the elections, I hope I can assist with these debates and help correct decision making. John Nixon Optical Network Engineering Auckland

#11 - Mick Clitherow 2008-06-27 00:59 - (Reply)

Mirabile dictu, it is amazing what great men of science, engineering and destiny have achieved sans web-site. The work of Tessla who created the synchronous alternator for power generation (Go to Niagara Falls), Uk scientists and their cavity magnetron, Flemming and penecillin, the maths that created the modulation systems that enabled satellite communication , not to mention the work of Clerk Maxwel, Albert Einstein, the boys at palo Alto Bell labs who invented solid state amplification etc etc. The Brits coloured the map red around the world in the XVIII and XIXth without even typewriters. The Romans did even better than we did. With enough bandwidth to overcome variations in latency, and the vagaries of routing, downloading near video on demand or movies from a data base is no sweat via IPTV. It is just another stream of, one hopes, reasonably synchronous packets with their headers. If, however, you want live Sky TV, you have to present the signal to the bog-standard Sky decoder in exactly the same format as it would have been presented from the Sky dish and associated LNB. The solution is essentially to provide a cable service over fibre. Terribly impure, not to mention retro. However, the attitude to the technology and marketing risks by Sky TV Brahmins is also retro. I think that the point to make is that once you have the fibre from A to B, you can terminate it in step with demand and the advances of technology. Given the diminishing costs of fibre, it is shortsighted only to lay one core, especially since the costs of fibre to the premises however defined are about trenching much more than about orange conduit and 10mm dia fibre cables with multiple strands. It cost about NZ$160,000 to lay about 160m of conduit to the Devonport primary school, through a scoria field. This is not typical I agree, but does back up my point. The contract management was not smart, and the idiology of the NS City Council was such about overhead distribution that we the ratepayers had to indulge its susceptibilities . The play moves fast. The bandwidth for terrestrial rf suitable for a city environment is fixed. so lets embrace fibre. The sociologist, C Northcote Parkinson, aka quondam UK Inland Revenue director, wrote a book about the hypothesis that work expands to fill the time available. So it is with the capacity of a channel of communication. Those who doubt the capacity of the content-providers to create the demand to justify then 20 to 100 to 1000 Mega Bits / sec soon to be created should draw a lesson for Herr Gutenburgh. He it was in the early XIVth whop developed the moveable type printing press. He went to the venture capitalists of the day, the Lombardy bankers, they who had financed the Crusades (Think of Richard the Lionheart, and Don John of Austria) . "Arhh, Herr Gutenburgh, a most interesting invention, and you want much money for a product roll-out? But tell us: given the universal illiteracy " He did not get the venture capital. As now, 600 years later, he had to rely on Whanau, Family and Fools . All the best, Mick SC

#12 - Kevin 2008-07-18 18:40 - (Reply)

Hi John. Great vision for the access infrastructure. Here's my vision as a consumer. I don't care about my broadband speed any more - it just works. I buy Internet access through my utility retailer. They bundle electricity, gas, Internet and family mobiles on one bill. I don't have a relationship with a "Telco", I don't need one. My home appliances are all Internet enabled and secure. I get my email from Google for free. I watch high definition TV and movies on demand by subscribing directly over the Internet or just watch free stuff - the choices are limitless. I make local and long distance calls using Skype or my mobile. I work from home for a company in the UK and go there twice a year for my reviews even though I don't have to. If something better than Skype or any of the other services comes along I just change because I can. Consumer choice is king. Bring it on.

#13 - Neil 2008-09-24 17:07 - (Reply)

I am worried about the policy outlined above. Nowhere does John talk about increasing backbone capacity within New Zealand or capacity out of New Zealand. Just Fibre to the home. Fibre to the home is useless if we do not have the capacity in the backbone. (like having a porche but only a dirt track as a motroway to drive it on) I have searched and searched to see if National talks about this but they do not. It either shows a basic misunderstanding about what is going on or a reluctance to agree that labor has this part of the equation right. Currently, there is competition growing within NZ to link exchanges and cabinettes. Also, Kordia is looking at getting involved in an international Fibre network which will drive down prices by breaking the Telecom monopoly in this area. Only when this has been done does fibre to the home make sense. So. I would like to see some comment by National on Backhaul within NZ and international capacity. So far, their lack of comment suggests that they are happy with this bandwidth constriction which shows a fundamental mis-understanding about the issuus. I look forward to comment. Regards Neil

#13.1 - Mick Stracey Clitherow 2008-09-24 18:42 - (Reply)

Rest assured that FTTH is essentially shorthand for improved connectivity back through the chain of points of aggregation, switches etc to the local peering exchange. Suggest that politicians have to keep the message simple. An example of what private industry is achieving can be found in Devonport, where Orcon as put in adsl2+ into te exchange and Vector Communications has provided 2 Gbps backhaul from the exchange to the sky Tower. Telecom's backhaul is I think still an ATM line. Competition may have by now awakened the sleeping giant, which eartlier in the year did not even have a date for this sort of upgrade. FYI, the trunk lines around NZ are not constrained for capacity, as there is healthy competition and duplication. By her own direct admission, the Southern Cross Cable Manager said thqat the qable still had dark fibres. It suits their business model always to have a queue. The dark fibres are only put into service with the necessary capital investment if the utilisation is going to be 100% 24/7. This is a shareholder focus, not a customer focus. You are correct: only competion(duplication) will shake this business model. Happy to continue/develop this via email jpasia@ihug.co.nz . There is a spectrum of techniques to get 10/100/1000Mbps to the actual point of use. They depend on needs, ability to pay, competion, and any input from the Regulator. Try getting all of that on air in Morning Report. Ciao (I am in italy) Mick

#14 - Diana Amundsen 2008-11-08 20:49 - (Reply)

Hello John. I think your vision is wonderful and would transform New Zealand if you brought in fibre-to-home. We might have a chance at keeping pace with the rest of the advantaged countries in the world if your policy is realized. It is election night right now, and it seems pretty obvious that you're going to get in as the new Prime Minister - congratulations! Now, you have the most important job of all: Do as you promise, and make this happen. Let's see you go! Diana.


Add Comment

E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA

 
Submitted comments will be subject to moderation before being displayed.