The Australian Government claim the "Coalition are a fact-free zone" when it comes to the National Broadband Network, but raw business facts have led to the shedding of 400 jobs in South Australia.
Communications Minister Stephen Conroy has disputed opposition claims that the total cost of the NBN could be as high as $90 billion, after initial Government estimates put the cost at $37.4 billion. The worrying part about the NBN debate is that this $52.6 billion discrepency isn't the biggest conundrum, that title can be attributed to the confusion over whether or not a cost-benefit analysis is required for a new business venture.
Speaking on ABC Radio's AM program on Monday, Minister Conroy insisted that a cost-benefit analysis is only required if it is expected that a venture will make a loss.
"The cost benefit analysis argument works if you claim the NBN isn't making money," Minister Conroy said, "and the NBN corporate plan clearly states that the NBN makes money over time"
To see the risks of operating a business venture without a cost-benefit analysis, Holden's Elizabeth production facility in South Australia is a topical example, where 400 employees face redundancies due to weakening demand. The struggles in the automotive industry are well publicised, but South Australia's opposition leader Steve Marshall doesn't think this is an excuse for the state not to do it's homework.
"We have been calling since day one for a cost benefit analysis to be done," he said.
Despite Mr Marshall's calls, neither Holden or the State Government have provided any documentation.
The debate about whether fibre is better than copper, whether we should have fibre to the home or just to the node, or whether we should be aiming for 100 megabits per second or if 25 will suffice is one to be had amongst computer technicians, but the debate about business fundamentals should be had by all of us.
No comments:
Post a Comment