bund, two points.one. my understanding is the above ground fibre...

bund, two points.

one. my understanding is the above ground fibre optic cable degenerates and needs replacing after 15 years. Existing copper wire last three times longer so if in reality the NBN costs $43B now (who knows) nearly that much will need to be spent after 15 years. Either that or wireless technology will surpass cable and cable will be dumped.

two. financing of a project this size (and considering the rubbery costings) would not be undertaken by private enterprise unless costings and revenue streams were adequate and predictable.

So if there is reluctance from private enterprise the government has three choices. A) fund the whole thing with a special bond issue or B) fund from the deficit or C) a combination.

A) investors would be guaranteed a return (that can be rigged anyway) and may be asked to buy more bonds should the venture fall apart B) general bond raising is used through the national accounts and C) is a bet each way

Without proper costings this won't start what ever Julia said. It's that simple and the benefits are a little airy fairy. In a few years wireless technology will enable us near national blanket coverage anyway. Speeds will increase as technology improves.

What ever: it's all political and in the end it will be our money the government will use. There's plenty of fight left in the NBN debate.