PARLIAMENT | PARTY | GRASSROOTS

Red Alert

Archive for the ‘infrastructure’ Category

Very poor optics Mr Joyce

Posted by Grant Robertson on March 15th, 2010

It has not been the best week for Steven Joyce. Both his pronouncements on limiting access to student loans and reviewing the Super Gold card have seen him run an issue up the flagpole only to have to run it down again in very short order.

It seems that it all got the better of him on a visit to New Plymouth on Friday. The Taranaki Daily News has reported some very odd behaviour at the official opening of the Bell Block By-Pass. It sounds like a big local event with New Plymouth Mayor Peter Tennant in attendance along with former MP and Regional Councillor Roger Maxwell. The Daily News reports

But Mr Tennent was not long into his speech when Mr Joyce’s press secretary approached the minister and handed him a note. Mr Joyce then continually texted on his cellphone while Mr Tennent, then Mr Maxwell, spoke. And then, when it was the turn of New Zealand Transport Agency regional director Jenny Chetwynd to speak, Mr Joyce left his seat and walked behind a nearby bush so he could talk on his phone.

Apparently when the National cabinet are discussing their plans Mr Joyce is the first to raise the “optics” of a situation, ie how it will look to the public. I would say that texting at a public event is not good optics. Hiding behind a bush is also not good optics.

He was still behind the bush when all the speeches had finished, which forced organisers to postpone a ribbon-cutting ceremony for several minutes. When Mr Joyce wandered back out into the open, the remainder of the official opening continued without any further delays. After ceremonially cutting a ribbon and declaring the bypass open, he was then taken for a drive down the new section of highway in a big truck driven by New Plymouth MP Jonathan Young – and even then he was texting during most of his time in the cabin.

For the record, delaying a ribbon cutting ceremony because you are behind a bush talking on your cellphone is really poor optics, not to mention just plain discourteous. I am not sure about the optics of texting when Jonathan Young is driving “a big truck”, but it probably pays to keep half an eye on the road!

Now all of this took place on Friday. What was happening on Friday? Ah yes. That was just about the point that the review of the SuperGold card was turning into a rapidly descending flag. It would be fascinating to know who was on the other end of the phone, but I am guessing his first name was probably John.

Tags:
Filed under: humour, infrastructure, national, senior citizens, transport
38 Comments

Investment in rail

Posted by Chris Hipkins on March 14th, 2010

Last week I posted about the current woes of our rail network, noting that under private ownership there had been a lack of investment in upgrading and maintaining the trains and tracks. In hindsight perhaps the then Labour government should have bought back the whole lot in 2003, not just the tracks, and now we’d be 5 years further ahead than we are. I’m not sure that was even an option back then, but regardless of the history, looking to the future it’s clear a big investment is needed if rail is going to be a viable transport option in New Zealand.

It’s interesting to note that the New Zealand government are one of the few around the world who haven’t included investment in rail as part of their economic stimulus package in response to the global recession. In the US they’re spending $17.7 billion on ‘transit and rail’ to reduce traffic congestion and petrol use. Italy are spending 960 million euro in rail and another 480 million euro in local public transport. Korea are spending KRW 11 trillion on ‘green transport’. The Aussies are spending 1.2 billion on rail, the Canadians 480 million and France 300 million. The list could go on…

Here in New Zealand Steven Joyce is obsessed with roads as if they are the only viable form of transport. Roads are convenient, and for a lot of passenger trips they are the most logical choice, but for freight and suburban transport, rail remains a viable and important option, but only if government backs it. As I noted last week, freight within NZ is expected to increase by up to 75% in the next 20 years – does National want to see all of that going onto the roads? Why aren’t we following the rest of the world and looking to rail to ease traffic congestion and reduce our reliance on imported oil?

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: economy, infrastructure, public services, transport
22 Comments

Critical infrastructure yes?

Posted by Clare Curran on March 4th, 2010

Two recent pieces of interest in the NZ Herald. Fran O’Sullivan’s piece yesterday titled: Failures make us look third world. About, yes you’ve guessed it, Telecom’s XT network failures and Transpower’s outage in Auckland.

She’s concerned that these outages were:

to put it kindly, more like what you might expect to occur in South America or parts of Southeast Asia

and then says:

Infrastructure failures do occur. But in Telecom’s case the excuses tendered by chief executive Paul Reynolds (who either doesn’t know what caused the failures or is simply using confusion to obfuscate what critics claim is the failure to scale up the XT network fast enough to meet escalating demand) verge on a Monty Python skit.

The absurdity of Transpower needing to call in police assistance to protect its workers when they went on to an irate farmer’s land to fix the electricity transmission company’s pylon was also bizarre.

Both these failures exposed the fragility of some of the nation’s critical infrastructure: Telecom does not have a back-up network for its XT service which will automatically kick in when failures occur.

And she hopes that the Govt’s national infrastructure plan will address the issues. But is concerned that it won’t go far enough. And I agree.

The second piece just updated on the Herald website is somewhat horrifying.

Telecom is giving out rival 2degrees’ services to key hospital staff on XT as backup in case the network, which has failed four times since December, goes down.

The Herald reports that this is what’s happening in the Canterbury DHB. Otago Southland DHB is reviewing its contract with Telecom and in the Hutt Valley, north of Wellington, Telecom began transferring clinical hospital staff to a reliable network after four outages that could have jeopardised emergency responses.

Capital and Coast, Blenheim’s Wairau Hospital and Hawkes Bay DHBs have either moved to pagers or are reassessing their contracts with Telecom.

So tell me that a functioning mobile network is not critical infrastructure?

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: comms & IT, infrastructure
6 Comments

Telco consumers need a voice and guaranteed standards

Posted by Clare Curran on March 3rd, 2010

Thoughtful editorial by the NZ Herald yesterday about Telecom’s XT woes, its culpability and the possible role of government.

Two sentences I particularly agree with:

“Few things are guaranteed to raise ire as much as a useless piece of expensive technology.”

“There comes a point when nothing can compensate for a piece of equipment that does not work when needed.”

I also agree with Ernie Newman of the Telecommunication Users Association (TUANZ) who says that if Telecom did not do something drastic to help its customers, it was time for the Government to step into what was a national economic issue.

But what I don’t agree with is the Herald’s conclusion that:

such a situation would exist only if Telecom enjoyed monopoly status in the mobile-phone market. Such is not the case, with Vodafone and the fledgling 2degrees offering competition. That means it falls to Telecom’s customers to punish the company if they so wish.

Three points to make here.

The XT network is part of New Zealand’s core infrastructure. People rely on it for communication; social, business and emergency. Competition does not overturn this. Steven Joyce is moving in this direction by indicating that mobile performance standards may be regulated under the TSO (the old Kiwi share). We agree but regret it is necessary.

Then there’s consistent standards. The failure of 111 has drawn attention to the nature of our critical infrastructure. Too many NZers rely on mobile phones for most, if not all their calls for this not to be an issue. Are there consistent standards for delivery of service to NZers? Are there consistent standards that a network must meet in order to remain viable?

And a government that takes information access seriously ought to be procative about ensuring progress towards universal availablity and reliability.

And finally, who should be representing the voices of New Zealand people on these issue? TUANZ has a mandate to represent the players in the marketplace. It does a good job, but its mandate isn’t to speak on behalf of New Zealand domestic consumers.

Consumer NZ has made one statement to my knowledge, advising XT customers to contact Telecom if they have problems or rival networks to negotiate the best deal. That’s fine, but it’s not really sticking up for people is it.

As for the Ministry of Consumer Affairs! What is it that they do again? Under Heather Roy?

That leaves the Labour Opposition.

In Australia, the Communications Minister Stephen Conroy recognised there was a gap early on and established (and properly funded) a new body to represent consumers; ACCAN, the Australian Communications Consumer Action Network.

This is what they do, and I think New Zealand should consider whether it needs a similar body.

ACCAN is the peak body that represents all consumers on communications issues including telecommunications, broadband and emerging new services. ACCAN provides a strong unified voice to industry and government as consumers work towards availability, accessibility and affordability of communications services for all Australians. Consumers need ACCAN to promote better consumer protection outcomes ensuring speedy responses to complaints and issues.

Tags: , , , , ,
Filed under: comms & IT, infrastructure
16 Comments

Steven Joyce used the “r” word today

Posted by Clare Curran on February 23rd, 2010

Finally, Steven Joyce seems to have woken up to the fact that he’s a Minister, and there’s a crisis happening in one of his many portfolios. And when there’s a crisis, the public like to think that the government takes charge.

He’s waited way too long to make a move. And that will cost him. I don’t think he’s behaving like a strong Minister, and I think it’s interesting that despite the persona, the Telecom crisis saw him standing back wringing his hands, saying while it was “concerned, the government couldn’t really do anything”.

Suddenly, this afternoon, that changed. He decided the government did have a role after all. I wonder whether it was because John Key told him to say something and he finally asked for some advice.

For a Minister who has seemed almost unnaturally averse to the concept of regulation, it was a surprise to hear Steven Joyce say today that the government may have to regulate. Out of character.

This is some of what he said: 

… ensuring 111 calls made from mobile telephone networks get through is vital.

“The recent spate of outages on the XT network has exposed some shortcomings in this area and officials have been working urgently with Telecom since last evening to address these issues.”

Currently, Telecom is obliged under the Telecommunications Services Obligation (TSO) to provide emergency calling on its fixed network. However, mobile phones are not covered by the TSO.

Mr Joyce says that the government may need to regulate to ensure that operators prioritise 111 calls in situations where networks become unstable.

Well, it’s taken days for him to come to that view and I believe he’s been negligent in not getting involved earlier.

It’s ironic that he’s talking about regulation, the day after it appeared he would lean towards not regulating the termination rates on mobile calls, after two of the main players, Vodafone and Telecom offered to further phase in a reduction of rates.

Maybe he’s realising that customers need to come first. It’s a reality that there must be a charge for terminating a call or text, but it needs to be fair. For the consumer and also for the third player in the marketplace. But he’s acted too late and and he’s shown himself not to be strong and decisive. 

Maybe he’s finally realised that where a significant public interest is at stake, the government does have a role. Watch this space, because the PM has a political nose and he’ll get involved. And if he does, then Steven will be damaged.

This isn’t just about the XT network. It’s about NZ Inc.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: comms & IT, economy, infrastructure, regulation
9 Comments

Finally, Steven Joyce said something

Posted by Clare Curran on February 23rd, 2010

After calls from myself and Ernie Newman from the Telecomunications Users Association for Steven Joyce to intervene in the Telecom debacle, Steven Joyce has finally said something. Not much, but at least he’s said something.

I’ve been saying for days that the Minister should intervene with Telecom on the XT outages. This morning I called for Steven to get on the blower to Telecom. He now says he has had a discussion with Telecom. But it’s not enough.

This is a critical infrastructure issue. What happens to people who rely on their mobile phones in an emergency? How can they be reassured they can make the calls they need to when they need to. Let alone the appalling effect on business.

Joyce. You are a Minister.  People expect you to take a leadership role.

Meantime, the issue gains momentum. Today the Alcatel-Lucent CEO in NZ has resigned. In news just in, the Chief Technology Transformation Officer for Telecom Frank Mount has resigned. This is crisis stuff for Telecom and a critical piece of new New Zealand infrastructure.

Meantime, no decisions have been made on who and how ultrafast broadbanad will be laid out in New Zealand. Fifteen months since the election. Not one millimetre of govt-funded fibre laid. The Govt’s biggest election pledge. Steven Joyce is the Minister.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: broadband, comms & IT, infrastructure
14 Comments

Hamilton Election Promise Broken Already

Posted by Sue Moroney on February 9th, 2010

“Promise on Road Project Broken” screams the front page of the Waikato Times today. It was being delivered to homes all over the Waikato just as John Key was delivering his speech outlining his Government’s programme for the year ahead. How appropriate!

The NZ Transport Agency came to Hamilton yesterday to deliver the news that the Hamilton leg of the expressway is now not scheduled for completion until 2024. The problem is that the Nats made an election promise to complete the Waikato Expressway inside ten years – that is by 2018.

The other problem is that the Minister has reversed the order of construction so that the Hamilton by-pass comes last. That will create a bottleneck effect as the construction takes place to the north and the south of Hamilton first.

It means larger volumes of traffic will be delivered to congested Hamilton streets until 2024.

It looks like the Hamilton Government National MPs, David Bennett and Tim MacIndoe lack the influence and the ability to get their major election promise delivered.

Oddly enough, even though John Key used his speech to announce the Kopu Bridge replacement for the 11th time, the Waikato Expressway didn’t feature in his speech at all today. Hmmmmm………curious.

Filed under: Hamilton, Uncategorized, infrastructure, transport, waikato
5 Comments

Steven’s Choice

Posted by Clare Curran on January 26th, 2010

The stakes are high right now for Communications Minister Steven Joyce. And for NZ’s largest telco, Telecom, who are believed to be considering structural separation.

The government and Telecom were engaged in a Mexican stand off all through 2009 over whether or not Telecom could access to the govt’s $1.5 billion for ultrafast broadband. The Govt signalled they wanted the telco to continue down the separation path. Telecom pushed back and did nothing.

Now it looks as though they will do something. The big question is, if they stucturally separate, will all Telecom jobs stay in NZ?

This Friday, 29 January, is the deadline for bids to participate in the govt’s $1.5 billion ultrafast broadband project (UFB).

This is the biggest $ commitment made by this govt. More than a year after the election they haven’t delivered much. The commitment was to deliver UFB to 75% of homes in 6 years. Then it became 10 years, and not to their homes, but to the streets they live in.

And not one km of fibre has yet been laid. It’s unlikely any will be laid until at least the end of this year. Despite there being a number of ready to roll projects under the previous Labour Govt’s Broadband Investment Fund (BIF) which Joyce axed in one of his first decisions. Industry and public criticism of the govt and Joyce has been muted because there’s a lot of money at stake and everyone wants a piece of it.

 The outcome of the govt’s allocation of $$ to broadband will shape our future highway. For better or worse. This industry is essential to our future economy.

The highway we build must take us through the next major phase of our economic development, ensure equitable access to high quality broadband across our country in urban and rural NZ, to communities, business, schools, our health service and drive innovation in our energy sector.

It should energise our ICT sector and broaden it out beyond telecommunications. This is major infrastructure.

Instead, we have continued uncertainty, a Mexican standoff with one of NZ’s biggest companies and resulting instability which could push Telecom to do something radical, which they might consider to be in their interests, but which are ultimately not in New Zealand’s. And where is the Government?

Back in October, I posted on the choices facing the govt and Joyce. Titled: A fork in the road, the choices haven’t changed, though the attitude of the biggest player may have.

The choice is between a Telecom-led rollout (unitary authority) and a regional approach with involvement by electricity lines companies and a range of other bodies including local govt. The decision taken could herald a significant fork in the road for this government overall.

Telecom is in the frame to potentially be part of the urban and rural rollout only if they agree to undergo further structural separation. Up until now they’ve shown no signs of doing that and have even said firmly it’s off the table.

Lately, I think that’s changed. That structural separation is indeed a possibility. Because they know in order to be relevant they must be part of the future.

But at what cost? To Telecom, and to the nation? Especially if they decide to structurally separate anyway even if they don’t win the broadband bid and take a large slab of their business offshore. Telecom may not be a kiwi company, but they are kiwi jobs.

Labour was mindful that while change was required to bring more competition into the market place, it didn’t want to destroy Telecom. At all. Not sure where this Government’s at on this.

Steven Joyce holds his cards close to his chest. His reputation as an inscrutable player is a high stakes game. The stand off with Telecom is understood to be pushing them to consider big changes.

Has he considered that those changes might not be in the nation’s interest? And is he and his government talking with our biggest telco?

Tags: ,
Filed under: broadband, comms & IT, economy, infrastructure
11 Comments

Hamilton Passenger Train Service Gathers Steam

Posted by Sue Moroney on December 2nd, 2009

Around 100 people attended a public meeting in Hamilton last night to discuss the proposal to get a passenger train service for commuters between Hamilton and Auckland.

The meeting was hosted by the Campaign for Better Transport and the business case for the train service is well-established.

Unfortunately, Nanaia Mahuta and I are the only local MPs supporting the train service – the two National MPs told the meeting all the reasons it shouldn’t go ahead.

The National Party rhetoric goes something like this:

*Hamilton is too small to sustain the service;

*Hamilton should be grateful that it is getting funding for an expressway;

*Waikato Mayors just want the expressway completed in 10 years time instead;

* There is a private bus company that commuters could use.

Their arguments don’t stack up. Masterton and Palmerston North have passenger train services to Wellington and they are a lot smaller than Hamilton.

The expressway, when completed at a cost of $2b in 10 years time, will save 10 minutes on the journey to Auckland – that is until Waikato cars get to the Southern Motorways and sit in traffic jams for ages!

The Waikato Mayors have always argued for a balanced transport system for the region and they didn’t anticipate the Government was going to cut city public transport funding for Hamilton to fund the expressway as they have.

Oh duh… the buses to Auckland get caught in the traffic jams too.

I reckon the real reason David Bennett and Tim MacIndoe are talking the proposal down is they agree with the Don Brash Taskforce comissioned by John Key when it recommended the sale of state assets.

KiwiRail will be the first up for sale and they won’t want a whole lot of Hamilton commuters up in arms when they sell it off.

Filed under: Hamilton, infrastructure, privatisation, transport, waikato
21 Comments

Joyce out of step with Auckland

Posted by David Shearer on October 28th, 2009

John Banks recently wrote in the NZ Herald that Auckland needs an inner city underground railway loop. He joins fellow aspiring mayor, Len Brown, the chair of the ARC, Mike Lee and just about every smart thinking Aucklander in believing that Auckland needs this piece of infrastructure urgently.

So why is the National Party so out of step with the rest of Auckland? Stephen Joyce has instead prioritised roads; the most farcical being the new Puhoi to Wellsford motorway. This $2.3 billion folly will swallow up capital that could make the tunnel and electrification a reality. That stretch of road north of Auckland carries about the same number of vehicles as Sandringham Road. It’s full for only a handful of days a year when everyone tries to go north during the holidays – not even economically productive days. He’s planning to waste $100 million on a feasibility study.

The reason for the rail tunnel is simple. Currently, trains come into Britomart anad have to go back out again on the same lines . The loop would allow them to continue under Queen St, K Rd and then join the line again at Mt Eden allowing for a doubling, at least, of trains going  through Britomart. That would increase the frequency of trains and lead to greater patronage – 3 or 4 times more. And, as other countries know, it stimulates growth and vitality in the inner city and ar0und stations. Simple really. Maybe too simple.

The only hitch is that diesel trains can’t use an underground loop because of fumes. That’s a key reason why we should move full steam ahead on electrifying Auckland’s rail. But on this Joyce is vague. Possibly 2013 he says. Possibly? He should forget the holiday highway and invest in what Aucklanders want and need – a first class rail service.

Filed under: Auckland, Uncategorized, infrastructure, transport
29 Comments

Love this – how about it Mr Joyce?

Posted by Darien Fenton on October 26th, 2009

bridge1_300x200104821In Auckland, we struggled (and failed) with the curmudgeonly NZTA to get them to close the bridge for just one day to celebrate the 50th anniversary of our Harbour Bridge.

In the end, there was a pretty mean celebration at some conference or other, while Get Across cyclists broke the barriers and cycled across anyway.

But yesterday, Sydney’s Harbour Bridge was transformed into a grassy picnic ground and attended by 6000 picnickers chosen in a ballot to enjoy food, music and the fabulous view.  They even had cows grazing on the fake grass to add to the rustic atmosphere.

That’s smart tourism thinking – using an iconic structure as an attraction for something other than traffic.

So how about a break from all that tarmac Mr Joyce?

Tags:
Filed under: Auckland, events, infrastructure, public services
10 Comments

The elephant in the room

Posted by Clare Curran on October 21st, 2009

Word has it that Telecom is under pressure from the Government to have a good think about structural separation. I have it on good information that Steven Joyce and Paul Reynolds (Telecom CEO) met late last week. And that separation was on the agenda.

What could that mean? A separation between the retail side of the business from the wholesale/networks and access sides? Perhaps even more than that, structural separation may also release value for Telecom shareholders. A separate Chorus with an unencumbered mandate may well be able to make a more active (and more useful) contribution to national plans for broadband infrastructure rollout and access.

Given the circumstances; major broadband decision imminent, reasonably radical proposed changes to the telecommunications services obligations (TSO), the fallout from the CEO salary bonus and Telecom’s attempts to reduce its service tech workforce and convert them to owner operators, you’d think there’d be some sort of shift in mindset from our largest telco.

But it doesn’t appear to be happening. I’ve been talking to lots of people and the views are pretty unanimous.

It’s like there’s an elephant in the room. And it’s the big question. What will Telecom do and what should it do around broadband? For the good of the company and the country.

So here goes. Three things. And they’re not all about Telecom.

(more…)

Tags: , , , ,
Filed under: comms & IT, infrastructure
16 Comments

The future highway is more than we think

Posted by Clare Curran on October 12th, 2009

I’ve been thinking a lot about broadband. Don’t switch off, keep reading because it’s more important than you might think.

We all want faster and better internet connections, but broadband is so much more than that. It’s New Zealand’s future. For the delivery of voice services yes. But there’s so much more to it.

Health, education, energy and media services are all likely to come via that new highway sooner than we think. But only if the government takes charge of it and makes sure there is public investment in the sort of sort of services that will benefit the majority of New Zealanders, and in how they will be delivered equitably.

Because the industry cannot and will not deliver the services on its own.

The advent of convergence across broadcasting and all our media is taking telecommunications out of its comfort zone.

The reality is, delivering broadband to New Zealand homes, business, schools and hospitals is not just about voice and internet services.

It’s about infrastructure, core infrastructure, that will enable other services to converge via the fibre. Of course broadband is not just fibre. It’s also  wireless and satellite services. But fibre means energy services can be delivered to your home and your smart meter (if we get the right ones) will be able to regulate your appliances to save power and keep your house running.

And we can deliver a range of social services  via broadband that will benefit our country socially and economically and transform our society. But it’ll take vision, leadership and public investment. Not just at the base infrastructure level. Which is where we’re at right now.

There are also huge potential environmental benefits both through Teleworking and real-time environmental monitoring.

The benefits for agriculture are enormous too, think about every farm being directly connected to our RS&T system. The list goes on.

Respected telecommunications analyst Paul Budde puts it like this:

In order to make this work, the government – being the linchpin in most of these sectors – will now have to make a firm commitment to sectors such as healthcare, and applications such as smart grids, using this infrastructure… it’s not just about high-speed internet… industry leadership will be a crucial factor in moving telecoms beyond telephony and broadband access.

I think the Ministry of Economic Development gets that. It’s still a bit hard to tell because despite all the announcements in recent weeks, there’s still quite a few questions that are unanswered. And I’m not sure that they’ll be able to do a lot more than pay lip service to these aims in the short term. But I have some hopes.

But I’m yet to see any signals that the government really understands what’s at stake.

Worryingly, I don’t think Treasury gets it. Just as worryingly, Telecom doesn’t get it. And that’s a big pity. Telecom is our biggest telco, it’s got a national network providing land-line telephone services to all New Zealanders. It also provides internet and mobile services. It’s been rolling out broadband.

But it appears to see itself and its future (short term because I don’t think Telecom is really thinking long term) as trying to maintain its market share as a telco.

And I say, it’s time to think outside the square, Telecom.

I think there are a range of other companies, utilities, not traditionally part of the telecommunications industry who are able to see a bigger picture and a bigger future where broadband is a vehicle. It’s not the end game.

I hope the government is able to do that too.

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: Energy, comms & IT, economy, education, health, infrastructure, media
6 Comments

Note to self: things to do in Australia

Posted by Darien Fenton on September 28th, 2009

I’m off to Australia this week, with partner John, to meet his two new grandsons, Chance and Chay (yes, well they are Australians) and so John can meet for just the second time his two-year old granddaughter, Mala  - (and before you ask, we’re paying).

Because I can never separate the personal from the politics, I’ve made a list of things to look into including:

  1. Why Australian cleaners are now paid $21 an hour when ours are still paid $12.55, when they’re employed by the same contractors.
  2. What Rudd has done differently to Key to end the recession earlier and with lower unemployment than NZ.
  3. Why increasing workers’ rights in Australia is not seen as reducing productivity or harmful to business when in New Zealand it’s seen as the opposite.
  4. How many firms have really gone bust because they have to pay the same minimum redundancy pay I am proposing in my Redundancy Protection Bill.
  5. What’s happening with the National Transport Commission report that said that excessive client power and poor pay and conditions for truck drivers were a major cause of the high levels of deaths and injuries on Australian roads – and whether Joyce should take note.
  6. What forms of contracting arrangements for independent contractors do they have that give them more rights and collective bargaining power.

Should be a great trip!  I’ll send photos.

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: business, economic, infrastructure, labour, personal, transport, union, workforce
9 Comments

No delays in broadband rollout? Yeah right!

Posted by Clare Curran on September 24th, 2009

Communications and IT Minister Steven Joyce has just told the House in question time that there has been no delay in rolling out ultrafast broadband.

It’s amazing how this government can tell a barefaced lie with a straight face. The election was almost a year ago. The $1.5 billion delivery of broadband to 75% of New Zealand homes was a core election promise. Supposedly ready to go! They axed the previous Government’s programme which was poised to rollout and put everything on hold for months while they recast a plan which now looks remarkedly like the previous government’s. That’s taken all year.

The delays continue. It is unlikely that any actual rollout will begin until mid to late next year. That leaves eight years. The real cost is estimated at around $6 billion to connect to people’s homes.

This government talks about investing in infrastructure. It seems to think that infrastructure is purely the network of roads, wires or fibre required to create a physical structure. What Mr Joyce, who is also the Associate Minister of Infrastructure, doesn’t seem to get, or pays lipservice to, is that with broadband, you can just invest in the fibre. You’ve got to invest in what will pass through the fibre. Services that will benefit society. And that’s the government’s role.

It’s unknown whether the private sector investment required to make up the shortfall between $1.5 b and $6 billion will manifest itself, because its unknown what level of public investment will be made in the health, education and enregy sectors which will stimulate demand. That’s the real question.

Steven Joyce is adept at running a bland line that focuses on the mechanics. They are important. But they’re just a part of it. A bit more of a holistic approach wouldn’t go astray. Might be against his nature.

Tags: ,
Filed under: comms & IT, infrastructure
7 Comments

Opening up #3 How can we?

Posted by Clare Curran on September 20th, 2009

Liberty, Linux and the gift economy.

Liberty. Freedom to act. The right to be. The essence of our humanity and of our society. A fundamental value which underpins Labour.

Linux. The story of a network of self-organized volunteers who broke new ground in the early 90s, not only in computer science, but in the way in which they worked together on a project from which none of them would derive significant monetary benefit. They did it because it was important, they were driven and because it provided a greater good.  The term Linux is derived from Linus Torvalds, a Finn, who in 1991 invited a bunch of academic computer scientists to join him in creating a new operating system. This was around the time the internet happened.

Today, Linux remains hugely important as the basis of many computer operating systems across the world which are constantly evolving.

It’s been described as the phenomenon of massive, distributed , self-organising volunteer labour, which continues to accelerate.

The gift economy. The notion that:

where goods and services are exchanged without a direct quid pro quo, and where a participant’s power and status are derived not from what s/he has accumulated by taking from others, but from what s/he has contributed by giving to others.

This is a deeply compelling philosophy. It’s the philosophy of reciprocity and exchange which underpins community and builds society. And it’s the philosophy of the internet. And, I contend, of Labour.

Why am I telling you this?

Because today is Software Freedom Day. And Labour can learn a lot from these founders of software freedom. They exposed the limitations of the monopoly market and the way in which the control of software has been used to concentrate wealth and stifle innovation.

There are extraordinary parallels across our society particularly in the technology infrastructure that will drive our future as a nation.

Open access, open source, open data, open software, open government. Opening up. This discussion began at our Labour Party conference last weekend.

Today, I pledge that we will try to practice what we preach and have an open discussion to build sound and profound policy. Please join this discussion and add value. If you are a Red Alert reader, you’ll be more likely to take an interest.

And read this article (PDF link) where I got some of the ideas for this post.

Tags: , , , ,
Filed under: Red Alert, comms & IT, copyright, democracy, economy, infrastructure
26 Comments

What now for Telecom?

Posted by Clare Curran on September 18th, 2009

Yesterday’s response in the House by Steven Joyce to a question about whether Telecom would have a role in the urban rollout of broadband was fascinating for two reasons.

Firstly, it put Telecom firmly in the frame to apply to potentially be part of the urban and rural rollout. But only if they agree to undergo further structural separation. On the face of it, it looked as if Joyce was appeasing Telecom, following their somewhat snarky media release yesterday where they felt left out of the government’s urban broadband announcement.

Joyce reassured Telecom that the government would be supportive of “all bids” that met the criteria and that regional and national bids would be considered. He stressed that the challenge would be to meet the requirements of open access and ownership arrangements of the companies delivering the rollout (called Local Fibre Companies) where they could be shareholders but not own the companies.

Ultimately, that’s about Telecom agreeing to separate, probably its network infrastructure (Chorus) and wholesale arms further from its retail arm.

But secondly, it was strange that Joyce was actually addressing this issue in the House, off his own bat. His backbench MP asked the question: What role could Telecom play in the urban broadband initiative?
So there are two potential conclusions.

First, Joyce was keen to reassure the country’s largest Telco that they could have a piece of the action and the government wasn’t excluding them. Sounds fair.

Second, that Joyce was delivering a not too subtle message to Telecom, that up until now they may have chosen to ignore. Guys, if you want a piece of the pie then you have to play ball and voluntarily separate further. Interesting wasn’t it, as a number of commentators have already pointed out, that the Australian Government said more or less the same thing (on a much large scale) to Telstra the very day before! Synchronicity? Hmmm.

Just want to make clear. This is observation. It’s not criticism. Labour took Telecom down the path of structural separation. Way before Australia. If that’s the message Steven Joyce is delivering, then it’s a continuation of what Labour started under David Cunliffe. And well, that’s a good thing.

So what does it all mean? That Telecom wants the lion’s share of the work. That they have publicly said they’re not happy with the government’s urban rollout plan. That Joyce has reassured them they have an equal chance with every else. And that the people who actually will make the decisions about who will be the successful bidders haven’t yet been appointed to the Crown Fibre Holding Company. Those appointments will be critical to the decision-making process.

What else? Well, if Telecom doesn’t play ball, we could end up with a government-backed network AND Telecom. What does that mean for our largest Telco and one of our important brand companies (even if it’s not majority NZ-owned). The ball’s in your court Telecom.

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: comms & IT, economic, infrastructure
15 Comments

An ironic moment in select committee

Posted by Darien Fenton on September 17th, 2009

We had our first submission on the Infrastructure Bill in the Transport & Industrial Select Committee this morning from the NZ Utilities Advisory Group (NZUAG).  Nothing wrong with the submission, and in fact some good points.   One of the submitters was a senior Chorus manager, who was there representing utility operators.  Telecom’s new service partner Visionstream has taken over Chorus field service operations in Auckland and there’s been a bitter dispute waging for weeks over Visionstream’s insistence that the workers buy their own jobs.

He said that telco operators deal with 73 different local councils and each had different rules and some had none.  This biggest thing for his group was national consistency – the same rules across the country.    I think that’s fair enough.  But Chorus and Telecom don’t have national consistency for their workers.  So when it’s in the business interest, consistency matters; when it comes to the workers, forget it.

Filed under: infrastructure, labour, union, workforce
5 Comments

Only 14 schools get ICT upgrade

Posted by Trevor Mallard on September 15th, 2009

From Anne Tolley:

Fourteen schools are set to receive major upgrades to their ICT infrastructure, in the first stage of the government’s $34 million boost for broadband in schools.

The schools will receive internal network upgrades of around $5 million of the $34 million allocated.

So 14 schools – probably fewer than 100 over a six year period on this basis. Just pathetic esp given Tolley’s earlier cuts in this area.

“Ultra-fast broadband has the potential to enhance the teaching and learning experience for students in every New Zealand school. It will allow schools to access a wider range of online resources and tools, and deliver programmes that are relevant and engaging for students,” says Mrs Tolley.

Totally agree with her – so why doesn’t she do it?

Tags: , , , , ,
Filed under: comms & IT, infrastructure
12 Comments

Qs to the Minister for redundant Telco workers

Posted by Darien Fenton on September 3rd, 2009

Some of us have been asking questions of Ministers about the Telecom lines engineers getting dumped with no redundancy pay and those offered take it or leave it contracts with Visionstream. I thought the Minister of Labour, Kate Wilkinson would be across these issues, so I put in some written questions. Here’s her replies:

Question: Does she consider redundancy protection for workers a part of good employment process?

Answer: Good employment practice would mean an employer and employee would reach an agreement about the process for resolving workplace problems, including redundancy and changes in work arrangements.

Question: Does she support the good faith provisions of the Employment Relations Act: if so, what advice does she have for workers who are offered take it or leave it contracts?

Answer: Yes, I support the good faith provisions of the Employment Relations Act 2000 and this is the stated position of the government. The duty of good faith is an important part of the employment relationship including that parties have to be responsive and communicative at all times.

Question: Does she believe that existing Employment Relations Act provisions sufficiently protect Chrous workers who are being offered take it or leave it contracts with Visionstream?

Answer: The intent of the Employment Relations Act 2000 is not to prevent employers from making commercial decisions about how to structure their business including decisions about the size of their workforce and the need, from time to time, to make some jobs redundant. Issues related to contracts for service are covered by general civil law… I consider that these (the ERA) provisions are appropriate and sufficient protections for employees as they provide a fair balance of employers and employees.

Question to Telco workers: Does the Minister know what’s she doing?

Answer: She doesn’t have a clue.

PS: Not Paul Holmes

Tags:
Filed under: infrastructure, labour, parliament, redundancy, workforce
4 Comments

« Older Entries