The Government released its broadband investment proposal yesterday. I have not had a proper chance to review the documents yet, but the proposed 10-year timeframe is absolutely lacking vigor. The proposal is confirmed to be a dark fibre model, which I’ve commented on in the past here, with more in the comments here. It is not entirely negative as it appears the proposal is to allow the local fibre companies (these are the regional public-private partnerships) to operate a wholesale lit access network. Going with the regional model, which I’ve been a proponent of, is positive. Analysis to follow when time permits.

Full media statement quoted below. Documents can be found over at the Ministry of Economic Development here.

Mr Joyce says once finalised, the investment model will deliver on the government’s commitment of ultra fast broadband to 75% of New Zealanders where they live, work and study over the next ten years.

The government is proposing to establish a Crown-owned investment company (“Crown Fibre Investment Co” or CFIC) to drive the government’s investment.

Under the proposal, CFIC will invest alongside private sector co-investors in regional fibre companies that will deploy and provide access to fibre optic network infrastructure in the 25 towns and cities covered by the initiative.

CFIC will operate an open, transparent and contestable process to select local partners with selection based on:

• The amount of additional fibre coverage being proposed
• The proposed capital structure
• Commercial viability of the proposal
• Consistency with government objectives
• Track-record of the partner

Mr Joyce says the open infrastructure model will ensure all telecommunications companies have the option of using the fibre.

“This model aims to provide government investment on favourable terms, while minimising government involvement in commercial operations which we believe the private sector is better positioned to direct.”

The government has committed up to $1.5 billion for the roll out and expects that to be at least matched by private sector investment.

“This is a big investment both in terms of the money committed and the returns it will bring. It’s essential that we get it right the first time.”

“The government now looks forward to receiving submissions from interested parties,” says My Joyce.

Interested parties have until April 27 to make submissions.

Some vague detail about what the Government is thinking has shown up in this Computerworld article: Joyce disappoints conference on broadband detail.

Steven Joyce, ICT Minister, suggests the Government will put most of the $1.5b into dark fibre, and in the next paragraph that the interface might be at Level 2 or 3 of the communications stack. This reads as a technical contradiction. Later in the article Joyce also renewed a commitment to open access to the dark fibre. I am concerned by these comments, and hope they are the result of poor context, rather than poor advice.

There are numerous problems with the open access dark fibre model. Home-run fibre is expensive to deploy and terminate. Providing the facilities to house each provider’s termination equipment is costly. Requiring a truck-roll every time a customer wants to change a provider reduces competition.

There needs to be a neutral shared access network that all service providers have equal access to. Any service provider must be able to connect at regional points of presence to this access network, and start offering their services. Without this, investment in terminating equipment, and operational cost will be duplicated. Non-neutral access networks will form, forcing residential subscribers to receive all their services (TV, Internet, Voice, etc.) from only that provider, or affiliated providers, and competition from new service providers will be closed out.

In the case where multiple competing access networks are then built (e.g. by Telecom and Telstra), a new service provider would be forced to connect, where they are permitted to do so, and manage customers on these disparate access networks, increasing their costs, again reducing competition, and innovation of services.

Dark fibre should be part, but only a part, of any solution. A neutral shared access network based on PON technology would cover the vast majority of user cases, perhaps 100% of residential, and between 80-99% of commercial (depending on the point in the lifecycle of the access network). There will always be entities requiring more than it is cost effective to deliver over a shared access infrastructure. For these, direct splicing of dark fibre from the customer to the provider would be necessary. Current examples would include companies like Weta FX, and research institutions and universities. Not to mention providers themselves who may be customers of such a network for the purposes of connecting their sites and data centres. Thus the network might be constructed with this is mind, providing sufficient additional fibre capacity to wholesale dark fibre in this way to these special-case customers. But a balance must be struck to ensure providers do not opt to use dark fibre when the shared access network is sufficient.

It is also worth noting that in most of these dark fibre cases, there already exist large amounts of dark fibre in these areas anyway.

It was announced last week the Government Shared Network will be scrapped. It is not entirely surprising that it was a failure. The idea had merit, but many who work in Wellington know that fostering cooperation between Government departments can be difficult. From the outset the GSN was wrapped in layers of bureaucracy, and encumbered by unnecessary policies that limited its usefulness to many would-be subscribers. To some the fate was evident at the outset with its 14(?) section RFP, detailing multiple layers of management, many different services, and prohibiting many from being delivered by the same service provider (though somehow in the end most of it went to IBM anyway).

The real cause of its failure was that the GSN started as a prescribed set of services, rather than developing organically as departments expressed real needs for new services. A simpler approach would have been merely to provide the infrastructure for the departments to share information and services over, and then gently foster cooperation on projects and service delivery, and facilitate the development of those when the need actually arose.

The GSN may be dead, but hopefully in future we can see the spirit of cooperation begin and grow more organically, with assistance not direction from the SSC.

nzreferendums.org has been online for over six months, yet only 73 users have registered. It has utterly failed to get the required momentum to work, and I’ve decided to close the website down.

Thank you to all who signed up and tried to make it work. Perhaps a variation of the concept may re-emerge sometime in the future.

For those who aren’t aware what this site was, and just to keep the idea alive, I’ll leave an explanation below.

If you wish to contact me, please leave a comment (or use nzreferendums[at]punk.co.nz).

What was this site?

nzreferendums.org was aimed at making better use of the Citizens Initiated Referenda Act, which enables the voters of New Zealand to call official referendums. It is the most powerful means we (the public) have to tell the Government what we want. You can learn more about this at the Elections Website and Wikipedia.

Despite its power, since the Act was passed in 1993 there have been only three referendums. Organising a referendum is no easy task. The hardest part is gathering the signatures required to force the Government to hold the referendum. The purpose of the site was to make that task easier. Thereby improving democracy and giving the voters a stronger voice.

The idea at a glance

A “Digg” like site where:

1. Users submit referendum ideas on important issues.
2. Other users click to register their interest in it, showing that they would sign a petition to have a referendum on that subject held.
3. When there is enough interest to make it work officially, those users finalise the wording (if necessary) using tools such as discussion forums, polls, and wiki editing provided on the site.
4. The forms to initiate an official petition for a referendum are then completed and submitted to the Electorial Comission (along with the processing fee) safe in the knowledge that there is enough support for it to succeed.
5. All those users who registered their interest are sent an email telling them where they can go to sign the petition. Or if they prefer, where to download and print out the petition form, so they can sign it and mail it in.

The idea was to save having to register a petition for a referendum, and put lots of effort into collecting signatures, if it simply won’t be successful. It was hoped that it would promote greater use of the existing CIR Act as a means for more direct democracy, and that smart ideas for the country would have a forum in which they could recieve support from the public.

The following proposed referendums were listed on nzreferendums.org at the time of closing. I’ve only included those that recieved two or more votes.

Make the tax on Alcohol & Tobacco reflect actual costs

Both Alcohol and Tobacco have a major cost to the healthcare system. The proposal is to modify the tax on these to ensure such costs are fully recovered from the actual users. It could be adjusted each year to recover the forecast costs and keep the balance even.

Abolish LAQCs and implement capital gains on housing

The proposal is that tax schemes like LAQCs that allow people to dodge tax on housing should be abolished. Capital gains should be implemented on housing. The housing market reformed to encourage a market for home owners instead of property investors.

Reduce the number of District Health Boards

There are currently 21 District Health Boards. Each has its own management structure, seperate duplicated departments, etc. They do not operate cohesively and efficiently. They do not share resources or staff when needed.

The proposal is that the number should be dramatically reduced and the health system should operate with more unity to save costs.

Preparation for diminishing oil supplies

Should the Government be required make an effort to prepare for diminishing oil supplies rather than leaving it to later?

For example, placing more emphasis on public transport now, so it doesn’t cost the country more later when steel, rolling stock, etc. prices go up due to the dramatically increasing demand.

Action on broadband – Fibre to the Home (FTTH)

Should the abysmal state of telecommunications be solved once and for all with the deployment of a Fibre to the Home (FTTH) network?

There are many ways this might be achieved, working out what is preferred and whether that should even be included in the referendum wording can be done in a user poll closer to the time.

Just for example, one option might be a Government subsidy of $1000 for each home connected. Of course to qualify for the subsidy the network would need to meet certain design standards, be flexible, and would be required to operate as an open wholesale network only.

Another option might be simply to give the money to local councils to decide best how to use it for their region.

And of course maybe an SOE, 25% funded by Government subsidy, and 75% through bond issue or some other debt mechanism that is paid back through subscriber revenue.

Return some of GST back to local councils

Should a portion of the GST collected from each district be returned to that district to make them more autonomous and for spending on things like transport, etc.

For example, the out of the 12.5% GST, 10% would go to Government, while 2.5% would be returned to the district in which is was generated.

Alternatively districts could be granted authority to implement a sales tax.

Ban Smoking in public places

A referendum to ban the sale of tobacco and its use in public spaces. The exact nature and timeframe will be decided using forums and polls when enough participates have signed up.

Develop a Constitution for New Zealand

Start a long term (5-10 year) process of public consultation and debate to develop a constitution for New Zealand.

The constitution should establish the rights of citizens, the powers of the various branches of the state, their purpose, and the fundamental aims of the Government.

Ban drug companies from advertising/promoting prescription only and restricted medicines.

A review of the laws allowing the advertisement of prescription only medicines by drug companies on TV etc. New Zealand and the United States (US) are the only two developed countries that allow such advertising of prescription-only medicines. These advertisements attempt to influence consumers’ choices about medicines.

Fat and sugar tax, or subsidies on healthy foods

Should there be a referendum on creating some kind of fat or sugar tax? Possibly with the money going towards some kind of subsidy to encourage healthier foods.

Reform the credit-check/personal-information laws

Reform the credit and personal information industry (e.g. Baycorp) by placing the responsibility on such companies to ensure all information is accurate.

All data must be made freely available to the person on request (in a timely manner) for free. The person may declare any information erroneous in which case it has to be fixed within a set time from the notification or the company incurs a penalty that is paid to the person. All persons have the right to ask for their data to be removed entirely.

The privacy commisioner is responsible for audits to ensure that companies do not maintain data that is outside of the bounds that they are legally allowed to maintain. And that they do not continue to maintain any data in secret (or accidently as residue in a system).

If a person suffers any loss due to erroneous or illegal information being provided by a company, then that loss may be claimed from the company by that person.

No company is allowed to pass on your information to anyone else without signed consent.

Entrench the Bill of Rights Act

Currently, human rights such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the right to a fair trial are affirmed in NZ law through the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. However, while the BORA requires all laws to be interpreted so as to be consistent with it insofar as this is possible, nothing stops our Parliament from passing laws which are blatantly inconsistent with it.

One option is to entrench the BORA, preventing Parliament from amending it without a supermajority, and allowing the courts to overturn laws which are inconsistent with it. Alternatively, a hybrid system could be devised, allowing the courts to make declarations of inconsistency and overturn laws unless Parliament expressly confirms them (IIRC a similar system is used in the UK).

Place of manufacture and company ownership displayed on packaging

Flags depicting the place of manufacture and the country where the profits ultimately end up, should be displayed with every consumer product sold in New Zealand.

The flags should be of reasonable prominence, for example 1cm wide label stuck or printed onto the front of any packaging.

This lets consumers easily avoid buying products such as those made in countries with reputations for poor heath/safety standards or where the profits ultimately go a country with a dubious human rights record.

Life Cycle Assessment (sustainability) available for all products sold in NZ

A product’s life cycle starts when raw materials are extracted from the earth, followed by manufacturing, transport and use, and ends with waste management including recycling and final disposal. At every stage of the life cycle there are emissions and consumption of resources. An LCA is a tally of these emissions and consumptions.

If a basic LCA (just how simplified can be decided later) is available for all products, it gives the consumer another factor for choosing one product over another thereby letting the average consumer choose the level of environmental responsibility companies must maintain in order to be commercially successful.

I suggest that a basic LCA available online be mandatory for a product to be sold in NZ (with the url printed on any packaging).

Ban Police Taser use in New Zealand – Tasers are a form of Torture, according to the UN.

Police use of Tasers has NO place in New Zealand society.

“TASER electronic stun guns are a form of torture that can kill, a UN committee has declared after several recent deaths in North America.”

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,22814674-5001028,00.html?from=public_rss

Adopt a new national flag

We’ve had four national flags to date. Has the time come for another update?

It need not be the flag promoted by the NZ Flag Trust, there are other alternatives (http://newnzflags.blogspot.com/).

It need not mean that New Zealand becomes a republic (Canada is not a republic, but they ditched their defaced (red) British ensign).

Does the current flag represent us, and will it adequately represent the next couple of generations? How recognisable is it on a flagpole or from a distance, or in a small icon size? Is it something you’d wave at a sporting event?