KEY POINTS:
National's deputy leader Bill English took to the stage yesterday at the TUANZ Telecommunications Day in Wellington to reaffirm National's pledge it will spend up to $1.5 billion on a nationwide fibre optic network if it wins the election.
But I couldn't help feeling that English wasn't quite convinced with what was written in his own speech notes. After all, English was last year saying that a large scale public investment in broadband, such as the one that the Australian Labor Party had on the table at the time, was a bad idea.
"I might have been of that view myself for a while," English admitted yesterday.
He claims he's come around to the view that such an investment is now a good idea. But some of his comments betray his lingering scepticism. He mentioned the New Zealand Institute's estimate that a fibre optic network would lead to national productivity gains of between $2.7 and $4.4 billion, but didn't exactly endorse the research.
"I hope they are right. I suspect that if that type of value can be created, people will be willing to pay for it," was his noncommittal take on the projections.
He also raised the question of whether New Zealanders will be willing to pay for faster broadband.
"If consumers aren't willing to pay, that says something about the value being created."
If English is a less than enthusiastic supporter of John Key's fibre plan - after all, this goes against his politics, he's certainly willing to go along for the ride.
"It is our commitment that Govt will subsidise this investment," he stated emphatically.
But he fudged answers on just what form that investment will take. John Key's announcement suggested it would be an investment in network infrastructure, part of a public-private partnership with the Government having a stake in an open access network for the investment it puts in. But English says nothing is set in stone.
"We are probably not going to get into a whole lot of detail about that in the next few months," he said yesterday.
He spoke of positively of Maui Gas, which the Government invested in to "de-risk" the upfront cost of building the gas production network. But English also hinted that an investment in broadband on the Government's part could also come in the form of subsidisation of services.
"It may be that it's a hell of an effort to get in both ends, Government ownership and demand subsidy. We may in fact have to pick one," he said.
"We haven't got some secret option locked away in the cupboard."
What I took from the English speech is that, even if reluctantly, National's main players are in agreement that Government money should be spent on broadband. But there's still difference of opinion on exactly how it should be spent. We'll need to see more detail before the election if we're to get a clear idea of where National will take broadband infrastructure investment should it win the election, especially with Labour planning to unveil its own rival package.
English was right when he admitted that National had set itself a "very challenging target" with its broadband plan.
But his following statement is equally right: "Those challenges only arise in proportion to the scope of the vision."
