Despite being essential to daily life, Australia's NBN still operates under outdated market assumptions that leave too many people behind, writesPaul Budde.

AUSTRALIAS DIGITAL CONNECTIVITY problems are not just technical theyre structural. For too long, governments and regulators have accepted a market logic that favours infrastructure builders and service providers over the very people who rely on them.

The latest findings from the Australian Communications Consumer Action Network (ACCAN) offer yet another wake-up call: Australians see internet and mobile services as essential, but they dont feel empowered in the market that delivers them.

ACCANs newConsumer Sentiment Trackergives voice to this growing discontent. Its not a generic economic index like theWestpacorOECDconfidence measures. Instead, it zooms in on how people actually feel about the communications services that shape their everyday lives and what it reveals is deeply concerning.

While average speeds are improving, Australias broadband future still hinges on resolving deep-rooted infrastructure and policy failures.

Communications are essential so why dont we treat them that way?

Nearly 90 per cent of Australians now consider home internet to be an essential service. Three-quarters say the same about mobile access. These are not discretionary purchases theyre vital enablers of work, education, health, emergency support and social inclusion. Yet our regulatory frameworks still treat communications like a competitive luxury market rather than a basic utility.

This contradiction lies at the heart of Australias digital malaise. Despite our modern rhetoric about digital inclusion, market dynamics continue to push affordability, reliability and choice out of reach for too many.

The illusion of choice

The tracker confirms what many of us have observed for years: consumers may value price above all, but few are confident enough to act on it. Only a third compare their options and just 10 per cent switch providers each year. Thats not consumer empowerment, its entrenchment.

And this isnt the consumers fault. The telco market is deliberately complex, clouded by fine print, data limits, speed tiers, bundling tricks and opaque relationships between retail service providers and network operators likeNBN Co. The National Broadband Networks wholesale-retail separation, while theoretically competition-friendly, has often left end users confused and underserved.

What good is a competitive market if people dont feel informed or confident enough to exercise their options?

An idea whose time came too early?

Back in 2005, I gave a presentation to theAustralian Association of Social Workersin Adelaide. My argument then was simple but radical for the time: telecommunications infrastructure is not just a utility its a powerful social and economic enabler.

I spoke of a future where broadband would underpin e-health, e-education, smart grids and digital services that could bridge urban-rural divides and support a more equitable society. Broadband, I argued, should be treated as a national good, not merely a commercial undertaking.

As the world races toward fibre and 5G, Australia risks being left in the digital dust unless bold leadership steps in.

Unbeknownst to me, the then opposition communications spokesperson,Stephen Conroy, was in the audience. After the session, he told me that the presentation had been an eye-opener. He invited me to his parliamentary office in Sydney to discuss the broader potential of broadband further.

That conversation became the start of an ongoing collaboration. I provided strategic advice as he developed what would become Australias National Broadband Network (NBN), initially based on a visionary Fibre-to-the-Home (FttH) model.

That original FttH plan would go on to receive international acclaim. When theUN Broadband Commission for Digital Developmentwas launched in 2010 an initiative I had helped establish Senator Conroy was invited to serve as a founding commissioner. These were years of optimism and clarity about the transformational potential of digital infrastructure.

A decade of drift

But since then, Australia has drifted. Political backflips, cost-cutting compromises and short-term thinking diluted the original NBN vision. The pivot away from FttH left us with a fragmented mix of technologies and a market still dominated by profit-first strategies and underwhelming consumer experiences.

Todays communications environment is not what we envisioned back in 2010. What could have been a nation-building infrastructure project became, in too many respects, a commercial patch job.

The ACCAN tracker highlights the price weve paid for this dilution. Despite ever-increasing dependence on broadband, consumers remain poorly informed, rarely switch providers and feel underserved. The market, as it stands, fails the most basic public service test: does it serve people equitably?

A price increase in NBN services is expected based on a surge in high-speed fibre connections.

Where policy must go next

The solution isnt rocket science and we need:

• a formal concessional broadband policy to support low-income households;
• an obligation to serve that recognises internet access as a basic right;
• simpler, independent comparison tools that demystify pricing and plan structures; and
• a rethink of NBN pricing and structure, with a stronger public-interest mandate.

Above all, we need to return to the principle that guided the original NBN vision: broadband infrastructure should be built for people, not just for markets.

Reclaiming the national vision

To be fair, the NBN today is in better shape than it was five years ago. Fibre upgrades are progressing, speeds are improving and the networks underlying capacity is catching up to global benchmarks. But better infrastructure alone is not enough.

What we still lack is the vision to use this national asset as a platform for broader public good. The social and economic benefits of universal, affordable, high-quality broadband are many times greater than its direct commercial returns. That was true in 2005 and its even truer today.

The question is not whether we can build the network. We have. The question is whether we can now build the policy frameworks, regulatory tools and public mindset to ensure that broadband truly serves the nation, not just the market.

Paul Buddeis an IA columnist and managing director of independent telecommunications research and consultancy,Paul Budde Consulting. You can follow Paul@PaulBudde.

Related Articles

• NBN in Australia: Speeding ahead, but the system still lags behind
• How Australia lost its broadband lead and how to win it back
• Fibre surge and new pricing threaten telco status quo
• NBN Co's wireless upgrade a big boost, but Musk's Starlink still a challenge
• Libs' latest NBN bashing: Big on blame, short on Liberal liability