Telstra’s suggestions for the broadband Request for Proposal (RFP) are designed to ensure the successful bidder has the capacity and resources to hit the ground running in order to meet the Government’s tight timeframes. They are reasonable suggestions based on best-practice tendering processes and absolutely common in every other part of Government except communications. Australia’s broadband future is a serious issue, and pretenders need not apply.

Now that rubber is hitting the road on next generation broadband, who among the potential FTTN bidders is putting their foot on the accelerator, and who is reaching for the handbrake?

The Competitive Carriers’ Coalition is straight off the mark with a suggestion to add another step in the consultation process – or should I say, two steps back in the delivery of high-speed broadband. The CCC’s David Foreman told The Australian “the CCC strongly suggests that the expert panel release a draft request for proposal (RFP) after March 30, and allow at least two weeks for responses to be received and considered before issuing a final RFP.”

The CCC has already had the opportunity to submit its ideas for what should be included or excluded from the RFP process, and the best they can come up with is “you show me your’s first, and I’ll tell you if it’s acceptable”?

Ravi Bhatia from Primus and G9 (or is that GP for group of procrastinators) said Telstra’s idea for bidders to submit bonds is “desperate” and the G9 is very well financed and would have no problem coming up with the necessary capital (Commsday 1/4/08).

In that case, there should be no problem producing a bond that represents around 2 per cent of the total project cost. Neither should there be a problem listing the sources of funding for the project. Or should the government and the people of Australia accept a “trust me” from any potential bidder?

OPEL, which as far as we know is still little more than a $2 shelf company, told the government it had nearly $1 billion of its own to contribute to the rural broadband project. Surely some lessons have been learnt here?

If you want to build FTTN; “Show us the money!”

A badly-designed tender process is open to rort and exploitation. Just look at what happened with the auction of satellite TV licenses. As Telstra pointed out in its RFP submission, Albert Hadid was legally able to place cascading proposals on two licenses, initially based on deposits of only $500. Even though the rules were changed mid-process, Mr Hadid was able to secure the licenses after paying only $6 million in deposits and on-selling them for a $40 million profit.

Iinet’s Stephen Dalby told CommsDay that Telstra’s bond proposal was “an innovative form of pressure” that could limit competitive bids.

Ah...yes?! It should limit bids to those who are serious and can actually deliver rather than dither and delay. A multi-billion commitment is a bit of “pressure”, so if you haven’t got the wherewithal to get over the first hurdle, don’t enter the race.