Calls to make 'timely' Telstra service upgrades mandatory after two-week mobile disruption
There are calls for the government to tighten Telstra's obligation to its customers to include "timely and to standard" upgrades of its mobile services after towns were left disconnected for a fortnight.
Nationals leader David Littleproud said the government needed to make changes to the Universal Service Obligation (USO).
Under the USO, Telstra has an obligation to provide a "standard telephone service" within a reasonable timeframe.
"Subsequent to that, we've seen technology shift … mobiles have now taken over.
"What we said in the last election is what the Coalition would do … extending that USO to cover the mobile phone infrastructure."
More than 13,000 residents in Dalby, on Queensland's Western Downs, had mobile calls, internet and other services including EFTPOS and ATMs disrupted for two weeks this month due to Telstra upgrading a tower.
Telstra told the ABC that customers needed to have a backup option available.
"We understand people are using the mobile network, that's why we're doing this massive upgrade on the tower in Dalby."
Mr Littleproud said the response was "substandard".
"We've seen this elsewhere … in St George, and in Goondiwindi, we had outages going well beyond days. That's why the government needs to step in," he said.
A spokesperson from the office of Communications Minister Anika Wells told the ABC the government was looking to include mobile coverage in its legislation.
"While the Coalition left USO reform to languish, Labor has taken real steps to ensure regional communities aren't forgotten when it comes to mobile coverage."
When the ABC asked for additional information, the government sent a statement released in February by then-communications minister Michelle Rowland.
It stated the government would consult and introduce legislation this year to cover the mobile network.
"Implementation of outdoor SMS and voice will be expected by late 2027, with many Australians likely to obtain access before then," the release said.
"Basic mobile data will be considered in the future as technology road maps and capacity considerations develop."
Telstra switched off Dalby's mobile services on Monday, June 16 in order to upgrade its base tower to 5G.
NBN, satellite, and landline connections were uninterrupted, but locals called it a safety issue, with many businesses and medical staff impacted in the town of about 13,000 people.
Mr Littleproud, also the member for Maranoa, said the regional town had been forgotten.
Mobile services in Dalby and surrounds were restored after the two-week disruption, but the outage left businesses and residents shaken.
"It's a bit of a catch here — we have to rely on Telstra as once you leave town most other providers aren't available," Anna Story from Dalby's Chamber of Commerce said.
"They need to change their advice for future outages.
"[Saying] 'coverage is likely to be impacted' is a very different thing to no coverage for five days."
It was stressful for residents too.
"My elderly father-in-law has been in hospital for several weeks in the Scenic Rim and my husband — his power of attorney — has been uncontactable in the case that urgent medical and care decisions need to be made," Tina Burnett said.
"My husband works out of town, and he was unable to contact his employer or the other works to coordinate tasks as they had no service on their mobile phones."
Ms Burnett said the outage was poorly communicated.
"They provided a link to outage details which required me entering my address. When I did that, the website told me that there was no outage in my area," she said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News.com.au
2 hours ago
- News.com.au
One Nation leader Pauline Hanson ‘disgusted' by Sussan Ley's Acknowledged of Country speech
A 'disgusted' Pauline Hanson has hit out at Sussan Ley after she acknowledged traditional owners during a major speech to national media last week. The One Nation leader has accused Ms Ley of double standards after the opposition leader performed an Acknowledgment to Country during her first major speech at National Press Club on Wednesday. 'I was disgusted. Absolutely disgusted with it,' Senator Hanson said. 'Because the Liberals, they were the ones that actually opposed the Voice to parliament. 'It wasn't just the Liberals that opposed it. It was a lot of people like myself, like Gary Johns, and then you had Barnaby Joyce and you had Jacinta Price. 'Once the public were informed about what it meant and changed in the Constitution, people were better informed and made their decisions about it.' The senator told Sky News' Danica and James that Ms Ley wasn't the right person for the Liberal Party's top job, adding a 'true conservative' needs to replace her. 'It's going to be very interesting what happens the next three years under Sussan Ley,' she said. 'I think she will be overthrown before the next election.' It comes after Ms Ley announced there is a 'time and place' for the declaration while her acknowledgment a stood as a far cry from the staunch stance held by her predecessor Peter Dutton. Under Mr Dutton, acknowledgement of country addresses were missing from a number of major Liberal Party events and speeches. Ms Ley perviously told ABC Radio it wasn't a 'boxing ticking' exercise. 'Look I think Acknowledgements of Country have their place, but in significant moments like yesterday was one of those places,' the Opposition Leader said. 'And as Environment Minister and Health Minister, I listened carefully and I participated in what I would describe as meaningful Welcome to Country ceremonies that involved the circumstances of Indigenous Australians with respect to our natural environment and their own health that were relevant and important. 'I don't think it should be at every work meeting, because I think that actually diminishes the value of what it is. 'So there is a time and a place, and it's about striking the right balance.' A survey of 1005 Australians conducted by independent marketing research firm Dynata on behalf of the conservative Institute of Public Affairs last month found that more than half (56 per cent) of participants agreed Welcome to Country ceremonies have 'become divisive'. IPA deputy executive director Daniel Wild said the survey results were proof 'Australians have had an absolute gutful' of the 'divisive and pointless' tradition. Mr Wild argued Ms Ley's stance at the National Press Club was also 'at odds with modern Australia', and accused her of '[failing] to state who the purported traditional owners of the National Press Club are'. Only 17 per cent disagreed with the statement, while 27 per cent said they were unsure. Surprisingly, 48 per cent of those aged 18 to 24 — a demographic often thought to be more progressive than generations past — did not believe the ritual to be a unifying one. Sentiment around the performance of Welcome to Country before major events like Anzac Day or sporting matches was more mixed — 46 per cent and 49 per cent respectively said they should no longer be performed before either event, versus 34 per cent and 30 per cent who said they should continue.
Courier-Mail
2 hours ago
- Courier-Mail
Anthony Albanese rejects call for US to be more transparent about Australian military presence
Don't miss out on the headlines from Breaking News. Followed categories will be added to My News. Anthony Albanese has rejected Coalition's front bencher Andrew Hastie's call for more 'transparency' from the United States in relation to their operations on Australian bases. Mr Hastie, a former SAS commander, has previously called for 'greater transparency' on how the US is using its Australian bases like Pine Gap near Alice Springs, and the Naval Communication Station on Western Australia's North West Cape, in order to bolster military posture in the Indo Pacific. The Coalition's home affairs spokesman urged for more 'mature' discussions on operationalising the alliance, guard rails for combat operations and clearer definitions for Australian sovereignty. Responding to the suggestion on the ABC, the Prime Minister said: 'I'm not sure what he means by that,' and rejected the idea of Australia using defence as a bargaining chip to secure a tariff exemption. Andrew Hastie has said the government should press the US to be more transparent on its Australian military operations. Picture: Richard Dobson/ NewsWire 'He belongs to a political party that during the election campaign, when President Trump announced tariffs on what he called the Liberation Day, they drew into question, said 'we should be bargaining with our defence relationship,'' Mr Albanese said. 'That was something that I rejected on that day.' Asked if US' military footprint would make Australia more vulnerable in the event of intensified conflict with China, Mr Albanese said it was his goal to 'avoid conflict,' and backed Australia's alliance with the US. 'I think it is in Australia's interest and the United States' interest and the interests of other partners we have to have interoperability, to have the AUKUS arrangements in place,' he continued. 'If Mr Hastie is questioning that, then he should say that. It's why I've been very clear on that.' Anthony Albanese rejected Mr Hastie's calls and backed the Australia-US alliance. Picture: NewsWire/ Martin Ollman Mr Albanese also said despite the 'laser-like focus' on when he would secure a meeting with US President Donald Trump, he was more concerned with 'supporting Australia's national interests'. He also noted that while he was prepared to meet with Mr Trump 'when a suitable time could be organised,' he flagged the yet-to-be-finalised Quad meeting between the US, Japan, India and Australia which will occur in the 'coming months'. 'We also have the Quad meeting coming up, which we are finalising as well,' he said. To date Mr Albanese has had three phone conversations with Mr Trump, and also met with US treasury secretary Scott Bessent, US trade representative, Jamieson Greer and US National Economic Council director, Kevin Hassett while he was in Kanamaskis for the G7. Originally published as Anthony Albanese rejects call for US to be more transparent about its military presence in Australia
ABC News
2 hours ago
- ABC News
Lattouf wins
TAYLOR AIKEN: Walking from court, victorious. ANTOINETTE LATTOUF: I was punished for my political opinion. TAYLOR AIKEN: Antoinette Lattouf winning her public showdown with the public broadcaster. - 7 News, 25 June 2025 Hello, welcome to Media Watch, I'm Linton Besser. And the sorry tale of Antoinette Lattouf arrived at its entirely predictable yet still shocking conclusion last week with unequivocal findings the public broadcaster had capitulated to a pro-Israel lobbying campaign and unlawfully jettisoned an on-air presenter who had done nothing wrong: ANTOINETTE LATTOUF: … I shared a Human Rights Watch post because Human Rights Watch found that Israel was using starvation as a weapon of war. Today the court has found that punishing someone for sharing facts about these war crimes is also illegal… -7.30, ABC, 25 June 2025 The findings of the Federal Court reverberated across the country splashed in the pages of newspapers from coast to coast: ABC blows $1m in losing Lattouf case - The Sydney Morning Herald, 26 June 2025 Lattouf's win is a loss for ABC and taxpayers - The Herald Sun, 26 June 2025 And prompting despair from rusted-on lovers of the ABC: CRAIG: … I love the ABC and I will defend the ABC to the nth degree, long may it reign. I think what happened to Lattouf and the action the ABC took was appalling. MICHELLE: … I actually have lost trust in the ABC … … and I'm really disappointed because, you know, I've listened to you guys for 45 years … - Melbourne Mornings with Rafael Epstein, ABC Radio Melbourne, 26 June 2025 SALLY SARA: … this is from Jackie in Brisbane. 'What is also concerning is that pro-Israel lobbyists have had access to the ear of ABC upper management, ordinary Australians can only make a complaint online'. - Radio National Breakfast, 26 June 2025 Much of what occurred in the lead-up to the ABC's 2023 sacking of fill-in radio presenter Antoinette Lattouf has already been established. The coordinated barrage from her first day in the chair of complaints from pro-Israel voices, the pressure from former ABC chair Ita Buttrose grasping for any means by which Lattouf could be dumped, and of course the final straw Lattouf's notorious social media post. The ABC itself had already reported allegations from Human Rights Watch that Israel was deliberately starving the people of Gaza but Lattouf doing so after a string of social media comments deeply critical of Israel's military campaign that remarkably had not been considered before she was hired, so spooked senior echelons of the organisation it set in train a sequence of events which the Federal Court summarised like this: The consternation of senior managers of the ABC turned into what can be described as a state of panic. - Justice Darryl Rangiah, Federal Court of Australia, Lattouf v Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Judgment, 25 June 2025 But what this judgment does do is hold accountable those inside the ABC who played a role in this sorry affair. At the very top of that list, the director of the division then responsible for ABC Local Radio Chris Oliver-Taylor, at whose feet Justice Darryl Rangiah laid primary blame for Lattouf's removal. While Oliver-Taylor had insisted he had valid reasons for terminating Lattouf's employment the judge found otherwise: … I reject Mr Oliver-Taylor's evidence that the reasons given by him for his decision to take Ms Lattouf off air were his actual reasons. - Justice Darryl Rangiah, Federal Court of Australia, Lattouf v Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Judgment, 25 June 2025 Oliver-Taylor told the court he believed Lattouf had been explicitly instructed to not post anything online concerning the war in Gaza. The judge again disagreed: I find that, contrary to his evidence, Mr Oliver-Taylor knew that Ms Lattouf had not been given any direction and had merely been given advice or requested not to post anything about the Israel/Gaza war … - Justice Darryl Rangiah, Federal Court of Australia, Lattouf v Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Judgment, 25 June 2025 In fact, the ham-fisted sacking of the radio presenter was spurred by news of an imminent article in The Australian about Lattouf's comments on the conflict and the dread of external criticism: … Mr Oliver-Taylor sought to mitigate the anticipated deluge of complaints and criticism of the ABC … … the decision was made to appease the pro-Israel lobbyists who would inevitably escalate their complaints about the ABC employing a presenter they perceived to have anti-Semitic and anti-Israel opinions … - Justice Darryl Rangiah, Federal Court of Australia, Lattouf v Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Judgment, 25 June 2025 Oliver-Taylor's haste demonstrating: … extraordinary sensitivity to the prospect of adverse comment by The Australian. - Justice Darryl Rangiah, Federal Court of Australia, Lattouf v Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Judgment, 25 June 2025 While the judge found Antoinette Lattouf an honest and generally reliable witness and he made similar findings about the most junior of the ABC's managers caught up in the affair, Elizabeth Green, he was less kind about the hierarchy of ABC executives above her, 'unimpressed with Chris Oliver-Taylor's evidence under cross examination' later describing it as 'implausible' and inconsistent with his own notes. 'Implausible' too, the evidence given both by a senior editorial policy advisor Simon Melkman and Ben Latimer, the then head of audio content whose evidence he also described as troubling. The judge also rejected the evidence of the acting head of the ABC's Capital City Networks Steve Ahern: The evidence of Mr Latimer, Mr Ahern and Mr Melkman under cross-examination left me with substantial doubts as to the reliability and credibility of their evidence on controversial matters. - Justice Darryl Rangiah, Federal Court of Australia, Lattouf v Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Judgment, 25 June 2025 The performance in court of the ABC's former chair Ita Buttrose did not escape mention either: Ms Buttrose's evidence in some of these passages is difficult to understand … … [and] seems quite unrealistic … Ms Buttrose's evidence under cross-examination was somewhat theatrical and difficult to follow at times. - Justice Darryl Rangiah, Federal Court of Australia, Lattouf v Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Judgment, 25 June 2025 Not a single criticism was made of then Managing Director David Anderson's reliability with the judge preferring his version of history over that of his former boss. While both Anderson and Buttrose were found to have piled pressure on Chris Oliver-Taylor by forwarding him a clutch of lobbyist complaints Anderson in particular played a 'material' role in the affair, not because he failed to intervene in Oliver-Taylor's rash move to sack Lattouf, but by planting in his subordinates mind his view that Lattouf was a potential risk to the organisation and: … conveying his opinion that Ms Lattouf held anti-Semitic views. Mr Anderson's opinion was then adopted by Mr Oliver-Taylor. - Justice Darryl Rangiah, Federal Court of Australia, Lattouf v Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Judgment, 25 June 2025 The Federal Court did not find the ABC had been in any way motivated by racism, rather it had terminated Lattouf's employment on the basis of merely holding a political opinion which happened to be on the side of the Palestinian people. I am satisfied Mr Oliver-Taylor attributed to Ms Lattouf the holding of a political opinion opposing the Israeli military campaign in Gaza, which in his view, made her unsuitable to work as a presenter at the ABC. - Justice Darryl Rangiah, Federal Court of Australia, Lattouf v Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Judgment, 25 June 2025 While Lattouf's posting of the Human Rights Watch Report to her Instagram account did not ever breach ABC policies, it was, according to the court, ill-advised and inconsiderate to the organisation. And how much has this cost the ABC? And by that I mean how much has it cost you? The organisation's new managing director Hugh Marks revealed the mounting legal bill to ABC Melbourne's Raf Epstein: RAFAEL EPSTEIN: What is the total bill gonna be, do you think? Lawyers' costs, penalties, everything, what are we looking at? … HUGH MARKS: … it will be millions … RAFAEL EPSTEIN: Does that mean more than two? HUGH MARKS: Oh I would suspect so … … it sounds like there's still more work to do. - Melbourne Mornings with Rafael Epstein, ABC Radio Melbourne, 26 June 2025 And yet, it could have all been made to go away 12 months ago with Lattouf publicly offering to drop the case in return for an apology a few shifts on radio and a mere fraction of what the ABC would spend defending itself in court: JOSH BORNSTEIN: The amount of money spent on a case that could have settled for $85,000 is self-evidently ludicrous … … it has been in aid of nothing other than to discredit the ABC … - 10 News First, 25 June 2025 So why didn't the ABC settle the case earlier? Answer: it tried. But while both sides did agree a final figure, which rose to $150,000, the ABC would not adopt the apology Lattouf sought, which included an admission the broadcaster had unlawfully terminated her employment precisely the outcome the court has now delivered her. On Wednesday, Marks released a public statement apologising to Antoinette Lattouf and told the ABC's News Channel: HUGH MARKS: … I regret the way that it was handled and I regret the way that her employment at the ABC was handled. - ABC News, 25 June 2025 Hugh Marks says the ABC will soon promulgate new social media policies. But the judgment creates a difficult tension between the ABC's obligations to impartiality and its ability to constrain the political speech of its staff, as employment lawyer Michael Bradley told us: This is tricky territory for any employer, especially one like the ABC which has public trust obligations of impartiality. … the proper balance between respecting personal freedom while preserving an organisation's ability to fulfill its mission exists; but that requires far more intelligence and insight than the ABC has recently displayed. - Email, Michael Bradley, Marque Lawyers, 27 June 2025 There is no shortage of hard lessons in this scandal for the ABC and now that almost every key player has departed the organisation those lessons must fall to the new boss. Last week, Hugh Marks promised to act as a better firewall between the organisation and future lobbying campaigns: HUGH MARKS: Our obligation is to ensure we're not overly affected by external forces and that's partly and pretty much a big part of my role … - ABC News, 25 June 2025 There's no doubt in my mind that Hugh Marks will indeed be tested on this very pledge. You could set your clock to crises in this place as the ABC strives to achieve an almost impossible nirvana of objectivity and impartiality while still wading into some of society's most divisive issues. Last week, the ABC was resisting an overhaul of policy and procedure and I think it's right to do so because the Lattouf affair was not evidence of a lack of policy but evidence of a lack of backbone. For the better part of a decade the public broadcaster has been repeatedly buffeted off-course by members of its board going weak-kneed before the gripes of the persistent and the powerful even when those complaints have very little, if any merit. Surely … surely, that must end now.
