On Thu, 15 May 2008 00:00:37 -0500, Paul Day wrote:

> On Thu, 15 May 2008 07:34:58 Michael may have written:
>> We are not currently discussing it previously, we are discussing it now.
>
> Of course we're not currently discussing it previously. That doesn't
> even make sense.
>
> However, you ignored it previously and will no doubt ignore it now as
> well.
>
>> And given you cant supply any quotes, just proves that it was never stated
>> at all
>
> You lie - again. May as well start with the Hansard entry.
>
> And this time, unlike last time, don't ignore the most important quoted
> words: "their coverage footprint will remain."
>
> Hansard for ECITA 46, 13th Feb. 2006:
>
> Senator Coonan. "We know what consumers want here: they want to be able
> to continue to have a good coverage and to be able to have at least as
> good a service as they get with CDMA. We know what consumers want. This
> is a very technical inquiry group that we have convened here to make
> sure that these issues can be sorted out in the long-term interests of
> consumers."
>
> Senator CONROY. "As it stands we are basically being told by Telstra,
> 'Trust us; we'll deliver what we.re telling you,' even though it
> actually has not been done anywhere else in the world."
>
> Senator Coonan. "I do not think Telstra is saying, 'Trust us'. What
> Telstra is saying is, 'We will work with you, the department, and we
> will work with you, the regulator, to make sure that service standards
> are at least equivalent to CDMA and to make sure that the services to
> consumers are not interrupted.'"
>
> Mr Jennings. "I will address two aspects of that. First, the network.
> Because they would largely be using CDMA now, their coverage footprint
> will remain. That is a given."
>
> (Mr Max Jennings, General Manager, Wireless Access Services, Telstra)

Is there anything else? If not, I'd say he simply fucked up.

Funnily enough, the "very technical inquiry group" (consisting of Senators
Coonan and Conroy) didn't think to challenge that assertion of Jennings.

But in any case, after reviewing the transcript, Telstra really should
have written to the committee and clarified the statement.