- Mobile access and functionality in remote Australia
Overview
5.1The Committee received evidence about a prominent ‘digital divide’ in Australia between metropolitan and regional Australia—which is wider again, by many magnitudes, in remote Australia, particularly in Indigenous Australian communities.
5.2The Committee also heard that inadequate telecommunication services significantlyimpacts education and health outcomes; employment opportunities; andsocial and economic wellbeing in Indigenous Australian communities. Connectivity is also increasingly important for accessing government services and enables access to vital information in times of emergencies and natural disasters.
5.3Some remote Indigenous communities are employing innovative solutions to ameliorate connectivity issues, such as wi-fi mesh networks and Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellites for internet access—but true mobile connection (including remote mobile voice call and internet access) remains problematic.
The ‘digital divide’ affecting Indigenous communities
5.4First Nations Media Australia (FNMA) submitted that connectivity generally ‘diminishes with remoteness, especially in the towns, communities and settlements such as outstations on traditional homelands where Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people comprise a greater proportion of the population’:
The types of connectivity available in towns and larger communities in regional and remote areas differ significantly to smaller settlements, which often have limited access to different types of internet access. With less than a third of remote First Nations communities connected by fibre optic cable, there is heavy reliance on satellite and microwave backhaul solutions, especially in minor communities and settlements.
5.5The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network (ACCAN) expressed concern about ‘digital exclusion in remote Indigenous Australian communities, particularly due to the inadequacy and limited availability of communications infrastructure in these areas’:
Reports indicate that the digital divide in remote Indigenous communities, and inother areas, is widening.…Poor mobile coverage disadvantages communities, especially as governments prioritise the online delivery of services which are inaccessible for people who arenot connected.
Mapping the Digital Gap project
5.6Dr Daniel Featherstone, Senior Research Fellow at RMIT University told the Committee about the Mapping the Digital Gap project which is examining digital inclusion in remote First Nations people communities as part of the Closing the Gap target17, which states that by 2026 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people will have equal levels of digital inclusion.
5.7Dr Featherstone said 86 per cent of people in project communities have a mobile phone, with 90 per cent of them using a prepaid service. He noted that half the households across these project sites are ‘without TV services’ which are delivered using Viewer Access Satellite Television (VAST) using set top boxes. Given TV access impediments there is high mobile device video viewing which has exacerbated congestion of the network: ‘So in places like Galiwin’ku, where we’ve been, the services are congested to the point of being almost unusable’.
Communities with limited access to services
5.8The Central Land Council (CLC) which represents more than 24,000Indigenous people across 777,000 square kilometres of Central Australia, submitted the primary concern of its constituents is the ‘availability of any mobile infrastructure, or other means of telecommunications and digital connectivity.’ The CLC submission stressed: ‘The digital divide is deep in remote Central Australia’.
5.9Mr Neil Turner, Manager, Pilbara and Kimberley Aboriginal Media, which serves12remote communities, called for improved mobile coverage on more roads servicing these communities. Similarly, Ms Jozan Collins, CEO of Ingkerreke Services Aboriginal Corporation, said only one of its 55 homelands in Central Australia has reliable, truly ‘mobile’ telecommunications. She noted:
… Obviously a lack of mobile infrastructure is a barrier to people living permanently on their homelands. So we are supportive of any contribution we could get to help better that for people on homelands.
5.10The Central Australian Aboriginal Congress (CAAC) said it faced significant challenges due to poor or no mobile coverage delivering services to more than 17,000 Aboriginal people living in Mparntwe and remote communities across Central Australia including Ltyentye Apurte (Santa Teresa), Ntaria (Hermannsburg), Wallace Rockhole, Utju (Areyonga), Mutitjulu, Amoonguna, Yulara, Imanpa and Kaltukatjara (Docker River).
…the impact of not having telecommunications in remotecommunities is acute,and as well as limiting access to health care in emergencies, can lead to social isolation, inability to access government services (many of which are only available online), and the inability to purchase food. Access to adequate and affordable telecommunications has also been shown to improve learning and access to job opportunities. How can a student in the modern world be expectedto complete studies without access to the internet?
5.11Mr Chris Hosking of the Northern Territory (NT) Government’s Department of Corporate and Digital Development said authorities needed to have better work-arounds for outages, for example, EFTPOS unavailability has serious community impacts.In its submission, the NT Government described digital connectivity as ‘critical enabling infrastructure’.
Access to health services
5.12The Department of Regional NSW submitted that remote communities experience significant barriers toaccessing health services:
Without adequate connectivity, virtual care is not available as a service delivery option to supplement face-to-face care and risks driving health inequity by reducing access to timely, safe, and quality care for regional and remote communities.
5.13The CAAC expanded:
In this context, telehealth and other telecommunications technologies benefit residents by increasing access to care, and by providing greater support to health care professionals through increased communication with centre-based specialists and practitioners.
5.14Mr Trevor Osborne, Chief Information Officer at the CAAC, said reliable mobile connectivity was important in remote communities due to the significant numbers of patients with limited mobility: ‘…we have to be able to provide the technology that will take the doctors to thepatients…’ He described how basic telecommunication services were also critical to the internal operation of health services:
In the clinics themselves, if the phone system doesn’t work you are in trouble, because nobody can make an appointment. And if we don’t have connectivity, the doctors have to write notes, so if we go down for an hour everything goes nuts. … The other parts of the clinics at the moment are around managing prescriptions and delivering them. A lot of that relies on you being able to see the patient history.
5.15Mr Simon Stafford, Digital Health Team Manager at Aboriginal Medical Services Alliance Northern Territory, said reliable communication was critical to running good primary health care in Central Australia and elsewhere. He also said that the availability of basic telecommunications services is important to retaining a health workforce. Mr Stafford said there were potential solutions from combining new satellite technologies with a community wireless system, and unexpected collaborative benefits.
When our members first got their satellites, often at night they would turn off theclinic use of the satellite and beam it out just to the community so people could actually do stuff. And often clinics become the place where people come todo things. And all of a sudden nurses are having to show people how to do computer stuff—which is a good thing, a good community thing, collaborative—but you realise there is a real need. Otherwise the digital divide will just get bigger quickly.
5.16Mr Chris Hosking said the NT Government’s focus on co-investing to improve telecommunications services was motivated primarily by improving social and health outcomes in remote Aboriginal communities:
We absolutely fundamentally understand it's an enabler to economic development, but keeping kids at school and fixing people with rheumatic heart disease, diabetes and kidney failure has been a much higher priority… And, quite frankly, our report card in that area is dismal. The levels of diabetes, kidney disease and rheumatic heart disease here in the Territory are at third-world levels…
Access to news and information
5.17In its submission to the inquiry, FNMA noted Outcome 17 of the National Closing the Gap Agreement commits governments to ensuring Indigenous Australians ‘have access to information and services enabling participation in informed decision‑making regarding their own lives’.
5.18For example, Mrs Laurie May, General Manager of Indigenous Community Television (ICTV), said a mobile service was needed to activate the (VAST) set top boxes required to view the direct-to-home television service for remote Australians. Mrs May called on the Australian Government to make a ‘commitment to supportingthe repair and maintenance’ of the VAST network, which is used to broadcast ICTV, providing content created for and by people in remote Indigenous Australian communities.
5.19Mr Ian James, Station Manager at Wangki Yupurnanupurru Radio, said the station contends with numerous black spots as it broadcasts to more than 40 remote communities over a 165 kilometre plus radius in the central Kimberley in Western Australia, many of whom struggled to receive information during the severe 2023 floods.
5.20FNMA noted reliable telecommunications can save lives by providing access to telehealth services and through emergency messaging, but remote telecommunications infrastructure can be ‘patchy or unreliable’ at peak times and is not resilient to weather events:
Mobile towers typically run off solar power and have at least 24-hour battery back-up, but this may be challenged with extended weather events or where the mobile tower relies on local mains power. Service outages, lasting anything from an hour to several days, are quite common in remote communities, affecting everything from phones to online banking.
5.21The role of mobile telecommunications services for emergency services and in responding to natural disasters is discussed in further detail in Chapter 6.
Solutions for remote communities
5.22Dr Featherstone said the Government’s Mobile Black Spot Program (MBSP) and Regional Connectivity Program (RCP) were ‘no longer fit for purpose’ for remote and regional communities:
We need a more targeted First Nations solution that allows for innovative solutions—more place-based and obviously using the Closing the Gap framework around co-design and co-delivery. And we need universal service. We need everybody to have access to online and good communication services that are reliable and have a good quality of service.
5.23In its submission, the NT Government stated co-investment is the only way toencourage companies to invest in costly infrastructure, and co-investments should prioritise the very remote areas which lack existing services. This may require identifying potential new partners for future co-investment opportunities.
5.24FNMA supported the potential for co-location and co-investment models hostingmultiple mobile carriers. FNMA recommended Government policy create incentives for successful multi-carriersharing of infrastructure within funding guidelines for mobileinfrastructure grants:
Fostering competition through co-location models for mobile infrastructure that encourage co-investment by MNOs will potentially yield positive outcomes for regional and remote consumers. This is particularly the case for remote-living First Nations people, given that mobile telephony is their primary form of internet access and the affordability concerns associated with mobile data usage, especially through the widespread use of prepaid plans.
5.25Dr Robin Gregory, Policy Officer at Regional Development Australia Northern Territory (NT), said they want the Australian Government to ‘actively develop policies that will foster greater competition’:
…because at the moment in remote Australia there is virtually no competition and we will not get improved connectivity and digital services without that competition. … Fifty per cent of those people between 16 and 64 are completely without income, because they can’t contact Centrelink, or they get breached. They can’t meet the basic mutual obligation requirements. And a lot of that is really down to really poor access to telecommunications. The user-pays model doesn’t work because people can’t afford to pay.
5.26The CLC welcomed the encouragement from federal grant programs for consultation with local First Nations peoples communities but lamented it ‘is disappointing that this is not a requirement’:
… we need to take a more fundamental look at how telecommunications and digital connectivity options can be provided in a way that promotes equity for remote Aboriginal communities and between our communities.
5.27The CLC also believed any new investment in remote mobile infrastructure should ‘prioritise roaming opportunities’ given the overwhelming prevalence of single‑carrier tower utilisation currently in remote Australia. Enabling roaming between competing carrier’s terrestrial tower presences would greatly improve remote connectivity now, however, embedding multi‑carrier infrastructure was preferred: ‘multi-carrier services support Aboriginal mobility’.
5.28However, Mr Stafford, Aboriginal Medical Services Alliance NT doubted the competitive multi-carrier model was a suitable fit for remote Australia:
I don’t think we need a competitive model out there. What we need is a collaborative model. In truth, there is not any income to be made serving remote communities with communications. It is more about access to services, and we are just seeing the world go more and more online. And unless there is communication infrastructure, people get left behind.
5.29He also implied that co-location has the potential for maintenance disputes:
…someone has to do the maintenance, and we don’t want people bickering about fixing something. That is why it would have to be a collaborative model, because the reality is that fixing things out remote is difficult.
Improving affordability
5.30FNMA said prepaid mobile phones are the primary source of data used in most remote communities:
While prepaid mobile plans may reduce financial vulnerability in the short term byenabling consumers with more direct management of expenses than post-paid contracts, prepaid data is more expensive per GB than billed services over the long term.
5.31Dr Hogan of FNMA said Government subsidies should be considered because meaningful telecommunications competition was unlikely.
…the government could perhaps look at subsidising or concessions for people in remote areas, particularly First Nations people with poorer access, such as reduced data costs for data plans; or free data for accessing government services online, such as Centrelink and MyGov and so forth.
5.32The CLC noted that telecommunications companies receive government subsidies to install infrastructure but Indigenous Australians in remote communities still pay relatively high costs for sub-standard services:
… As long as the profit motive continues to drive telecommunications companies and without adequate policy and regulatory settings geared to promote equity, remote Aboriginal community members will continue to be at a disadvantage in comparison to other Australians when it comes to accessing this essentialservice.
5.33The CLC said there needed to be a Universal Service Guarantee (USG) for mobile services and more flexible service arrangements. The current USG is a federal Government promise which provides that all Australian homes and businesses have access to broadband internet and voice services—regardless of location. The USG does not provide a mobile connectivity commitment. Rather, the USG is an update of the original Universal Service Obligation (USO) for telecommunications which has reduced the locations of payphone services given the growth in mobile telephony usage.
5.34The CLC highlighted while satellite services offer a ‘technical solution for people living in remote places, the cost and rigid payment models (i.e., monthly plans) mean they are practically out of reach for most of our constituents’:
Flexible and affordable pay-per-use options would make this technology far more accessible to Aboriginal people living in remote communities. The same can be said for mobile services.
Wi-fi networks
5.35Dr Featherstone from RMIT recommended governments fund the wider development of wi-fi mesh or wi-fi hotspot networks as a solution to overcoming poor mobile connectivity in many remote communities. He noted what was occurring in Kalumburu, Western Australia (WA), funded through the Regional Connectivity Program:
Activ8me has rolled out the network, so there’s seven access points around the community and 126 households or dwellings with a receiver in the building so that you can access it within the house, not just outside, which is usually the case as well. They’ve also put a VoIP phone, a voiceover internet protocol phone, into each house so people can make calls within that local network or call outside. Sowithin the network, it’s free. As you go outside, it costs.
… of course, the demand on that service becomes an issue with congestion. But, generally, I think it’s a really good solution. The infrastructure just needs to be robust enough.
5.36Ms Jennifer McFarland, a Community Development worker at the Central Australian Youth Link Up Service, said wi-fi mesh networks were the best alternative for very remote communities:
The thing with wi-fi, and why mesh would be better than just a wi-fi hotspot, is that wi-fi does not have the same coverage. So you have only about 100 metres around a wi-fi hotspot, whereas the coverage with mobile services is better.
5.37Ms McFarland said community-based wi-fi would be more financially viable for residents in remote communities, who pay higher prices for data than most Australians. Contrasting that view, Ms Collins from Ingkerreke Services Aboriginal Corporation said that for the Iwupataka Land Trust, located approximately 25kilometres from Alice Springs, a traditional mobile tower would be more reliable than wi-fi mobile hotspots:
…on Iwupataka Land Trust there are 24 homelands, about 80 houses, and they could really benefit from a tower. At the moment, I think the Northern Territory department is putting some mobile hotspots in place. I don’t think they are necessary. I just think we just need to put a tower in.
Satellite-based services
5.38As outlined in Chapter 1, satellite-based communication services were raised asapromising alternative to traditional terrestrial mobile infrastructure in regional and remote locations. The potential for Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellite services was noted as a particular example, having the potential to dramatically change the economics ofimproving connectivity in regional and especially remote communities.
Low-Earth Orbit satellites
5.39LEO satellite services—currently offered by Starlink but with other operators such as Amazon’s Project Kuiper on the horizon—were a focus in evidence to the inquiry.
5.40Mr John Stanton, Chief Executive Officer of Communications Alliance Ltd, which manages the Satellite Services Working Group for 26 operators of satellite activity in Australia and globally, acknowledged providing modern, high-speed communications in such a vast and sparsely populated country as Australia was a ‘daunting task’, but that LEO satellites already play a significant role in providing fix broadband services:
… the Starlink constellation of satellites already has more than 100,000 fixed broadband services in operation in Australia, and that's continuing to grow. We believe LEOs will also play a role in the provision of services to mobile devices.
5.41However, Mr Stanton said there was no doubt that there was ongoing role for terrestrial communications infrastructure in regional and remote Australia.
5.42Mr Luke Coleman of Vocus Group expected that LEO systems will eventually provide mobile telephone and data services on par with what might be expected from land‑based tower infrastructure:
…making a phone callisno different from making a phone call in a big city. In fact, even doing videoconferencing using Zoom or Teams over Starlink or a LEO satellite service, because of those very low latencies, is no different from using a terrestrial service.
5.43Mr Coleman highlighted the potential for LEO satellites to provide backhaul in regional areas at lower cost than using traditional network infrastructure such as fibre or microwave.
5.44Mr Simon Lardner, also from Vocus Group, agreed LEO satellites will change some of the economics around transmission, especially in providing remote coverage:
[Transmission] is quite a big number and can be 20 per cent or 30 per cent of the total network cost for that location; so moving to something like an LEO satellite, which is a fraction of that, very much changes the economics… With LEO, itmeans that potentially you can look at doing black spots for very small locations.
5.45Mr Coleman envisaged that Starlink, in much smaller regional and remote communities with very basic infrastructure, could be offered as a free service from the end users' perspective, if there was a means to use government subsidies to pay for the service:
As for the cost of a LEO satellite service, there is the dish itself … which is several thousand dollars for the enterprise-grade dishes; then, of course, there is the ongoing cost of the LEO connectivity…But, regardless of that, I would say that, compared to the cost of building terrestrial infrastructure, it is almost inevitable that it will be dramatically cheaper than building terrestrial infrastructure.
5.46Mr Peter Hitchiner of One Wifi & Infrastructure welcomed LEO satellites playing a ‘very important role in rural and remote areas where there's a deficiency of existing terrestrial transmission’ due to them providing sufficient bandwidth with low latency.However, he noted some deficiencies:
Forinstance, terrestrially based systems are much better for coverage within premises. It's a complementary role…
5.47The Committee heard from state and territory governments about their interest in LEO satellite services. For example, Ms Penny Griffin, representing the Western Australian Government, referred to some promising trials underway in the state. MsGriffin said there is ‘huge interest’ across government, but ‘the challengewillbe managing the cost’. Mr Eamonn McCabe, also the WA Government, said Starlink provided ‘much superior performance’ than the NBN Sky Muster service.
5.48Mr Chris Hoskingof the Northern Territory Government contended LEOs could have a significant role in mobile service provision in regional Australia, possibly at the expense of some MNOs:
…I think that technology innovation over the next several years is going to change the game, and I think it's going to catch some of the conventional telcos a little flat-footed. … We have to rethink how those solutions are delivered to those remote parts of the Territory.
5.49The Committee is also aware of arrangements between Starlink, Telstra and Vocus to provide voice and fixed broadband services in regional and remote Australia.
Potential for direct mobile phone connections
5.50Some witnesses referred to the potential for mobile phones to connect to satellites directly to receive service in remote locations. Ms Griffin observed this technology was developing quickly:
It will solve where we have such large coverage gaps. There is the potential tohave coverage everywhere. There might not be a lot of capacity, initially at least, but it will serve the emergency alert problems we have. It will be offered by existing carriers, so you will have a pathway back into the terrestrial network. Itisexciting: this is the holy grail.
5.51Mr Czinner of TPG Telecom also referred to the progress being made in connecting mobile phones to LEO satellites for messaging and voice calls. Mr Czinner elaborated on the trials he was aware of:
Some companies have already announced that they're doing voice and text calls next year. There's One New Zealand, for example, where there are already trials. You've got the satellite service that Apple has launched, the emergency service where you point your phone and do low-capacity bandwidth messaging.
5.52Mr Sheridan, Optus noted the excitement about the use of LEO satellite technology in regional and remote Australia but offered a note of caution:
…we seethem as being some way off, probably several years, and probably not substitutable for your traditional mobile type of solution, but more of a complement for the mobile solution. There will be limitations in terms ofthecapacity that that type of satellite solution can deliver.
5.53Mr Mike Johns from Communications Alliance Ltd also noted there may be some limitations due to interference from trees and foliage.
5.54Mr Czinner expected it was early days for how regulatory oversight of LEO systems linking to Australian mobile networks will develop:
To be able to have the phone operate with the LEO sat it will still require the spectrum of the operator. So, you'll have to work with the LEO sat operator to send the signal. It will then come back into the core network. They would be an adjunct.
5.55Mr Czinner also expressed concern about the advantage an MNO may gain from developing a relationship with a first-to-market provider such as Starlink at the expense of other MNOs:
Our comment in respect of a level playing field is to ensure that none of these operators, especially the ones that are first to market, are monopolised by any person or by any MNO. We think this would be a huge competitive benefit to anybody…That would probably need to have either the ACCC come in and make a statement on it or for there be to some regulation of government to ensure that doesn't happen.
Satellite services in remote communities
5.56The CAAC said it had installed Starlink in six of its remote health clinics and one at Alice Springs in response to ‘telecommunications market failure’:
Utju Health Service, located 215km from Alice Springs, is now utilising a combination of domestic and commercial Starlink systems and NBN satellite systems. This provides consumer internet coverage of up to 300mb/sec (up to 10times faster internet speeds) to our health clinic. Another domestic Starlink satellite provides internet coverage to some of the staff housing as well, and shortly this will be expanded to cover all our remote staff housing.
5.57CAAC’s Mr Trevor Osborne described the impact of improved services on health service delivery:
We are now almost independent of the slow satellites. … doctors now ring me and say, ‘I can treat the patient quickly, and I can read their record quickly, and I don’t have to spend time waiting for all this information to come up’.
5.58Mr Hosking said the NT Government was investigating the potential for LEO satellites to uplift the connectivity of all schools in the Territory and had allocated $4million a year to reach the NT’s remote schools:
We have about 130-odd schools across the Territory in some of the remotest places—places where we don't have a health clinic or a police station.
5.59Mr Leslie Manda, Chief Executive Officer of the Central Desert RegionalCouncil, which services nine remote communities and 4,200 Indigenous Australians, welcomed a Services Australia project using a combination of Starlink and small cell towers to provide access to wi-fi, wi-fi calling and internet in remote communities of around 100–200 people. However, he noted:
The biggest challenge is exactly what you said: when there are large demands, many people on at the same time, it slows down the speed and reliability, no matter what system you have in place. I think that is the looming change that iscoming up for Starlink.
5.60However, Mr Manda also highlighted the costs to the community:
…the challenge is that there has to be someone who is responsible for that $2,000 bill. That is $2,000 a month, so it is almost $30,000 you have to have sitting on the side to just keep that connectivity up and running.
5.61Ms McFarland of the Central Australian Youth Link Up Service said low or medium Earth orbit satellites looked promising, but they were unaffordable for remote communities:
We were approached by Starlink recently because they know that we manage a bunch of wi-fi hotspots in remote communities. Their product is fabulous, but it is unaffordable, basically. For a commercial grade dish, you have to buy the infrastructure, the dish, then put it in, and then pay $2,000 a month.
5.62Mr Hosking said the NT Government believed LEO satellite services were cost competitive given the low infrastructure cost:
Once you get out there, that [estimated $2,000 monthly subscription] is actually afairly competitive price point when you start looking at the cost of a macrocell connected by fibre. We have done independent modelling, and, within that [$4million] budget allocation, we can connect every Territory school that's currently off the grid…
5.63Mr Osborne from CACC said the use of satellite technology should be explored given the ‘outrageous’ cost of mobile phone infrastructure in the Northern Territory. Noting the potential for combining different technologies such as LEO satellites andwi-fi, the CAAC recommended governments investigate the best and quickest solutions to help overcome the lack of telecommunications services in remote communities.
Committee comment
5.64While not an explicit focus of the inquiry, evidence to the Committee outlined in stark relief the wide digital divide between remote Indigenous Australian communities and the rest of Australia. The lived reality of remote Indigenous Australian communities is a world away from the good intentions of Australian governments’ agreement to close the gap in digital inclusion between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians by 2026.
5.65Encouraging telecommunications companies to invest in regional communities is difficult enough given the relatively thin commercial opportunities: the task is all the harder in remote Indigenous communities where the opportunity for profit is negligible at best.
5.66The Australian Government has invested in remote mobile infrastructure through the MBSP and the RCP, including dedicated funding of $25 million for connectivity in Indigenous Australian communities across regional and central Australia. The Committee also notes the commitments made by the WA and NT governments. However, despite this investment, many remote communities continue to suffer poor connectivity and the social, health and economic consequences of it.
5.67Evidence to the inquiry indicates new technologies such as satellite‑based servicesand wi-fi mesh networks have the potential to open up telecommunications opportunities in remote communities. Challenges exist using these technologies, including congestion and maintaining privacy and security, however safeguards canbe built into the system’s architecture.
5.68In particular, the Committee shares witnesses’ genuine excitement about the potential applications that LEO satellite technology can offer remote Australia. The Committee notes theformation of the Government’s LEO Satellite Working Group, which has primary carriage of advice and recommendations on these issues, and urges the Government to expedite consideration of measures to improve connectivity in remote communities through this Working Group.
5.69The cost of these new telecommunications solutions, although borne by small, economically struggling communities, currently appears to be far more economical than the much higher costs of alternative connectiveness pathways, ultimately requiring heavy subsidisation anyway. Nevertheless, a reliable, cost‑effective andtruly mobile solution for residents, and for those visiting remote Australia, isyetto be identified.
5.70The Committee recommends the Australian Government investigate and, where appropriate, fund targeted, place-based solutions for providing reliable and secure access to telecommunications services in remote Indigenous communities, including, but not limited to:
- deployment of wi-fi mesh networks or wi-fi hotspots, and
- use of Low Earth Orbit satellite services.
- Further, recognising the continuing role for co-investment in physical terrestrial infrastructure to expand telecommunications coverage in regional rural, and, if feasible, to remote areas, the Committee encourages the Australian Government to work with relevant state and territory governments on new co-investment opportunities, particularly in very remote communities that suffer limited or no services. This should involve consultation with local governments, land councils, and other relevant organisations to identify new co-investment partners which may not have been involved in previous co-investment initiatives, but which may be able to provide telecommunications services in very remote communities.
5.72The Committee recommends the Australian Government work with state and territory governments to identify new opportunities and new partners for co-investments in mobile and digital infrastructure in very remote communities that have limited or no existing telecommunications services.
5.73The Committee recommends the Australian Government provide additional funding for government-led collection of data relating to mobile and digital connectivity, and digital inclusion more generally, in regional and remote Indigenous Australian communities.
5.74It is the Committee’s expectation that any programs or measures to improve connectivity in remote Indigenous Australian communities should, where possible, be co‑designed with representatives of those communities.