I have related some details of Stuart Robert’s history of dodgy behaviour previously, including his massive internet charges, which he told Fairfax Media was because he used 300Gb of data, far exceeding his 50Gb limit for his 4G connection1. However, there are numerous examples of plans for 4G home internet connections. They seem to be mostly about $2-$3 a day for 200Gb-250Gb, much less than Robert’s average ~$60 a day.
Assistant Treasurer Stuart Robert has now paid back nearly $38,000 to cover his unusually high internet bills. These bills ran to as much as $2,800, but averaged about $1,850 per month, for internet access at his home on the Gold Coast. Initially, he had blamed “connectivity issues” because he was located “a significant distance from the telephone exchange resulting in poor broadband internet connectivity … At the time a 4G home Wifi internet connection was the only way to receive reliable and stable internet access”1. This does not seem to make sense.
There seem to be only three explanations for Robert’s enormous internet bill, and they are:
- He was being gouged by his internet provider, and as the taxpayer was paying for it, it is us who are being gouged. We need to know the name of his ISP.
- He has an interest in his internet provider and it was simply gouging the taxpayer, and Robert was benefiting from that gouging. We need to know the name of his ISP.
- He was being charged such an amount because he is running a business from home. We need to know the name of his ISP.
Which one is it? Robert and his wife are involved in a religious organisation that produces streaming videos and subscription TV channel. Could it be that was the cause of the 250Gb data excess?