Australia's tech sector could be forgiven for regretting the welcomes it gave Malcolm Turnbull to the communications ministry in 2013. The Attorney-General's Department, in fact, seems to exercise more effective ministerial control over the telecommunications industry than its own minister.

In 2013 it was argued that Turnbull understood his portfolio, having chaired ISP OzEmail in the 1990s, and he would surely be less combative than senator Stephen "red underpants" Conroy.

The communications sector in particular felt the country was finally ending its long history of hapless and ineffective communications ministers. Aside from Michael Lee's brief tenure (1993-96), few would recall any notable successes among Ralph Willis (1988-1990), Kim Beazley (1990-91), John Kerin (1991), Graham Richardson (1991-92), Bob Collins (1992-93), Richard "world's biggest Luddite" Alston (1996-2003), Daryl Williams (2003-04), or Helen Coonan (2004-07).

Today, Turnbull looks like just another in the long list of minions and sidekicks to inhabit the portfolio, with his preference for industry consultation over telco legislation ignored by parliamentary scheduling.

With the publication of the Federal Government's legislative schedule for the spring parliamentary sessions, it's clear that consultation over the telecommunications national security legislation will be brief. That's in spite of a recent sixty-second assurance by Turnbull that the government would consult with industry.

The legislation – the Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2015 – is onerous and (as is seen in the wash-up from similar laws in New Zealand) carries significant risks of unintended consequences. It requires carriers to provide documentation of their security arrangements if requested by the Secretary of the Attorney-General's Department. That department is not yet able to provide clear information about data retention implementation.

The laws also allow the department to instruct carriers about their security arrangements, in spite of it exhibiting no suitable skills (in a separate scandal surrounding letters sent from a dangerous individual to George Brandis, the department has shown it isn't even skilled in the use of Microsoft Excel).

The possible unintended consequences of the bill could, as looks likely in New Zealand, include accidentally stalling any rollout of software-defined networking, since carriers would have to get the okay from the department for changes to their internal networks.

It should have been easy for a minister to argue against the legislation in Cabinet, and to at least get the government to actually meet its promised consultation. Instead, as happened with data retention and Internet site-blocking, Turnbull's previously-stated opinions and his assumed relationship with the tech sector have come to nought.

From opposition, Turnbull strongly opposed the notion of any kind of internet filtering, and in government, he capitulated. From opposition, he strongly opposed the opposition Australian Labor Party's (ALP's) proposed communications data retention regime, and in government, he capitulated. In government, he promised consultation over the telecommunications national security laws, and in government, he capitulated.

He's been unable to carry out the Prime Directive of most telecommunications ministers, the at-all-costs protection of Telstra, having tried not once but twice to intervene in ACCC access price deliberations and avoid a wholesale price cut.

Even regulatory relief for a sector assaulted by three intrusive laws has been beyond Turnbull's influence in cabinet. The job of explaining that was left to the country's de-facto communications minister, Attorney-General George Brandis, whose department told The Register that the government has already cut the regulatory burden on the sector.

Turnbull's only demonstrable success in government has been in executing one instruction: Tony Abbott's notorious demand that he demolish Labor's National Broadband Network.

Turnbull isn't the only one on the outer: Australia's tech sector, having been defeated on telecommunications data retention by the spooks and site-filtering by the copyright sector, has now had its concerns about telecommunications security largely ignored. The history of abject humiliation for Australia's tech sector therefore continues. ®