Financing and support for community telecommunications infrastructure providers
Sam Brown made this Official Information request to Crown Infrastructure Partners
This request has an unknown status. We're waiting for Sam Brown to read a recent response and update the status.
From: Sam Brown
Dear Crown Infrastructure Partners,
Under the Official Information Act 1982, I request:
1. Any analysis, business cases, or advice regarding CIP's potential role in supporting community-owned, locally operated, or smaller-scale telecommunications infrastructure providers in rural areas, including whether such support has been considered, proposed, or declined.
2. Any assessment of capital access barriers facing rural telecommunications infrastructure operators, including analysis of whether:
- Commercial banks adequately serve infrastructure financing needs in rural telecommunications
- Specialised or illiquid assets (such as telecommunications towers, point-to-point links, or rural network equipment) create financing barriers that prevent otherwise viable operators from accessing growth capital
- Crown infrastructure financing could address market failures where commercial lenders decline to finance rural telecommunications due to asset liquidity concerns rather than business viability concerns
3. Any advice to Ministers or shareholding Ministers regarding CIP's strategic direction for rural connectivity infrastructure, specifically:
- Whether CIP's mandate includes supporting non-incumbent, community-based, or regionally focused connectivity providers
- Whether government strategy assumes satellite services adequately address rural connectivity needs, rendering terrestrial infrastructure investment unnecessary
- What role, if any, CIP envisions for supporting locally operated alternatives to satellite or incumbent-operated services
4. Any assessment of competitive dynamics where well-capitalised providers (including satellite operators with substantial backing) compete against capital-constrained local operators who cannot access equivalent financing despite potentially offering superior local service, resilience benefits, or community economic outcomes.
5. Any analysis of whether Crown investment or financing support for community telecommunications infrastructure would align with:
- Regional economic development objectives
- Infrastructure resilience and redundancy goals
- Retention of technical capability and employment in regions
- Competition and consumer choice objectives
6. Any advice on mechanisms through which community infrastructure providers could access Crown financing, co-investment, or credit enhancement, or alternatively, documented reasons why such mechanisms are not considered appropriate or necessary.
Context: There appears to be a structural financing gap where rural telecommunications infrastructure providers cannot access commercial capital due to asset illiquidity concerns, while government has reduced/removed direct infrastructure funding. I am seeking to understand whether Crown entities have assessed this gap and what strategy, if any, exists to support community infrastructure providers in rural connectivity markets.
Yours faithfully,
Sam Brown
From: Info
Hello Mr Brown
Thank you for your email and OIA request. Please find information regarding your OIA attached.
Kind regards
Tanya
-----Original Message-----
From: Sam Brown <[FOI #33448 email]>
Sent: Tuesday, 6 January 2026 8:04 pm
To: Info <[Crown Infrastructure Partners request email]>
Subject: Official Information request - Financing and support for community telecommunications infrastructure providers
[You don't often get email from [FOI #33448 email]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentific... ]
Dear Crown Infrastructure Partners,
Under the Official Information Act 1982, I request:
1. Any analysis, business cases, or advice regarding CIP's potential role in supporting community-owned, locally operated, or smaller-scale telecommunications infrastructure providers in rural areas, including whether such support has been considered, proposed, or declined.
2. Any assessment of capital access barriers facing rural telecommunications infrastructure operators, including analysis of whether:
- Commercial banks adequately serve infrastructure financing needs in rural telecommunications
- Specialised or illiquid assets (such as telecommunications towers, point-to-point links, or rural network equipment) create financing barriers that prevent otherwise viable operators from accessing growth capital
- Crown infrastructure financing could address market failures where commercial lenders decline to finance rural telecommunications due to asset liquidity concerns rather than business viability concerns
3. Any advice to Ministers or shareholding Ministers regarding CIP's strategic direction for rural connectivity infrastructure, specifically:
- Whether CIP's mandate includes supporting non-incumbent, community-based, or regionally focused connectivity providers
- Whether government strategy assumes satellite services adequately address rural connectivity needs, rendering terrestrial infrastructure investment unnecessary
- What role, if any, CIP envisions for supporting locally operated alternatives to satellite or incumbent-operated services
4. Any assessment of competitive dynamics where well-capitalised providers (including satellite operators with substantial backing) compete against capital-constrained local operators who cannot access equivalent financing despite potentially offering superior local service, resilience benefits, or community economic outcomes.
5. Any analysis of whether Crown investment or financing support for community telecommunications infrastructure would align with:
- Regional economic development objectives
- Infrastructure resilience and redundancy goals
- Retention of technical capability and employment in regions
- Competition and consumer choice objectives
6. Any advice on mechanisms through which community infrastructure providers could access Crown financing, co-investment, or credit enhancement, or alternatively, documented reasons why such mechanisms are not considered appropriate or necessary.
Context: There appears to be a structural financing gap where rural telecommunications infrastructure providers cannot access commercial capital due to asset illiquidity concerns, while government has reduced/removed direct infrastructure funding. I am seeking to understand whether Crown entities have assessed this gap and what strategy, if any, exists to support community infrastructure providers in rural connectivity markets.
Yours faithfully,
Sam Brown
-------------------------------------------------------------------
This is an Official Information request made via the FYI website.
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #33448 email]
Is [Crown Infrastructure Partners request email] the wrong address for Official Information requests to Crown Infrastructure Partners? If so, please contact us using this form:
https://fyi.org.nz/change_request/new?bo...
Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:
https://fyi.org.nz/help/officers
If you find this service useful as an Official Information officer, please ask your web manager to link to us from your organisation's OIA or LGOIMA page.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
hide quoted sections
Things to do with this request
- Add an annotation (to help the requester or others)
- Download a zip file of all correspondence (note: this contains the same information already available above).
Offensive? Unsuitable?
Requests for personal information and vexatious requests are not considered valid requests for Official Information (read more).
If you believe this request is not suitable, you can report it for attention by the site administrators
Report this requestAct on what you've learnt
Similar requests
Impact of government policy on rural telecommunications market structure
To Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment by Sam Brown
Predatory pricing and market concentration risks in rural telecommunications
To Commerce Commission by Sam Brown
National security implications of foreign-controlled satellite communications
To Christopher Luxon by Sam Brown
Spectrum allocation policy for rural broadband and fixed wireless access
To Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment by Sam Brown
Fiscal analysis of rural connectivity approaches and long-term cost implications
To The Treasury by Sam Brown
