Who could have predicted that a political battle over the future of broadband could become so philosophical?

It's come down to a case of public versus private ownership of assets.

From the outset, the Australian government has seen its proposed National Broadband Network as a way of leveling the playing field for telecoms service provision.

By taking the infrastructure out of the hands of one player (Telstra), it means all service providers can access it on similar terms.

Of course, this approach does require the network itself to remain in public hands, but that's a relatively small price to pay for the benefits that consumers and businesses will receive.

But on the other side, the Opposition is fundamentally against this approach for the same reason.

It doesn't believe the government should be shelling out billions of tax payer dollars to build a national network. That's a job for the private sector.

The two views are fundamentally different, and the outcomes just as so.

If the Opposition has its way, the bulk of Australia's telecoms power will remain with Telstra. A hotchpotch of technologies will be used by various private players to extend existing networks, but there will be no consistent, national approach.

But if the Government's NBN is allowed to be built, it will change both those dynamics. We will have a single, consistent national network and Telstra's dominance will be curtailed forever.

This is a big issue for Australia, and one that will affect daily life for all citizens for decades.

Let's not let a philosophical argument get in the way.