Look up "Australia NBN". I think you'll find plenty of articles and discussion on the points you raise.
In a nutshell:
Govt forms a company in which it initially holds 100% shares - it's called the National Broadband Network (NBN)
NBN borrows capital on open market to fund construction. Borrowing guaranteed by Govt.
NBN uses income from network to pay back debt as network is rolled out.
Success of project is guaranteed by granting a monopoly for fixed communications network to NBN co.
Project: The three technologies.
NBN lays FTTH to all premises reachable in towns with population > 1000.
High speed fixed wireless is provided to more sparsely populated areas.
High speed duplex satellite is provided to remote populations.
NBN co. cannot retail services - only wholesale to ISPs and other large users (utilities?)
Retail service providers may not own or compete with NBN co fixed infrastructure. No vertical integration allowed.
After project is complete (10+ years) Govt. sells off its holding of NBN co shares. Shares to be sold at a commercial rate that recoups investment + profit for Govt outlay.
Political views (abridged and rough)
Left and centre-left, and centre-right, "brilliant, finally a government doing something that needs to be done"
Right and far right, "communism, pure and unadulterated socialist attack on the freedoms of all"
Technophiles, "OMG finally something nearly right, but the interfaces aren't quite right and opportunities are being missed."
Rupert Murdoch, "this is a direct attack on my media, cable tv, telephony empire. Change the government now".
Opposition parties, "it's too expensive, under costed, inefficient and we'd do the same thing but not as good, but cheaper and anyway you only want it to watch porn and I have an ipad anyway, so there."
It is generally agreed that to attempt the same project in the USA would be laughable. Something about the constitution et al.