Regulator's Conference

ganam

The grandly-titled 'Global Symposium for Regulators' was held last week in Geneva, organised by the International Telecommunications Union.

The ITU has posted up some of the papers and speeches and there's interesting reading, mainly on licensing and spectrum.

http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/treg/Events/Seminars/2004/GSR04/documents.html

The ITU has also published the results of a consultation on 'Best Practice Guidelines for the Promotion of Low Cost Broadband and Internet Connectivity'. Regulator's were asked to submit up to five regulatory principles.

ComReg proposed:

1. Foster all access technologies equally: different technical solutions may be required
for different areas
2. Supply side regulation should be tailored to encourage sustainable competition
through infrastructure investment whilst recognising the need for operators to
overcome barriers to entry into a market dominated by access costs
3. Create incentives for the incumbent to roll out broadband whilst guarding against
foreclosure
4. Ensure adequate and cost effective backhaul and associated facilities are in place
5. Regulatory intervention should support consumer demand not just operator supply
initiatives.

Full response is at [PDF 16K}
http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/treg/Events/Seminars/2004/GSR04/contributions/ireland.pdf

Other countries responses are at:
http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/treg/Events/Seminars/2004/GSR04/consultation.html
(At the bottom of the page)

Slutmonkey57b

Classic stuff. Ofcom's document is all about removing access bottlenecks (LLU) and the like, while ComReg's waffle is all about "set(ting) pricing principles to ensure the incumbents can make a regulated return on investment sufficient to maintain the network and have the incentive to invest...." Also note thatOfcom's waffle is a page long and consists mostly of "Force em to open up, and if they don't like it, well, they'll just take it harder next time." Whereas Comreg waffle on for 3 pages and come to the conclusion that, really, it's not fair on the incumbent really, and sure, and they a wonderful bunch of fellas really.

NOTE TO COMREG: READ THE SEC FILING. EIRCOM ARE NOT MAINTAINING THE NETWORK. THEY ARE RIPPING US OFF.
ComReg's take:
"..it is likely that customers who have experienced ISDN will be early adopters of broadband".
".. ensure that seamless migration between suppliers is available..."
"NRA's should ensure that business cases take into account all [colo/LLU charges at cost rather than retail] and should not allow the incumbent to gain from unregulated/lightly regulated inputs."

My Take:
"it is likely that customers who have experienced ISDN will be ****ING DESPERATE to cut down their astronomical phone bill, thank you very much."
"What, like eircom cutting off your CPS at every opportunity, or changing your account number whenever you change the services on your line that the CPS operater cannot order on your behalf?"
"That's it, Cerberus, the three-headed poodle of Comreg, is going to sort out those "onerous retailbased charges" ANY MINUTE NOW. Just as soon as he gets his evening biscuits. Tremble ye, almighty Dr Nolan, the forces of Don Quixote shall rain down upon thee until thine head be enbaldened by the polishings of brimstone."

eircomtribunal

Same impression here.

I'd like to invite/urge everybody who wants to understand the background of ComReg's abysmal failure ( We should never forget the mind-boggling "achievement" to bring a young, educated, English-speaking, "Northerly" country to second last place on the EU Broadband league.) to read the latest blog on Comwreck.com: "It's the Regulator, Stupid!", especially the bits quoted from Sean Mac Cann's article about sectoral regulators.
The quote starts below this picture.
P.