Give proper control back to the state

Bard

Yes... another poll... this time it's a simple YES or NO... no room for "UNDECIDED" or "DON'T KNOW/CARE" - if you fall into one of those categories... DON'T VOTE!

--

The question is: do you agree with the following statement? (YES or NO)

"The Government, on behalf of the state, should buy back the telephone network infrastructure, including telephone lines and exchanges, from eircom plc., - infrastructure that the Irish public originally paid for through taxes, etc.,- effectively making eircom 'just another telecom company' who would then have to rent this infrastructure from the state in exactly the same way as Esat or any other licensed operator."

G'wan... YES or NO?

hmmm

No

1. All they have to do is impose effective regulation
2. Public Monopolies tend to provide awful service anyway
3. It's not worth a third of what it was sold for
4. Someday they're going to have to lay off a third of their staff, and I don't want to be the one paying their redundancy.

SkepticOne

I voted yes for the following reasons.

1. If we are forced to have single 'last mile' infrastructure (and it looks like we are for the forseeable future) then it shoud be under democratic control.

2. The existing infrastructure being exploited by Eircom was never built with the intention that it should be used for the benefit of private interests.

3. When it was being built up, no other organisation was allowed to build up competing infrastructure. Eircom got a complete monopoly on a plate.

4. What is being proposed is not an Eircom under public ownership but just the state-built infrastructure. Eircom would still have good access to this infrastructure (greater than they are giving others now) but would not be able to block others from doing so.

Bard

You got my meaning in one, SkepticOne.

I, for one, don't believe that, in a country of this small size, the basic telecommunications network should be out of state hands.

P R O F A N I T Y

No
i hate to inform you guys of this, but eircom was alot worse under the goverment, Zero investment. adsl trials didnt start untill it was sold.

The goverment have no intention of investing in this type of thing,
4 billion pounds could build one excellent fibre ring connecting every major irish city and split it up so we could all have cable internet

seamus

And that's exactly what I've been thinkin since the whole blackout talk started. Eircom having control over the local loops is like stena line having say over who sails on the Irish sea - it's fúcking ridiculous. Because Eircom own them, they can do whatever the fúck they like with them, and no-one can stop them, what were the government thinking when they let eircom have the loops?!!

This is a cause for more worthwhile than the blackout(which is still the best idea at the moment). Could you imagine - all telco's paying standard tax for use of the lines, which in turn is used for their upkeep and upgrading, and everyone in Ireland eventually gets cheap, uncapped ADSL(maybe even T1!). I'm salivating here at the prospect. This is definitely something we should fight for!!!

SkepticOne

Originally posted by P R O F A N I T Y
No
i hate to inform you guys of this, but eircom was alot worse under the goverment, Zero investment. adsl trials didnt start untill it was sold.

Not quite true. ADSL trials were started in 1998, a year before privatisation. In my experience, Eircom was much the same in recent years prior to privatisation. Again, what is being proposed is not the nationalisation of Eircom but just the infrastructure. If Eircom, Esat or whoever wants to invest in ADSL they would be able to do so on a fair basis. The nationalised infrastructure would simply be controlled by a state body but OLOs could come along and install innovative products without being blocked or delayed because they represented competitive threats to Eircom.

The goverment have no intention of investing in this type of thing, 4 billion pounds could build one excellent fibre ring connecting every major irish city and split it up so we could all have cable internet

There are several fibre rings in Dublin but they have nothing to do with residential internet access. You have to get a leased line to access them.

P R O F A N I T Y

Hmm yes but they were just piss takes, like ennis.

the situation here for internet access has changed, its gothen alot cheaper compared to what it was and is set to get abite cheaper again will a new dual billing system for internet calls.
still not good enough.

I fully agree, with the *idea* behind this. i think it was koreo (or japan) that bought al lthe exchanges back from private hands and supplied broadband. it worked great and now they are the e hub of asia. But i just dont believe the goverment would have any interest in providing a service level like they did.

Also, the fibre costs money to split, 4 billion i think then could have enough left over to split it. its not that easy to get a fibre leased line in dublin actually, i know esat do some but eircom mostly do a form of SDSL or HDSL (afaik) Colt i think do fibre leased lines but dont quote me on that.

SkepticOne

Originally posted by P R O F A N I T Y
Hmm yes but they were just piss takes, like ennis.

the situation here for internet access has changed, its gothen alot cheaper compared to what it was and is set to get abite cheaper again will a new dual billing system for internet calls.
still not good enough.

And they have stopped taking the piss now?

I fully agree, with the *idea* behind this. i think it was koreo (or japan) that bought al lthe exchanges back from private hands and supplied broadband. it worked great and now they are the e hub of asia. But i just dont believe the goverment would have any interest in providing a service level like they did.

It was the *idea" you were being asked to vote on, not the political feasibility.

Also, the fibre costs money to split, 4 billion i think then could have enough left over to split it. its not that easy to get a fibre leased line in dublin actually, i know esat do some but eircom mostly do a form of SDSL or HDSL (afaik) Colt i think do fibre leased lines but dont quote me on that.

Yes. So it makes sense to use the local loop infrastructure rather than install expensive leased lines to homes.

sceptre

Originally posted by hmmm

4. Someday they're going to have to lay off a third of their staff, and I don't want to be the one paying their redundancy.

The poll's specifically talking about the infrastructure - not the company. So the redundancy issue wouldn't be one for the government.

(unless you meant that the money paid for the basic infrastructure would be funnelled into a big redundancy payout, in which case, I misunderstood your post)

hmmm

Originally posted by sceptre

The poll's specifically talking about the infrastructure - not the company. So the redundancy issue wouldn't be one for the government.

You need people to run and upkeep an infrastructure

SkepticOne

Originally posted by hmmm
You need people to run and upkeep an infrastructure

Very true and Eircom would probably foist their former TE staff on civil service grades into this thereby absolving them of the problem of redundancy. This would have to be combatted. Nevertheless, since we are almost all Eircom customers in one form or another, either directly or indirectly, and since Eircom have the monopoly, this redunancy cost will be fully passed on to us anyway.

sceptre

Originally posted by hmmm


You need people to run and upkeep an infrastructure

Guess I didn't misread your post then. Of course you need people to run and upkeep an infrastructure. But if Eircom aren't maintaining a resource they no longer own, any redundancies are an issue for that private company that the state no longer owns. If Eircom are maintaining a resource that they no longer own they are still a private company and any redundancies are an issue for that private company that the state no longer owns. Still irrelevant then - it wouldn't afect a state that has just bought back the actual phone lines and exchanges, leaving Eircom in the position of an OLO.

Obviously after this potential redundancy, many ex-Eircom staff would end up working for any company the state might form to maintain the network (unless Eircom did win this maintenance contract) (I doubt the government would be dumb enough to actually bring them into the civil service) but the remainder would be Eircom's problem.

And for Eircom engineers that failed to find employment we as a state would be stuck with paying benefits (I'm not debating this point, you're entirely correct here)

P R O F A N I T Y

Originally posted by SkepticOne

And they have stopped taking the piss now?It was the *idea" you were being asked to vote on, not the political feasibility.
Yes. So it makes sense to use the local loop infrastructure rather than install expensive leased lines to homes.

I disagrea, better to spend 4 billion building a new a modren infacture then and old and out dated one.

it makes sense to provide boardband now over it, but not to buy it.

So no, i dont support the idea of spending 4 billion of and old broadband system, only to have to spend millions more to develope it when you can have a new one at a faction of the cost.

hmmm

I don't know where this buyback thing is coming from. Eircom are required to give competitors access to the last mile. Required - we don't need to 'own' it, the EU has said it should be supplied at cost to competitors. The problem is that our regulator has very little bark and no bite.

If we had
- a strong regulator
- government commitment

we would have had LLU. After that Eircon are irrelevent, they can keep offering their mindless 'services' and the consumer could simply up and go to a competitor. Buying back the infrastructure is an expensive alternative to replacing the ODTR with something useful.

nahdoic

Originally posted by hmmm
No

1. All they have to do is impose effective regulation
2. Public Monopolies tend to provide awful service anyway
3. It's not worth a third of what it was sold for
4. Someday they're going to have to lay off a third of their staff, and I don't want to be the one paying their redundancy.

I voted no. Totally agree with hmmm here.

SkepticOne

Originally posted by hmmm
I don't know where this buyback thing is coming from. Eircom are required to give competitors access to the last mile. Required - we don't need to 'own' it, the EU has said it should be supplied at cost to competitors. The problem is that our regulator has very little bark and no bite.

I don't think the buyback would ever really happen. The government will never spend billions of public money communications infrastructure, either buying back the current stuff or creating new infrastructure so the discussion is a bit academic. However, I believe the current infrastructure is grossly undervalued. If the government were to build such infrastructure it would cost far more than what Valentia is paying for Eircom.

I believe it is the infrastructure that Valentia is interested in and they are taking advantage of the downturn in telecoms stocks and the weakness of the current board to get hold of it. The weakness of the current board and staff are also dragging the market capitalisation down below that of an unencumbered Infrastruture

I've never been a fan of regulated monopolies. The monopoly is always one step ahead due to greater access to information. It also has the ability to lobby powerfully. One of the points they argued with the IrelandOffline delagation, was that it was unfair that they were the only telco being regulated and that they were continually being held back due to red tape etc. It is likely that they are doing the same with politicians.

I am certainly in favour of more power to the regulator given that the current setup with one company owning the local loop is unlikely to change. But I also think that the infrastructure should never have been privatised in the first place. I think that the situation will always be lopsided for the forseable future.

Oak3

yes.

Kix

No. Effective regulation is what's required. Spend a fraction of the money a buy back would cost and achieve the same result.

K

disConnected

Well, I voted 'yes', although I am not completely sure, as most state owned companies/operations are run quite inefficiently.
Oh while we are at this point: Has anybocy heard anything from Mary O'Rourke lately?

Shinji

It's a Railtrack-esque situation. The British government has learned the hard way that giving private companies control of vital national infrastructure is utterly ludicrous, because then you get this horrific conflict between shareholder value and profits on the one hand, and the good of the nation and the provision of a service on the other.

The basic infrastructure - the railways, the roads, and wires in the ground - should all remain state-controlled. Then they're not meant to turn a profit, only to provide a service for the people of the nation. The services which RUN on those rails, roads or wires should be private enterprise based in order to foster healthy competition and secure private investment in public systems.

It's a very simple system. Britain screwed it all up over a decade ago; Ireland as per usual followed blindly on the telecoms issue, and is now paying the price. The opportunity exists for the government to undo their mistake before it's too late. Eircell is gone, spun off into a proper private enterprise, just as it should be. Now remove the infrastructure from Eircom, demote them to the role of telecommunications provider, and get the country's telecoms infrastructure back on the road.

(Not, of course, that I expect any cosy complacent Irish government to have the balls to do this...)

hmmm

I would imagine the prospect of Aer Lingus going bankrupt is of more importance to her right now

dahamsta

I'm not sure what to think to be honest with you. There are so many pro's and con's with both, it's hard to make a decision. Or, to put it another way, in true Irish tradition - NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO WE'RE SCREWED!

I'm going to leave my vote for a few days...

adam

pork99

Yes I agree - good idea - most effective way of creating a "level playing field" for competing OLOs

therefore it will never happen, its now eircom's train set - no one else gets to play

rickoshea

The Government would not be allowed to buy Eircom. The privatisation of the telcos was instigated by the EU. No government is allowed to give financial aid to any public sector (or former public sector) company, unless such aid is also offered to private sector companies.

There have been the odd 'loans' made by Governments but they have to get permission from EU to do it.

But there must be a way around this. Maybe if the government set up its own telco and 'leased' the lines from Eircom. If this leads to a situation where most of the Eircom's revenue depends on the public telco, then they are caught by the b0ll0cks!!!

Not that simple I know, but there must be better ideas along these lines out there..

Shinji

The Government would not be allowed to buy Eircom. The privatisation of the telcos was instigated by the EU. No government is allowed to give financial aid to any public sector (or former public sector) company, unless such aid is also offered to private sector companies.

Actually this isn't strictly true. There's nothing that I know of to prevent the government from taking over and maintaining the infrastructure - I could be wrong here, but as long as they make access to the infrastructure available to all comers at even prices, it's well within EU directives. The EU calls for free competition in the telecoms market, which doesn't necessarily mean private ownership of the copper...

Bard

Originally posted by rickoshea
The Government would not be allowed to buy Eircom.

Buying Eircom is not in question here. If you read my first post properly you'd know that.

SkepticOne

If I might be so bold as to generalise about some of the 'No' answers. There seem to be two main categories.

1. Those who think effective regulation is the key.
2. Those who believe the Government can't or would not buy back the infrastructure. (this is more dealing with the feasibility rather than the desirability of the proposition.)

Personally, I would be very happy if (1) were to arise. The need for the government to purchase the infrastructure would be greatly diminished.

There does not seem to be anyone who believes that the key lies in giving more power to Eircom over its own infrastructure and cutting out all this regulatory "red tape" that is holding back Eircom from providing better services to its customers. This is Eircom's line but it is surprising that noone agrees with it. There's normally one or two

NeilF

Originally posted by SkepticOne
If I might be so bold as to generalise about some of the 'No' answers. There seem to be two main categories.

1. Those who think effective regulation is the key.
2. Those who believe the Government can't or would not buy back the infrastructure. (this is more dealing with the feasibility rather than the desirability of the proposition.)

Personally, I would be very happy if (1) were to arise. The need for the government to purchase the infrastructure would be greatly diminished.

The biggest problem is that everything the ODTR does can be appealed to the courts, holding everything up. The market moves so fast that by the time the courts are finished no one cares about the outcome anymore. Meteor was tied up in the courts for a good while, was it not?

As the telcos, in general, don't seem to have any sense of fair-play in respecting the decision of the ODTR I think she needs almost dictatorial powers to make them see sense. After all, is the ODTR not more knowledgable to make the decisions than a judge?

If anything, it is the ODTR who should go to court to force compliance with an order!

dahamsta

If anything, it is the ODTR who should go to court to force compliance with an order! [/QUOTE]

Too true. Isn't the arrogance of Eircom just astounding? How have they gotten away with this for so long? How have they hidden it from the public? God knows, I've been ranting about them for years now.

I Told You So.

adam

Giblet

I think it's a matter of making this ordeal more of a public affair.
Maybe then people would know what is happening,
And maybe then *something* will happen.
I think it's shocking that nobody* has a say in the running
of our nations biggest companys, especially one that effects
everyone.


*besides the obvious cretins