Flat rate in 6-8 months ???

Fmcgrath

Why on earth would Mary O rourke have the Flat rate amendment to the bill withdrawn !!! why???...........one can only guess. There goes my vote to FF.
Is it really realsitic to expect a 56k flat rate offering in about 6-8 months time as some one said in an earlier thread??

On a side issue...I have a few weeks ago stolen Tizlox's sig and use it in all private and work emails, this really gets people asking questions......as usual Eircom thrive on people's innocent ignorance of the fact that they are been shafted. I reccomend that all Ireland offline members use this sig (If they aren't already) Jaysus I wouldnt even mind printing up a few banners or leaflets and posting them outside Eircom HQ and on lamposts.

"Amount you spend staying online 24/7 for 30days on eircoms 56k subscription service - €720.60
Amount a british user spends staying online 24/7 for a month on BT's 56k subscription service - £20 "

longword

Originally posted by Fmcgrath
Is it really realsitic to expect a 56k flat rate offering in about 6-8 months time as some one said in an earlier thread??

No. There is EU legislation planned for that 6-8 month timeframe. We will likely have to wait quite a while longer before the benefits are felt. They missed the EU mandated LLU deadline by a margin of over a year for example. If we're relying on that route, we might have FRIACO in time for the next Olympics.

Dangger

http://www.newsbytes.com/news/01/172548.html

"29 Nov 2001 - "Definitive" E.U. laws governing the Internet will be on the agenda when the E.U. presidency passes to Spain next month."


"The directives on "universal service" and "access" and "interconnection" are intended to increase Internet penetration throughout Europe. Specifically a legal context for flat-rate Internet pricing will be created. "There is actually less competition in the E.U. for flat-rate and broadband Internet services than there was two years ago," says Scott Smith, director of Internet strategies, Europe at the Yankee Group in London. "

timod

I really hate to be critical of Jim Higgins, as he really did a great job, but he was very easily fobbed off by the minister. It was he that withdrew the amendment, not MO'R. (based on the minister telling him that everything would be ok) - so you can't let the blame rest entirely with the minister.

(jeez, I'm being very fair aren't I...)

Just wondering...

In the meetings that IOFFL had with the Department of Public Enterprise, and the ODTR, was this European Legislation brought up?

If not, why did the DPE not mention it until the very end of the debate yesterday?

Tim

Dangger

In the meetings that IOFFL had with the Department of Public Enterprise, and the ODTR, was this European Legislation brought up?

No, but I am awaiting confirmation from the ODTR as to their mentioning of technology neutral legislation in our recent meeting and if this legislation is the same.

Yoda

Originally posted by timod
I really hate to be critical of Jim Higgins, as he really did a great job, but he was very easily fobbed off by the minister. It was he that withdrew the amendment, not MO'R. (based on the minister telling him that everything would be ok) - so you can't let the blame rest entirely with the minister.

She hit him with it only when his Amendment was discussed. He'd never heard of it before -- and neither had we. Now, if he'd had presence of mind he might have thought, as we did, OK, give us the little bit of that ahead of the approval of the EU legislation. But in the moment, given the time pressures and also her sending her aides to go fetch it, well, if he thought of it, it'd be pretty much l'esprit de l'escalier.

sceptre

Originally posted by Yoda

But in the moment, given the time pressures and also her sending her aides to go fetch it, well, if he thought of it, it'd be pretty much l'esprit de l'escalier.

Think that's fair to say.

If the impending EU legislation doesn't sort it, one could be of the opinion that the Minister was misleading the House (not that that hadn't already occurred in the morning session).

timod

Agreed, caught off gaurd a liitle. Still credit to him for coming up with some very good proposals.

Also, nobody has mentioned that he did manage to get in the bit about affordable access (although modified slightly)
(anybody have the exact text?)

Yoda

I mentioned it in my first of three posts on the Communications Bill. http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?threadid=48613

timod

oh yeah:

"encouraging access to the internet at reasonable cost to users"
instead of:
"promoting affordable internet access"
I've read so much legislation, eu and ie, as well as media reports at this stage, I gets a little confussed....


Anyway, can this encouragement mean that the new commission can step in and take an active roll in getting flat rate for us, as opposed to legally mandating it?

If they don't try to get flat rate for us, will the commission itself be in breach of the act? Stretching it a bit, I know...

sceptre

Stretching it a bit, certainly. But they will have a brief and a mandate to promote it