Broadband deal illegal?

Written By: - Date published: 7:08 pm, November 1st, 2010 - 10 comments
Categories: interweb, national, telecommunications - Tags: , ,

Interesting snippet in The Herald today:

Web body says fibre deal may be illegal

The Government risks riding roughshod over international obligations with plans to give investors in its ultra-fast fibre broadband network a 10-year regulatory holiday, according to an internet users advocacy group.

InternetNZ has raised concerns about the regulatory forbearance period breaching international legal commitments after seeking an opinion from Wellington public policy lawyer Michael Wigley. …

Wigley said that under the World Trade Organisation’s General Agreement on Trade Services (GATS), New Zealand, like other countries, must have a telecommunications regulator “separate from, and not accountable to, any supplier of basic telecommunications services.

Stephen Joyce denies that there is an issue (well he would, wouldn’t he):

Joyce said he was well aware of the obligations under the international agreements and was confident the measures being taken were consistent with these obligations.

He said the regulatory arrangements were not a “regulatory holiday” and that fibre investors would be subject to significant regulation

So when is a regulatory holiday not a regulatory holiday? Clare Curran’s take over at Red Alert is pretty blunt:

Joyce has basically responded saying he doesn’t care.

He is using public ignorance of the complex nature of the government’s $1.5 billion ultrafast broadband scheme to mask his disregard for expert criticism and concerns about the project.

The National Government’s willingness to roll over to the demands of parties putting themselves forward as partners in the ultrafast broadband networks is the latest example of disregard for NZ law, legal trade obligations and public scrutiny.

I’ve referred this to MFAT. And I put out a release on this this afternoon. Here it is.

Perhaps it doesn’t really matter. At the rate Joyce is moving, two years after the major 2008 election promises, he’ll finally get all this ultra-fast fibre broadband installed about two weeks after it has become technologically obsolete…

10 comments on “Broadband deal illegal? ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Draco T Bastard 1
    1 November 2010 at 7:14 pm

    Does it really matter? They’re just wasting more time and money trying to prop up the failed privatisation experiment and it doesn’t matter which party gets in government. Subsidising private profit at taxpayers expense in the delusional hope that it’ll start working after 3 decades of it not doing so.

    Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

    • Vicky32 1.1
      1 November 2010 at 8:10 pm

      “Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.”
      Exactly!
      Deb

    • Bunji 1.2
      2 November 2010 at 9:02 am

      Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

      – Albert Einstein

      I think that’s the quote you’re looking for.

  2. come get some 2
    1 November 2010 at 9:14 pm

    Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

    also applies with his (and previous governments) transport policies

    Captcha: disturbing

  3. come get some 3
    1 November 2010 at 9:14 pm

    Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

    also applies with his (and previous governments) transport policies

  4. Libertyscott 4
    1 November 2010 at 10:28 pm

    It’s a red herring.

    New Zealand has two telecommunications regulators separate and not accountable to suppliers (Telecommunications Commissioner and the Commerce Commission). I was working with the Negotiating Group on Basic Telecommunications of the WTO in the 1990s, New Zealand was covered then and is more than well covered now.

    Besides, it only matters if another WTO signatory country wants to take NZ to a dispute panel over this, which is extraordinarily unlikely.

    • Bunji 4.1
      2 November 2010 at 9:00 am

      In the immortal words of the House of Pain:
      “It ain’t a crime if you don’t get caught”?
      Is that the attitude Libertyscott? Never mind the consumers who get a raw deal from monopolies and the like that those regulatory authorities are meant to protect against.

  5. Libertyscott 5
    2 November 2010 at 10:55 pm

    I was merely pointing out that it is not a breach of NZ’s WTO obligations. I’m completely opposed to the government’s broadband policy, so I’m hardly going to defend it.

Links to post