|
UK White
Paper draws a blank?
| The
UK Government has reacted to the ongoing convergence of broadcasting,
telecomms and IT with the publication in December 2000 of its
long-awaited 'Communications White Paper' - which aims to keep
the UK at the forefront of the 'new economy', and the Government
focused in a blurring regulatory environment... |
 |
With the publication
of its Communications White Paper late last year, the UK government
has given notice of its regulatory intentions governing the telecomms,
broadcasting and publishing industries well into the new millennium.
From an industry perspective, the White Paper says nothing that
was not expected; in fact, according to Peter Striven, a Partner
at Baker and Mackenzie who heads up the firm's UK Telecoms Group,
it "indicated a steady-as-you-go approach and continues the main
trends that have been apparent in the telecomms industry for about
two or three years."
These are,
says Striven:
- A general
move towards deregulation;
- A move away from sector-specific regulation towards competition
law;
- And the establishment of an altogether 'lighter' regulatory environment.
A decent
first attempt
However, while the White Paper may not have satisfied the most ardent
industry observers, it does address the converging communications
industry and proposes many logical actions that should - if correctly
implemented - go a long way to putting the UK at the heart of the
global information society. Although many issues are covered, three
main ones stand out:
- The dropping of ownership restrictions on the ITV franchises -
which many have interpreted as giving the green light to a single,
unified commercial broadcaster, rather than dividing the UK's commercial
ITV energies equally between the two main players now, Carlton and
Granada. This would create the environment for a world leading commercial
broadcaster.
- The fact that the Government views the rollout of, and access
to, high-speed broadband networks as pivotal to the development
of the country.
- The formation of 'Ofcom', a unified regulatory body which will
merge the existing 'alphabet soup' of regulators.
Anxieties
remain
While the decision to drop the ownership restrictions for the ITV
franchises has met with much positive feedback, the Government's
plans for broadband access and the creation of Ofcom remain a cause
for concern. In relation to the development of a national broadband
network, the White Paper says: 'We will look for ways to build on
the private investment that is already being made in broadband and
consider whether public support is needed to help research and develop
new high-speed networks'.
This sounds
particularly ominous when pitched against the backdrop of current
private investments in broadband. Telewest has stated its desire
to pull out of an agreement with BT to co-operate on the unbundling
of BT's local loop, in favour of concentrating on its own established
customer base; and it is believed that NTL are expected to make
a similar decision. Were this situation to persist, the UK taxpayer
could end up shouldering a significant amount of the cost for the
development of a 'national broadband network' - despite an EU directive
enabling European governments to take a levy from the telecoms and
broadcasting industries to fund broadband. And this brings us conveniently
to the next point of concern: the formation of Ofcom.
Ironically,
one of the reasons that both Telewest and NTL - and an array of
other broadband companies - have lost their immediate impetus is
down to the highly ineffective way Oftel, the UK's telecomms regulator,
has spectacularly failed to create an authoritative environment
where broadband can flourish. The very real concern is that if a
regulator whose sole purpose is to regulate just one sector fails
to do so, what hope has a lumbering agency with a whole portfolio
of different responsibilities?
Further, the
paper suggests that Ofcom's powers would be largely analogous with
a combination of both the ITC and Oftel, with certain aspects of
the Competition Commission. This in itself seems like a good enough
idea, but it is imperative that the new regulator is not as toothless
as Oftel or as reliant on Government as the ITC, otherwise the giant
corporations will only need to intimidate one regulator, rather
than many.
And while it
makes sense to have a single regulator for a converging industry,
just filling it with staff from existing industry-specific regulators
will not be enough. The regulator must undergo an 'ideological'
shift in the way it views the market. It must now be seen as a whole
- rather than the aggregation of its constituent parts - and Ofcom
must understand the significance each new development will have
on the wider market.
The global
angle?
While the White Paper comprehensively deals with UK-specific regulation,
it fails to address a major problem associated with a converging
communications network: 'how to regulate content which is received
by UK networks but which originates overseas. Unfortunately, there
is no immediate answer to this problem.
However, it
is something that is being debated at the European level. So far,
two schools of thought have emerged. The first is to force content
providers to comply with the regulatory environment of the countries
where their content is received; the second involves closer regulatory
co-operation between EU member states.
Despite not
actively addressing the regulatory problems of an industry whose
products can traverse the world in second, the White Paper provides
the UK government the opportunity to enter the 'premier league'
of information economies. And at first sight, the fact that it draws
extensively on recent telecomms deregulation is a good thing.
However, ten
years ago the UK was a guiding light in telecoms deregulation and
now it is widely regarded as having fallen into the second division.
It's an old adage but one remains ever true: 'it takes more than
words'.
|