<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Mark Newton wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:93105A2A-92F8-46D4-A128-ABA9C36E2A7A@internode.com.au"
type="cite"><br>
<div>It's often interesting to examine these kinds of statements by
looking at </div>
<div>what wasn't said, as well as what was.</div>
</blockquote>
Indeed<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:93105A2A-92F8-46D4-A128-ABA9C36E2A7A@internode.com.au"
type="cite">
<div>Because the way it looks to me is that the Communications
Minister and</div>
<div>Telstra have ganged-up on the ACCC, trying to force their will
as a </div>
<div><i>fait accomplis. </i>At the end of the day, the
Communications Minister can</div>
<div>say whatever he likes about regulatory certainty, but the Trade
Practices</div>
<div>Act doesn't give him (or any other Minister) the authority to
promulgate</div>
<div>determinations like this.</div>
</blockquote>
Rubbish - I don't see the ACCC forced into anything. I think there is a
bit more to it than that - On page 2 of the letter from Conroy to
Trujillo are some fairly black-and-white arguments from Graeme Samuels
(as reported by Conroy) as to precisely why the ACCC does not see a
need for declaring ADSL 2+ - namely, that access seekers already have
access to LSS and ULLS, and if anyone thinks they want to offer service
in an area they already have the option of installing a DSLAM to do so.
Infrastructure-based competition is better than resale and all that.<br>
<br>
I haven't got time to back through the TPA to verify, but while I am
sure they need to hold an enquiry etc if they are minded that they want
to declare a new service, I am fairly sure they don't have to hold an
enquiry and go through the process for every single request that might
cross their door, if they are minded not to declare it.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:93105A2A-92F8-46D4-A128-ABA9C36E2A7A@internode.com.au"
type="cite">
<div>It'll be very interesting to see what the ACCC has to say about
that in the</div>
<div>next few days. In particular, if the ACCC has made a decision,
why wasn't</div>
<div>it announced under their letterhead by Graeme Samuels? Are they
likely</div>
<div>to be just as surprised about this outcome as we have been?</div>
</blockquote>
The ACCC hasn't made a decision. The ACCC simply pointed the minister
to its past public statements. Nothing has changed for the ACCC - all
that has happened is that the Minister has written a letter to Telstra
with the minister's opinion, and Telstra has said 'yes'. The only
surprise I can think from the ACCC's perspective might be "what took
you so long - we told them all that a year ago".<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="720">--
Paul Brooks | Mob +61 414 366 605
Layer 10 Advisory | Ph +61 2 9402 7355
-------------------------------------------------------
Layer 10 - telecommunications strategy & network design</pre>
</body>
</html>