So who is right? The Labour Party wants to split Eircom in two in order to create a separate network division to ensure that broadband penetration catches up with other developed countries and argues that a break-up of the firm's operations would mean the "endless blockages" in broadband delivery would be addressed. Eircom says that that physical local-loop unbundling is not the main reason for the State's broadband deficit. The company says the Republic suffers from a lack of competing networks for broadband delivery.
The party's detailed 80 page policy document can be downloaded here and I've not had time to read it yet. But Tommy Broughan's speech launching the document gives us a reasonable picture. It rightly criticise the Government for having no coherent strategy and addresses market, institutional and regulatory failings that all contributed to the dismal picture.
The Government originally thought that cable operators would provide most of the broadband access and operators like NTL and Chorus were given exclusivity contracts that were never delivered, mainly due to seriously underestimating the costs involved. Even in principle that strategy was flawed as cable operators would be likely to act as gatekeepers and dictate content, as has happened in the US. It is vital to maintain the principle of open access or open network provision. It was this situation that lead to the development of the Internet in the first place and allowed all manner of innovation and content provision to flourish.
One could argue that the provision of a broadband network is a natural monopoly and competition in such cases can be inefficient and wasteful. What is required is one network using whatever combination of available technology - wired, wireless, electricity cables. The nature of the technology does not effect the nature of the network as all it does is process digital data. The policy should be one network, many providers. The network should be regulated in order that the providers be as free as possible to compete and innovate in terms of content and price.
This is why I'm a bit dubious about Broughan's reference to measures to encourage "inter-platform competition". There may be a bit of conceptual muddle between content and service provision. In fairness, I'd better have a close read of the actual document. I must also point out that I had the benefit of discussing these issues earlier today with my friend and colleague, Tom Weymes, co-author of a fine article in the Irish Communications Review in 2003 (article available here). It's a little dated but its summary of different regulatory regimes, as well as its critique of earlier policy and regulatory failures in terms of the development of the Internet in Ireland, provides excellent background and context in order to consider what should be done next.
Comments