Tanczos Nandor: Communications Legislation Bill — First Reading 
Tanczos Nandor: Communications Legislation Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:631;Page:3006] 
NANDOR TANCZOS (Green) 
: 
 I rise to speak on this bill on behalf of the Green Party and to indicate as I think all members have so far indicated that we will be supporting this legislation. I want to put that within the context of the very real commitment the Green Party has to New Zealand developing a world-class telecommunications system. That relates to things like broadband and the steps the Minister of Communications has taken to regulate and unleash some of its potential in this country. In relation to things like mobile telephone rates it is well known that we pay very high rates for mobile calls in this country. We have a real commitment to the development of that system because for us it is about creating a sustainable economy. If we take a triple bottom line analysis of the matter then for us world-class telecommunications have a social pay-off in that they are about participation—the ability for all New Zealanders to actively and effectively participate in our society. The kinds of technologies we are talking about have enormous potential to increase participation and therefore to give a sense of inclusion and involvement in our society and our communities. 
Regarding environmental issues the Prime Minister has talked about the need to start thinking about how we move towards a post-oil economy—the need to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels because of the reality of peak oil and the enormous environmental challenge we face in terms of addressing climate change—so having an effective telecommunications system to allow us to interact communicate and meet in various ways apart from having physically to move people around is a crucial part of that. Of course in terms of economics if we are to overcome our geographical isolation in this country and the disadvantages of a dispersed population with low density then we have to become serious about taking advantage of the technologies available in the world today. 
If any nation is capable of doing that it is our nation—New Zealanders the people of Aotearoa—because we are a creative innovative people. Whether we are talking about the descendants of the Polynesians who came here—the Polynesian pioneers; the “Argonauts of the Pacific” who made their way here and created a unique and rich culture—or the more recent pioneers people of European African and Asian descent we know we are descended from people who took risks and chances. In this country we were early adopters of technology. We thrive on new ideas new challenges and new technologies so we are well equipped to pick up the challenges and potential of the technology available to us today. 
I thank Mr Williamson for his physics lesson. I thought it was enormously helpful and I was amazed to hear Clayton Cosgrove say that he still did not quite understand. That is unfortunate because I thought it was a very good lesson. Mr Williamson talked about the potential frequency available and I was staggered to hear the analogy he used. I for one was not aware that that is what we are talking about in terms of potential frequencies. I thought that his analogy about interference on the airwaves was also a very good way of demonstrating what we are talking about. I think that for many of us in the House it was a valuable contribution. The points he made reinforce the point made by the Minister that while this is a technical bill it is important. It deals with some serious issues that we have to address. I am pleased we are doing that—that we are debating the bill and that it is about to go to the select committee and work its way through the process. 
Of course we cannot have discussions about a piece of communications legislation without acknowledging the context we are operating within following the Government’s announcement on local loop unbundling unconstrained bitstream separation and naked DSL. Those issues were raised by Maurice Williamson and Clayton Cosgrove and are part of the broader context within which we are operating and it is something the Green Party is enormously supportive of. We are 100 percent behind the policy package the Government has announced. I congratulate Mr Cunliffe on having the courage to take some pretty bold steps and I look forward to being part of the whole process in seeing that package through to reality. 
One thing we need to start addressing in the context of that package and the whole telecommunications review is the issue of the cost of mobile calls in this country because it is an area in which we are significantly disadvantaged. One issue in clause 4 specifically relates to that. It is about extending the cut-off period from 5 years to 7 years to allow the Telecommunications Commissioner the time to address the 10 issues set out in new section 65(1A) inserted by clause 4. New section 65(1A)(j) lists “co-location on cellular mobile transmission sites.” which is actually a big issue. It relates to a question I asked the Minister during question time today about how we will prevent Telecom from deliberately delaying negotiations around access to the copper wire network in order to delay the benefits of local loop unbundling. I think the same applies to co-location because at least some people would say that the difficulty in negotiating a fair price and terms for access for co-location has hindered the entry of other mobile network players into the New Zealand duopoly environment. So we are disadvantaged by the duopoly we are subject to and we have to take seriously how we can start to create conditions that make it feasible for new entrants to come into the market to create real competition and therefore to benefit New Zealand consumers. 
I support competition in terms of service provision and that is why I am supporting local loop unbundling and this issue I am just speaking to. But I think it can be shown that in the provision of infrastructure competition is not always helpful. Competition can create perverse incentives for inefficient behaviour. But it is in service provision that competition is most important. If we look at the way the infrastructure around mobile phones has developed in this country we can see sites where there are multiple towers within an area. That is hugely inefficient in terms of resource use it is economically inefficient and it has been caused by the environment in which the infrastructure has been developed. I understand that now we are starting to see a move towards cellular mobile transmission sites being built in ways that do not even allow co-location. They are actually being physically engineered so that extra gear cannot be co-located because it is physically not up to it. I think that that is an enormous problem. How we get into that and actually create meaningful regulation for co-location is a very important issue. 
It is perhaps going a bit beyond this bill but there is another issue where the regulator has recently made a finding around termination rates. Those are the costs that mobile phone companies charge landline companies for calls that terminate in the mobile phone. Although there is the ability to regulate termination rates I understand there is no ability to ensure that any savings that landline companies get from the regulated termination rates are passed on to customers. To me that is ridiculous. That is a clear flaw in the Telecommunications Act so although that is a bit beyond this legislation it is one of the things we need to start looking at as well. I though it was important to raise it in the context of the debate because we have to look at these things within the context of the broader picture. I reiterate that the Green Party is supporting this bill and we congratulate the Minister on the work he has been doing.