Flavell Te Ururoa: Telecommunications Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Telecommunications Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:636;Page:7138] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 Morena Madam Assistant Speaker. Kia ora tatou katoa. I think it is acknowledged that communications technology changes faster than I have been known to run which might be a bit of a surprise to some. Just over a decade ago the concept of a teleconference for example was so remarkable that new regulations had to be introduced to accommodate the advances of the telecommunication industry. I was looking up the Maori Incorporations Constitution Regulations of 1994 the other day as one does and I was struck by the change to the 1969 regulations—clause 126 to be precise—which permits a teleconference of committees of management. 
Rodney Hide 
: I remember it. 
TE URUROA FLAVELL 
: I will give the member a little bit more information. The regulation describes “teleconference” as “The contemporaneous linking together by telephone or other means of instantaneous audio (or audio and visual) communication” of a quorum of the committee. I am sure people remember that. 
Today we are also debating new regulatory provisions and indeed enhancements to the regulatory process. The bill aims to address issues to achieve the efficient and effective regulation of the telecommunications sector. But there are some key differences in time between 2006 and 1994—and indeed 1969—that this bill represents. As I said at the start we are now immersed in a rapidly evolving telecommunications market. Competition introduces new tensions to the industry so that providers are vying to present the best cost options for fixed line telephone services for broadband for mobile and for call network. We are watching a dynamic market develop that has the potential to provide increased capacity to areas through installing high-capacity transmission systems through the laying of fibre-optic cable—and that is all great. 
Whatever package is being put forward the improvements to major fixed and mobile investment projects the capacity of wireless broadband coverage and the growth of wireless technologies have to be good for New Zealand even if most seem to be just worried about losing their mobiles. Increasingly there are more and more New Zealanders who need to benefit from the technology. The census results last week reported that 74.2 percent of households in New Zealand have access to cellphones and for young New Zealanders the percentage is even higher with more than 85 percent stuck to their cellphones. We are really pleased that this bill builds on this emerging momentum and sends a very strong policy signal to the two megaplayers Telecom and Vodafone that they will be subject to a greater degree of Government regulation. 
In this regard there has been failure by successive Governments to step up to the mark. A mass of light-handed regulation has resulted in some fairly dramatic problems—problems that are evident in results such as the fact that we boast the highest mobile rates in the OECD. Well boast is hardly the word I would use when I am presented with my daughter’s mobile accounts demonstrating young people’s prolific and accomplished use of mobile technology. Still we are moving on and moving on is something that this bill enables New Zealanders to do. 
The amendments in this bill seek both to improve the performance of the telecommunications market and to deliver long-term benefits to the end users. It also helps to promote competition. As part of this focus on transparency and access for competitors and in addition to the accounting separation regime proposed in the original bill I see that the Finance and Expenditure Committee recommended the introduction of an operational separation regime for Telecom to promote both competition and efficiency. The Maori Party is happy to support this change and the other amendments put forward by the committee. 
It is disappointing however that the necessary amendments to allow Maori interests to enter the mobile market were not included in this report. The critical issue for tangata whenua interests is around Maori spectrum interests. As I see it the regulatory focus dominating the bill is on fixed line rather than mobile. As I understand it fixed-line communication costs in Aotearoa including ADSL Broadband are much higher than in most other OECD countries and it is artificially kept that way. We know that where there is competition for fixed line-costs customers will achieve lower prices by at least $10 per month and we support that. But the costs for mobile for both new industry players and customers alike are also kept artificially high resulting in the highest rates in the OECD as I commented earlier. I note that a number of the submissions to the Finance and Expenditure Committee pointed out that mobile is not a separate issue. 
But the key issue for Maori is that Maori spectrum interests—Hautaki Trust Econet—are in mobile. Until the mobile issue is sorted Maori are unable to access the telecommunications industry and consequently unable to access the $3 billion mobile market. The focus on mobile is no random decision. Maori consumers are jumping right over a generation of technology; leapfrogging if one likes the copper wire network and going straight to the less capital-intensive wireless technology including mobile phones. Anyone who hangs around with our rangatahi will know that most young Maori are relying on mobile phones—mostly prepay—for their communication needs. That is the way of the future. Young people jump from provider to provider depending on which one has the best offer this month; and that is how it should be. 
Indeed an example in the health sector demonstrates the impact of mobile technology not just as a means of communication but as a site for a new public health initiative. A study reported in the June 2005  
New Zealand Medical Journal 
 concluded that a mobile phone - based smoking cessation programme was extremely successful in recruiting young Maori. The programme used regular personalised text messages to provide smoking-cessation advice support and distraction both in English and in Maori and sourced in Maori tradition; and importantly text messaging was free for 1 month. The messages were brief and bold and to the point flashing concepts such as change courage challenge action goal strength—from one phone to another. I am told it was a very successful idea and the high Maori participation in the trial demonstrates how accessible and acceptable it is to our young. 
Today and every day over a million text messages are sent in New Zealand. The Maori Party cannot therefore let the opportunity provided by this bill pass without noting the importance of addressing the mobile market concerns and in doing so remind the House that such action will allow Maori interest to enter the market. The bill does not deal with the fundamental obstacle whereby Maori still have to buy their way into the telecommunications industry instead of being there as of right as the Waitangi Tribunal recommended. The tribunal’s report on the radio spectrum found that Maori do have an interest in the management rights to go with the radio spectrum and that the two partners to the Treaty should have discussions about them. Yet characteristically the Crown simply proceeded with legislation to give 100 percent control over these management rights. 
We are again in the situation of making the best of a bad deal for Maori. One recommendation that has been put forward to allow Maori to enter the mobile market has been to create the category of specified services from the Telecommunications Act and move the services listed into the designated services category. Specified services are services where the Telecommunications Commissioner can regulate everything except price. Designated services are services where the Telecommunications Commissioner can regulate everything including price. As we noted in the first reading of the bill regulation of everything except price is not regulation at all. 
New Zealand’s digital future relies on cost-effective efficient and competitive telecommunications infrastructure. The Maori Party will support any initiative to ensure that the New Zealand consumer is being delivered a world-class telecommunications service at the lowest cost and highest quality that a truly competitive market could bring. The telecommunications sector has always been one that directly affects the consumer yet it is frequently perceived by most people as big companies profiteering at the hands of the small consumer. Our support for this bill is therefore based on our motivation of championing consumers by indicating a willingness to regulate companies if charges continue to increase unfairly or competition is hampered. We are however committed to ensuring that the impact of mobile technology and the way in which it is revolutionised by business and social interactions must be investigated if we are truly to achieve progress. Kia ora tatou.