Cunliffe David: Telecommunications (TSO Broadband and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Cunliffe David: Telecommunications (TSO Broadband and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:673;Page:19580] 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn) 
: 
 I will take a quick call to summarise several of the issues that have been raised in respect of Part 2 of the Telecommunications (TSO Broadband and Other Matters) Amendment Bill and to look at the consequences of the change that has been proposed and the delay that has occurred. The two key issues relate to the regulatory forbearance period and the question of how it was removed and the extent to which it was removed; and the effect of the so-called open access regime and whether it is indeed open access at all layers and all places which it is not. I will also look at several of the other clauses in this part. I particularly want to note the effect of undertakings and the application of the pecuniary penalties.  
Starting from the top I say the regulatory forbearance period has not been fully repealed. It went to the Finance and Expenditure Committee and had universal condemnation from the industry. The Maori Party was silent and voted for it but after the bill went back to the Minister the Maori Party either changed its mind or had its mind changed for it. The Minister needed a way out of being a minority of one so the regulatory forbearance period was changed in Supplementary Order Paper 247. That amendment has not been to the Finance and Expenditure Committee and has not been discussed by the industry or the public. But it was not as the Government said a full repeal of regulatory forbearance. The Commerce Commission is unable to adjudicate certain aspects until 2018— 
Clare Curran 
: 2019.  
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: —until 2019; my colleague corrects me. That just reflects the shadowy opaque nature of this process where deals have been done in the back room and show up in the fine print. The public of New Zealand know to their bones that that means their interests are put at risk by the corporate sharpies cutting deals behind closed doors and in the fine print that nobody can understand. People have been there before. They saw Maurice Williamson give the industry the wet bus ticket for 10 years as the “Minister for Telecom” and it looks like the son of Maurice Williamson is sitting in the chair as the Minister for Communications and Information Technology. He has aged prematurely but the son of Maurice Williamson is sitting in the chair presiding over—in fact designing—a new wet bus ticket for the fibre age. Here in this bill is the wet bus ticket. It is half of a wet bus ticket on regulatory forbearance.  
On the open access regime there is a lovely sense of irony— 
Hon Christopher Finlayson 
: 9 years and you did nothing. 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: I hear the Attorney-General squeaking in the back row. What a lovely sense of irony. I am sure he would not have put that title on this measure because it is not an open access regime at all. It is somewhat open in respect of Telecom retail but it is anything but open in respect of the crucial dark fibre layer of the network. Right here in the bill are the provisions stating that for some part of the open access network equivalence of input—the gold standard—applies but we do not get the gold standard for the crucial dark fibre layer until 2018 2019 and 2020. Instead we get the watered down version called non-discrimination. What are the consequences of that? Firstly the undertakings that are already in place for the functional separation between the three boxes of retail wholesale and access go. That does not I agree with the Minister matter very much at the retail end because it is replaced by structural separation but there is no structural separation between access and wholesale. There is no structural separation on the core of the network and that is where the public’s interests are put at risk.  
What is the cumulative result of firstly the Government’s ultra-slow process and secondly this ultra-risky bill? Since 2008 when the Government changed New Zealand has slipped on the download speed scales from 12th to 21st in the OECD on connection speed from 12th to 24th out of 30 and on subscriptions from the seventh cheapest to the fourth-most expensive in the Western World. That is the real tangible price of the ultra-slow broadband processes that are vested in this bill by this Minister. Now on the eve of the next election the Minister brings to the Chamber Supplementary Order Paper 247 which he could not get organised in time to put to the select committee. He tries to squeak it through before the election so he can say he has done something. New Zealanders have been waiting 2½ years for the Minister to come up with a policy and he has come up with something that in crucial respects is about as strong as dishwater.