Street Maryan: Telecommunications Amendment Bill (No 2) Radiocommunications Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Readings 
Street Maryan: Telecommunications Amendment Bill (No 2) Radiocommunications Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Readings 
[Volume:634;Page:6110] 
MARYAN STREET (Labour) 
: 
 I rise to speak to the third reading of the two bills: the Telecommunications Amendment Bill (No 2) and the Radiocommunications Amendment Bill (No 2). It is clear that certainty and efficiency around the communication sector is highly desirable for the economic progress and development of New Zealand and this Government’s economic transformation agenda. These two pieces of legislation are critical even though they are not major pieces of legislation. 
The Telecommunications Amendment Bill (No 2) was as has been noted by previous speakers reported back unanimously by the Commerce Committee and concerns in fact a matter of an extension of time because of the imminent expiry of particular telecommunication services in December 2006. Therefore it is a technical bill and I do not think there is anything of major import in it. 
I come to parts of the Radiocommunications Amendment Bill (No 2) and will pick up points that were raised previously by the Minister David Cunliffe in particular. I will come to items about the select committee’s deliberations in a moment. First when talking about the management rights in the Radiocommunications Act it should be noted that the present Act provides for management rights and underlying spectrum licences to be created for periods of up to 20 years; this gives certainty of investment. In addition management rights—termed “successive management rights”—can be created prior to the expiry of existing rights but as separate ones. The Radiocommunications Amendment Bill (No 2) allows in limited circumstances the aggregation in time of an existing management right and a successive right. This will facilitate an efficient transition from one right to the next and give improved certainty and efficiency in the radiocommunication sector as rights created from 1990 onwards reach their 20-year expiry date from 2010 onwards. 
The Government has already completed the commercial offer and acceptance process for UHF television licences and will soon make offers to holders of licences for AM and FM sound broadcasting services. Policy on renewal offers for cellular services is now being developed. These renewal processes make it clear overall that this Government is committed to creating certainty on commercial terms for the major users of the radio frequency spectrum. The bill enhances the legislative environment for such certainty. The present Act has provisions that allow holders of spectrum licences to enter into arbitration regarding alleged interference between licensed frequencies. The criteria for arbitration are altered under the bill to become identical to the considerations used in initial certification of the licences. 
The bill also allows holders of radio licences to move into the arbitration process. This is an example of how the two distinct regimes are being carefully altered to bring them closer to each other. A residual power remains for the Chief Executive of the Ministry of Economic Development who grants radio licences in the first instance to intervene if appropriate. But an agreed arbitrated solution is likely to achieve better outcomes for both parties than a solution using imposed powers of revocation. There was no opposition to these provisions in submissions to the select committee. 
The other provisions amending the Radiocommunications Act facilitate electronic processing by removing references to duplicate copies ensure correct wording relating to the expiry of successive management rights improve the efficiency of recovery of unpaid regulation fees and enact amended regulation-making powers. Concerns were expressed by some submitters about the proposed regulation-making powers in respect of the allocation of radio licences. But the select committee thought that this could be addressed appropriately through liaison with the industry as and when any new regulations were developed and the Minister concurs with that view. Apart from that point the other changes that I have just identified were generally supported by submitters. 
There was a submission to the select committee seeking a particular amendment to enhance the present transitional provisions of the Act for land mobile services. The legislation as introduced did not deal with such policy matters as this nor did it propose any changes to the transitional provisions. The select committee concurred that it was inappropriate to modify the legislation to address this topic but also recognised that the issue will be addressed by a wider policy development process concerning security of tenure of what are at present annually renewed radio licences. Such a wider process can consider not just the concerns of some land mobile licensees but other services such as fixed point-to-point links maritime and aeronautical uses and other similar applications. 
A Supplementary Order Paper was initiated by New Zealand First as the previous speaker Pansy Wong mentioned. That was done to further address the land mobile issues and has proceeded to the point where we now have the legislation ready for its third reading. 
 This wider policy development process will give an opportunity for all sectors of industry to provide their views and for a balanced outcome to be achieved. As with all such processes the Government remains open-minded as to the outcome of the intended discussion paper. Whether the eventual outcome will warrant legislation obviously cannot be determined at this time but it is important to welcome the recognition that the wider process is the appropriate mechanism to address these issues. 
All the provisions of the Radiocommunications Amendment Bill (No 2) are intended to maintain and enhance the efficient operation of the regime prescribed in the Act. The radiocommunication sector is a fast-moving and dynamic section of our economy but it continues to require infrastructure investment and physical assets. In many cases investment in radio spectrum licences or management rights is quite small in comparison with the cost of physical infrastructure. 
The Commerce Committee had an amicable consideration of this legislation and despite the comments of the previous speaker Pansy Wong that would impute something to the contrary it did come down unanimously in support of these two bills.