Tremain Chris: Communications Legislation Bill — In Committee 
Tremain Chris: Communications Legislation Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:634;Page:5594] 
CHRIS TREMAIN (National—Napier) 
: 
 I rise to speak to Part 1— 
Darren Hughes 
: Showing up his own colleague. 
CHRIS TREMAIN 
: —and to add to the wonderful comments of Mr Tim Groser who I might add spoke exceptionally well the other night in my electorate of Napier when addressing members of Rissington Breedline. He did a fantastic job and I thank him. Part 1 deals with the expiry of designated services under section 65 of the Telecommunications Act 2001. We are dealing with an omnibus bill. Part 1 amends the Telecommunications Act and Part 2 amends the Radiocommunications Act 1989. 
Before I debate Part 1 in any detail I refer to a quote made by Minister David Cunliffe when he introduced the bill. He said: “This bill maintains a commercial environment of certainty and confidence for both telecommunications services and use of the radio frequency spectrum.” Well that is why National is supporting this bill because we see that it maintains some certainty. But if one puts that statement into the context of David Cunliffe’s announcement about recent changes to Telecom one would argue that he has his wires twisted somewhat because he managed to wipe a couple of billion dollars off the value of Telecom’s shares in the space of a few days. I would argue that that does not give certainty and confidence either to shareholders of Telecom or to potential future investors in this country. 
In focusing back on Part 1 I say we are talking about a largely technical measure. It is designed to prevent an unintended consequence and it deals with some timing issues. The bill is narrow in scope. Part 1 is extremely narrow; it deals with one issue. Part 1 amends the Telecommunications Act by extending by 2 years the regulation of 10 of the 13 telecommunications services that were originally regulated under the Act. Clause 4 lists a number of examples: in new section 65(1A)(a) interconnection with Telecom’s fixed public switched telephone network; in new section 65(1A)(b) interconnection with fixed public switched telephone networks other than Telecom’s; and going right through to new sections 65(1A)(g) to (j) dealing with local telephone number portability service cellular telephone number portability service national roaming and co-location on cellular mobile transmission sites. 
I have had a fair bit to do with the last four of those items in terms of the Telecommnications Amendment Bill which we are examining in the Finance and Expenditure Committee. Those issues will have a big impact on the telecommunications environment going forward particularly as New Zealand tries to get more competition into the mobile phone market place. That was highlighted by the flamboyant figure of Tex Edwards from Econet who came before the select committee and talked about his struggle to get his company up and running despite I might add— 
Darren Hughes 
: Whose fault was that? 
CHRIS TREMAIN 
: I take that on board entirely. The select committee to a T turned around to Mr Edwards and put the blame where it was due: back in Mr Edwards’ court. 
I acknowledge the work of former Minister Swain who had a fair bit to do with the 2001 bill at that point in time and who gave new competitors the opportunity to get into the market. But they had to establish that they could get 10 percent coverage before they could get national roaming and co-location on sites around the country. That was good legislation because a company like Econet had to establish a level of investment in the country. Even though Econet has invested about $20 million - odd—although I could be corrected on that—into spectrum to buy its rights and although it has coupled up with a local iwi trust it has not made the investment that is needed to go forward. So I would be interested to hear the Minister’s view of the extension of these designated rights for 2 years of how that impacts on a company like Econet and of whether that company would still have the opportunity to follow through—if it ever does.