This was sent to an acquaintance of mine and forwarded to me for laughter value. This message had no confidential statement attached, so one assumes that it's open and can be distributed to the recipient wanted to. I hear actually on the Radio this morning that TelstraClear is off to the Commerce Commission. It will be good to track the outcome of that.. -------- Forwarded Message -------- From: Phillippa Fox To: jo(a)archnetnz.com Subject: UBS Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 09:37:53 +1300 COM04-05/66 Jo Smith jo(a)archnetnz.com Dear Jo Smith Thank you for your email of 17 September 2004 regarding the roll-out of Telecom's unbundled bitstream service (UBS). In particular, your concerns relate to the delay of the provision of this service to the market. In addressing this issue it is important to distinguish between the regulated UBS and the Telecom's commercial UBS. Access to a regulated UBS and corresponding backhaul service to be provided by Telecom was passed into law on 2 September 2004. Under the Telecommunications Act 2001, an Internet Service Provider (ISP) is entitled to apply to the Commerce Commission for a determination of the price and terms and conditions of an Internet grade UBS (with a minimum downstream speed of 256 Kbps) where the applicant is unable to commercially negotiate a satisfactory arrangement. As of today no ISP has applied to the Commission for such a determination. Alongside the regulated UBS, Telecom has on its own initiative offered a commercial UBS to market. The delays to which you refer are in relation to this voluntarily-provided service. The terms of Telecom's commercial UBS are available from Telecom. I understand that Telecom's commercial UBS promised by September has been delayed. Telecom says this is due to a "technical problem" which may take six months to resolve. Given ISPs have invested in marketing products dependent on this service, in the expectation that Telecom would deliver to its announced timeframe, I am concerned about the very short notice Telecom provided to these ISPs of the delay. However, I reiterate, this relates to Telecom's commercial UBS and not the regulated UBS. If an ISP cannot satisfactorily negotiate a commercial UBS, they should apply to the Commission for a determination to provide access to the regulated UBS. You also expressed concern that Telecom is able to advertise its commercial products while Telecom is not providing the service "it has been ordered" to provide and that Telecom is forcing customers into six month contracts preventing them from moving to other cheaper providers. As I explain above, Telecom is not under a legal obligation to provide the service that has been delayed. However, I encourage ISPs to apply for the regulated service if they are not satisfied with the commercial UBS offer. In regard to fixed term offers it is recommended consumers consider the range of offerings in the marketplace before committing to a specific fixed term. Given experiences to date under the Telecommunications Act 2001, I consider that there is potential to make improvements for the more timely achievement of the Act's objective ? the promotion of competition for the long term benefit of end users of telecommunications services. On October 11 2004 I announced a review of the Telecommunications Act 2001. Amongst other things, the review will look at improving the speed of resolution of key terms and conditions for supply of regulated services, including monitoring and enforcement issues, and improving the certainty and speed of processes for adding or altering regulated services. I intend to release a discussion paper in November for comment from interested parties. Yours sincerely Hon Paul Swain Minister of Communications -- Chris Hodgetts