Consolidated List of Questions
Issue 1: Process for Resolving the Terms of Supply of Regulated Services
Q1. Do you have any comments on your experience in negotiating commercial terms for provision of regulated services and/or any suggestions for improvement of the process which might reduce any delays experienced in negotiating satisfactory access terms and better facilitate the earlier introduction of competitive service offerings by access seekers?
Q2. Do you have any comments on the desirability and/or potential effectiveness of the Commerce Commission administering a reference offer type of option, and if so how such a reference offer option might best work?
Q3. Do you have any comments on the desirability of altering the access code referendum threshold for submitting the draft code to the Commerce Commission for approval? If so what should the threshold be?
Q4. Do you have any comments on the desirability of changing aspects of the access code regime to better enable the Commerce Commission to approve and enforce access codes? If so what changes would best enable enforcement?
Q5. Do you have any comments on the desirability and/or steps that could be taken to reduce the delays experienced in the provision of multi-network services, such as number portability, including comments on the desirability of empowering the Commerce Commission to initiate multi-network determinations in circumstances where the Commission considers this is in the long term interests of end-users?
Q6. Do you consider that there are excessive delays with the current process for obtaining access to new or improved regulated services? If so, what do you consider is the cause of such delays, and what improvements do you suggest for promoting prompt introduction of a new or improved regulated service?
Q7. Do you consider it necessary to introduce a provision to enable the Commission to monitor and enforce compliance with particular actions that it sets down in a determination, in order to provide enforcement of the determination terms and conditions from the public good perspective?
Q8. Do you consider it necessary to introduce a provision to enable the Commission to monitor and enforce compliance with particular actions that it sets down in a multi-network determination in order to provide enforcement of the determination terms and conditions from the public good perspective?
Q9. Do you have any other comments on the effectiveness of the current process for resolving the terms of supply of regulated services and/or how this process might be improved?
Issue 2: Process for Adding, Altering or Extending the Term of a Regulated Service
Q10. Do you consider that there were undue delays in the consideration of local loop unbundling, and/or the subsequent implementing of the Order in Council, and if so how could such delays best be avoided in the future?
Q11. Do you consider there is a need to clarify the circumstances where an extra step would be contemplated between the Schedule 3 draft report public conference and the final report, in a Schedule 3 investigation process? If so what form of clarification do you consider would be useful?
Q12. Do you have any comments on the desirability and/or means of enabling the Commerce Commission to take into account the policies of the Government as transmitted in writing by the Minister?
Q13. Should the Telecommunications Act 2001 explicitly provide for a clarification process to assist the Minister to consider a final report from the Commerce Commission?
Q14. Do you have any comments on the need to clarify the Minister's options to accept, reject or ask the Commerce Commission to reconsider a final report recommendation?
Q15. Do you consider that the process for extending the period of an existing regulated service requires amendment? If so, what are your reasons and what changes do you recommend?
Q16. Do you have any other comments or suggestions for improvement that you wish to make regarding the process for adding or altering a regulated service?
Issue 3: TSO Cost and Levy Administration Process Issues
Q17. Is there a need to clarify or amend TSO related definitions or processes in the Act and if so what changes are recommended?
Q18. Do you consider that the current TSO qualifying revenue definition unreasonably disadvantages some telecommunications services providers relative to other telecommunications service providers? If so please outline what you consider are the unreasonable disadvantages and what amendments to the Act should be considered that would best meet the long term interests of end-users of telecommunications services.
Q19. Should the methodology for determining deductions for TSO non-compliance be prescribed in the Act? If so what methodologies should apply?
Q20. Do you have any other comments or suggestions regarding TSO Cost and Levy Administration Process Issues?
Issue 4: Other Implementation Issues
Q21. Do you have any comments on whether the process of the Commerce Commission developing and accepting an access service undertaking when considering regulation, requires clarification? If so what changes do you recommend?
Q22. Do you have any comments on the need to provide the Commerce Commission with discretionary power to publicly disclose information derived by the Commission from data supplied by telecommunication service providers where the derived data will not uncover the underlying confidential information?
Q23. Do you have any comments on including reserve information disclosure regulation making powers in the Act to require parties to publish a reference interconnection offer?
Q24. Do you have any comments on the case for establishing an independent facilitation/mediation of resolution of users' telecommunication service performance concerns and if so do you have any suggestions as to how such a regime should best be set up?
Q25. Do you have any other comments or suggestions regarding how the Act might be improved?
Back to Top