ARN

Industry: Telstra senate submission a stalling tactic

Industry body slams Telstra's arguments against structural separation while analysts claims more is going on behind the scenes

Analysts and industry groups see Telstra’s senate plea against structural separation as a power play and claim the real action will happen in private negotiations.

The claims follow Telstra’s submission to a Senate inquiry into the Government’s proposed Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Competition and Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2009 and its speech to the same inquiry made on October 13.

According to Competitive Carriers’ Coalition executive director, David Forman, Telstra’s arguments against the Government’s plan to structurally separate its wholesale and retail businesses are old and wrong.

“There is no veracity in its arguments against functional or structural separation. In fact, these are the same arguments they’ve been running for years,” Forman said.

He also said Telstra’s argument that rural and regional customers would be badly affected by the move was best disproved by history.

“If you look at what has happened in the last 20 years, the consumers that have suffered the worst service and the highest prices are those in regional Australia and the reason for that is they have the least access to competition,” Forman said.

“If you separated Telstra’s wholesale business from the retail business, at least those consumers would have access to a level playing field and other companies would be able to come in and compete for their services.”

Forman’s response to Telstra’s argument that the proposed legislation is backed by incorrect information and that Australia’s level of competition is high was particularly scathing.

“Everybody knows that competition in Australia is absolutely dire. You only need to look at the independent statistic on the OECD to see how poorly served we are. So Telstra’s basic premise falls down and the entire construct of their argument collapses with it,” he said.

Ovum research director, David Kennedy, labelled the Telstra submission a ploy to buy time and added tension to behind-the-scenes talks between the Government and the telco.

“I don’t think it should be taken as reflecting the state of discussions between Telstra and the Government at all,” Kennedy said. “It was never our expectation that we would see anything new from the submission. The reason is Telstra is still engaged in negotiations with the Government and any concession they might be making they’ll be making in return for concession with the Government.”

Forman agreed back-room negotiation and the failure of the legislation was Telstra’s main objective, but said such a move would hurt the market.

“Telstra will have its bargaining position strengthened if the legislation doesn’t go through, and clearly that’s what it’s all about,” Forman said. “The negotiating value in the bill not being there strengthens its position in relation to the Government.”

Even a separated Telstra would have enough teeth to compete against the Government plans for a National Broadband Network (NBN), Kennedy insisted.

“What it would mean is instead of having an agreed timetable for the movement of traffic away from Telstra’s old copper and cable networks to the NBN, we’d have a competitive situation where the NBN would have to fight for every customer,” he claimed.

“It means it’s much slower to build up the NBN’s customer base, so it’ll be making losses for a longer period, and secondly it means they’ll have to spend marketing money to get every customer and that will increase their losses.”

However, Kennedy said the Government still had carrots to offer Telstra in exchange for its cooperation.

“On Telstra’s side, if the negotiation breaks down, the Government will go ahead and impose a separation on them and of course the Government would not be in a charitable mood at that point. The separation would most likely be a disruptive one,” he said.

“There are very good reasons for both sides to come to some kind of resolution and I think it’s more likely than not they will.”

Come socialise with us! Facebook | LinkedIn

More about: Bill, etwork, OECD, Ovum, Telstra
References show all

Comments

1

Anonymous

Wed 14/10/2009 - 13:27

Stuff people that live in rural areas

If people who live in rural areas want better access, start paying more taxes/rates like people from metro. Do not expect the same infrastructure as those that live in the metro areas.

2

Anonymous

Wed 14/10/2009 - 17:57

same to you, mate. fairs fair.

Stuff people who live in cities - if they want drinking water, timber, coal, how about they get their own dams, forests, and mines, instead of leeching it from our wilderness?

How about you grow your own food too? Yeah? Who needs who here?

3

Anonymous

Wed 14/10/2009 - 19:34

Old Arguments

I'm sick of hearing these tired old arguments made by people in the bush about what they think people in urban areas get. In reality just as often people in suburbs are just as badly serviced. I often hear of small towns/villages having full fledged broadband mean while whole suburbs in cities have next too non, due to massive black spots.

http://www.goldcoast.com.au/article/2009/08/15/108515_gold-coast-news.html

It even goes back to older argument of people in rural area's always thinking the cities having it all (milk and honey as it were).... :P

4

Anonymous

Wed 14/10/2009 - 22:03

errr we pay for drinking water, timber, coal, dams, forest, mines and whatever else exists, just because u live near those things doesn't mean u have a bigger claim to them

if u can't afford to pay market price for those thngs, then move to somewhere where u can

5

Anonymous

Thu 22/10/2009 - 15:41

Fairs Fair

I guess it's fair if City people are subsidised for coal, food, etc. similar to country people being subsidised for their services. I can see why building roads etc. can be beneficial for everyone though. The same for telecommunications.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Users posting comments agree to the ARN comments policy.
Login or register to link comments to your user profile, or you may also post a comment without being logged in.
Related Coverage
Related Whitepapers
Latest Stories
Community Comments
Tags: Telstra, National Broadband Network (NBN), competitive carriers coalition
ARN Directory | Distributors relevant to this article
Express Data , ICT Distribution , The IPL Group , VExpress Distribution
rhs_login_lockGet exclusive access to ARN's news, research and invitation only events.
ARN Distributor Directory
ARN Vendor Directory

iAsset is a channel management ecosystem that automates all major aspects of the entire sales,marketing and service process, including data tracking, integrated learning, knowledge management and product lifecycle management.