Number portability row far from over

By Richard Braddell

WELLINGTON - Telecom's fear of regulation, matched by Vodafone's concern that the status quo would be maintained, were the driving forces for the two companies to seek Commerce Commission approval of their numbering deed, a conference organised by the commission was told in Wellington yesterday.

The numbering deed, which is also supported by three other phone companies, was agreed after an ultimatum last year by Communications Minister Maurice Williamson who demanded the industry resolve the longstanding impasse on number administration or face regulation.

However, the deed, which is opposed by Clear Communications and some other carriers, requires Commerce Commission authorisation, with the final determination due on May 10.

But while the telecommunications industry unanimously supports provisions that would place number administration in independent hands, Clear Communications is among a group of companies which have refused to sign because of linked provisions for consideration of long-term number portability which they regard as too open ended.

Number portability, which is currently undertaken in a limited fashion using call forwarding, is generally regarded as a prerequisite to open competition in the telecommunications market because it enables customers to keep their number when they move to a new carrier.

The catch for the carriers, if they do not sign, is that they may be blocked from access to new numbers, severely affecting their ability to expand their businesses.

In an important indication of Labour's position, its commerce spokesperson, Paul Swain, yesterday slated the deed because carriers would not be allocated new numbers without also agreeing to the portability arrangements.

"The two issues are separate and fairness demands that they be treated separately but the Government has made the mistake of winding them together," Mr Swain said.

Late last year, Mr Williamson indicated that regulation would be a simple matter given the work that had already been done. However, Vodafone yesterday argued that it would take as long as two years for regulation to be passed and, with an election in the meantime, the outcome was uncertain.

Arguing that an industry-agreed solution was more flexible, Vodafone said that changing technologies could quickly render regulation outdated.

In addition, the costs of regulation could be high, as could be its design, establishment and administration.

Even a regulated regime identical to the deed would involve added costs since the regulator would have to ensure it was being complied with.