60 likes | 136 Views
How same issues have been tackled elsewhere. Russell Southwood Balancing Act http: //www.balancingact-africa.com e-mail: info@balacingact-africa.com.
E N D
How same issues have been tackled elsewhere Russell Southwood Balancing Act http: //www.balancingact-africa.com e-mail: info@balacingact-africa.com
“Consultation paper on “Measures to promote competition in International Private Leased Circuits (IPLC) in India”, Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, June 2005Source: www.trai.gov.in
The Indian context • Intro’d competition in international long distance in 2002. • International tariffs not come down “to levels witnessed in other countries in Asia reflecting the lack of effective competition in the market.” • Landing station controlled by VSNL had become a “bottleneck facility”. Cables financed by club consortia. Others paying charges to VSNL
Representations to the regulator • Higher and commercially non-competitive charges for international bandwidth hampering growth of broadband and internet • Non-permissability of reselling international bandwidth • Complaints from competitor international operators about co-location of equipment • BPO and ITES sectors unable to obtain competitive bandwidth
Methods used by regulators • Fixing ceiling tariffs with reference to international benchmarks and general trends • Permitting reseller market, essentially non-facility based operators • Removing barriers for access to cable landing stations • Facilitating mutual sharing of landing station infrastructure and international capacity amongst carriers • TRAI has fixed ceiling tariff but “tariffs in other countries still appear to be lower”
Examples from elsewhere • In general: “…have forced various obligations on incumbents owning submarine cable system”. • Have applied general interconnect agreement/directives. Reference Interconnect Offer • Hong Kong: HTKI access and co-location at landing station or virtual co-location • France: Need to ensure equal access to international facilities for all operators • Canada: Teleglobe under obligation to share monopoly facility in non-discriminatory and fair manner • Singapore: To ensure more competition, wholesale intl on “retail-minus” basis with specified discounts