1 / 10

Extending self- and co-regulation OIF 23 March 2001

Extending self- and co-regulation OIF 23 March 2001. Nic Green Regulatory Policy (nic.green@oftel.gov.uk). Various routes to less regulation. Benefits of self- and co-regulation. improve relevance of policy and quality of implementation: specialist skills/knowledge

zeus-sherman
Download Presentation

Extending self- and co-regulation OIF 23 March 2001

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Extending self- and co-regulationOIF 23 March 2001 Nic Green Regulatory Policy (nic.green@oftel.gov.uk)

  2. Various routes to less regulation

  3. Benefits of self- and co-regulation • improve relevance of policy and quality of implementation: specialist skills/knowledge • more flexible in face of changing markets • may meet regulatory objectives at a lower cost • move responsibility to meet consumer needs closer to providers • encourage take-up of services through better consumer information and protection measures

  4. The policy is appropriate regulation • As competition develops, we would expect relatively more self/co-regulation • but self/co-regulatory options will only be chosen if they make sense for individual initiatives • NOT an indiscriminate shift to less regulation • formal regulation will still be used where necessary

  5. Drivers for policy (1) • OFTEL framework for the next few years • supported by general success from existing initiatives: outcomes improved through extra expertise and flexibility • broad support from stakeholders, but • most against large structures • many against rapid OFTEL withdrawal • concerns over resources of smaller players

  6. Drivers for policy (2) • changes due at EU level • from individual licences to non-sector-specific laws • Communications White Paper (Dec 2000) • “OFCOM will have a duty to….roll back regulation promptly where increasing competition renders it unnecessary. It will encourage co-regulation and self-regulation where these will best achieve the regulatory objectives.”

  7. Communications White Paper • “we challenge the industry to come forward, even before legislation, with an effective code or codes of practice for service delivery, and with effective means of redress where service standards are not met” • “OFCOM should ensure continuing and effective mechanisms for tackling illegal material on the internet, such as those being pursued under the auspices of the Internet Watch Foundation”

  8. Statement - conclusions • make self/co more effective in the short-run • but without creating large structures • not clear outcomes would be better • likely focus • co- regulation in short-term, moving to more self-regulation over time • “consumer information” & “consumer protection” objectives

  9. Statement - proposals (1) • Linking up initiatives • stakeholder web site: promote transparency, communication & participation • residential consumer web site: information & protection outputs combined, links to elsewhere • working groups models, with role definitions • OFTEL guidance for self and co-regulation • what level of regulation: cost-benefit analysis • what OFTEL role, including monitoring

  10. Statement - proposals (2) • Promoting appropriate/effective codes of practice • to implement telecoms consumer protection rules • to facilitate shift to general consumer protection laws • aligning with OFT approach; question of who accredits codes in telecommunications

More Related