Clause 83 - Conditions about network access etc.
Communications Bill
6:45 pm
Mr Richard Allan (Sheffield, Hallam, Liberal Democrat)
The hon. Member for Maldon and East Chelmsford has picked up on an important point. I hope that the Minister can respond on an issue that Ofcom will face that has not been dealt with well enough in the case of the Oftel regime—the matter of billing by BT's incoming supplier. It is perfectly possible to purchase all one's telephone services from a third-party supplier, but the line still has to be rented from BT.
BT has no duty to pass on billing information to the third-party supplier, so one receives only a single bill from the third-party supplier, and with that, all the promotional material—the most important bit—for the third-party supplier services. One is left receiving both the billing from BT, and so its presence in the home, and, importantly, all its promotional material. It is clear that BT will have to face such issues. The concern must be whether we are leaving a gap that allows the incumbent supplier to say that that faces due discrimination. There is an argument that the incumbent supplier will have to change its accounting systems and that that will be expensive. One has to respond to that and to allow a certain amount of leeway. However, the interposition of the word ''unduly'' creates a position whereby a third party can prove that there is a problem with a competitive market and that a supplier is discriminating in favour of itself. In future it may not be BT, but another company seeking to defend its position and to impose barriers to a truly competitive market. Under the current terms, it may argue that that is not undue discrimination because it is a small infringement and it would be expensive to change it.
There is a balance between the extent to which the infringement of the competitive market takes place and the way in which that judgment is made. The hon. Member for Maldon and East Chelmsford helpfully pointed us to the European Union law framework, which is a fairly basic one that says that we must promote competitive markets and we cannot say that a practice is only slightly anti-competitive and is therefore okay. As making those judgments between the potential cost imposed and the infringement will turn on the definitions in the Bill, I hope that the Minister can clarify his understanding of the way in which it will operate in the context of the real world decisions that regulators face and will face in future.