Ofcom today published a document outlining its role in furthering the
interests of citizens. The discussion paper, Citizens, Communications
and Convergence, details how Ofcom serves citizens' interests by
ensuring that people have access to the communications services,
content and skills needed to participate in society.
The paper can be found here: http://tinyurl.com/5pr7pp
Consultation published: 11/07/2008
Consultation closes: 08/10/2008
- Discussion Paper Summary: http://tinyurl.com/6nz5s2
- Discussion Paper - Full Print Version: http://tinyurl.com/6eg3bx
- How to respond: http://tinyurl.com/5jkwkz
_____________________________________________
Summary
Source:
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/citizens/425646/
Citizens, Communications and Convergence
Introduction
1.1 The purpose of this paper is to discuss and clarify Ofcom’s role in
furthering the interests of citizens. It sets out our thinking on this
issue and we hope that it stimulates debate.
1.2 Ofcom’s responsibilities towards citizens are derived from the
Communications Act 2003. We have a principal duty to further the
interests of both citizens and consumers. We recognise that these
interests are often different and that it may be necessary to resolve
tensions between them. Furthering citizen rather than consumer interests
may also involve distinct regulatory approaches.
1.3 Ofcom serves citizen interests in many ways, by promoting widespread
access to communications services, ensuring plurality in the supply of
radio and TV services, promoting media literacy and ensuring that
disadvantaged groups of consumers are protected against market failures.
To date, however, we have not published a paper specifically discussing
how we seek to promote the interests of citizens.
1.4 In Ofcom’s Consumer Policy (December 2006) we identified the key
driver of the consumer interest: well-functioning markets that provide
choice, quality of service and value for money; protection from physical
and financial harm; protection from unreasonable annoyance and anxiety;
and the ability to make informed choices. The statement also explained
Ofcom’s role in furthering these interests.
1.5 The fact that we have not published an equivalent statement on
citizens has led some stakeholders to suggest that Ofcom lacks
commitment in discharging its responsibilities in this area. Some have
argued that we should present a more positive vision of our role in
furthering the interests of all citizens. However, other stakeholders
have suggested that there is no practical difference between consumer
and citizen interests and that it is not necessary to distinguish
between them.
1.6 In practice, the citizen focus has constantly informed Ofcom’s
thinking since the organisation’s inception, whether in seeking a
balanced approach to spectrum allocation or public service broadcasting.
We have sought to ensure that our decisions are in the interests of
citizens, as well as consumers. Nevertheless, we see some benefit in
setting out our general approach to this question (in addition to the
detailed assessments contained in specific policy documents),
particularly in light of the experience we now have in working with our
twin duties. There are two main reasons for doing so now.
1.7 First, it is important to ensure that all our decisions are
consistent and transparent. This includes being clear about how our
reasoning is affected by our statutory duty to further the interests of
citizens and consumers. Where there are tensions between citizens’ and
consumers’ perspectives, those tensions need to be exposed if their
resolution is to be judged rigorous by our stakeholders. Secondly,
increased convergence in the communications sector means that we need to
think in new ways about the outcomes that regulation seeks to deliver
for citizens and the mechanisms that are used to deliver them:
* Multi-channel digital TV provides much greater choice, but is
putting pressure on the ability of terrestrial broadcasters to
provide some public service content. This creates a need to
examine new mechanisms for ensuring that a diverse range of public
service content is available.
* The internet is now a fundamental part of the communications
landscape. It is becoming an increasingly important way of
supplying content that, in the past, was available only via
broadcast networks. Changes in the way that content is supplied
and consumed mean that the existing model of content regulation
will need to evolve. Devising means to respond to citizens’
interests in this area represents a considerable challenge.
* Telecoms networks are evolving too. Extra capacity may be needed
to enable consumers and citizens to enjoy the benefits of
innovative services and regulation has a role to play in ensuring
that network operators have the incentives to invest in upgrading
their networks. Related to this, there is a growing debate about
how operators should manage their networks and whether they should
be allowed to prioritise certain types of traffic.
* The increasing range of services on offer, and the innovative ways
that they are being used, also raises the question of which
services should be available to all members of society. At the
moment, BT (and Kingston in Hull) has a universal service
obligation that requires it to provide a phone line to anyone who
wants one, and to do so at a reasonable cost. Over time, there may
be calls for additional services, such as higher-speed broadband,
to be made available more widely.
1.8 In thinking about how regulation will need to change in response to
these developments, we will need a clear understanding of what the
interests of citizens are and our role in furthering them. But this
thinking does demand clarity about the limits of Ofcom’s role. Our
ability to further the interests of citizens (and consumers) is limited
by the fact that we can take formal action only if Parliament has given
us a specific power to do so, or if it is related to the exercise of
that power. Another constraint is that we must comply with EU law.
However, we can engage in wider discussions about issues that relate to
the communications sector. A good example is the way that we contributed
to the debate about digital TV switchover by providing analysis of
market developments that was supported by market research. This helped
the Government make an informed decision about fixing a date by which
switchover should occur.
1.9 The limits to our powers mean that we cannot address all the issues
that our stakeholders are concerned about, such as the possible health
risks associated with mobile phone masts or the affordability of new
communications devices and services. In some cases, other public bodies
will have powers to act, but where this is not the case, it may be
appropriate for us to seek to influence future legislation, at UK or EU
level.
1.10 In summary, the need to clarify what we mean by the interests of
citizens, and our role in furthering them, is driven by the need to make
sure that we are consistent, transparent and accountable. The task is
made more urgent, however, by the fact that over the coming years we
will have to reconsider the outcomes that certain features of regulation
seek to deliver on behalf of citizens and consumers, and to advise or
decide how they should be delivered in practice.
1.11 In the next section we set out our understanding of the distinction
between citizens’ and consumers’ interests. Section 3 considers the
duties to further citizens’ interests that are set out in the
Communications Act 2003. Section 4 sets out a framework for furthering
citizens’ and consumers’ interests in practice and the paper concludes
by highlighting the key projects through which we will be furthering
citizens’ interests in the coming months and years.
Companies Act 2006 : http://www.londonmet.ac.uk/companyinfo
-------------------------------------------------
MeCCSA Policy mailing list
W: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/meccsa-policy.html
Please visit this page to browse list's archives, or to join or leave the list.
|
