Home > Media and Analysts > Homepage features > Telecoms

15|10|08

Currie on communications

Ofcom Chairman David Currie made a keynote speech today in which he highlighted the major changes in the communications sector during his time in office.

David, who is stepping down next year, said that intensive competition had led to many success stories across the industry.

These included massive growth in the number of homes with broadband, as well as falling telecoms prices.

But, speaking at the Ofcom Annual Lecture, he said this competition between rival firms had not always been good news for the consumer.

Slamming

It had led to problems such as mis-selling and slamming in telecoms, while consumer satisfaction in the communication sector was not as high as it should be.

But he said there had been success in tackling scams, such as dodgy mobile cashback offers and last year’s high profile phone-in competition problems.

David added: ‘Several broadcasters, who ought to have known better, came close to forfeiting wider public trust. Hefty fines were in order.

‘They have learned that they too have a duty of care to individuals in the audience as consumer as well as to the mass audience as viewer.’

Internet content

He said a good start had been made in tackling potentially harmful internet content, and welcomed the fact that ‘old broadcasting style regulation’ was not being used to address the problem.

David said the Byron review – which led to the recently established UK Child Council on Internet Safety – was a model of good sense, and added:

‘Ofcom with other bodies and the industry need to develop, and spread awareness of the practical actions, and the tools and technologies – from the use of filtering and kite-marks, to parent’s enforcement of simple rules about internet use - that allow people to navigate the online world and for parents to ensure their children’s safety.’

But he also raised concerns about communications providers increasingly going to court if they disputed an Ofcom decision.

Legal action

David said some companies had admitted that is was in their interest to delay decisions if they knew it would end up costing them millions.

He said: ‘Wherever there is a position of incumbency, or where necessary change may cost money, an increasing first resort is to the City law firms and the inevitable delay the appeal process imposes.’

David added that repeatedly taking this course of action was ‘not a recipe for a healthy system or for the consumer interest.’

Back to top