|
|
Actions |
| ITEM
1 |
Introduction |
|
| 1. |
The
Panel agreed the revised agenda. |
|
| ITEM
2 |
Matters
arising from May meeting |
|
| 2. |
The
Panel was asked if it had any objections to contact details
being supplied at the request of guest speakers. The Panel did
not raise any immediate objections, provided that guest speakers
contacted Panel members on important issues only and not for
marketing purposes. |
Panel
members to inform Oftel of any objections to contact details
being supplied to guest speakers. |
| 3. |
Panel
members raised the issue of a perceived decline in the quality
of calls using indirect access. It was felt the decline in standards
arose from interconnection difficulties. Oftel agreed to bring
the issue to the attention of its Compliance Directorate. |
|
| 4. |
Panel
members confirmed that they had not approached the telecommodities
exchanges or the traffic standards bureaux, nor did they intend
to do so in the near future. |
|
| 5. |
The
Panel was informed that the industry communications group planned
to write to all operators ensuring readiness for ‘The Big
Number’ flash change day on 22 April 2000. The Panel requested
assurance that the letter would refer to parallel running of
the breakout code for ISDN international dialling with the harmonised
‘00’ international dialling code. (Parallel running
of the 00 new prefix would start on 22 April 2000 and termination
of use of 000 was required by 30 September 2000.) |
Note:
The letter will be sent out under Oftel’s signature, and
it will be ensured that parallel running of ‘000’
and ‘00’ is included. |
| 6. |
The
Panel would consider inviting the operator Tele2, as well/instead
of MLL, to talk to the Panel. Allocation of spectrum for unlicensed
users was also felt to be a topic worthy of coverage by a guest
speaker. |
Members
to suggest & Oftel to arrange guest speakers of interest
to the Panel. |
| ITEM
3 |
E-Commerce/Internet/Bandwidth |
|
| 7. |
Dave
Simpson, Oftel’s Senior Technical Analyst and Project Manager
of Oftel’s Internet Project, gave a presentation to the
Panel on general E-Commerce, Internet and Bandwidth issues as
they related to large businesses. |
|
| 8. |
The
Panel’s attention was brought to Oftel’s Statement
on the Relationship between Interconnection Charges and Retail
Prices for Number Translation Services, December 1999, and
particularly Annex B which explained two-part charging and volume
discounts for NTS call origination.
DS also
advised the Panel of BT’s recent Press Release announcing
unmetered access to the Internet.
|
|
| 9. |
In
order to communicate more effectively with the Internet community,
i.e. operators, service providers and users, Oftel had launched
a dedicated Forum called the Oftel Internet Forum (OIF). Panel
members were invited to attend the OIF and to look at OIF’s
home page (www.oftel.gov.uk/oif) for more information. |
|
| 10. |
Other
areas of Oftel involvement include the access to bandwidth initiative
(Statement expected April 2000), an investigation into barriers
to entry in the electronic market and SPAM (unsolicited bulk
e-mails). The Panel considered the implications of opt-in/opt-out
approaches to dealing with SPAM, and the E-Commerce Directive.
The Panel expressed interest in inviting a guest speaker to
address the SPAM issue. |
|
| ITEM
4 |
Update
on CLI and new guidance on recording of telephone conversations |
|
| 11. |
Frank
Phillips advised the Panel that Oftel had assessed the comments
received on the CLI Presentation Numbers Consultative Document
(issued April 1999). A wide variety of responses were received,
mainly from consumer groups. A Statement on the conclusions
drawn was expected in early 2000. The Statement would confirm
that type 3 presentation numbers (user provided, not verified)
would be permitted, with strong safeguards. A customer would
apply to its network operator to use a type 3 presentation number,
with Oftel vetting the use (using a questionnaire) as an interim
procedure. Operators were expected to offer the service after
the Telecoms Data Protection Directive came into force in the
UK on 1 March 2000. |
|
| 12. |
The
Panel discussed the use of type 3 presentation numbers and was
reminded that the consultation document described 3 categories
of returnable number, but did not specify how a returned call
must be answered. The Statement would not disallow the use of
answer phones for the returnable number. |
|
| 13. |
Panel
members, whose companies had received nuisance calls, enquired
about means of unscrambling hidden CLIs. They were advised to
discuss the matter individually with Frank Phillips. |
|
| 14. |
Frank
Phillips clarified a number of points regarding the recording
of telephone conversation guidance issued by Oftel in August
1999. The Home Office requested that Oftel issue guidance explaining
to the business community a judgement made in the European Court
of Human Rights. Oftel’s role was to clarify a legal position
and give guidance, however some press coverage had given the
impression that Oftel had imposed the rules. The provision of
payphones, allowing employees to make private calls at workplaces
that recorded all calls, received the greatest amount of press
coverage. Government lawyers interpreted the law to cover all
workplaces and requested that Oftel publish the guidance to
protect businesses against possible challenges by employees.
The article of the Telecoms Data Protection Directive that deals
with the recording of calls (article 5 -–confidentiality
of the communication) has to be brought into UK law by October
2000. |
|
| 15. |
The
Panel was advised that the Home Office had consulted on revisions
to interception law and a Code of Practice for the interception
of communications in the UK. The Consultation Paper could be
downloaded from: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/oicd/ioca.pdf |
|
| 16. |
Geoff
Morgan (Oftel) addressed the Panel on CLI issues relating to
the National Code and Number Change. Whilst BT aimed to produce
a detailed plan of CLI changes, it would not be publishing the
plan due to the possible legal repercussions of any changes
to the plan. Other operators had not declared a plan of changes.
Businesses were advised to contact their operator’s project/account
manager for details of CLI changes. Heavy and critical users
of CLI were advised to parallel run both CLIs, although it was
noted that this presented a significant cost overhead. |
Oftel
to notify Panel members of any further information on the timing
of CLI changes. |
| ITEM
5 |
05
Corporate Numbering |
|
| 17. |
Geoff
Morgan, Oftel Numbering Project Manager, gave a presentation
on Corporate Numbering. The 05 number range was reserved for
Corporate Numbering in 1997, but Oftel had not received any
serious requests for allocation of 05 numbering capacity to
date. It was suggested that the telecoms environment had changed
so radically since 1997 that technology might have left the
demand for 05 numbering behind. Oftel was reluctant to open
a new range without a proven demand. |
|
| 18. |
The
Panel felt Corporate Numbering was good in theory but not very
practical. It was agreed that there were difficulties in moving
from large schemes already in use to the 05 range, and that
it could represent an inefficient and expensive use of the numbering
resource. However, the Panel did demonstrate an interest in
the range and agreed to respond to a questionnaire to be distributed
by Oftel. The questionnaire would seek to establish the extent
of demand for Corporate Numbering. |
Oftel
to circulate a questionnaire to Panel members, seeking comments
on the requirements for Corporate Numbering. |
| ITEM
6 |
National
Leased Lines Statement |
|
| 19. |
Chris
Woolford, Oftel statistician, briefed the Panel on Oftel’s
Statement on National Leased Lines published in November 1999.
The Statement launched a review of the regulatory framework
relating to national leased lines. The plan was to complete
the review and publish a Statement by October 2000. The first
Statement, issued in January 1999, found UK prices for leased
lines broadly in line with Europe, but expensive compared with
the US. However, price comparisons for leased lines were extraordinarily
difficult, as much relied on the route, capacity, discounts
and traffic volumes. The review would focus on whether customers
were getting the best deal, whether competition was developing
and how competition varied with bandwidth. Oftel was concerned
that the UK environment had proved difficult for businesses
to operate, possibly due to a lack of BT flexibility. |
|
| 20. |
The
Panel was informed that feedback on its experiences would be
valuable. Panel members were invited to speak confidentially
to Oftel if they wished to share commercially sensitive information
such as SLAs and contract terms. Responses to the consultation
were requested by 31 January 2000. |
Panel
members to consider sharing experience of leased lines with
Oftel. |
| ITEM
7 |
Oftel’s
Strategy and Working Plan 2000/2001 |
|
| 21. |
Geoff
Delamere, Oftel’s Head of Customer Markets Unit, presented
Oftel’s Stakeholder discussion document on developing a
long term strategy to achieve the best deal for telecoms customers
(http://www.oftel.gov.uk/abo
ut/lts1199.htm).
Oftel’s overall goal of providing the best possible deal
for the customer in terms of quality, choice and value for money
remained unchanged, but the old activity based objectives were
to be replaced by outcome based objectives, looking to move
to lighter regulation as competition took effect. Regulation
would move from sector specific using the licence conditions,
to increased reliance on the Competition Act. The key question
behind Oftel’s strategy was whether Oftel needed to continue
promoting competition. Rolling two-year market reviews would
be used to assess the extent of sufficient and sustainable competition.
The Panel questioned the length of time between reviews, but
logistics and resources would restrain the frequency. It was
noted that Oftel might need to introduce heavier regulation
where competition had regressed, e.g. through acquisitions. |
|
| 22. |
The
Panel was encouraged to play a more dynamic role in the development
of Oftel’s long-term strategy. It was hoped the Panel would
become competition champions, helping to quantify the costs
and benefits of proposed regulation. Oftel could make valuable
use of the Panel members as ‘well informed customers’
and ‘expert purchasers’ of telecoms services. It was
hoped to expand the Panel’s role without duplicating the
existing work of trade associations. |
|
| 23. |
Dissemination
of views between meetings was seen as a necessary step. It was
decided that a secure web-site would be launched, allowing Panel
members access to information between meetings. This was seen
as particularly useful for involving Panel members in policy
work when it would be most productive, that is, before the publication
of Consultation Documents and Statements. |
Oftel
to organise the launch of a closed user group web-site, with
a view to launch by next Panel meeting. |
| 24. |
In
recognition of the Panel members’ specialist skills and
knowledge of the telecoms business market, members were asked
to consider the possibility of speaking to the Small Business
Task Force on areas of expertise or joining the TMA Study Group. |
Panel
members to consider invitation to speak to the Small Business
Task Force or join the TMA Study Group. |
| 25. |
Geoff
Delamere also presented Oftel’s short-term strategy, which
addressed Oftel’s work packages over the coming year. It
was planned publish a Statement and Consultation in early 2000,
with the Oftel Management Plan for 2000/1 being published in
March/April 2000. |
|
| ITEM
8 |
Billing
Case Studies |
|
| 26. |
In
response to Panel members’ concerns over billing errors,
Oftel had proposed to conduct a set of billing case studies
with a view to publishing the findings. In an effort to find
out detailed information on the kind of errors businesses were
experiencing, Oftel had drafted a questionnaire on billing errors.
A copy of the draft questionnaire was circulated to the Panel
at the meeting, with comments invited by 14 January 2000. The
comments would be used to ensure the questionnaire uncovered
the nature and scope of business’ billing complaints. A
final version would be posted on the Panel’s closed user
group web-site with a request for wide response from members. |
Panel
members to forward comments on the draft Billing Studies Questionnaire
to Oftel (EG) by 14 January 2000
(extended
to 29 February).
Oftel
to post Questionnaire on the Panel’s web-site.
|
| ITEM
9 |
MEMBERSHIP
OF PANEL |
|
| 27. |
Oftel
had been approached by businesses requesting membership of the
Panel. Existing members were asked their views on widening the
membership. It was felt that the Panel might benefit from the
introduction of new members, but that it would be counter-productive
if the increase to membership meant a change in the structure
of the meetings, that is, from boardroom to cinema style. It
was felt the addition of up to five businesses would be feasible. |
|
| ITEM
10 |
Future
meetings |
|
| 28. |
Dates
of next meetings: |
|
|
- 28
March 2000, 1pm at Oftel, 50 Ludgate Hill, London EC4M 7JJ
|
|
| 29. |
Suggested
topics for next/future meetings: |
|
|
- Oftel
viewpoint on how to regulate the converged industries of
telecoms/IT/broadcasting
- Update
on E-Commerce/Internet/Bandwidth presentation concentrating
on ADSL
- Possibility
of inviting DTI to speak about SPAM and the E-Commerce Directive
|
Oftel
to speak to Project Managers with a view to including on future
agenda |
| ITEM
11 |
Any
other business |
|
| 30. |
The
Panel asked for confirmation that the UK’s request for
a deferment of the introduction of Carrier Pre-Selection had
been denied.
Note
for minutes: The Commission did not grant a deferment
on the terms requested by the UK (a delay of 12 months until
December 2000 for implementation of CPS for options 1 &
2 – national and international calls, and until December
2001 for Option 3 – all calls). The Commission requested
that an interim solution be introduced by 1 April 2000 ahead
of availability of the permanent switch-based solution. The
UK is now working towards the implementation of interim CPS
on BT’s network using autodiallers by the end of March
2000.
|
|
