At 09:14 p.m. 6/06/2005, you wrote:
>On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 14:59, you wrote:
>
>| I don't understand why it's being questioned now, a year after the
>| government agreed to write the cap into law. Wasn't there the technical
>| advice to explain at the time that the internet is a two-way medium?
>
>Simple - (1) last year wasn't election year, and (2) NZ can't concentrate on
>more than one issue at a time, and last year the Foreshore stuff, and after
>that the Civil Union bill made sure nothing else (like upload speed regs) got
>much attention from Joe Public!

I should add, if I recall someone e-mailed every political party (well the ones in parliament anyway I think) and none of them at the time wanted to unbundle the local loop although the article seems to suggest (I can't be bothered looking up the parlimentary records) that National is now having 'doubts'.. In fact the only MP I know of (I'm sure there are others but the only one I've heard of) that apparently wanted to unbundle and put up some fight for it was Paul Swain.

Personally, I never understood what the CC was thinking recommending the 128k limit in the first place. The only thingI can think of that their recommendation was that Telecom should not be required to offer more than 128k average (which is still a bad idea IMHO) but instead the law passed in parliament was that Telecom should not offer more than 128k maximum (or at least this seems to be the general interpretation of the law) for UBS.

Perhaps too the gov wanted to take small nips at Telecom since as has been suggested before, they might be afraid to do anything which affects Telecom's stock prices too much given their importance to the NZ share market.

-- 
This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list. 
see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ, 
and various documents. 
To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@lists.unixathome.org 
with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message