Category: Regulation

This just in, Steven Carter, Chief Executive Officer of UK communication uber-regulator Ofcom will be standing down with effect from 15 October 2006.

Luke Gibbs of OfcomWatch covered Carter possible departure this back in January this year.

At the time of writing this article, Ofcom hasn’t given an official explanation of why Carter is leaving, just that he is.

As to the process of him leaving, the official Ofcom line is a little bewildering, “He will continue to lead on all operational and financial matters until that date (15 October 2006), but from 1 August 2006 will not be party to Ofcom’s economic, competition and policy decisions.”

What’s special about 1 Aug 2006? Given Carter’s contract prevents him from securing future employment whilst at Ofcom, is this perhaps someway for him to hasten taking up another role with another organisation? Carter’s contract also contains “appropriate gardening leave restrictions” up to a maximum of 12 months at the discretion of the Chairman.

The next role for Carter has been the matter of some conjecture, nay gossip. Given Ofcom is seen by a lot of the world as a leader in communications regulation, there are many possible roles. Amoung those mentioned so far have been BSkyB, and with James Murdoch rumoured to be shifting upstairs the position may be open. Hey … how about the FCC?

From 1 August, David Currie will act as Executive Chairman and will chair the Policy Executive, until a permanent replacement can be found.

Prior to joining Ofcom in 2003, Carter was at UK cable company NTL during its time of financial troubles.

More details on the story when we have them.

OfcomWatch
Ofcom

Yesterday piece raised the questions of where the Conservatives thinking may be on UK Telecoms, Media, and Technology (TMT) sector. Today we outline how we intend to find out more.

So where do we start?

Well, initially we hope to meet with and interview Hugo Swire, MP (Shadow Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport) and John Whittingdale, MP (Chairman – Media, Culture and Sport Select Committee). Both will be important figures in developing coherent, cohesive and workable policies for the party in this area and we hope interviewing them will provide us insight as to the likely direction of travel on some of the main issues.

There are also a number of other bodies within the party looking at issues impacting the TMT sector – such as the Conservative Technology Forum – and we hope they may also meet with us to outline their current position and work on these issues.

There are a range of immediate issues where we think the U.K. can benefit from the Conservative’s input:

• (i) copyright policy;
• (ii) radio spectrum management;
• (iii) the regulation of new media;
• (iv) digital switchover;
• and (v) the regulatory environment, in particular, the future of Ofcom.

Do the Conservatives have something different to say on these and possibly other equally-important issues? We want to uncover areas of contention and, alternatively, areas of consensus. Ultimately we want to highlight the importance of this policy area, and ensure that it is at the forefront of the party’s offering in the future – after all, technology is the future.

Naturally, there will always be those who say regulatory decisions made by organisations such as Ofcom are ‘independent’ and ‘evidence-based’ and therefore would be valid whoever happened to be in government. However, most people know Ofcom is ultimately a product of the government who created its remit – New Labour – and who on occasion have allowed the notion of ‘evidence-based’ regulation to underpin a culture of third party ‘experts’ who decide policy matters with a minimum of public participation or scrutiny.

Of course, any ‘evidence’ rarely, if ever, just points to one policy outcome. Regulation is always discretionary – it needs to be in order to be flexible enough to be applied coherently – but accordingly it is also always political.

It won’t have escaped anyone’s attention that senior appointments at Ofcom are made by or approved by the Secretary of State – is this what is meant by ‘non-political’? Surely very few people are really convinced by the notion of regulatory independence. Political context defines any regulatory outcome to an extent.

We should note at the outset that we certainly don’t already have answers as to what the Conservatives should be doing in this area. However, we do believe it would be beneficial for everyone if they engage in these issues and push them to the fore. We hope that this challenge will be of as much interest to the Conservative Party as it is to us.

We will keep you posted as to how we get on.

Luke Gibbs and Russ Taylor are founders OfcomWatch

If you were to consider UK telecoms, media, and technology (TMT) policy since Parliament passed the Communications Act 2003 and brought about the formation of Ofcom much has happened. The regulatory machinery of the state has swung into action with relative efficiency, taking on such issues as BT’s marketplace position, digital switchover, and public subsidy and control of broadcasting and new media. And we are starting – just starting – to see the results of some those efforts.

But up until now, it is fair to say that the Conservative Party have basically ceded influence over the TMT policy arena to New Labour – not least because Labour has been the party of power during what has been a period of radical technological change. The Conservatives, for a number of reasons, have been somewhat ineffectual at making their voices heard in this space … leaving observers such as ourselves largely unsure of where the party stands on most issues impacting the TMT sector.

This is not a good thing. These industries are massively influential from a social and economic perspective. According to Ofcom, for example, the U.K. communications marketplace has an annual turnover of £55.9 billion. That’s tens of thousands of jobs and billions of pounds at stake. Policies applicable to the TMT sector also affect how the U.K.

• (i) sees itself,
• (ii) communicates,
• (iii) drives its economy,
• (iv) learns,
• (v) projects global influence, etc.

What can we say? The TMT sector is already staggeringly important and will become more so as economies across the globe become increasingly interlinked through electronic communications technologies. So it is common sense that there be senior level engagement with technology issues across all political parties.

This holds particularly true for the Conservative Party.

• Firstly, they are the UK’s main opposition party.
• Secondly they are currently engaged in a process of revamping their image and re-orientating their policy offering in order to be relevant.
• Thirdly, technology – and the policy and regulation associated with it – is always relevant.

However, any proposed policy and regulation must be backed by new thinking. So, although we have been told what sort of music David Cameron has put onto his new iPod, we don’t yet know how he thinks this technology might be used to deliver public service broadcasting or for that matter public services, or what the rights issues might be, and how all of this might impact the commercial market.

Of course there won’t be any answers overnight – and we don’t expect the Conservatives to suddenly unveil a raft of policy positions in what is a highly complex and constantly evolving area. But without doubt there’s a genuine and important opportunity here for the party. Developing a keen and critical understanding of TMT and proposing broad policies likely to harness the benefits that stem from new technologies would provide a platform that would assist the party in being seen as critical to delivering a modern Britain.

Certainly the party is already developing new ideas (or in some cases adopting the opposition’s cast-offs) in other policy areas. And by all accounts, David Cameron is doing an effective job of moving the Tories back toward the centre of British politics. The new leader appears flexible and open to new policy approaches. But nothing definite is happening in the TMT space. We think it should.

So with this in mind, we have decided that 2006 would be a good time to try and stimulate the political debate in regard to issues impacting the TMT industries by occasionally placing a specific focus on what the Conservatives might look to do for the sector. In doing this we hope to assess, encourage and develop thinking as to what the Conservatives have to offer if (and when) they return to power.

We will not be attempting to write the Conservative Party’s policies in regard to the TMT sector. Far from it – as always, we hope to provide a dialogue – a small impetus that might get a much bigger ball rolling. And any debate on would possibly include the views of those who may not be supporters of the Conservative Party – new or old. We remains open to all.

Tomorrow, in the second installment, we’ll get in to the details of what could get the ball rolling.

Luke Gibbs and Russ Taylor are founders of OfcomWatch

In an update to this story, Ofcom confirm Carter to leave

A reasonably insightful interview with Ofcom’s Stephen Carter by Maggie Brown in Monday’s Guardian. There is a suggestion that Carter is looking to move on – which would mean that the implementation of many of the key recommendations/agreements from the various strategic reviews he has overseen will fall to someone else (most likely – Ofcom’s COO – Ed Richards).

Brown suggests that Carter will be judged by the decisions he has taken in regard to ITV – particularly the decision to scale back ITV regional programming obligations. In reality I think the industry – both media and telecoms – are likely to judge Carter by the regulatory settlement he got out of BT.

However, interesting to note the use of what Carter refers to as the “‘soft power’ of influence” in regard to decisions taken on ITV. Apparently others – including the ‘independent’ Content Board’ – favoured a different approach on scale backing PSB obligations but didn’t get their way.

Other interesting points from the article –

• 1. Production Supply Market Review – which is published tomorrow. Carter says Ofcom has not tried to rewrite the ITC’s ‘terms of trade’ agreement made in 2003. He states,
  

  “We will make it clear that we are not intending to redraw the terms of trade on a short-term basis or whim, given that they have had a relatively short period of time to bite. The 2003 agreement will stand.” Asked for his views about the seven-day window agreed between the BBC and Pact, the independent producers’ body, he says: “It is too electric a subject to speculate on.”

• 2. BBC – Carter stands by Ofcom’s position that the licence fee money should be ‘contestable’. This reiterates the advice of the independent Burns’ Panel who looked at the BBC structure and funding. However, the government didn’t go with it in the Green Paper on the BBC’s future, and it is unlikely to be in the White Paper. In my opinion this is also the right thing to do- although there will be plenty of people who disagree.

It will be interesting to see where Carter moves – if he does – my money would be on BSkyB (or News Corporation). Of course there will always be a role for him at Ofcomwatch – if he fancied a hands on role in new media.

Luke Gibbs is a co-founder of OfcomWatch
Ofcom