Dear eircom tribunal

If only the ODTR had as much influence as you think. This letter in response is addressed to you - but it's aimed at the Irish government. Some home truths:

1. Our government doesn't care about Internet access for consumers and small businesses. This is a government whose visions coincide 100% with whatever will gain them the most votes. Since voters' expectations about a quality infrastructure have been managed through the floor, the state of Internet access in Ireland is no longer a voter-sensitive issue. The government's vision of an e-commerce "hub" (remember that one?) starts and finishes with enticing large overseas companies to locate here. Nice headline, voter-friendly stuff. We are a small twig on a minor branch of government. If you think that the government cares about the ODTR or about the Internet, think again.

2. eircom, despite the makeover, is ran by an old-guard Politburo rump of Telecom Eireann monopoly-mindset managers whose defensiveness and resistance to change exceeds that of Mr Paisley's DUP. They measure success in terms of how obstructive - not how co-operative - they can be. The company should be split up. The ODTR simply should not have to deal with it in its present structure.

3. In this, eircom is aided and abetted by a pro-eircom Cabinet. There are elements in government who resent the ODTR's very existence. Perhaps they see it as a man's job - sorry, make that "a one of the boys" job? Perhaps the ODTR's existence deprives them of the usual opportunities for a few backhanders.

4. Given the foregoing, it is hardly surprising that, until very recently, the ODTR's enforcement powers were a joke - they ranged from the derisory (a £1,500 fine) to the suicidal (taking away eircom's licence). The former was akin to taking a pea-shooter to an elephant. The latter is wildly impractical - you cannot shut down an entire country, start a constitutional crisis and utterly wreck this country's reputation - just to apply a regulatory sanction.

5. Further, there is an inherent contradiction between our mandate and the
legalistic parameters within which the ODTR is asked to operate. On the one hand, we are supposed to act fast and deliver early. This is particularly true of the Internet side of the ODTR. On the other hand, the ODTR is also required to always move in lock-step with the delays of a commercial legal court system. That system is a cynical playing field where rival private companies grind each other down in expensive wars of attrition. It's a bit like being asked to sprint in leg-irons. For instance, we operate mostly in fear of an administrative law challenge - lest it could ever be argued that the ODTR has ignored or given short-shrift to any sector opinion. Effectively, we need the entire industry's permission to move - every step of the way. This overly-consultative mindset is imposed on us. This is not the stuff of leadership. It is akin to leadership by referenda. Ludicrous in government - and no less so for the ODTR. This devotion to legal due process is commendable when our fundamental freedoms are at stake (not that Ireland is exactly at the forefront there) - but this devotion to unturning every legal stone in advance is sheer misplaced pedantry when no personal freedoms are at stake; and when the greater good of the Irish people is dependent upon our being freed up to move quickly. Effectively, it amounts to asking eircom for reasons why things cannot progress. Naturally, once the ODTR has officially absorbed those reasons - invariably hyped up and unbelievably complex (mixing up detailed PhD level network engineering arguments with complex economic and pricing arguments) - then the ODTR is immediately on the back foot, trying to sort out the beef from the bull.

6. Telecom Eireann grew under a protectionist legal regime. Despite this, eircom's submissions to the ODTR are afforded parity of status (at best) to those of the other licensed operators. As noted, this even-handedness, in a context of unfairly-inherited power imbalances, is inequitable and is a barrier to change. There needs to be a period of sustained positive discrimination in favour of change until we have obtained real competition. As part of this, the government needs urgently to look at reducing, to the fullest extent possible, the rights of parties to mount cynical spoiling court actions against initiatives taken by the ODTR - so that we can get on with doing the job we want to do.

Kind regards

The ODTR