Citizens, Communications and Convergence

Discussion Paper Summary

Introduction

1.1 The purpose of this paper is to discuss and clarify Ofcom’s role in furthering the interests of citizens. It sets out our thinking on this issue and we hope that it stimulates debate.

1.2 Ofcom’s responsibilities towards citizens are derived from the Communications Act 2003. We have a principal duty to further the interests of both citizens and consumers. We recognise that these interests are often different and that it may be necessary to resolve tensions between them. Furthering citizen rather than consumer interests may also involve distinct regulatory approaches.

1.3 Ofcom serves citizen interests in many ways, by promoting widespread access to communications services, ensuring plurality in the supply of radio and TV services, promoting media literacy and ensuring that disadvantaged groups of consumers are protected against market failures. To date, however, we have not published a paper specifically discussing how we seek to promote the interests of citizens.

1.4 In Ofcom’s Consumer Policy (December 2006) we identified the key driver of the consumer interest: well-functioning markets that provide choice, quality of service and value for money; protection from physical and financial harm; protection from unreasonable annoyance and anxiety; and the ability to make informed choices. The statement also explained Ofcom’s role in furthering these interests.

1.5 The fact that we have not published an equivalent statement on citizens has led some stakeholders to suggest that Ofcom lacks commitment in discharging its responsibilities in this area. Some have argued that we should present a more positive vision of our role in furthering the interests of all citizens. However, other stakeholders have suggested that there is no practical difference between consumer and citizen interests and that it is not necessary to distinguish between them.

1.6 In practice, the citizen focus has constantly informed Ofcom’s thinking since the organisation’s inception, whether in seeking a balanced approach to spectrum allocation or public service broadcasting. We have sought to ensure that our decisions are in the interests of citizens, as well as consumers. Nevertheless, we see some benefit in setting out our general approach to this question (in addition to the detailed assessments contained in specific policy documents), particularly in light of the experience we now have in working with our twin duties. There are two main reasons for doing so now.

1.7 First, it is important to ensure that all our decisions are consistent and transparent. This includes being clear about how our reasoning is affected by our statutory duty to further the interests of citizens and consumers. Where there are tensions between citizens’ and consumers’ perspectives, those tensions need to be exposed if their resolution is to be judged rigorous by our stakeholders. Secondly, increased convergence in the communications sector means that we need to think in new ways about the outcomes that regulation seeks to deliver for citizens and the mechanisms that are used to deliver them:

• Multi-channel digital TV provides much greater choice, but is putting pressure on the ability of terrestrial broadcasters to provide some public service content. This creates a need to examine new mechanisms for ensuring that a diverse range of public service content is available.
• The internet is now a fundamental part of the communications landscape. It is becoming an increasingly important way of supplying content that, in the past, was available only via broadcast networks. Changes in the way that content is supplied and consumed mean that the existing model of content regulation will need to evolve. Devising means to respond to citizens’ interests in this area represents a considerable challenge.
• Telecoms networks are evolving too. Extra capacity may be needed to enable consumers and citizens to enjoy the benefits of innovative services and regulation has a role to play in ensuring that network operators have the incentives to invest in upgrading their networks. Related to this, there is a growing debate about how operators should manage their networks and whether they should be allowed to prioritise certain types of traffic.
• The increasing range of services on offer, and the innovative ways that they are being used, also raises the question of which services should be available to all members of society. At the moment, BT (and Kingston in Hull) has a universal service obligation that requires it to provide a phone line to anyone who wants one, and to do so at a reasonable cost. Over time, there may be calls for additional services, such as higher-speed broadband, to be made available more widely.

1.8 In thinking about how regulation will need to change in response to these developments, we will need a clear understanding of what the interests of citizens are and our role in furthering them. But this thinking does demand clarity about the limits of Ofcom’s role. Our ability to further the interests of citizens (and consumers) is limited by the fact that we can take formal action only if Parliament has given us a specific power to do so, or if it is related to the exercise of that power. Another constraint is that we must comply with EU law. However, we can engage in wider discussions about issues that relate to the communications sector. A good example is the way that we contributed to the debate about digital TV switchover by providing analysis of market developments that was supported by market research. This helped the Government make an informed decision about fixing a date by which switchover should occur.

1.9 The limits to our powers mean that we cannot address all the issues that our stakeholders are concerned about, such as the possible health risks associated with mobile phone masts or the affordability of new communications devices and services. In some cases, other public bodies will have powers to act, but where this is not the case, it may be appropriate for us to seek to influence future legislation, at UK or EU level.

1.10 In summary, the need to clarify what we mean by the interests of citizens, and our role in furthering them, is driven by the need to make sure that we are consistent, transparent and accountable. The task is made more urgent, however, by the fact that over the coming years we will have to reconsider the outcomes that certain features of regulation seek to deliver on behalf of citizens and consumers, and to advise or decide how they should be delivered in practice.

1.11 In the next section we set out our understanding of the distinction between citizens’ and consumers’ interests. Section 3 considers the duties to further citizens’ interests that are set out in the Communications Act 2003. Section 4 sets out a framework for furthering citizens’ and consumers’ interests in practice and the paper concludes by highlighting the key projects through which we will be furthering citizens’ interests in the coming months and years.

The full document is available below: