PDF: 7881 KB - Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional ...

BTCE lnformation Paper 35The new objectives were:to ensure universal access to standard telephone services throughoutAustralia on an equitable basis and at affordable prices, in recognition of thesocial importance of these services;to maximise the efficiency of the publicly owned telecommunicationsenterprises - Telecom, OTC, AUSSAT - in meeting their objectives,including fulfilment of specific community service obligations and thegeneration of appropriate returns on investment;to ensure the highest possible levels of accountability and responsiveness tocustomer and community needs on the part of the telecommunicationsenterprises;to provide the capacity to achieve optimal rates of expansion andmodernisation of the telecommunications system, including the introductionof new and diverse services;to enable all elements of the Australian telecommunications industry(manufacturing, services, information provision) to participate effectively inthe rapidly growing Australian and world telecommunications markets; andto promote the development of other sectors of the economy through thecommercial provision of a full range of modern telecommunications servicesat the lowest possible prices.To assist in achieving these objectives, Telecom has been restructured as acorporation, and has become subject to competition in areas of value-addedservices and customer services equipment. Its self-regulatory functions havebeen assigned to an independent monitoring authority, the AustralianTelecommunications Authority (AUSTEL). The monopoly over the basictelecommunications network is to remain, however, partly to ensure provision ofthe CSOs imposed by the enabling legislation. These social objectives arespecified in the new legislation relating to Telecom, the TelecommunicationsCorporation Act, which came into force on 1 July 1989.The telecommunications and postal services of the Commonwealth governmentresulted initially from constitutional responsibilities. Power over these areaspassed from the States to the Commonwealth in 1901. Government control in thefirst instance, that is, prior to 1901, could have been justified on the grounds ofexternalities arising from a secure and reliable service, economies of scale, andfor income distribution reasons. Currently there exists some debate as to thenatural monopoly status of telecommunications suppliers. Evan (1988) states ‘itcan be tentatively concluded that the telecommunications industry (both in themain carriers market and’in the equipment and services areas) is most likely tobe characterised as a natural monopoly’. Irrespective of this, government policyrecognises that the ‘social and community importance that the telephone systemhad assumed should not be threatened in any moves towards greater efficiency,deregulation or liberalisation’ (Department of Transport and Communications1988).16