Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)

I move amendment No. 37:

In page 17, to delete lines 11 to 15.

I have tabled this amendment to try to amend the section of the Bill that proposes to insert a new Part 2A in the Communications Regulation Act 2002 which will set out regulations governing ComReg hearings. As we had a long discussion on this matter on Committee Stage, I will refer to it briefly on this occasion. I referred on Committee Stage to the proposed new section 38C(2) of the 2002 Act which will require people to attend hearings and produce information and documents at such hearings. I propose the deletion of the section which states that "if a person who appears before the Commission in compliance with a requirement made under section 38A requests the matter to be dealt with in public, the Commission shall comply with the request" because I want the commission to have discretion in this respect. If ComReg wants to conduct a private investigation into a company which it considers not to be delivering the service required of it, or engaging in some way in anti-competitive or similar practices, it should have the discretion to do so without being compelled by the company to conduct the investigation in public. I have received representations on this matter from people in the industry who believe ComReg should have discretion to act as it sees fit. They argue that it should be possible for the commission to investigate something diligently without it involving a massive public session with barristers, etc. We should try to avoid such paraphernalia which we are now used to as a result of our experience with tribunals. We need to ensure the proceedings are as simple, snappy and short as possible. Perhaps this is the wrong way around, in retrospect. I heard the argument the Minister made on Committee Stage. The genesis of my consideration of this matter is my belief the commission should have discretion.

See this speech in context