Seanad debates

Wednesday, 27 January 2010

Communications Regulation (Premium Rate Services and Electronic Communications Infrastructure) Bill 2009: Committee Stage. `

 

12:00 pm

Photo of Paudie CoffeyPaudie Coffey (Fine Gael)

I reiterate much of what was said on the earlier amendment about the need for serious sanctions to be applied when service providers abuse their positions. I appreciate that the statistics for premium rate charges were discussed at length on Second Stage. However, I remind the House that premium rate services on fixed lines and, in particular, mobile devices represent an industry that was worth €95 million last year. In 2008 Irish people received 76 million chargeable premium rate text messages. In the last year the number of complaints to Regtel has increased by four times, from 1,700 to 6,000. It is obvious, therefore, that there are abuses. Senator Walsh is right to say we need to consider the rights of consumers. Serious sanctions need to be provided to ensure service providers do not abuse their positions or take advantage of consumers who might not be fully aware of the extent of the services they receive.

This section of the Bill sets out the sanctions that will apply to those who provide unsolicited services, overcharge unsuspecting consumers or charge for services that are not provided. The proposed fine of €5,000 is small buttons to some service providers, especially in the context of the statistics I have mentioned, which show that huge incomes are being generated. I do not suggest all premium rate service providers are abusing the system. It is obvious that the vast majority provide very good services at reasonable rates. Equally, however, it is obvious that the small number of service providers which prey on vulnerable consumers will not want serious sanctions to be put in place. That is why Fine Gael is proposing that the fine be increased from €5,000 to €20,000. If that kind of stick hangs over any service provider which intends to abuse its position, it will not hesitate about rolling back. The amendment is an attempt to protect consumers by introducing serious sanctions. It is, therefore, well worth considering and I suggest the Minister should accept it.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.