7. Themes, Issues and Priorities

Themes

The purpose of this report is to identify and provide background to policy issues that might need to be considered further by MED in the short-to-medium term. For this reason, none of those issues has been argued to a conclusion. Each one identified needs to be prioritised, incorporated into the Ministry's work programme, and be progressed through research, analysis and consultation to a set of recommendations to Government.
Major themes that have emerged from the report are:

the effectiveness of current legislation in achieving Government's objective in the deployment of spectrum;
the current effectiveness of the MRR and the RLR, and the balance between the respective merits of competitive and administrative assignment;
the mechanisms by which the benefits of competitive assignment can be maximised and its drawbacks moderated;
the degree to which Government intervention is necessary and effective in ensuring that social and cultural objectives are met;
the implications of new technologies for spectrum management
opportunities related to spectrum commons; and
the need to further enhance international co-operation.

The specific issues relating to these themes have been grouped appropriately and prioritised in the summary table below. Subject to agreement with Ministers, they will be reflected in the Ministry's work programme, with the items of highest urgency and impact being given priority.

H = High impact issue carrying a significant risk to spectrum management and users.

M = Medium impact issue carrying moderate risk to spectrum management and some users.

L = Low impact issue carrying little risk to spectrum management and users.

S = High urgency issue likely to have significant consequences if not resolved within a relatively short time frame.

M = Medium urgency issue likely to have significant consequences if not resolved in the medium term.

L = Low urgency policy issue with no significant consequences if not resolved in the short to medium term.

No	Issue	Impact	Urgency
1.1	To what extent should mutual recognition agreements with other countries be pursued, and in what areas?	M	L

No	Issue	Impact	Urgency
2.1	How has the development of the MRR and the market for spectrum given effect to the objectives underlying the Radiocommunications Act 1989?	M	M
2.2	For spectrum in the RLR, are any changes to licensing conditions advisable (e.g. tradability, resource rentals, differential charging) to promote the highest value use of spectrum?	H	M
2.3	Should the transfer of spectrum from the RLR to the MRR be accelerated? Is there merit in transferring all non-essential spectrum to the MRR?	H	H
4.2	Is there merit in re-packaging the MRR to provide for regional or local management rights? What would be the implications for legislation, engineering and administration?	M	M
4.6	Use-it-or-lose-it requirements are common in overseas jurisdictions on both anti-hoarding principles and the proposition that unused spectrum is not realising its highest value to society. Notwithstanding the administrative difficulties, would it be in New Zealand's interest to impose such conditions more generally on management rights and spectrum licences? Under what circumstances should they be applied?	H	L
4.7	When "packaging" management rights, what weighting should be given to technical neutrality vs. technical efficiency, and competition issues respectively?	M	M
4.8	To what extent should MED be involved in resolving coordination issues between management rightholders?	M	H
6.5	What spectrum issues need to be resolved to support the introduction of digital broadcasting?	M	M

No	Issue	Impact	Urgency
5.1	Is a regime of tradable (MRR) spectrum with a small reservation for such non-commercial uses as essential services or iwi broadcasting, likely to meet future social and cultural policy purposes?	H	L
5.2	Responsibility for advice on the allocation and management of spectrum for broadcasting is shared between MED, MCH and TPK. Is there scope for improving the linkages in this structure?	M	M
5.3	How would a new tier or tiers of FM broadcasting spectrum licences meet community and regional needs? What implications, if any, would such licences have for overall management of the FM broadcasting band?	M	M
5.4	Should lower power FM licences established through temporary pending auction policies be assigned through an open auction, or should conditions apply on who is eligible to hold such licences?	M	M
5.5	How may spectrum best be allocated for public safety and security services?	M	L

No	Issue	Impact	Urgency
4.1	The Act relies on the provisions of the Commerce Act to resolve competition issues. Given the perceived need to apply spectrum caps and eligibility requirements in past and future auctions, and the absence of determinations against dominant acquisitions, is there a case for re-examining the effectiveness of these provisions?	H	M
4.3	Are there proactive means by which the government could promote and enhance secondary spectrum markets?	H	M
4.4	What alternative auction methodologies could be employed in future sales of spectrum where there are significant quantities of similar and substitutable lots?	M	H
4.5	There is a tension in the design of auctions (including the application of spectrum caps and eligibility requirements) between the objectives of assigning spectrum to the bidder according it the highest value and promoting the competitiveness of downstream markets. How might this tension be managed? Should constraints continue in place after the spectrum has been assigned?	M	H

No	Issue	Impact	Urgency
6.1	What would be the costs and benefits of establishing a partial or complete spectrum commons in New Zealand?	H	M
6.2	What changes, if any, are required to the New Zealand legislative and regulatory environment to accommodate new technologies?	H	M

Last updated 11 November 2008