Consumer Protection in the Communications Industry: Moving to best practice - Issues Paper (July 2008)

[« previous] [next »] [up] [title page] [full contents]

2.6. Code review

All codes are regularly reviewed. As there are a large number of codes these reviews require a considerable amount of time and resources for all stakeholders.

ACMA describes the review process as follows:

Codes should provide for regular review and amendment of the provisions of the code to ensure they are meeting community expectations and working effectively.

Industry bodies should promote discussion on codes and make recommendations for improvement. Among the matters considered should be whether the revised code should apply to any new sections of the industry that have been created, any matters asked to be attended to by a provider of a mandatory consultation certificate and any recommendations made by the [regulator] when the code was registered. Suggested amendments should be considered promptly and resolution of the consideration referred to the submitter. [22]

Under section 125 in ensuring that registered codes continue to meet registration criteria, codes should provide for regular review and amendment of the provisions of the code to ensure they are meeting community expectations and working effectively. Industry bodies should promote discussion on codes and make recommendations for improvement. Among the matters considered should be whether the revised code should apply to any new sections of the industry that have been created, any matters asked to be attended to by a provider of a mandatory consultation certificate and any recommendations made by the ACMA when the code was registered.[23]

Under section 120 of the Act, changes to registered codes must be effected by the registration of a new code and not by amending the old code. This has resulted in multiple versions of codes. Signatories to a previous code do not automatically become signatories to a new code – so the number of code signatories has fallen significantly for more recent codes.

One positive outcome from the review process has been the decision to amalgamate six consumer codes into a single Telecommunications Consumer Protection code. The Communications Alliance submission to the Productivity Commission review noted:

Significant substantive protections have been put in place over a period of 10 years and the form of those protections has recently been revised to incorporate them in a single Code which is less prescriptive and more easily read and understood.[24]

It should be noted, however, that the amalgamation of the six codes into the TCP code did not include any substantive reform of the content of these codes.

Overall, the code review process in telecommunications appears to have required considerable input and resources from consumer stakeholders due to the plethora of codes and the regularity of reviews.

The resourcing of consumer input is an issue in these circumstances. While a small number of consumer groups are provided with resources for consumer advocacy in telecommunications – the total sum for which has not increased in ten years – their remit extends far beyond the development and review of industry codes and they do not have sufficient resources to participate in the way that would be most effective to protect consumer interests. There are other relevant consumers organisations (e.g. CHOICE, the Australian Privacy Foundation) that do provide input where possible, but do not receive resources for providing input into code development and review.

---

[22] Australian Communications and Media Authority, Developing Telecommunications Codes for Registration: A Guide, 13 November 2003, page 9, <http://www.acma.gov.au/webwr/telcomm/industry_codes/codes/codes.pdf>.

[23] Australian Communications and Media Authority, Developing Telecommunications Codes for Registration: A Guide, 13 November 2003, page 9, <http://www.acma.gov.au/webwr/telcomm/industry_codes/codes/codes.pdf>.

[24] Communications Alliance, Submission to the Review of Australia’s Consumer Policy Framework Issues Paper, 14 May 2007, page 2, <http://www.pc.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/63731/sub050.pdf>.

[« previous] [next »] [up] [title page] [full contents]

[view all] [download PDF version]

[up to research]