Belinda Neal (Robertson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

On behalf of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Communications, I present the committee’s report entitled Phoning home: inquiry into international mobile roaming, together with the minutes of proceedings and evidence received by the committee.

Ordered that the report be made a parliamentary paper.

by leave—As members of parliament, we know how important it is to stay in touch. Some of us may complain about the number of calls we get on our mobile phone, but I do not think any of us would argue that it has not enhanced our ability to represent our constituents.

Those of us who have travelled overseas will have no doubt about the utility of international mobile roaming, a service that allows you to use your own phone and phone number wherever you are in the world—or in most places.

The utility of roaming was recognised by many of the participants to the communications committee inquiry. The Consumers Telecommunications Network said the following at the public hearing in Sydney on 28 November 2008:

… the expectation these days is to be able to be contacted. People want to take their phones with them, but they do not want to do that at the expense of getting a shock when they come back.

Members of the committee shared their own stories of the shock of mobile phone bills after travelling overseas.

During the inquiry, the committee was confronted with evidence of roaming bills, in some cases, in the tens of thousands of dollars. Thankfully, none of the committee members had experienced that kind of shock.

The committee found that there were two apparent reasons for the high cost of mobile roaming.

The first was to do with how costs are attributed. Roaming is supported by a complex technical treatment of calls to and from roamed phones. This treatment means that the cost of making and receiving calls is higher for roamed calls than for domestic calls.

The most obvious example of this is the approach to receiving calls. In the regular use of mobile phones, the recipient of a call is not charged. However, if the recipient is using roaming, they will be charged for the international leg of any calls that they receive.

Most consumers do not know this, but it is now obvious to the committee that it is a fact. Also, consumers, when selecting a phone service provider, generally only consider the domestic cost structure and are already locked in to the one provider they have selected when they decide to travel overseas. In other words, the consumers do not generally consider the cost structure of international roaming when they are selecting their service provider.

To enhance consumer understanding of roaming costs, the committee has recommended that:

• the Australian Communications and Media Authority facilitate a meeting of the Communications Alliance to discuss the development of a minimum standard for consumer information and awareness on roaming and potential costs; and
• the Australian government explore opportunities to collaborate with the Australian Telecommunications Users Group’s ‘Roam Fair’ campaign.

The second apparent reason mobile roaming bills are so high for Australian travellers has to do with the power of Australian providers in negotiations with overseas providers over roaming services. Australian providers do not appear to have the customer base to negotiate competitive prices for roaming services.

The committee believes that this situation is best overcome through a policy of regulating the framework for the wholesale cost of roaming through bilateral and multilateral negotiations with other countries, ensuring that countries with the largest number of Australian visitors are given priority in these negotiations.

In an effort to improve competition between Australian providers, the committee is recommending that the Australian Communications and Media Authority develop, through the Communications Alliance, an amendment to the code on mobile number portability to allow temporary mobile number portability for roaming services.

The committee also examined the various alternatives to mobile roaming, including: purchased phone cards; hiring a mobile in the country you are visiting; using the internet; and using hotel phones.

While there are a number of other ways in which travellers can remain in touch, none of these has the utility of roaming.

Nevertheless, the committee believes that with careful planning most travellers can find an alternative that offers some of the utility of roaming at a lesser cost.

In order to ensure travellers are aware of the alternatives, the committee has recommended they be incorporated into information on roaming provided by the Australian government.

There can be no doubt that it will take some time before Australians are offered really competitive roaming rates, but hopefully the committee’s recommendations will go some way towards reducing the cost of phoning home in the near future.

I commend the report to the House.

See this speech in context