Etain Doyle's decision on phones licence `gutsy'

Telecoms regulator Etain Doyle's decision to award the third generation (3G) mobile phones licences in the State after a beauty contest is a gutsy decision. For someone who seems to have spent most of her tenure embroiled in court battle with operators dissatisfied at the outcome of her office's deliberations, one could have excused her going for the easier option of a straightforward auction.

Equally, with both the main players in the mobile market, Eircom and Esat, arguing against an auction, there might have been all the more incentive to adopt such a course if only to show that pressure from existing operators could not influence decisions.

People studying Ms Doyle's ruling would do well to remember that she is not one accustomed to bowing to any vested interest, and her track record proves her case. The courts, too, have bolstered her position. She has yet to lose a case, despite the odd hiccup along the way.

Yes, the Government might have made more money pursuing an auction where, up until recently, amounts of £500 million per licence were being pencilled in. The backlash over the obscene costs of such licences in Britain means this figure would have been reduced somewhat in any event. Under the beauty contest arrangement, the cost per licence should be closer to £100 million.

The winners should be the customers. With the licences costing less, the companies securing them should eventually be able to provide a service at costs below those pertaining in the British market, where the winners have paid a hefty premium. It would be instructive to compare charges to customers for 3G across the Continent in a few years' time and compare them with licence and other costs to find if, for once, the customer does eventually get treated fairly.