Between the lines: Saint David mouses around sticky problem

By CHRIS BARTON

Nobody would wish to criticise David Russell, of the Consumers Institute. The man is a saint and his dedication to the greater good has been beyond reproach.

Which makes it difficult to understand the institute's ambivalence towards internet consumers hurt by Telecom's 0867 prefix dialling regime.

Mr Russell rightly calls for the Commerce Commission to hurry up its decision on whether Telecom abused its position by forcing all internet users over to 0867 dialling. The institute has also made a submission to the telecommunications inquiry that there is a need for a market regulator.

Admirable efforts. But they do little to help internet consumers hurting right now. While most have capitulated and moved across to Telecom's 0867 numbers, there are some - mainly Clear customers - who choose not to. But their choice results in Telecom charging them an extra 2c a minute for their web surfing time. The situation - dubbed "the internet tax" - has many consumers with extra charges on their Telecom bill, ranging from $80 to $400 a month, crying foul.

Mr Russell says web consumers can choose other internet providers offering 0867prefixed numbers to avoid the charges. But he misses a fundamental point. Consumers are being impeded from choosing Clear by its arch competitor, Telecom.

So, in the absence of a rallying call to arms from the institute, and while the commission dithers and the telecommunications inquiry drags on, what's a hapless web consumer to do?

Go to the Disputes Tribunal, the quasilegal forum where consumers can fight for their rights. It's a place where the little guy can sometimes take on big businesses and win.

In the 0867 challenge, there are two Davids preparing their slingshots to down Goliath. The first is Geoffrey Palmer, who has deliberately kept dialling an ordinary telephone number to connect to his internet provider Compuserve. Why? Because he believes the 2c per minute charges are in breach of the Kiwi Share agreement, which guarantees free local calling. Another is Mike van Lokven determined to fight for his right to choose the internet provider he wants.

Legal experts say consumers can argue the Kiwi Share - enshrined in Telecom's articles of association when the Government sold the SOE in 1990 - is an implied term of their linerental contract with Telecom. If that is true, Telecom has no right to charge 2c a minute. There's also some barracking from the sideline - the Crown Law Office - which says 0867 is likely to breach the Kiwi Share agreement.

But if Mr Palmer and Mr van Lokven get their day in court, the Government's sideline perch may quickly become a hot seat. Both complainants would be within their rights to subpoena, as custodian of the Kiwi Share, the Minister of Finance. Perhaps then, embarrassed in public, the Government might move to protect consumers' right to choose.