The Editor, Sir:

I have noted with some chagrin your article entitled "Local phone rates may be lowered" published in The Gleaner of Thursday, January 25, in which you attributed a comment purportedly made by me and which implies that the Office could lower the costs of terminating calls to mobile phones in the near future.

setting the records straight

My concern is that the article did not fully reflect the context in which I made the comment and I should like to set the records straight. It is extremely important that such context be understood primarily for accuracy.

My comments were as follows:

1. The Office had issued a determination some time ago which in effect declared all mobile operators dominant on its own network and that Digicel had, as is its right, requested the Office to reconsider this decision.

2. The Office's response to this application for reconsideration would be issued within a month.

3. If, and only if, the Office upheld its original decision could it interfere with setting mobile termination rates.

4. All rates determined by the Office are cost-based and, therefore, I could not state definitively whether the rates would be reduced, but that rates could be increased, reduced or remain the same depending on the outcome of the cost-based analysis.

no basis

For emphasis, I wish to make it clear that until the Office considers the submission in respect of the application for reconsideration referred to above and issues its decision, it has no basis to infer nor indeed can it state that the cost of phone calls could be lowered.

It made no such statement as appeared in the article to which this response is being made either expressly or by inference to your reporter.

I am, etc.,

J. Paul Morgan

Director General