The telecoms industry regulator has sought a substantial increase in her powers. Ms Etain Doyle wants the power to levy substantial fines on companies in order to enforce her decisions without going to court. She has also recommended that legal challenges of a commercial nature should be "streamed" to specific judges with technical knowledge for judicial review.

In a consultation paper to the Department of the Taoiseach, Ms Doyle - who has faced numerous legal challenges to her decisions over the past five years - also rejects the idea of appeals' boards for regulatory decisions because they still leave open a further right of appeal to the courts.

"This could add considerably to the timeframes involved. In a fast- moving sector such as telecommunications, this could in turn give rise to delays on business decisions and perhaps even future investment plans," the paper says.

Ms Doyle suggests mediation, arbitration and conciliation have a role to play but warns that experience demonstrates that parties often treat these "bodies" as quasi-courts, and benefits that might accrue are often dissipated or lost entirely. Also, the constitutional right of appeal to the courts always remains, adds the paper, which was published on the Office of the Director of Telecommunications Regulation website yesterday.

Irish judicial reviews are typically faster and the standards are more rigorous than those in some other jurisdictions and so provide more protection to the plaintiffs, writes Ms Doyle. But the paper acknowledges that the complexities involved and the need for speedy decisions place considerable burdens on all those involved in the process.

Ms Doyle writes that streaming cases of a commercial nature to specific judges would alleviate these issues. Any people involved in competition policy and law should be fully briefed and trained on the issues, she says.

Ms Doyle, who has previously criticised the limited powers available to regulators, warns that the requirement for regulators to take a criminal prosecution against errant firms "significantly caveats a regulator's capacity to meaningfully intervene" in fast-moving sectors.

She recommends the introduction of tougher powers that would enable regulators to enforce substantial civil fines to act as a deterrent and, in the case of abuse, result in a fine commensurate with the impact of the offence.

The paper criticises some public bodies for not collecting data to enable regulators to conduct detailed analysis. Further efforts need to be made to ensure that the level of relevant data available is on a par with best international practice, says the paper.

Delays in the planning process in the Republic are also highlighted and Ms Doyle suggests that regulators should leave the primary role of dealing with consumer complaints to the operators.

It also notes that due to its relatively small size, the Republic needs to be able to move with speed and flexibility to achieve better results than administrations elsewhere.

The consultation process is part of a major review of the regulation process in the Republic. It will form the basis of new regulatory policy when it is completed.