The Guardian reports today that Sky is frustrated with Ofcom over the regulator’s decision to employ a delayed public consultation over Sky’s DTT pay-package plans when rival Setanta did not have to go through the same procedure.

I think Sky have a fair point.

Probably the most important duty of a regulator is to treat similarly-situated parties in a similar manner. This is why many regulators have standardised application forms and codes that detail what is expected of all regulated firms. Exceptions to the ‘rules’ are typically only merited when unique circumstances arise that are themselves explained in the regulatory scheme. Firms rely on established procedures and timetables to guide their business considerations.

By contrast, Ofcom structure itself in what one might call a more business-friendly manner and often fashion procedures as the situation merits. That’s usually a good thing. However, in this case, Ofcom’s terse press release contains no explanation for the differing regulatory treatment — other than what we all assume: Sky is an important market participant. And Ofcom’s ad hoc use of a public consultation in this situation will undoubtedly damage Sky’s commercial interests.

It’s terrible when this happens. Regulated firms become cynical and the entire business-friendly environment is diminished.