Now that the idea has begun to trickle down that the Internet is not just a big pornography vehicle, but a valuable communications tool, some real and substantive debate has started to emerge.

Suddenly the tax implications of online trading across international borders have begun to exercise minds. Equally, there is the possibility more disadvantaged members of our society might be excluded from sharing the benefits of the digital revolution. Then there are security issues, and the risk of valuable information falling into the wrong hands.

A recent virtual debate over three days brought together a group of around 80 experts from Britain to compile a series of recommendations to implement successfully the digital economy there.

The Web-based debate took the form of four bulletin board discussion areas, where topics covered included: the economy of the future; access issues, the international dimension, and overcoming the legal and security pitfalls.

Not surprisingly, much of the debate focused on the economics of Internet trade, in particular the tax collection problems that loom as traditional trading barriers collapse.

The group rather vaguely concluded the British government should lead international work to tackle national taxation on a co-operative basis. It suggested this could be done through existing bodies such as the OECD or the World Trade Organisation, or possibly the creation of an international electronic trade organisation.

All very well in theory, but concerted US efforts to address the tax collection issue have opened a can of worms, spilling out many of the concerns that will also be raised in Europe.

Late last month, a 19-member panel convened in Virginia for the first time to consider how to tax the virtual world. On one side of the debate consumers and small businesses are saying taxes on the Internet for transactions conducted across state lines could stifle online growth, and even drive Internet companies overseas.

On the other side retailers who collect sales taxes, and state authorities who collect taxes to pay for police, schools and roads, say retail business is being lost to tax-free business on the Internet. The result is eating into the 36 per cent of state and local government revenue that comes from sales taxes.

The argument draws the logical - if fatalistic - conclusion that retailers will be driven out of business. This will shrink the property tax base, boost unemployment and reduce payroll taxes. The inevitable effect of this will be an increase in other taxes or budget cuts for government programmes.

Meanwhile, Internet traders have their own concerns about an online tax regime. First, it is unclear how they will collect tax across 3,000 different state and local sales tax jurisdictions, with different rates and exemptions in each. Second, there are concerns about the same sales being taxed several times when transactions are conducted across more than two state boundaries. As a result the authorities may consider imposing a national sales tax.

Last autumn, Congress imposed a three-year moratorium, until October 2001 on new taxes on Internet sales. Back in Britain the virtual think-tank, which was sponsored by Bull Cara, the information technology analysis and services company, also believes that a collective approach at government and local level is the best way to successfully implement the digital economy.

It recommended: "The Department of Trade and Industry's ongoing reorganisation of regional and other economic development and support agencies should promote a sector-based, partnership approach and act to defuse competition between agencies for `trophy' business."

The message was driven home over and over again that businesses and government agencies and departments need to invest in IT training for employees to ensure everyone is familiar with new technology to avail of the benefits.

The group's recommendation to establish a "quango or consumer agency" to oversee development of an inclusive information society highlights our own progress in this area. the Republic's Information Society Commission (ISC) has been up and running two years now, and although its power to implement policy is limited, it has the potential to encourage, embarrass and cajole government, social services and business into embracing the digital era.

The recent announcement of a public-private partnership to roll a high-speed bandwidth pipe throughout the State bodes well for our position on the international "wired" scale.

However, it is essential the Government, the ISC and the Office of the Director of Telecommunications Regulation ensure the high quality service is matched by a dramatic reduction in telecommunications costs.

It is one thing to offer the promise of cheaper access in tandem with the deregulation of telecommunications, it is another to implement it.

The Government would do well to follow the British think-tank's recommendation to "review the possibilities for promoting a nationwide tariff or set of tariffs for unmetered local calls.

It should also examine the possibility of subsidising a certain amount of access to the electronic infrastructure, as a new form of social-benefit payment".

If our decision-makers want the "e-commerce hub" hype to become a reality, then it has lessons to learn from closely monitoring the work of every international think-tank and advisory commission.

If competitive advantage is to be achieved, there is little time for reinventing the wheel.