SMME Forum defends minister
Communication Minister Dr Ivy Matsepe-Casaburri recently came under severe criticism from various industry quarters regarding her clarifying of the issue of self-provisioning of network infrastructure by, amongst others, VANS. This issue arose out of the public’s own interpretation of her determinations iro telecommunications market liberalisation.
The criticisms ranged from her clarifying that VANS would not be allowed to self-provide soliciting responses ranging from being “extremely disappointing and destructive” to “not being in line with government’s agenda to create jobs”.
To her credit, the Minister moved swiftly to provide clarity over an issue whose cause and resultant mis-interpretation was not of her making. Of course, everyone is at liberty to agree or not with the Minister.
Whilst we will defend to death the precious liberties of free speech as enshrined in our Constitution and thus the public’s right to criticise the Minister and government, the SMME Forum believes that recent criticisms of the Minister is both unfair and unjustified.
Had the Ministry allowed VANS to self-provide, this would have – at the minimum – put paid to the dawn of the SNO and would have also impaired the sustainability and business cases of all under-serviced area licence operators. Some of the members of the Forum are Under-serviced Area Licence (USAL) operators and would have been amongst those prejudiced were VANS allowed to self-provide.
Surely those criticising the Minister would have (justifiably) been amongst the first to level some of the fiercest criticism to the Minister had she allowed VANS to self-provide since this would have destabilised the market. And they would have been correct in doing so. However, the Minister was right in ensuring that there is clarity and certainty in the telecommunications sector.
In any event, the Telecommunications Act, in its current form, does not allow for VANS to self-provide. Had she allowed VANS to self-provide, the Minister would have faced the very real possibility of litigation.
These self-anointed spokespeople of the ICT consumers are the worst hypocrites. Their “track record” on issues affecting ICT access in black communities is acute in its absence. Instead of criticising the Minister of her resolve and fortitude, they leave themselves to being accused of “not being in line with government’s efforts to create jobs and contribute” towards bridging the digital divide currently afflicting those in the previously disadvantaged communities. At the very least, they are not criticising those who should be doing a lot more for the under-privileged communities.
A recent study conducted by Intuit for the benefit of the ICT Charter process and the SMME Forum indicate that connect-density (the degree to which access to ICTs and the internet per capita) is the lowest and remains so in black residential and business areas. This is a reality that most of us are familiar with.
Further, research of the ISP sub-sector of telecommunications industry shows that the industry is still lily-white (remember what Mr Andile Ngcaba said a few years ago during ISPAs conference before joining Didata for which he was severely criticised?) and is still deeply perceived by most blacks in the ICT sector as intransigent. More than 85% of the sector is still white-owned and controlled. The sad reality is that this industry has been, and still is, dominated by white males. Bar Telkom and a handful others, which have made commendable strides towards achieving workplace equity and transformation, the same cannot be said of the majority of the sub-sector.
Whilst we are correct to complain about lack of competition for Telkom, it may also be worth noting that there currently is not a single ISP or VANS operator providing services from townships and other under-serviced areas.
Surely if we are all motivated by the noble desire to bring down telecommunication connectivity rates, including dial up to internet POPs, should we not be asking ourselves questions as to why none of the ISPs – who are quick to criticise the Ministry- is operating from previously disadvantaged communities. Surely by providing POPs and other telecommunication infrastructure in this areas this will make it possible for these communities to connect with the world at reduced rates? Surely if we are to be inclusive whilst talking on behalf of “communication users”, should we not also be batting on behalf of those in less privileged areas?
It would be fitting to recall what President Mbeki said during the recent debate on his Nation’s address when he said: “If indeed we all came to understand this (the reality that our very collective future depends on our ability to understand and appreciate that our success is intertwined), together we would have to answer the question as to what white South Africa should do to ensure that black South Africa succeeds, and black South Africa needs to do to ensure that white South Africa succeeds.”
It is a sad indictment of our telecommunications sector that whilst South Africa is rated as having world-class telecommunication infrastructure and a sophisticated financial sector, the connect-density survey shows most black residential areas as having less than 1 percent of internet access. In fact, in some areas the connect-density is still zero. What do we make of the statistics that shows increased growth of the so-called black middle class?
South Africa’s ISPs and VANS providers should bury their heads in collective shame for doing less in developing our communities and stop criticising the Minister just for the sake of taking pitiful pot-shots at her.
By clarifying that VANS were not allowed to self-provide, the SMME Forum believes that the Minister was correct both from the legal perspective as well as from the point of ensuring that USALs are sustainable and can contribute towards better ICTs access by under-serviced communities. The latter will potentially also contribute immensely towards local job creation.
In any event, the Minister did not renege on any “promise” made as she just provided more clarity on what she meant through her own determinations. If anything, the Minister should be commended for moving with speed and fortitude in this case.
We should all be proud that under this government and Ministry, communities that have been deprived of access to ICTs due to structurally and political deficiencies of successive apartheid regimes are now central to the government’s policies and deservedly should receive high priority. Government and the Ministry are doing their utmost to connect under-serviced areas through telecentres, MPCCs and Cyberlabs. What is stopping the private sector (ISPs and VANS) to join in in droves?
Some ISPs are indeed pulling their weight and use their own resources and initiatives to ensure that SMMEs, especially black owned SMMEs, do have access to internet connectivity. This is a small step towards bringing them into the so-called “first economy” and a sign of commitment to grow the market by including those currently not able to connect.
Before we make it a habit to shoot wildly at the Ministry, let us cherish the precious commodity – access to affordable and universal ICTs – that underpins government policy. This policy is also informed by the declarations of the UN’s MDGs. Our Ministry is also spearheading efforts, through the WSIS and the PNC on ICTs, to bridge the digital divide in our society.
Let us all enjoin government and others in their collective efforts to cultivate and provide a better life for all by seeking ways in which we can all contribute to bridging the digital divide between our various communities.
We remind those self-anointed consumer activists that there also exist millions of voiceless communication-wanna-be-users who are desperate for the simplest of access to ICTs. These are the people we should be focusing most of our energies on.
The issue of access, especially access to ICTs, is paramount to our success in developing our country. Let us seek solutions that will assist in this regard. Only through establishing a cogent and integrated approach to bridging the digital divide, can we succeed. Establishing a symbiotic relationship between government and all stakeholders is the first step towards this.
Whilst we do this, let us all also defend each other’s liberty to hold different views in our democracy.
Whilst not encouraging sycophancy, let us also not be reckless in exercising our Constitutionally-enshrined liberties
Whilst we are not responding on behalf of the Ministry which shall do so in the event that it deems its appropriate to respond, recent criticisms of the Minister can, at the very least, be described as pitiful and mischievous.
To twist Lenin’s quote, I conclude thus “It is true that liberty is precious; so precious that it must be carefully distilled and savoured.”
Loading ...