An ill advised policy
The wording of the e-rate provision in the act has always been ambigous.
- It could mean dialled call rates to the internet
- it could mean Internet access rates ( in that case covering the ISP charges billed by telkom or independant ISPs).
- It may or may not include broadband
All this was pointed out to the DOC at the time, such advice was ignored.
What has Telkom done ?
1. As early as 2003 Telkom approached the DOC for a list of the schools qualifying for the subsidy ( it was clarified that this excludes independent schools and training centers). The DOC promised to do such and never did.
2. Telkom asked for an application process ie who is the account holder ? Who is to be billed for the Half-bill ? The school directly or the dept of education ? Noone wanted to take the responsibility.
3. Telkom asked if they are the only ones expected to subsidise the Acess part ( this is a competitive part of the business with many players) and if so, why ? If not, who will ensure that everyone does ? What is to stop the ISPs from refusing the busing from public schools so that they do not have to subsidise them ? No answer.
A great idea which failed at implementation because noone thinks of the execution when the policy is being developed.
Of course there is a solution :
Telkom, Vodacom, MTN, CellC together pay upwards of R200m per annum to the Universal service Fund ( another white elephant). Let the ISPs and Telkom bill standard rates to the public schools ( an incentive so noone refuses their business) and the Universal service Agency pays the Bills. As things are the fund must now be worth over R1bn , a form of Tax that does not benefit anyone nor the Telecoms industry but the fiscuss or just close down the Universal Service Agency.(This was also pointed out to the DOC then).
By the way the Rural Service licenses launched with such fanfare with alot of money, who knows whatever happened to them ? Another great policy/poor execution example.
I rest my case. RPM , send this response to the DG.