Ivy's budget speech

I have therefore directed Icasa to prioritise and urgently prescribe a list of essential facilities as envisaged in section 43(8) (b) of the Electronic Communications Act, ensuring that the electronic communications facilities connected to the Sat-3 submarine cable can be accessed soon.
Click to expand...
About time.

// Goes off to look at 43(8) (b)
 
BobbyMac said:
I don't know whether I should laugh or cry
Click to expand...

lol, so true. /me watches Neotel pack its bags and get the hell out of SA

Edit: I'm gonna cry if this is really so.

Dominic, is she seriously suggesting that it will take 4 years for them to draw up the policy that will allow other companies access to the local loop? Or will it be implemented in stages with the final stage being done in 2011?
 
Last edited:
I think Mbeki is getting a little bit of the Ivy pie on the side, that's why he hasn't fired her.
 
U just dont realise - by 2011 LLU is not an issue anymore since Neotel will already have their last mile network in place, while some of the wireless data providers and ISPs will have wireless and fibre networks to customers' homes and businesses, bypassing Telkom and solving their last mile issues. Lets get real, govt just thinks its easier to let the market sort the last mile thing out through new investments and replacing old infrastructure with new investments than actually negotiating some agreement on how to share the existing infrastructure.
 
eremos said:
lol, so true. /me watches Neotel pack its bags and get the hell out of SA

Edit: I'm gonna cry if this is really so.

Dominic, is she seriously suggesting that it will take 4 years for them to draw up the policy that will allow other companies access to the local loop? Or will it be implemented in stages with the final stage being done in 2011?
Click to expand...

I totally agree that it shouldn't take that long, but I didn't expect much from the DoC.

As far as I know LLU doesn't only involve a policy. I've heard that it takes a huge restructuring of the local loop cable wise. I may be totally of the point, so don't quote me.

What I do know is that they frequently mention the implementation of a policy of getting Telkom to hire infrastructure out at cost at (the infamous words) 'a reasonable request. This is not LLU, but it's a start.
 
As of 14 January 2006, 210,000 local loop connections have been unbundled from BT operation under local loop unbundling. Ofcom had hoped that 1 million local loop connections would be unbundled by June 2006. However, as reported by The Register, on 15th June 2006, the figure had reached only 500,000, but was growing by 20,000 a week. Ofcom announced in November 2006 that 1,000,000 connections had been unbundled[1]. By April 2007, the figure was 2,000,000.[2]

By June 2006, AOL UK had unbundled 100,000 lines through its £120 million investment, making it the largest single LLU operator in the UK market.
Click to expand...

From wiki (yes I know :o )

In this line of thought, I made my assumptions as stated in the previous post. A policy change would include all, no wouldn't it. Drafting up a policy each 'loop' sounds just silly, so it should involve more.

Now we are getting a something that may make many people angry. As always, the LLU will most likely end (thus in November 20011 + Africa time + Telkom lawsuits + government slack + x-factor) in places not including the major suburbs.

(20011 is not a typing error :p )
 
2011 WTF? Telkom is forced to unbundle end of next yr.. Thanks ivy.. u as always did something impressive for Telkom
 
?????? IV vs Icasa

Is Ivy the Director of Icasa - in her specch she directed Icasa to to this and to do that......Is this correct and if it is, then they should remove the I in Icasa, not so?:confused:
 
ou812ltd said:
Is Ivy the Director of Icasa - in her specch she directed Icasa to to this and to do that......Is this correct and if it is, then they should remove the I in Icasa, not so?:confused:
Click to expand...

I have therefore directed Icasa to prioritise and urgently prescribe a list of essential facilities as envisaged in section 43(8) (b) of the Electronic Communications Act, ensuring that the electronic communications facilities connected to the Sat-3 submarine cable can be accessed soon.
Click to expand...
Yeah I was wondering the same thing. wtf is happening here? ICASA shouldn't have to be told what to prioritise, they should already be on the ball! Where's the independence?
 
Highflyer_GP said:
Yeah I was wondering the same thing. wtf is happening here? ICASA shouldn't have to be told what to prioritise, they should already be on the ball! Where's the independence?
Click to expand...
she is perfectly within her rights to give policy directions

what's a little odd is that some of those directions have already been implemented or exceeded by ICASA

I HAVE THEREFORE DIRECTED ICASA, to urgently consider whether none, or only certain, of the existing VANS licencees can be authorised to provide services as well as to provide and operate electronic communications facilities or networks to ensure that such licensees are issued electronic communications network service licences in addition to other licences specified in the relevant section of the ECA, if applicable.
Click to expand...

ICASA notified the nation on 7 March 2007 that it intended to convert VANS into both electronic communication service and electronic communications network service licences - http://www.info.gov.za/gazette/notices/2007/29687.pdf. Have a look - it is a short and simple document "mapping" out how ICASA proposes to convert licences granted under the Telecommunications Act to licences under the Electronic Communications Act

I HAVE THEREFORE DIRECTED ICASA, to prioritise and urgently prescribe a list of essential facilities as envisaged in section 43(8) (b) of the ECA, ensuring that the electronic communications facilities connected to the SAT-3 submarine cable can be accessed soon. Taking into account the balance of forces in international submarine connectivity and the objectives of this Act, the Authority should pay particular attention to section 43(5)(b).
Click to expand...

cool - i think she is saying that ICASA must now get on with it and out telkom to terms. ICASA is also already busy with this process

besides which this must be the 3rd / 4th / 100th time i have heard this..

I HAVE ALSO TAKEN THE POLICY DECISION that, given the complexity of local loop unbundling process on the one hand and the urgency for South Africa to enable all operators appropriately licensed to have access to the local loop on the other, the unbundling process in South Africa should be urgently implemented.
Click to expand...

ICASA is already proposing co-location at local exchanges. Spectrum is (hopefully) being awarded to parties other than the usual suspects. The local loop as a question of fact, rather than a question of law, is already unbundling itself

..."urgency". Right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X