Communications and Digital Technologies & GCIS Budget: Committee Report

This premium content has been made freely available

Communications and Digital Technologies

26 May 2020
Chairperson: Mr B Maneli (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

Video: Portfolio Committee on Communications, 26 May 2020

Tabled Committee Reports

The Committee met to adopt the Budget Vote Report of the Department of Communication and Digital Technologies and the Budget Vote Report of Government Communication and Information Systems (GCIS). The Committee suggested a number of technical issues for amendment in relation to data costs, the SABC and the South African Post Office before the reports were adopted with amendment.
 

Meeting report

The Committee went through its Committee Report on the Government Communication and Information System (GCIS) Budget Vote. They considered the Report's Observations and Recommendations:

Ms P Van Damme (DA) said she would like to make a recommendation on what was discussed in the meeting with GCIS. A lot of print media is struggling at the moment and many magazines have had to shut down. This meant job losses. She suggested that government advertising must be given to print media and community media.

Mr C Mackenzie (DA) added that broadcasting also needs government support and that this was not restricted to one medium.

The Sub-Committee adopted the report with these amendments.

Ms Van Damme said the DA would like to reserve its vote as it still needs to be discussed at its caucus.

Committee Report on Department of Communications and Digital Technologies (DCDT) Budget
The Committee went through its Committee Report on the DCDT Budget Vote. They considered the Report's Observations and Recommendations:

Mr Mackenzie noted the report said that poor people are paying more per megabyte for data. He was not sure that this was true anymore as there has been a 50% reduction in data costs from the two major network providers. There was in and out of bundle megabytes and poor people were paying more because they were purchasing out of bundle megabytes. He said there was 98% mobile coverage and added that he was not sure the Committee needed to be that controversial at this stage.

Mr V Pambo (EFF) asked for clarity on Mr Mackenzie’s comments.

The Chairperson explained that Mr Mackenzie said the statement as reflected in the report would be controversial since there has been a reduction in data pricing.

Ms P Faku (ANC) said the paragraph was not controversial and that it was indeed correct as the majority of the people in South Africa pay high data costs whether they belong to the middle or upper class. People still pay too much money for data in the country. There are children who live with their grandparents and depend on a SASSA grant who have to buy data to submit assignments, but cannot afford this. She proposed that the paragraph remain as it is reflected in the report.

The Chairperson said the reality was that there was still inequality and the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted data and connectivity challenges as poorer people cannot access what those in urban areas can. He said this did not mean there was no appreciation for the industry’s attempt to reduce data pricing.

Mr Mackenzie said he understood what Ms Faku was saying, but that she was speaking of digital inequality. He had an eye for detail and was raising a technicality that the Independent Communications Authority (ICASA) had not yet concluded that data was too expensive. He did not think the statement was accurate. The statement could be left as is, but cautioned that it would reflect badly on government.

Mr Pambo said Ms Faku was out of order and that she should have left Ms Van Damme to clarify Mr Mackenzie’s point and not be so stringent so that the Committee could have a discussion. Since Mr Mackenzie has backed down, the statement should be left as is as it spoke to the reality of South Africans and many of them would agree. The industry has not done enough to reduce data costs.

Ms Van Damme said she thought everyone misunderstood what Mr Mackenzie was saying. He was raising a technical point. She explained that Mr Mackenzie was saying that ICASA had not yet reached that conclusion which is why the sentence is incorrect. She clarified that Mr Mackenzie was not saying that data prices were fine and that if people could not afford it, it was okay. He was saying it was factually incorrect to include the statement as something that ICASA said when it did not say this.

The Chairperson said he accepted what Mr Mackenzie agreed – to keep it as is.

Ms Van Damme said that it was incorrect.

Ms Faku said that even though ICASA has not reached the conclusion that data is still too expensive, it would be appreciated if Mr Mackenzie could withdraw his statement.

The Chairperson said Mr Mackenzie has withdrawn his suggestion.

Mr Mackenzie referred to the comment a page or two later: “ICASA’s ongoing inquiry has not found that data prices are too high and the Committee must commend ICASA’s ongoing inquiry into mobile broadband services and the cost to communicate”. This should be put in the report instead.

Ms Van Damme added that Mr Mackenzie was saying the process is not final.

The Chairperson said Mr Mackenzie has been understood.

Ms Faku asked for clarity on Mr Mackenzie’s comments.

The Chairperson explained that Mr Mackenzie was saying that the ICASA inquiry was still ongoing on the cost to communicate. The way this was captured may not be correct as ICASA still needs to report.

The Committee moved on to Observations:

Mr Mackenzie referred to point about the cost savings generated by the amalgamation of the Department of Communications and the Department of Telecommunications and Postal Services and said this was not accurate. How many jobs were lost? He was told senior people had been moved to another office at the same salary scale. There were in fact no savings after the amalgamation. The sentence was not true.

The Chairperson said he understood that the Acting DDG of Communications has been taken to the Project Management Office (PMO) for three months, but at the DDG level. What Mr Mackenzie was saying would be considered.

Ms Faku said she did not think the sentence needed to be changed.

Ms Van Damme noted that it has not been made clear in the report that there is displeasure over the fact that another year has gone by and the digital migration process has stalled.

Mr Pambo referred to Point 7.1 on page 26 and said the Deputy Minister should have responded to this and it should not be a recommendation. It should reflect that Deputy Minister is not doing her job as the Committee should already have received a response.

Ms Faku said the Deputy Minister had requested providing the Committee with a legal opinion.

Mr Pambo said the issue must be followed up with the Deputy Minister as a matter of urgency.

Ms Van Damme said the SABC could potentially ask for a bailout at the end of the year and she would like to add “serious concern” as the matter needed to be taken seriously.

Under Recommendations, Ms Faku said the recommendation about a concrete plan for the rollout of Digital Terrestrial Television (DTT) was not captured.

Ms Van Damme referred to recommendation about the SABC and said it should state “a plan needs to be presented on how to ensure that the loss does not happen”. She understood the impact of COVID-19, but that the financial situation of the SABC must be considered and a clear plan set out to put measures in places to ensure that further losses do not occur in the current financial year.

Ms N Kubheka (ANC) said when the SABC presented its R1.5 billion loss, the Committee thought it had spent this during the COVID-19 pandemic, but this was not the case.

The Chairperson said he understood that the State Information Technology Agency (SITA) has responded that it is cooperating with the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) investigation.

Mr Mackenzie referred to point that “Post Bank needs to expand its footprint in rural communities” as said this needs to be amended as it was already in rural communities.

He referred to point about the South African Post Office rebranding to attract customers. He does not recall anyone discussing this. There was nothing wrong with the Post Office’s branding. The cost of rebranding would be too high and this point should be removed.

Mr Pambo said he agreed with Mr Mackenzie.

Ms Kubheka said the sentence Mr Mackenzie referred to needed to be reworded. She added that the Post Office must reorganise in order to attract and not rebrand.

Ms Faku said she agreed with repositioning and not rebranding for the South African Post Office. She pointed out that SAPO was not attracting young people for employment. There should be a footprint spread of the Post Office in rural areas.

Ms Z Majozi (ANC) said she agreed with the repositioning of the Post Office to attract more customers. It also needed to expand its footprint as attracting customers did not mean it would be accommodating all nine provinces.

The Committee Content Advisor, Mr Mbombo Maleka, read through the changes he had captured which the Committee had discussed.

The Committee accepted these and formally adopted both reports with these amendments.

The corrected version would be circulated to Committee members.

Meeting adjourned.

Audio

No related

Documents

No related documents

Download as PDF

You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.

See detailed instructions for your browser here.

Share this page: