International Telecommunications Regulations, World Radio Communications Conference Final Acts, with Minister; Committee Report on Cost to Communicate

Meeting report

Ratification of the International Telecommunications Regulations (ITR)

Mr Siyabonga Cwele, Minister of Telecommunications and Postal Services, said the former Minister had attended the previous conference on regulations in 1988, which had mainly dealt with fixed lines. It was important to ratify the regulations because it affected the interoperability of mobile telephony which had increased dramatically since 1988 and to increase the transparency on pricing which needed to be improved. There was also a need for increased online protection in terms of cyber security and spam, the need to open up access to provide for the disabled, to introduce the establishment of the basic rules of e-waste management as well as to deal with the big cost of communication.

Ms Nonkqubela Jordan, DDG: International Relations, Department of Telecommunications and Postal Services (DTPS), said the treaty had been inspected to ensure that it was in alignment with the Constitution, domestic laws and international treaties. The Department had consulted with government bodies, industry, intergovernmental bodies, Cabinet and now the Committee. She said it was an opportune time to ratify the regulations because it would assist in the areas of pricing and access both of which were contained in the white paper on ICT.

Mr Jim Paterson, Director: ICT Multi Lateral Relations, DTPS, said the National Development Plan (NDP) recognised the impact of broadband on the growth of GDP as well as the impact of ICT investments on socio economic development and the ITR would facilitate these. The old regulations were extremely outdated. He gave a background to the ITR regulations and why they had to be updated citing the dominant role of mobile telephony over fixed lines and the fact that Africa was the fastest growing market. At the 2012 conference there had been concern and lobbying because it had been felt that government was trying to take over the internet, but these had proven to be unfounded. He then spoke to the content of the new ITRs introduced at the conference. There had been a lack of consensus on the security and robustness of ITR networks and on spam. Key issues for South Africa had been transparency and the high price of roaming charges. The Department recommended that the treaties be signed as they would contribute to improved telecommunication services and better customer experiences and in this way it supported the ICT white paper. The treaty would be binding by December 2017 unless notification was given that a country would not ratify it. He said debate had already started on the need to review the ITRs on a regular basis.

Discussion

Mr C Mackenzie (DA) asked if voting took place on a ‘one country one vote’ basis.

Ms D Tsotetsi (ANC) asked if the Department could guarantee the correctness of what was agreed upon, given that decisions were done on a consensus by exhaustion basis. What were the implications for those countries that had not signed?

Ms M Shinn (DA) asked which seven countries had already ratified the treaties.

Mr E Siwele (ANC) asked how regular the ITR review should be.

The Minister replied that the eight countries that ratified the treaties were Antigua, Azerbaijan, Bermuda, Belarus, Kenya, Saudi Arabia, Trinidad and Tobago and Vietnam. The voting was done on a ‘one country one vote’ basis but small countries were influenced by big countries, sometimes in the form of financial aid. South Africa always consulted key stakeholders in its own industry first before going to the conference so that there was consensus on the South African position. The intransigence of big countries on certain points were purely to protect commercial and national interest.

Ms Jordan said that there were voting alliances, for example commonwealth countries would meet or the French would meet with francophone African countries. She added that the South African delegates had to sign an agreement that they would abide by the governments mandate. There was support from the African and Arab groups for the ITRs. Countries that did not sign could ratify at a later stage. South Africa had proposed that a review be held every eight years. At the ITU there was a huge lobby to avoid issues related to the internet. She apologised that the list of countries that had ratified the agreement were not part of the pack of papers and said the list of countries would be circulated to the members.

The Chairperson asked why it was important that the treaties had to be ratified now.

Ms Jordan said there were a number of clauses that would assist government especially around the issue of wholesale pricing and roaming prices in general and in the SADC region in particular. This was a big issue with the mobile operators. Secondly it would assist emerging players in the industry because most of the roaming partners were based in the UK. Other reasons were concerns over the regulation of e-waste where regional countries were waiting to see South Africa’s stance and the fact that if data costs were not addressed then regulations would be needed on pricing and especially data pricing.

The Minister said SADC had taken a decision a few years ago to harmonise roaming costs, which had already taken place in the East African bloc of countries. This was being stymied because mobile operators asked where in the country’s statutes this was said. The other SADC member states were feeling that South Africa was becoming arrogant because the bulk of roaming traffic was to South Africa and the costs were exorbitant. While there had been an agreement to gradually introduce the lowering of roaming tariffs, this had not yet begun to be implemented. Issues such as e-waste and ensuring access to people with disabilities were important in terms of the countries stance on human rights and environmental sustainability and climate change. The regional internet exchange points had already been implemented and it was working well. Namibia had reported a significant 30% drop in international bandwidth costs.

Ms Shinn noticed that no SADC country had ratified the treaty. What was the status of their processes?

Ms Jordan said that Zimbabwe, Zambia and Namibia were pursuing ratification. On the issue of roaming charges, she said these countries had already included clauses in their electronic communications acts, unlike South Africa, so it would be less urgent than South Africa’s need.

The Committee agreed to recommend to the House that the treaties be ratified.

Ratification of the World Radiocommunication Conference 2015 (WRC-15) Final Acts

The Minister said that South Africa fell in ITU Region 1, which included Europe which was far more developed in terms of IT infrastructure and satellite services. In addition, spectrum allocation negotiations occurred on a regional basis. The Department had been driven by the interests of South Africa and the African continent. South Africa had been happy with the outcomes of WRC -15 and had been the biggest beneficiaries of additional spectrum at the 2015 conference. The biggest tension at the conference had been the area of mobile telephony services because it was continuing to grow and would need more spectrum and other sectors felt they were being pushed aside. South Africa had tried to protect broadcast digital spectrum which would be up for review in 2019. If South Africa did not use the spectrum it would find that that spectrum would be cohabitated. Spectrum had also been allocated to search and rescue, maritime services, science research and road safety. Another big issue was spectrum for global flight tracking in the aftermath of the Air Malaysia incident and Unmanned Aircraft Systems (drones).  

Ms Jordan said the Department had followed a process which had included eight national meetings since 2013. The Department had been mandated to consult with the security cluster. It had held six continental engagements and five ministerial meetings. There was a gap between commercial interests and the development agenda of the Department.

Mr Dick Sono, Chief Director: Radio Spectrum, said the last conference was held in November 2015. It was necessary for countries to ratify the WRC Final Acts and incorporate the International Radio Regulations. There was also a need to update radio frequency plans because the radio frequency regulations had last been updated in 1995. The Final Acts had been published on 5 November and would be in force from 1 January 2017. South Africa reserved the right to its own National Radio Frequency Plan and that these were in line with NDP policies. It also protected spectrum for the broadcast of digital terrestrial televisions and provided a more flexible regulatory framework for use with the radio spectrum and harmonisation within the region would ensure no interference with neighbouring countries services. Key outcomes of WRC-15 were the additional allocations to mobile broadband communications, in which Africa was the region that had gained the most spectrum for broadband; digital terrestrial television (DTT) spectrum remained exclusively for digital TV; spectrum was allocated for emergency and disaster relief and search and rescue; spectrum was allocated for wireless systems on aircraft; maritime communications, road safety (driverless cars) and for global flight tracking.

Discussion

Ms Shinn asked if wireless avionics on aircraft would facilitate access to the internet on aircraft.

Ms Tsotetsi asked how often the acts were reviewed, given that developments in ICT moved very fast.

Mr Sono said there would not be issues because of the allocation for wireless avionics had different frequency ranges than those used on the ground and so would not interfere. Airlines used satellite services for Wi-Fi. He added that South Africa was already doing studies on technical work for the next conference WRC -19.

A Departmental official said the review took place every three to four years. The studies were complex and the length of the conference was too short for all the studies to be presented. South Africa discouraged a review within three years and was comfortable with a four-year period.

The Minister said the study groups were very important because the conference used the work of the study groups. South Africa needed to be at the conferences to keep up to date and provide advice on what was in South Africa’s best interest. Skills and innovation in a skills economy were important. There was now talk of 5G communications. Also it was important to build up the skills base of the country and the Department would put proposals that a percentage of NSFAS bursaries be put aside for these skills. Municipalities were excited about the emergency and rescue issue. The DST was collaborating with African countries regarding satellite launches and that it was important that academics be part of the delegation that went to Geneva. Universities should be allowed to be members of ITU at reduced cost because they could assist in support of the research for the fourth review and research.

Ms Tsotetsi asked if invitations could be extended to the conference for Committee members.

The Chairperson said the Minister had invited the Chairperson.

The Minister said he would look into the matter, but the Department was constrained by resources but he recognised that it was important for Committee members to be present at the conference so that they could be appreciative of the debate taking place at the conference.

The Committee report was adopted.

Committee Business

The Committee’s report on the public hearings on the “Cost to Communicate’ was adopted with amendments.

Mr Mackenzie asked what had happened to the Committee’s oversight tour.

The Chairperson said that due to financial constraints there would be no overseas visits. However, the request could be resubmitted for later in the following year.

Ms Shinn asked if a two-day public hearing could be scheduled in the new year on digital migration because currently it was not working as the program was unaffordable and set top boxes cost three times more than those that could be bought in a store. She acknowledged that it would have to be done in conjunction with the Department of Communication.

The Chairperson said that the difficulty was that one had to cooperate with the Department of Communication. She said the focus was more on priority areas that needed to be completed before the budget process started. She said she would check with the Department of Communication.

Ms Kilian felt that it was the mandate of the Minister of Communications and the Committee could not move ahead of the Minister and the Department of Communications.

The meeting adjourned