PARLIAMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
WRITTEN REPLY
QUESTION NO: 1130
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 4 September 2009
QUESTION PAPER NO: 14
DATE OF REPLY: 16 October 2009
Mrs J D Kilian (Cope) to ask the Minister of Communication:
1) Whether the Independent Broadcasting Authority of SA (Icasa) has
amended certain sections of the Digital Migratory Regulations; if not,
why not; if so, (a) which regulations were amended, (b) why were the
amendments necessary and (c) what will the impact be on the time line
and general implementation programme from analogue to digital
broadcasting migration in South Africa;
2) whether there will be any budgetary implications for Sentech as State-
owned enterprise; if so, what will be the (a) nature and (b) extent of
such implications;
3) (a) how and (b) from which source will the resulting loss of revenue
be compensated?
NW1395E
REPLY:
ICASA informed me as follows:
1) The Digital Terrestrial Television Regulations were amended for
further public consultation.
a) The following regulations have been amended:
i) Regulation 7
ii) Regulation 10
iii) Regulation 12
b) The amendments were necessary due to legal issues raised by e-TV
regarding the time frames as set out in the regulations. In
particular, the amendments were necessary to create clarity in
regard to the compliance period for the broadcasting services,
considering that the dual illumination period started before the
regulations were finalized. The Authority had suggested time frames
and targets based on the dual illumination period as defined in the
Ministerial Policy of 2008. The Ministerial policy set the dual
illumination period from 01 November 2008 to 30 November 2011. e-TV
argued that using these timelines in the regulations amount to
suggesting that industry should comply retrospectively with
liabilities in case they fail to comply.
e-TV also argued that the Authority should review the time set for
broadcasters to submit their ECNS licensee who will operate the
multiplexes. The Authority had initially suggested that this be
done within 60 days of the finalization of the DTT regulations. e-
TVâs argument was that a shorter time frame will force them to
contract with Sentech while they would prefer to seek an
alternative provider depending on the price charged by potential
competitors to Sentech. This provision has since been reviewed and
aligned with the finalization of the broadcasting frequency plan
which set out the actual technical parameters.
The Authority further considered recommendations regarding the
broadcast of languages in the SABC bouquet. In the regulations, the
Authority had proposed that each local content programme should be
broadcast in multiple languages. The SABC submitted that it was not
feasible for the public broadcaster to broadcast each individual
programme in three languages. The Authority amended this regulation
to allow further industry and public input. The new proposal
suggests that the SABC should ensure that all languages are
equitably distributed across the bouquet. The actual targets will
be set out in the relevant licenses.
c) The amendment to the regulations means that the rollout of
commercial DTT will commence at the beginning of 2010. In the
meantime, SABC, E-TV and M-net are continuing with the DTT trials
which started in 2008.
2) There will be no budgetary implications for Sentech due to the
amendment to the regulations.
3) Not applicable in view of the response in the above paragraph (3).