Power policy process, or sleight of hand?

I can`t make up my mind about the second National Telecommunications Colloquium held at Midrand last weekend. For three days, 300 delegates from industry bodies, telecommunications companies and government agencies were loquacious, as expected. Whether there was much point is a question that`s been plaguing me just a little.

[VIDEO]On the one hand, there was an encouraging sense of urgency about the proceedings. Everyone realised that policy formulation and implementation should happen sooner rather than later.

Equally encouraging was the broad participation, the remarkable level of consensus, the amiability of the participants, and the lack of extreme protests. All acknowledged the fact that a phased, managed introduction of competition to the telecommunications sector was desirable. Most agreed that Telkom`s request for a duopoly should be denied, and at least two new full-service competitors should be licensed.

Everyone, that is, except Cosatu. Despite not having made a submission indicating its position on the future of telecoms regulation, its representatives stalled proceedings for a fruitless hour trying to get a broad understanding that not everyone reached a broad understanding that competition in the sector was a good idea, and that in fact this idea was diametrically opposed to their - unstated - position.

But on the major issues, most were in agreement, and a lot of useful comments were received.

The same urgency that seems so encouraging was a problem too. Expecting 300 people to come to sensible decisions on an entire government department`s policy and regulation in less than three days is, perhaps, asking a bit too much.

Expecting 300 people to come to sensible decisions on an entire government department`s policy and regulation in less than three days is, perhaps, asking a bit too much.

Ivo Vegter, Features Editor, ITWeb

On some of the more sticky issues, the working groups explicitly stated that there simply wasn`t enough time to reach definite recommendations. As a result, the easy questions were dealt with, and the tricky ones will revert to the minister or her advisers for a decision.

One came away from the event with a nagging suspicion - perhaps unfairly - that it was a mere token for stakeholder consultation. This suspicion is a residue from the first National Telecommunications Colloquium, held six years ago. Veterans of the occasion still vividly recall their disappointment when industry views were summarily dumped in favour of protecting the government`s interests in Telkom and the equity partners being wooed at the time.

At the opening of the colloquium, minister of communications Ivy Matsepe-Casaburri was given the opportunity to promise the 300-odd participants that this time their views would shape the policy decisions. Andile Ngcaba, director-general of the department, said the same.

Of course, nobody in any official capacity would be drawn on which of Telkom`s views, or the department`s views, or the colloquium`s views, weighed heavier in the mind of the minister. And one has to admit that against the government`s constitutional obligation to its citizens, its part-ownership of Telkom is a conflict of interest.

So, was the colloquium merely a clever manoeuvre to enable the department to shift the blame should future policy go sour, and at the same time take credit for future policy success? Or was it a genuine attempt to canvass industry views and draft a telecommunications policy that will propel SA into the realm of the globally competitive e-business players?

Only time will tell if the suspicions are unfounded. If they aren`t, the industry - and the government`s credibility - may never recover. If they are, I won`t regret losing a favourite topic for righteous editorialising.