The Independent Communications Authority of SA (ICASA) fought a rearguard action in Parliament to keep its name yesterday, following a Department of Communications proposal to change it to the Electronic Communications Authority.
During the public hearings before the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Communications into the ICASA Amendment Bill, ICASA councillor and acting chairperson Tracy Cohen defended the regulator`s wish to keep "independent" in its title. She argued there was little reason for the new name and that its implementation would affect costs.
Lyndall Shope-Mafole, director-general of the Department of Communications, said the proposed name change was part of an overall education strategy by her department to get the public to know that the "e" in various names such as "e-government" meant electronic.
"Part of the department`s mandate is to take this country out of the industrial age and put it into the information age. But if they [ICASA] want to stay in the industrial age, then so be it," she said.
Strong criticism
Yesterday`s hearings, the only public ones into the proposed ICASA amendment Bill, saw a range of presentations that strongly criticised the proposed legislation for a number of reasons.
These included a lack of detail about the future funding of ICASA, fear of increased ministerial interference due to the proposal that the minister of communications would appoint ICASA councillors through an "independent panel" rather than through Parliament, the muddled ICASA procedures for hearing and addressing complaints, and the fact that consumers are left out of the process.
Other concerns over the proposed legislation were that the transfer of the postal regulator from the department to ICASA would increase the regulator`s administrative burden, the increase in the number of councillors to nine from seven would make ICASA top heavy and increase its operating costs exponentially.
Companies and organisations presenting at the hearings included ICASA, the SA Post Office, Internet Solutions, Telkom, Vodacom, MTN, Cell C, the second national operator (SNO), the National Association of Broadcasters, the Internet Service Providers` Association, the Media Institute of SA, and the National Community Radio Forum.
Almost all the telecommunications organisations expressed concern that the name change and the fact that government was a player in the market, through its Telkom and SNO shareholdings, heightened a conflict of interests and ran counter to good corporate governance. They also called on the communications department to guarantee ICASA`s independence to ensure confidence in the whole managed liberalisation of the market.
The SNO suggested that state-owned enterprises, including Telkom, that fell under the department`s ambit should be transferred to another department, such as the Department of Public Enterprises, in order to lessen the conflict found within the present structure.
"Such a separation of line ministries` functions would be in accordance with international best practice as it should lessen the potential for conflict of interests," said SNO legal adviser Carla Raffinetti of law firm Edward Nathan.
Where`s the consumer?
Several presentations pointed out that a number of factors had to be met to ensure ICASA`s independence, including funding arrangements, and the appointment and removal of councillors. They cited chapter nine of the Constitution that guaranteed independent institutions freedom from executive government interference and case law that upheld the principle.
Members of Parliament appeared divided on the issue of ICASA`s name change. One ANC MP, Randy Pieterse, said ICASA had developed into a brand "that was becoming recognisable to the public".
ICASA`s Cohen agreed, saying suppliers of all equipment approved by ICASA were given "stickers" that they now recognised and the regulator had applied for trademark registration of its logo.
Another MP and ANC committee whip Godfrey Oliphant argued that no matter what ICASA`s name changed to, it would still be independent "as its independence is enshrined within the body of the law".
Inkatha Freedom Party MP Suzanne Vos countered that by saying: "All you want to do is take the polish off the jewel."
The ANC`s Pieterse delivered the last remark by saying: "This is all very well, but where does it leave the consumer?"
Related story:
ICASA hearings begin in Parliament
Share