Africa Speaks about ICT policy

The fallout between telecom operators and the New Partnership for African Development (NEPAD’s) eAfrica Commission continues to deepen, with latest wrangles prompting the Commission to change the name of the region’s premier fibre cable. South African officials have said they are abandoning the name East African Submarine Cable System (EASSy), under which the initiative has been promoted since 2002, to The Nepad Broadband Infrastructure Network (NBIN). Telecom operators, who originated the idea of EASSy, have recently told the Commission to find its own name (see interview on page 3).

It is anticipated that late 2008 is the earliest the cable that will link the eastern coast of Africa to the international fibre optic system could get operational. That is three years from the finish date of June 2005 the initiators of EASSy had anticipated in November 2002. Earlier in 2006, projections were that the project would become commercially operational in the second quarter of 2007, but once NEPAD effectively took over the driver’s seat from telecom operators, a new completion date of first quarter of 2008 was given.

So what, as renowned playwright William Shakespeare once asked, is in a name? Does a rose (flower) by any another name still smell the same?

The recent pronouncement by South Africa’s communications minister, Matsepe-Casaburri that the East African Submarine Cable System (EASSy) had been renamed the NEPAD Broadband Infrastructure Network (NBIN) was as astounding as her assertion, during the same function, that “the original model developed for the cable is not what international financial institutions such as the World Bank would have liked.” This was in direct reference to the closed access model, believed to be widely favoured by the consortium telecom operators who conceived the EASSy project way back in 1992.

Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) legislators have recommended the establishment of a Parliamentary Forum ICT policy and strategy to guide the development and adoption of ICT at the regional level. The development, widely seen as a move to harness and promote effective use of ICT in the legislative assemblies was adopted following a three-day workshop in Johannesburg, South Africa.

The Internet Government Forum (IGF) convenes in Athens at the end of October to chart a way forward for making the running of the Internet more inclusive, and more democratic. Several key issues of concern for various governments and members of the Internet community worldwide were amply articulated in the run-up to the World Summits on the Information Society (WSIS) – a process that has continued ahead of the IGF. Simply put, these issues revolve around enabling control of the ‘Internet’ and its technical arms to be decentralised from ICANN and its few chosen agents, increasing security of the Internet, having international oversight over the Internet, among others.

.

Lyndall Shope-Mafole, Director General of South Africa’s Department of Communications, spoke to CIPESA on August 29 2006 about what her government is doing to increase affordability of telecom services, the East African Submarine System (EASSy) and the future of the SAT 3 cable. Excerpts:

 

Q. What is the South African (SA) government doing to enhance affordability of telecommunications services?

 

A. One of the objectives of our government is to make SA competitive and broaden participation of the poorest citizens in our economy. To increase competitiveness in the economy the cost of communication has to be much lower, so we want reliable communication that is affordable. From experience, the cost of communication is cheaper where there is infrastructure and where governments have taken a specific role to see that infrastructure is built and is affordable. Governments can do this using public funds, or tax exemptions.

For SA the challenge is that we are big geographically; we are not small like Singapore where you can put up fibre overnight and cover the whole country. Yet the state has to make infrastructure available. So we have licenced a Second National Operator (SNO), but even then unless you take a deliberate policy to ensure that the network goes beyond big towns, you will not cover all the country.

 

Q. How does EASSy fit into this picture, and how will you reconcile with private sector players that accuse governments and the New Partnership for African Development (NEPAD) of sidelining them in the EASSy project?

 

A. It is difficult to argue with people who have invested their own money but our role as governments is to set the policy framework under which the cable will be built. The telecom companies are not terribly thrilled with governments because the governments are saying this cable is not only for profits but has developmental objectives too. Besides, governments will assist to get funding for EASSy under the NEPAD framework. Even the smallest African telecom company can have equity to put in the network. That will promote competition and affordability of EASSy bandwidth.

 

Q. What benefits will the SNO bring to SA?